No Blessings for Baby If Daddy is Jerk
Tuesday, May 12, 2009 at 2:00PM
I was over at What About Our Daughters yesterday and suffered a severe head rupturing upon reading the exchange between WAOD and TV talking head/minister Roland "Rolly Rolls!" Martin and his new black male accountability initiative that just happens to be punitive to women and their children.
I’ve called on pastors nationwide to stop the stream of momma, grandmother, aunts and female cousins coming to the altar for baby dedications with no man in sight. That pastor should say, “Until I personally meet with the father, I will not dedicate this child.” Somebody has to hold that man accountable for his actions. (Roland Martin)
I don't know how you get a man to show up for a Christening by telling the mother and her family who, you know, kind of want their child to be blessed in the church and loved by Jesus, that the minister will not do the service unless the father shows up.
Um ... what? Wait? WHAT???
More after the jump.
If ever there was a baby that needed to be blessed, its the child of a man that has to be hunted down to get him to show up at a church for a 3.5 minute prayer. How is turning away the people who have taken on the responsibility of raising a man’s child holding him accountable? If the man was concerned about what a preacher thought... chances are he wouldn’t have an illegitimate child in the first place. Y’all don’t have to say AMEN! I’m saying it for you.
If anything they ought to be having baby dedications in the hospital room as the baby leaves the birth canal!
Isn’t the point of the entire commentary that women can’t police children and you need a MAN? So why would this, presumably male pastor, send the “women folk” to do his dirty work? How did a call for men to RISE UP and be MEN turn into yet another chore for Black women to complete? (WOAD)
You've got this kid, this kid who is starting out in the world in a situation he or she did not choose and you're saying, "Hey kid, I'd love to bless you in the name of our Holy Father and stuff, but your dad's a bum so ... SOL." Um, excuse me?
Martin, of course, has said that this "Baby Excommunication Black Male Accountability project (as dubbed by WOAD)" is not about punishing mothers but demanding something of fathers. It just feeeeels like they're punishing kids and mothers, you see? And besides, Rolly Rolls bellows at WOAD, what solutions did they offer!
(T)o the folks who seem to criticize my solutions, which include personal and institutional accountability, what’s yours?
You can continue with the notion of throwing black women under the bus, but that is total BS. I’m married to an ordained minister. The both of us use our ministry time speaking, teaching and mentoring singles and young couples. We address issues such as womanhood and manhood ...
So go right ahead and spend time complaining about what someone else suggested. But if all you’re doing is writing and not taking action, then it’s a waste of time.
If you’re sitting around and not even talking to the young men and women in your own family about pre-marital sex, birth control, and the responsibilities that come with having children out-of-wedlock, then you’re wasting time. If you’re spending more times telling the girls to close their legs but celebrating boys with multiple girlfriends, then you’re a part of the problem.
I often ask the question, “What are YOU prepared to do?”
Well, actually WOAD suggested that the ministers start a paternity ministry that would directly target fathers as opposed to tell women they had to make some guy who they couldn't get to church if they were on hell's fire show up for a Christening they A) don't care about or B) ... really, Roland. These folks don't care.
WOAD picked a wonderful passage of the bible to illustrate why turning away women and children from a valuable ritual in the Christian church just because they made an error in picking mates is wrong:
When my father and my mother forsake me, then the LORD will take me up. (Psalm 27:10)
This means when everyone else fails, God doesn't. Ministers in their representation and interpretation of the word are supposed to be on God's team and God is about taking in orphans, bastards, the lost, the unwanted, the unloved, the fatherless, the motherless and all others who are among society's rejects. If the church starts rejecting society's rejects where in the HELL are they supposed to GO? If a single mother can't go to the church for love and support, where CAN they go? And let's keep it real, if women stopped going to church the damn thing would collapse in on itself in a week. If you're expecting an armada of dead beat dads to show up to flip pancakes for that pancake brunch you're going to be sadly mistaken.
