this business of getting past that and if you could then deal with alternative ideology outlooks which were in variance with what you believed in then you were getting somewhere. that's your invictus theme. >> right. dr. king says isn't it something that well, he believed the greatest christian was not a christian at all and that was gandhi. he felt gandhi or anyone who wanted to have a world of peace, that gandhi was inescapable. let's talk about gandhi's influence. >> i think when he said that he was thinking of gandhi not as a hindu. he was thinking of gandhi as a

moral human being. you have to deal with that socratic element in martin. there is obviously the attraction toward gandhi, you know, in terms of what he had achieved and the spiritual strength that enabled that achievement. it's important but also implicit in martin and there is appreciation of this movement in human terms that far transcended the case. >> i would guess mays, thurman and king all felt gandhi would be in paradise. that he didn't have to do anything else to be saved to get into paradise. which means they are looking

at -- >> it's the same sort of thing. >> i think so. i think your comment on ethics is right on. because, for maze, god has to be an ethical force in the world and, you know, you've got to look at the 20th century. great moment in the 20th century is 1917, the russian revolution. and will the world go into a violent revolution such as russia was and a civil war or is there another methodology? and one of the things i was struck by is that at howard at the school of religion was the center of this talk about gandhi. between mortechai johnson who

calls gandhi the little brown man and is this -- this is the way we can have a social revolution that meets up with the idea that we don't want to destroy human personality. we don't want to destroy human personali personality. if we dominate we will destroy human personality. there is discussion at howard school of religion that this is the kind of ways that a revolution has to be fought in the long run, a revolution has to be empowered through this force -- sole force that keeps human personality intact. war destroys relationships, period. how do you bring those back?

that was a theological concern for mays, howard and more for the students. i really want to push that with all three of these persons working at the issue of community. from a deeply theological perspective. it's not an approach as the rationale for ethical engagement. it's an embodied theology and the process by which one is entering into diversity with other faiths, religions. people with multiplicity of ideas of approaches. the approach to working at building community is grounded in a theology that is taking the

issue of personality which is usually. and how one can honor person, engage in the conversation and advance the conversation in ways that are both faithful to one's theological grounding without violating another person's sense of identity which includes, for many, faith orientation. >> it's very interesting. martin was very much committed to the idea of personalism. he was very drawn into the philosophy of personalism. if you look at this. which is sourced from france it comes from hano, goes into people like munier and we get it

on this side of the pond. it's important for him. could you comment a little bit on how this works for mays? we know there is an ethical connection. is it connected to the personalism that influences martin? >> mays is not like the she havefield, bright ton, boston personalist. but mays's experience, i mean, he opens his own autobiography by saying my first memory is a mob. my father is attacked and made to cowtow for fear of his life. and mays, like thurman, both of them are rooted in the deep south. we can never take that away from them. they both experience the terror

of the deep south in the way terror distorts the personality. if you have to kowtow, that distorts your personality. they almost seem like the narrative of douglas. douglas says the first time they are trying to beat him, he's almost going back in his head that his personality is being dimmed. that's how they see jim crow. jim crow is such a violent act on black people that it distorts their whole personality. for mays, if there's going to be a god, god has to enhance the human personality and the vit vitality to live. so both thurman and mays grow up in the south. thurman in florida, mays in south carolina.

and thurman's grandmother always told him, you know, that god -- i'm roughly paraphrasing. did not make him a nigger. if there is some kind of god and these -- both mays's mother is the deep spiritual one and thurman's grandmother are these men's mother, there is something about the personality. so that experience comes out. they resonate to the intellectual forms but it comes out of their lives. >> the quote, luther, that you gave from thurman, the truth is in religion is in religion because it's true and is not true because it's in the religion. do i have that right? >> not true just because it is in a particular religion, yeah. >> i would guess that both mays

and dr. king would agree with the quote. >> yes. >> so connect how you see their interfaith this the discussions we have for interfaith is also a discussion going on about multi fai faith. interfaith is something different. and the search for being comfortable with the particular as i'm searching or accepting the particular but recognizing that the goal is universal and i guess still with regard to my particular circumstance and particular faith. how does that feed into it -- their thoughts? >> i would say that you have to see both mays and thurman

growing. i don't think they are these interfaith people at first. first of all, they are dealing with prejudice because they are protestants and catholics. you've got to start there. >> who's a catholic? >> within christianity, there is a 16th century revolution called the protestant reformation. they're dealing with those issues. they are very much in a black, protestant world. i think we shouldn't forget that. they are trying to expand. they don't have -- it's not our language today. they don't have the language guided by theology. they are trying to push the language of a protestant theology further than i think,

you know, most people would have been comfortable with. so mays is trying to sort through what does hinduism mean? what does islam mean? they are meeting and encountering people in the christian tradition. the eastern orthodox tradition. they are trying to sort out this sort of big picture. it's not the kind of world of the university of chicago religious studies program where we kind of do this comparative of analysis. they come up through both of them are black baptists. and rise up and are trying to push language and ideas as they encountered and experienced them. >> that's the point. i'm thinking it feels like they

