|
小馬丁‧路德‧金 (MARTIN LUTHER KING, Jr.) 從伯明罕市監獄發出的信 Letter from Birmingham City Jail
任何一個地方的不公正是對一切地方的公正的威脅。 小馬丁‧路德‧金(1929－1968)生於佐治亞州亞特蘭大，祖父和父親均為浸禮會牧師。他15歲入莫爾豪斯學院專修為天資聰慧的學生開設的課程，以後在賓夕法尼亞州切斯特的克勞澤神學院獲神學士學位，又在波斯頓大學獲哲學博士學位。金在阿拉巴馬州蒙哥馬利市的德克斯特大街浸禮會教堂任牧師時，一場對公共汽車的聯合抵制運動開始了。他領導這場鬥爭歷時一年，這使他成了全國知名人物。隨後他組織南方基督教領袖聯合會，成為迅速擴展的民權運動的領導人。 1963年，金把一場非暴力和消極抵抗運動帶到種族隔離和種族歧視嚴重的伯明罕市。在一次次抗議性的示威遊行中數百人被捕。金寧可進監獄也不服從法院關於停止示威的命令。在單獨監禁的日子裏，金對七位重要的教會人士寫的信作了答覆。他們在信中要求他取消示威運動，轉而依靠談判和法院解決問題。金用復活節週末的時間起草他的答覆。金因為領導了民權運動於1964年被授予諾貝爾和平獎。1968年當他指導田納西州孟菲斯的罷工鬥爭時遇刺身亡。
我在這伯明罕市監獄的鐵窗內閱讀你們最近的聲明，該聲明把我們當前的活動稱為「不明智而又不合時宜的。」…… 既然你們已受「外界的人紛紛介入」一說的影響，我認為我應當闡明自己在伯明罕的原因。……我與我的幾名助手在伯明罕，是應邀前來的。我來伯明罕是因為我在這裏有些基本的組織關係。此外，我來伯明罕是因為這裏存在著不公正。正如八世紀的先知們離開他們的小小村落，把「上帝是這麼說的」一話傳到遠離他們故鄉的地方，正如使徒保羅離開他在塔爾蘇斯的小村，把耶穌基督的福音帶到希臘─羅馬世界的幾乎每一村莊和城市，我也被迫把自由的福音帶到我自己故鄉以外的地方。……任何一個地方的不公正是對一切地方的公正的威脅。…… 你們對目前正在伯明罕舉行的遊行示威感到痛心。但是我很遺憾，你們的聲明竟沒有對引起示威的客觀形勢表述同樣的關切。我相信你們每個人都不願緊跟在淺薄的社會分析家腳後，只看後果而不去設法解決根本原因。我會毫不猶豫地說，眼下在伯明罕發生所謂的示威遊行是不幸的事。但是我想更強調一點：該市白人政權逼得黑人居民走投無路，沒有別的選擇。 任何非暴力鬥爭都包括四個步驟：(1)收集情況以判斷是否存在不公正；(2)談判；(3)自我淨化；(4)直接行動。在伯明罕我們已經歷了所有這些步驟。無可置疑的事實是，種族不公平籠罩著該市黑人社區。伯明罕可能是美國種族隔離最徹底的城市。該市警察暴行的醜惡記錄全國各地盡人皆知。該市法庭對待黑人的不公亦是臭名昭著的現實。比起我國其他城市，伯明罕有更多尚未解決的黑人家宅和教堂爆炸案。這些都是確鑿的，殘酷的，令人難以置信的事實。