And how can you make something about male accountability, yet still focus solely on women and their issues? If this was always about women and their poor mate choices then why call it a black male accountability project? Why didn't he call it a "pick a better mate" project? And even if that was the case, why punish the baby? Because the baby is who is receiving the blessing, who is being prayed for and prayed over. What sense does that make? What did the baby do other than be born?
The baby NEEDS you, Rolly Rolls. Try harder next time.
Reader Comments (33)
How about a much simpler question - what if the father doesn't believe in god? Why should he have to put up with the church nonsense because the mother does? The whole thing is ridiculous. Just because the father doesn't want to be at some religious ceremony because it's against his personal beliefs does not mean that he's absent from the child's life either. Does that mean that those mothers should be denied the ceremony in the religion that they DO believe in? Great way to further segregate and polarize the black community!
"The baby NEEDS you, Rolly Rolls." Huh. Baby needs some OTHER pastor, IMO.
Initially I think Mr. Martin was trying to come up with some viable solutions to the GROSS EPIDEMIC of fatherless in the black community. Roland's a good brother but I think he should have thought things through a little bit more clearly before suggesting his ideas; especially when blogs like WAOD exist.
We need to educate our young men and women on single parenthood and the negative side effects that are associated with being a lone parent. All single parenthood is not doomed; but statiscally its not promising when young men and women don't know their daddies. Aside from financial barriers are emotional vacuums and mountains of resentment and anger that build within childhood and last a lifetime when not addressed. Black women need to make better choices cause they're the ones that are usually stuck to provide, protect, and fend for the defenseless baby.
Education on making better partner choices; that goes for men and women would be a good place to start. There's sex ed and then there's relationship ed.
As for WAOD I shake my head. Something about the energy of that once promising blog has turned into a cesspool dark cloud of vitriolic negativity.
It doesn't matter whether the father believes in God or not. If he chose to have sex with a woman who does and she has a child then he should honor what the mother wants to do. It's all a choice, see? If a non-religious person was a necessity then he should've picked someone else. But that argument is an obfuscation tactic. Sometimes when you actually care about someone you honor the things that are important to them that don't cause you any harm - of course the key point is CARING. And this whole argument of Martin's is ridiculous. We have enough unwanted and uncared for Black children as it is. Even if the ceremony has no real Biblical reference it's not a bad tradition as long as people grow up to have some sort of values and spiritual practice. We need something greater than ourselves regardless of what some people may think.
Roland's heart is in the right place, but I believe that his proposal was not thought all the way through.
P.S. I chose you for a blog award.
From my point of view, the whole idea of blessing a child in a church is outmoded theology. The mother, father, or anybody can bless a child. Of course, the larger question is whether black women are being faulted while the men are let off the hook. Martin seems to be putting some of the onus on black women.
re: better partner choices: Putting aside the whole "should you have a baby with someone you aren't ready to marry" question for a second, I just want to interject that the dudes aren't always obvious bums to begin with. I've seen a LOT of seemingly good/apparently responsible dudes get ghost a few months AFTER baby arrives, once they finally realize that baby raising is not all glitter n' ponies n' cake. And many times they're the ones who talked the women into going through with the pregnancy.
I agree with most of the comments, I think Roland's heart was in the right place, but penalizing the child, mother, and other people who are in the child's life is very wrong. Probably since he is a minister and loves the church and what it stands for he probably doesn't realize that many of the those father may not be the least interested in church or for that matter the child.
The paternity ministry is a great idea. Get the names and locations of these fathers and have the menfolk of the church go out and continually visit and talk to these young men. And a connected "maternity" ministry for the young women would be great.
Personally, God and religion and my father prevented(scared) me from having a child/having sex as a teenager. If that could prevent some of these birth, I say go for it.
I feel like there should be a tag … or a warning … or something sewed into the suits of some particular pontificating negroes that says: NOT EVERY PERSON WHO WEARS ONE OF THESE GETS TO BE MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.
It might prevent these spasm’s of silliness we all suffer through when some puffed-up wack-a-doo gets a platform.
What in Gods’ name does this approach do to curb the out of wedlock birth rate?
I can see Martin making a play to bring shame back into the dating and mating patters of young minority men and women. But there’s pretty good chance that if your carrying your baby to the alter without a wedding ring or a man around, shame left the building years ago.
At that point, that mother is only doing what she thinks is best—seeking divine stewardship for a road she know's is going to be rocky.
If Martin wants so desperately to steer black men in the right direction, find one and help him. Become a Big Brother, or adopt a child of color, or do something tangible to improve the conditions of a young black male life. Rather than write a road map for others to follow that he himself will never use.
Ain't nothing worse than a bigmouth.
First of all, I love context. So here's my swipe at what has been written:
Roland suggests that before a baby be christened or baptized, the father needs to be scrutinized/interviewed by clergy.
Danielle believes that the suggestion is dumb as rocks.
My perspective: It's time for those who say they follow the Lord Jesus to grow up. Jesus was almost discarded and cast aside by a man who wasn't His father b/c the mother became pregnant out of wedlock. If that isn't an example of what God thinks of children who are born out of wedlock, then what is? If God thought enough of His own son, then what does He think of that single mom's son or daughter? Geez.
At any rate, Roland's suggestion is "religious." The religious leaders of Jesus's day would have treated Mary like crap had they thought Jesus was born out of wedlock. They would have punished her and her child.
It's time for the church to take accountability to care for the widows and orphans. It's time for the church to deal with people accountability and model parenthood and even love for people that empowers us to make wiser choices. And trust me, there is nothing wise about interfering with a child's spiritual life b/c of the choices of its parents. I think Jesus said it's like hanging a millstone around the neck if we cause a young one to stumble. He said something like that, right? (sigh)
@ Robin
Let the church say AMEN!
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that I agree with Roland to a certain extent. I know of a very popular church in my city that is full of baby mommas, baby grandmommas, and baby great-grandmommas. The majority of these women had their children out of wedlock and the daddy's are no where to be found. Matter of fact, the pastor's daughters contribute to this category. My cousin and her daughters by three different daddy's are also part of this epidemic.
From my understanding, I think Roland may be suggesting that it has become more of a trend to christen or dedicate a baby to the church. Many of these women think that just because their friend or sister or their enemy got their baby dedicated, they need to have their baby dedicated. Yet, these women continue to live their same party/ghetto lifestyle and continue to raise their "dedicated" baby in this lifestyle. And I know a lot of you will probably say "what does she mean? She don't know what she's talking about!" Um... yeah I do. Like I said, my cousin is the prototype of my explanation.
I do believe there are some single mothers who trully want to have their baby dedicated and will raise them the way God wants all of us to live. But this number is more than likely few and far between. The church should embrace these single mothers and fathers, but we need to make sure they are doing things for the right reason and not just because they think it's a trend. And that statement goes for everyone and everything we do in the church.
As for the first comment about what if the father doesn't believe in God but the baby's momma does, first of all the baby's momma shouldn't have even messed around with the non-believer in the first place, and that is in the Bible.
Tootsie Roll is now the vioce of God. ROTFLMBAO
Cut Roland some slack. Look, his approach is not perfect but Black women must take responsibility for their decisions! And I say this as a Black woman. Is Roland's approach good? No. But, come on, a christening doesn't mean shit anyway. Let's just keep it real for a second -- denying a baby a christening is NOT tantamount to the church "rejecting society's rejects" (I rolled my eyes at that one.) It's ridiculous to suggest that, just as Roland's suggestion that denying a christening unless a daddy shows up for 5 minutes is equally ridiculous.
Fatherhood and education need to be valued in the Black community - by both men AND women.
And, you know, I'm tired of discussions like this. I swear to God, the hood (which, at this point, is nearly unrecognizable from broader black culture) is going to collapse in on itself. The thing we like to call "hood living" (no dad around, baby mamas everywhere, sneakers instead of books) is NOT sustainable. Black culture is self destructing! So I'm not going to sit here and talk about a fucking christening while the walls are burning.