…… 通過痛苦的經驗我們懂得了，自由不會由壓迫者自願送上門；自由必須由被壓迫者去爭取。坦率地說，我可從未參加過根據某些人的時間表是「時機恰當」的直接抗爭運動，這些人從未飽嘗種族隔離之苦。多年來我一直聽到這個話：「等待！」每個黑人的耳朵都聽膩了。這「等待」一詞幾乎總是意味著「永不行動」。它不啻起鎮靜作用的反應停，使緊張情緒放鬆片刻，卻導致沮喪失意感這一畸形兒的產生。我們必須同意昨天傑出的律師的觀點：「公正被延誤太久，也就是公正被否定。」對我們的憲法和上帝賜予的權利，我們已等待了340多年。亞洲和非洲國家正以噴射機的速度衝向政治獨立的目標，而我們卻仍以老牛破車的步速去爭取在便餐櫃檯喝上一杯咖啡。…… 你們對我們意欲違反法律表示極大的憂慮。這當然是合理的關注。既然我們如此奮力地催促人們服從最高法院1954年關於在公立學校取締種族隔離的決定，那麼發現我們有意識地違反法律便會感到奇怪、荒謬。有人或許要問：「你們怎麼能既提倡違反某些法律，又提倡遵守另一些法律呢?」可以用存在著兩種法律的事實來回答：既有公正的法律，又有不公正的法律。我願第一個為遵守公正的法律大聲疾呼。一個人既有法律上，亦有道義上的責任去遵守公正的法律。反過來說，一個人有道義上的責任拒絕遵守不公正的法律。我贊成聖奧古斯丁的話：「一個不公正的法律就根本不是法律。」 那麼公正與不公正的法律二者差別何在? 人們怎樣判斷一個法律公正還是不公正呢? 一個公正的法律是人制定的符合道德法則和上帝的法則的法規。一個不公正的法律則是與道德法則不一致的模式。用聖托馬斯‧阿奎那斯的話來說，一個不公正的法律是一種並非植根於永恆和自然法則的人類法律。任何提高人格的法律是公正的，任何貶低人格的法律則是不公正的。 一切種族隔離法都不公正，因為種族隔離扭曲靈魂，損害人格。它給予實行隔離者以虛假的優越感，給予被隔離者以虛假的自卑感。借用傑出的猶太哲學家馬丁‧布貝爾的說法，隔離用「我─它」關係取代「我─你」關係，最後把人降低到物的地位。因而種族隔離不僅在政治上、經濟上、社會學意義上是荒謬的，而且在道德上也是錯誤和有罪的。保羅‧蒂利希曾說過：罪惡即是分離，難道種族隔離不是人類悲慘的分離的存在主義表現，不是人類極度的疏遠和可怕的罪孽的表現嗎? 因此我號召人們遵守最高法院1954年的決定，因為它在道德上是正確的；我號召人們拒絕遵守隔離法，因為這些法令在道德上是錯誤的。…… 請允許我作另一種解釋。不公正的法律是一種強加於少數人的法規，這些人不參與該法規的制定或創立，因為他們沒有毫無阻礙地投票的權利。有誰能說頒佈種族隔離法令的阿拉巴馬州立法機關是民主產生的呢?
整個阿拉巴馬州用盡各種合謀方式阻止黑人成為正式選民。在一些縣裏黑人雖佔人口大多數，但竟然沒有一個黑人登記參加投票。難道這樣一個州確立的任何一項法律能被看作是民主制定的嗎?