If I remember correctly, I think Roland Martin was raised Catholic. Not saying that I agree with his suggestion, but I do understand that the family construct is highly highly important in the Catholic Church.
I think Roland's idea is a bit much, but he does have a ponit. We've reached a point in the black community where we have 2 and 3 generations of women in the same family having babies without even considering waiting until marriage. They talk about how "Christian" they, sit up in the front row at church every Sunday are and no one blinks an eye or says a word. The Bible explicity says that fornication (any sex outside of marriage) is wrong, but for these women, there's no social stigma. I'm over 50, and I remember when I was a teenager; if a girl became pregnant, the family sent her away to have the baby. or at the very least kept her inside the house until after she gave birth. And yes, women are responsible for the epidemic of unwed births and absent fathers. If women diligently used birth control until after marriage, this wouldn't happen so often. If women knew that they wouldn't be so freely accepted if they had children out of wedlock, they'd be less likely to have children without being married.
@ LMB and Ally
The problem is Martin presented this as a Black Male Accountability Project, not a Black Women Need Better Counseling In Selecting Mates Project. If you're going to create something to help black males, I think it should address the issues with black males directly, not indirectly by talking about women and their problems. So while black women have their problems, that is not what Martin initially proposed and that's why I reacted so strongly. It just doesn't make sense to say you're going to address black men then turn around and talk about black women some more.
Unless he's arguing that black women can make black men do something. Or that any human being can make another person do what they want. In the end, we can only control ourselves, hence why I thought his idea sounded nutters.
"first of all the baby's momma shouldn't have even messed around with the non-believer in the first place"
No, that is not the correct response.
The correct response is "first of all the baby's momma shouldn't have been having sex outside of marrage with the non-believer or believer in the first place".
"So I'm not going to sit here and talk about a fucking christening while the walls are burning."
Either this was satire, or FCR's comment collapsed on itself with this last sentence.
I really don't have time when I'm sitting in church to judge the actions of others. Interesting that other churchgoers seem to fit judgment calls in between choir selections. If an unwed mother wants her baby christened in church, then it should be done. We should never turn a person away from the church.
@ Ally and LMB: Must be nice to stand on top of that mountain and judge others...
God forbid someone should have the unmitigated gall to request that men and women should be equally responsible for the child they created. Better choices eh? Although many women ignore indicators that a man will not marry them, be good a husband or father material - has it occured to you that there are women out here who were fooled? People can present themselves in ways that make you think well of them. Until men are faced with the stressors of raising a child and all that it entails, most women don't know how their mate will react. Do you know what the stats are for pregnant women who are victims of domestic violence? Pregnancy is a trigger for men who otherwise may have taken a very long while to show who they really are.
Once a child is here, branding her a "baby momma" who should have made "better choices" is silly. While I applaud Mr. Roland's idea in theory, in practice it only serves to punish those who may have already been victimized.
You never know where someone has been or what they have been through...
Having grown up in the church all my life and by the grace of God not getting caught up in the ridiculousness that pervades many "play churches" in not only the Black community, but all communities, I must say that I completely understand the varying POVs. The state of our churches today leaves much to be desired that I find it rather arrogant to propose such a siege on the untraditional family. I can only see a decline in church membership from the women, not an increase from the men. I like the idea of a paternal/maternal ministry. However,there's a dangerous game being played here. Is it the church's or any individual's place to judge another for their choices? No. We wouldn't need God if we were that great. Do some less than savory people use the church as a "no tag" zone where they are suppose to be free of judgement, thus free of consequence & responsibility? Yes. I witnessed many get up with a testimony/prayer request (which in reality was a call for a special offering) about particular struggles which had direct relation to their choices. But what killed me was their immediate evocation of "we all fall short" "none of us are perfect" and "the church is here to lift its people up" rhetoric. I find it hard to digest sometimes when the speaker isn't just struggling with one or two children out of wedlock and no support, but seven; and so far behind in rent, you must have only payed the deposit. Seven...but I digress.
FCR's comment on not focusing on the christening or the church's rejection of a child's christening is somewhat agreeable. However, I want to clarify something. Its true that the christening, just as much as a baptism is not gonna bring you salvation. Your heart and its genuine acceptance of God does. But these acts serve a purpose. When you go before God and tell him, "I want to give my child to you and put him/her under your hedge of protection" through a christening, you are saying "Lord I am taking the first steps to bringing up my child up in your ways". Now ,thats on the parent if he/she is just doing it because it what's hot in the streets right now. But, if we reduce the significance of these acts, pretty soon people will stop seeing the need for prayer and just say "well hell, he already knows whats up".
On a relevant side note: Is is just me or am I hard pressed to find a good amount of discussion (be it literature, television, film, lecture, etc) directed toward the black men in our community? I could be reaching but, it seems to me that us black women are more likely to be the consumers of this information, so these topics are aimed more at us and how WE should change it up to make our lives better? Steve Harvey's recent book was all well and good, but can I get a rebuttal titled "Man Up: We Already Knew". Instead of folk telling us to just let the man be what he'll be, get the play out of his system, and move on in the meantime, I need people to holla at our bretheren and tell them to stop skating. It just feels too one sided. Of course, that would mean there'd need to be a market for such discussion amongst our black men. Is one out there? Are brothers out there picking up self help (hate that term) or get-it-together books too?
Apologies for the length. That flashback to church really got me going.
You know... I've always had my issues with the Black Church.. it's like when we can't oppress ourselves hard enough, we leave it to our churches to fill our heads with dis-empowering bullshit to oppress us further.. If black people could get mad at the church like we get mad at the government and white folks.. we could actually get something together up in this piece...(The church and God.. and religion are separate issues btw)
This is a big cop out on so many levels.. why not focus on safe sex, or if you don't want to talk about what is already going on.. let's talk about abstinence....how about supporting young women so they know there are other options than getting knocked up. How about supporting young men so they act responsibility?
when the bun is in the oven it's too late for a lecture and when the bun is out-- you need support not judgment or faux punishment from a system that set you up from jump..I'm so pissed I am going to pray..
@Jeanette
No truer words could be said...
If black people could get mad at the church like we get mad at the government and white folks.. we could actually get something together up in this piece...(The church and God.. and religion are separate issues btw)
Bump Roland Martin and his incredibly STUPID, FOOLISH, RIDICULOUS idea. Let's talk about pimp struttin', Stacey Adams-wearing, (personal) jet-settin', tailored-suit-wearing', Bentley-drivin'-with-your-tithes pastors who insist you hand over ALL your little money on Sunday morning while they watch our communities foreclose out of existence, or be terrorized by baby drug lords, or suffer from inadequate educational systems that send our babies out into the world dumb and underserved.
And maybe Roland can show me the scripture in the Bible that lists caveats for BLESSING A BABY AND GIVING HER BACK TO THE LORD? Really? We're going to stop praying for the babies who need God the most?
Uh huh. Okay then.
I love that this starts out as 'Get the men to do right' and ends up as with everything else the Black 'leadership' teaches hurting, ostracizing the Black woman and baby....I mean how did we get from 'men take care of your kids' to 'women make the men take care of their kids'...as if a woman can make a grown man do anything...If she could seh would probably be married NOT a baby mama.
@ Jeanette, I cosign COMPLETELY.
So the mother finds the father of the baby, drags him to church for the christening... only for him to disappear for future birthdays, graduations, family reunions and each day in between. Why is appearing for a so-called 3.5 minute prayer any guarantee to a lifetime of fulfilling paternal presence?
I hear Roland and his defenders when they say his heart is in the right place, but this excuse is getting old and tired. He's addressing a very real problem with an incredibly boneheaded solution by punishing the only party I can safely say is guilty of nothing.