我們決不能忘記，當年希特勒在德國幹的每一勾當都是「合法的」，而匈牙利自由戰士在匈牙利做的每一件事皆是「非法的」。在希特勒治下的德國，幫助、安慰一個猶太人是「非法的」。但我相信，倘若當時我生活在德國，我準會幫助、安慰我的猶太弟兄們，儘管這是非法的。倘若我今天生活在一個共產主義國家，某些基督教信仰所珍視的原則遭踐踏，我相信我會公開提倡拒絕遵守這種反宗教的法律。…… 我們這一代人將不能不為壞人的惡語劣行，同時也為好人令人吃驚的沈默感到悔恨。我們必須認識到，決不能依靠必然性車輪的滾動來實現人類進步。人類進步通過自願與上帝合作的人孜孜不倦的努力、堅持不懈的工作得以實現，而若是沒有這種艱苦的工作，時間本身將成為社會惰性力量的同謀。……
你們把我們在伯明罕的活動稱為極端和行動。起初我對教會同仁竟把我的非暴力鬥爭視作極端主義者的行為感到失望。我開始考慮這麼一個實際情況，即我恰恰站在黑人社會兩股對立的力量中間，滿足於現狀的那股力量由兩類黑人組成。一類黑人因長期遭受壓迫已完全失去自尊自重之心，適應了種族隔離；第二類人是為數不多的中產階級黑人，因享有某種程度學術上和經濟上的保障，又因有時從種族隔離中獲利，他們已不自覺地變得對群眾的疾苦麻木不仁。另一股勢力飽嘗辛酸，充滿仇恨，它再向前跨出一步便會鼓吹暴力行動。該勢力體現於在全國層出不窮的各種黑人民族主義團體，其中最大最出名的是以利亞‧穆罕默德的穆斯林運動。當代人對種族歧視繼續存在的沮喪失望感使這一組織應運而生，發展壯大。它由對美國失去信念的人組成，他們徹底否定基督教，而且得出結論，認定白人為不可救藥的」魔鬼」
。 我盡力設法站在這兩股力量中間，我說我們不必追隨滿足現狀者的」無所作為主義，」也不必倣傚黑人民族主義者的
仇恨和絕望。有一種以博愛和非暴力抗議為手段的更好途徑。我感謝上帝，因為通過黑人教會，非暴力方式進入了我們的鬥爭。假如這非暴力哲學至今未誕生，那麼我肯定此刻南方許多街道已血流成河。而且我更確信，假如我們的白人弟兄把我們斥為」暴民煽動者」和」外來鼓動家」──指我們中那些通過非暴力直接行動的渠道工作的人──而且拒絕支援我們的非暴力鬥爭，那麼數以百計的黑人出於沮喪和絕望將從黑人民族主義思想中獲取安慰和保護，這一發展趨勢不可避免會導致恐怖的種族對抗惡夢。 被壓迫人民不堪永遠受壓迫，爭取自由的浪潮終將到來。這便是美國黑人的經歷。內心有物提醒他們記住自己天賦的自由權；身外有物提醒他們記住自己能夠取得這權利。…… 然而當我繼續思考這一問題時，我卻漸漸為自己被看作極端主義者而略感欣慰。難道耶穌不正是一個在博愛方面的極端主義者嗎?
──「愛你的敵人，祝福詛咒你的人，為虐待你的人祈禱」。難道阿摩司不正是爭取公正的極端主義者?
──「讓公正如洪水，正義如激流滾滾而來。」難道保羅不是傳播耶穌基督福音的極端主義者?──「我在自己的身體上帶著主耶穌的痕跡。」難道馬丁‧路德不是極端主義者?──「我站在這裏；我別無選擇，所以拯救我吧，上帝」。難道約翰‧班揚不是極端主義者?──「我將留在獄中直到我死去的那一天，免得把自己的良心變為屠場。」難道亞伯拉罕‧林肯不是極端主義者?──「這個國家不能在半奴隸、半自由狀況中繼續生存。」難道托馬斯‧傑斐遜不是極端主義者？──
「我們認為這些真理不言自明：人人生而平等。」 所以問題不在於我們是否要做極端主義者，而在於我們要做什麼樣的極端主義者。我們要做服務於仇恨的極端主義者還是服務於博愛的極端主義者?
我們要做為保存不公正而奮鬥的極端主義者，抑或是為正義的事業奮鬥的極端主義者?
……
我已周遊了阿拉巴馬州、密西西比州和南方其他各州。在炎熱的夏日和秋高氣爽的早晨，我看著一座座尖塔直插雲霄、外觀很美的教堂，注意到南方在營造大批宗教教育場所上不惜工本。我一次又一次情不自禁地暗自發問：「誰在這兒做禮拜?
誰是他們的上帝?
當巴尼特州長大談干預，鼓吹拒絕執行國會的法令時，當華萊士州長公然號召挑戰，煽動仇恨時，他們的聲音上哪兒去了?……
當代教會常常只是發出微弱、無效、動搖不定的聲音。它常常是維護現狀的主要支持者。普通地區的權力機構不但不對教會的存在感到不安，而且因教會的緘默，因教會常對現狀表示認可感到安慰。 但上帝對教會的審判從未像現在這樣嚴厲。如果當今的教會無法恢復早期教會的犧牲精神，它將喪失權威的光環，失去千百萬人對它的忠誠，被人們當作對20世紀毫無意義、無關宏旨的社會團體。……我感謝上帝，因為有組織的宗教階層中某些高尚的人已從束縛手腳、令人癱瘓的鎖鏈中掙脫出來，積極加入我們為自由而鬥爭的隊伍。……他們懷著這樣的信念踏上征程：正義即使被擊敗也比取得勝利的邪惡強大。如果說這個種族是塊麵團，這些人便是發酵劑。他們的證言已成為精神食鹽，在這動盪不安的時期用於保存福音的真話。他們已在失望的黑暗山洞中鑿通了一條希望的隧道。……但即便教會不去援助正義，我對未來也不感到絕望。即使我們的動機目前被誤解；我對我們在伯明罕鬥爭的結果也不感到擔憂。我們將在伯明罕和全美國達到自由的目標，因為美國的目標是自由。雖然我們可能被辱罵被嘲笑，我們的命運與美國的命運緊緊結合在一起。……總有一天，南方會認識到它真正的英雄是何人。他們將是詹姆斯‧梅雷迪思們，以巨大的勇氣和堅定的意志面對暴徒的嘲笑和敵視，面對令人痛苦的孤獨，而這些正是先驅者生涯的特點。他們將是年老的、飽受壓迫欺淩的黑人婦女，以阿拉巴馬州蒙哥馬利市一位72歲的老婦人為典型。她懷著自尊感與決心不乘實行隔離的公共汽車的黑人同胞們一起站立，對詢問她是否疲勞的人作了語法不規範但卻頗有深度的回答：「我的腳很累，但我的心安寧。」他們將是年輕的大中學學生、年輕的福音傳教牧師和大批年長者，勇敢而又和平地在便餐櫃檯邊靜坐抗議，為了問心無愧寧願坐牢。總有一天，南方會明白，當這些被剝奪繼承權的上帝的孩子們在便餐櫃檯坐下時，他們實際上是為實現美國夢的最佳理想，為猶太─基督教傳統最神聖的準則挺身而出，從而把整個國家帶回到民主的偉大源泉，由建國的先輩們在擬定憲法和獨立宣言時所深深開掘的源泉。…… 我希望這封信能使你們堅定信念。我也希望自己有可能很快與你們每一位會面，不是以一個牧師和基督教兄弟的身份，而是作為一個主張取消種族隔離的人或一名民權領袖。讓我們期盼種族偏見的烏雲很快飛走，誤解的濃霧從我們擔驚受怕的居民區消散；讓我們期盼在不遠的明天博愛和兄弟情誼的燦爛星辰將以美麗的光華照亮我們偉大的國家。 附註：
While confined here in the Birmingham City Jail, I came across your recent statement calling our present activities "unwise and untimely." . . . I think I should give the reason for my being in Birmingham, since you have been influenced by the argument of "outsiders coming in." . . . I am here, along with several members of my staff, because we were invited here. I am here because I have basic organizational ties here. Beyond this, I am in Birmingham because injustice is here. Just as the 8th century prophets left their little villages and carried their "thus saith the Lord" far beyond the boundaries of their home town, and just as the Apostle Paul left his little village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ to practically every hamlet and city of the Graeco-Roman world, I too am compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my particular home town. . . .Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. . . . You deplore the demonstrations that are presently taking place in Birmingham. But I am sorry that your statement did not express a similar concern for the conditions that brought the demonstrations into being. I am sure that each of you would want to go beyond the superficial social analyst who looks merely at effects, and does not grapple with underlying causes. I would not hesitate to say that it is unfortunate that so-called demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham at this time, but I would say in more emphatic terms that it is even more unfortunate that the white power structure of this city left the Negro community with no other alternative. In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: 1 ) collection of the facts to determine whether injustices are alive; 2) negotiation; 3) self-purification; and 4) direct action. We have gone through all of these steps in Birmingham. There can be no gainsaying of the fact that racial injustice engulfs this community. Birmingham is probably the most thoroughly segregated city in the United States. Its ugly record of police brutality is known in every section of this country. Its unjust treatment of Negroes in the courts is a notorious reality. There have been more unsolved bombings of Negro homes and churches in Birmingham than any city in this nation. These are the hard, brutal, and unbelievable facts.... We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly I have never yet engaged in a direct action movement that was "well timed," according to the timetable of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word "Wait!" It rings in the ear of every Negro with a piercing familiarity. This "wait" has almost always meant "never." It has been a tranquilizing Thalidomide, relieving the emotional stress for a moment, only to give birth to an ill-formed infant of frustration. We must come to see with the distinguished jurist of yesterday that "justice too long delayed is justice denied." We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God-given rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jet-like speed toward the goal of political independence, and we still creep at horse and buggy pace toward the gaining of a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. . . . You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. This is certainly a legitimate concern. Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court's decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, it is rather strange and paradoxical to find us consciously breaking laws. One may well ask, "How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?" The answer is found in the fact that there are two types of laws: There are just laws and there are unjust laws. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with Saint Augustine that "An unjust law is no law at all." Now what is the difference between the two? How does one determine when a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a mode that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of Saint Thomas Aquinas, an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality. It gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority. To use the words of Martin Buber, the great Jewish philosopher, segregation substitutes an "I-it" relationship for the "I-thou" relationship, and ends up relegating persons to the status of things. So segregation is not only politically, economically, and sociologically unsound, but it is morally wrong and sinful. Paul Tillich has said that sin is separation. Isn't segregation an existential expression of man's tragic separation, an expression of his awful estrangement, his terrible sinfulness? So I can urge men to obey the 1954 decision of the Supreme Court because it is morally right, and I can urge them to disobey segregation ordinances because they are morally wrong. . . . Let me give another explanation. An unjust law is a code inflicted upon a minority which that minority had no part in enacting or creating because it did not have the unhampered right to vote. Who can say the Legislature of Alabama which set up the segregation laws was democratically elected? Throughout the state of Alabama all types of conniving methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters and there are some counties without a single Negro registered to vote despite the fact that the Negro constitutes a majority of the population. Can any law set up in such a state be considered democratically structured? . . . We can never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was "legal" and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was "illegal." It was "illegal" to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler's Germany. But I am sure that. if I had lived in Germany during that time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers even though it was illegal. If I lived in a Communist country today where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I believe I would openly advocate disobeying these anti-religious laws. . . . We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of good people. We must come to see that human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability. It comes through the tireless efforts and persistent work of men willing to be co-workers with God, and without this hard work time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. . . . You spoke of our activity in Birmingham as extreme. At first I was rather disappointed that fellow clergymen would see my nonviolent efforts as those of the extremist. I started thinking about the fact that I stand in the middle of two opposing forces in the Negro community. One is a force of complacency made up of Negroes who, as a result of long years of oppression, have been so completely drained of self-respect and a sense of "somebodiness" that they have adjusted to segregation, and of a few Negroes in the middle class who, because of a degree of academic and economic security, and because at points they profit by segregation, have unconsciously become insensitive to the problems of the masses. The other force is one of bitterness and hatred and comes perilously close to advocating violence. It is expressed in the various black nationalist groups that are springing up over the nation, the largest and best known being Elijah Muhammad's Muslim movement. This movement is nourished by the contemporary frustration over the continued existence of racial discrimination. It is made up of people who have lost faith in America, who have absolutely repudiated Christianity, and who have concluded that the white man is an incurable "devil." I have tried to stand between these two forces saying that we need not follow the "donothingism" of the complacent or the hatred and despair of the black nationalist. There is the more excellent way of love and nonviolent protest. I'm grateful to God that, through the Negro church, the dimension of nonviolence entered our struggle. If this philsosphy had not emerged I am convinced that by now many streets of the South would be flowing with floods of blood. And I am further convinced that if our white brothers dismiss us as "rabble rousers" and "outside agitators"－ those of us who are working through the channels of nonviolent direct action－ and refuse to support our nonviolent efforts, millions of Negroes, out of frustration and despair, w－ ill seek solace and security in black nationalist ideologies, a development that will lead inevitably to a frightening racial nightmare. Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The urge for freedom will eventually come. This is what has happened to the American Negro. Something within has reminded him of his birthright of freedom; something without has reminded that he can gain it. . . . But as I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a bit of satisfaction from being considered an extremist. Was not Jesus an extremist in love? "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, pray for them that despitefully use you." Was not Amos an extremist for justice － "Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." Was not Paul an extremist for the gospel of Jesus Christ－ "I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus." Was not Martin Luther an extremist－ "Here I stand; I can do none other so help me God." Was not John Bunyan an extremist－ "I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a butchery of my conscience." Was not Abraham Lincoln an extremist－ "This nation cannot survive half slave and half free." Was not Thomas Jefferson an extremist－ "We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal." So the question is not whether we will be extremist but what kind of extremist will we be. Will we be extremists for hate or will we be extremists for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice－ or will we be extremists for the cause of justice? . . . I have traveled the length and breadth of Alabama, Mississippi, and all the other Southern states. On sweltering summer days and crisp autumn mornings I have looked at her beautiful churches with their spires pointing heavenward. I have beheld the impressive outlay of her massive religious education buildings. Over and over again I have found myself asking: "Who worships here? Who is their God? Where were their voices when the lips of Governor Barnett dripped with words of interposition and nullification? Where were they when Governor Wallace gave the clarion call for defiance and hatred? . . . The contemporary Church is so often a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. It is so often the arch-supporter of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the (church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the Church's silent and often vocal sanction of things as they are. But the judgment of God is upon the Church as never before. If the Church of today does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early Church, it will lose its authentic ring, forfeit the loyalty of millions and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the 20th century. . . . I am thankful to God that some noble souls from the rank's of organized religion have broken loose from the paralyzing chains of conformity and joined us as active partners in the struggle for freedom . . . they have gone with the faith that right defeated is stronger than evil triumphant. These men have been the leaven in the lump of the race. Their witness has been the spiritual salt that has preserved the true meaning of the Gospel in these troubled times. They have carved a tunnel of hope through the dark mountain of disappointment. . . . But even if the Church does not come to the aid of justice, I have no despair about the future. I have no fear about the outcome of our struggle in Birmingham, even if our motives are presently misunderstood. We will reach the goal of freedom in Birmingham and all over the nation, because the goal of America is freedom. Abused and scorned though we may be, our destiny is tied up with the destiny of America. . . . One day the South will recognize its real heroes. They will be the James Merediths, courageously and with a majestic sense of purpose, facing jeering and hostile mobs and the agonizing loneliness that characterizes the life of the pioneer. They will be old, oppressed, battered Negro women, symbolized in a 72-year-old woman of Montgomery, Alabama, who rose up with a sense of dignity and with her people decided not to ride the segregated buses, and responded to one who inquired about her tiredness with ungrammatical profundity: "My feets is tired, but my soul is rested." They will be young high school and college students, young ministers of the Gospel and a host of the elders, courageously and nonviolently sitting in at lunch counters and willingly going to jail for conscience's sake. One day the South will know that w4ien these disinherited children of God sat down at lunch counters they were in reality standing up for the best in the American dream and the most sacred values in ourJudeo-Christian heritage, and thus carrying our whole nation back to great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the founding fathers in the formulation of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. . . . I hope this letter finds you strong in the faith. I also hope that circumstances will soon make it possible for me to meet each of you, not as an integrationist or a civil rights leader, but as a fellow clergyman and a Christian brother. Let us all hope that the dark clouds of racial prejudice will soon pass away, that the deep fog of misunderstanding will be lifted from our fear-drenched communities, and that in some not too distant tomorrow the radiant stars of love and brotherhood will shine over our great nation with all of their scintillating beauty. |