didn't have to go through the stage. they sort of jumped beyond it to know there is a universal and that everybody is working to get there whether they know it or not. >> i think for thurman there is a matter of interfaith is probably informed through dealing with racial reconciliation. at morehouse, there is a lot of evangelical language in thurman's letters and way of speaking in articles he writes. sounds very evangelical. when he goes to seminary and has to room with a white roommate which causes him to rethink all of the categories of race he's

had and to try to make sense of how this has to be thought of in terms of ethical boundaries. keeps white people outside of his boundaries and ethics refers to how do you relate to other black people. as he reconstructs his way of understanding racial relations, there is a broadening taking place with people of different faith traditions. when he establishes the church he begins to work at what is fundamentally common to all of us with our various theological and church traditions. in his late 20s now, this is early. from the time he's leaving the church in oberlin, ohio, there is a man who comes up to him.

he's chinese, bud his who says to thurman, i want to thank you. when i experience the worship services i feel uh i'm in my homeland in my buddist temple. thurman says i'm doing something right. i don't know how it is or what it is, but i'm doing something right. it would be years later. there is a strong connection between racial reck sill nation and the kind of inclusive community we are talking about in terms of interfaith and multi faith communities. all three of the figures is terribly powerful. it tends to trump certain types of religious niceties which in

other circumstances you might be concerned to pay close attention to. i think the racial experience inform it is outlook of all of these men. really important. >> we're going to take questions from the audience as they are getting situated for that. let me ask one other thing. after dr. king's death was there an ongoing relationship between thurman and mays? >> they remained friends until thurman died in 1980 and mays dies in 1984. they are on going. >> i know dr. mays became the chairperson of the atlanta board of education. where was dr. thurman? >> in san francisco. >> okay.

so we have covered a lot of areas and we have a mic here. we'll open it up for anyone who would like to offer a question or a comment. just comment very brief, questions. so come right up to the mic. >> you can always tell a morehouseman, but you can't tell him much. we have a morehouseman about to ask a question here. maybe make a comment. >> i have a question. first, i want to thank you all for the panel. it was most engage gauging. this conversation could go on for the night and you would have our attention. thank you for your depth of knowledge, not just on thurman and king individually. you have all commented on all three kbig figures and how they relate to one another. my question is the relationship between kind of their interfaith

perspective and their interdisciplinary perspectives. i think each one of them as academics and scholars shows themselves to be widely read, working across the disciplines, between disciplines. i wonder if you can speak to that aspect of their life and maybe how it points to something in them, not just theologically, but as to their entire outlook on the world and breaking down boxes and barriers wherever they may be. >> very good question. >> one of the things i don't think there is a lot of credit for. mays writes a book called the negro's god as seen through its literature. now we have lots of literary studies about the way people use religion in literature or the ways expressed. this was a ground-breaking approach. he had no teachers who knew about the subject. i was amazed by that because i

think the book is problematic at times. as i read it as a scholar now. but as i read it, i am also reading how he extends himself to say through african-american literature we can understand theology. and that's a pretty ground-breaking and seminal approach. in the late 20s and dr. smith can speak more about this. you had people like katie cannon borrowing from alice walker. here's mays with no -- there ain't no black studies program at the university of chicago. so this is a really seminole kind of thing and thurman as well. >> the last full book he wrote before his autobiography is entitled "the search for common ground." he's drawing upon myth, science,

looking at the nature of the se self. in biology he's looking at sociology. he's certainly looking at current events, but the range of disciplines that are informing his effort to define the meaning of common ground to the human enterpri enterprise. for thurman, what informs this is the understanding that truth is not only located in religion, but it's located wherever god's creation is. that god is in creation for thurman as well as god transcends creation, both. that god is not entrapped in creation, but you can then see how for thurman, every person has this sacred status that you can't say god is in her, but not

in him. or god is in that group, but not in this other group. every aspect of creation, it is a panenthis, but every expression of creation has god embedded in it. so the search for truth will naturally turn to the discipline. science for thurman isn any way antagonistic to the religious enterprise. they can go hand-in-hand in pursuing god. what thurman would warn against is the arrogance of science to think as if it is the only approach as if the arrogance of religion to assume the traditions have the only answer in terms of the search that is never ending. >> of course, there is always science on the one hand which is

a judicious appreciation for what is the case and the investigation of such questions. then there is scienctism. it is limited in a way that you can understand anything. if you take martin from a very early age, it's clear for example that morehouse majored in sociology. he didn't get a good grade. he got a "c." there you go. and in the case of statistics, he almost took as far as one can tell, a moral view towards it that it was a kind of deformation of a real understanding of what was going on. i'm only trying to say that i think there is a very humane orientation which makes him want to explore, you know, the big picture. if he were to be anything on the

scientific side today, it would be an astrophysisist. that would integrate everything. it would say there are certain types of number-crunching activities that can kill the soul. that is, by all means, something we don't wish to do. there are limits. >> to each of you, thank you for providing the informative lecture. i am roman johnson. a political science major from tennessee. my question is directed to dr. king. currently, the myth of martin king's life is perpetuated in academic and public spaces. king had a sexist world view and

did not give proper attention to many women who worked tirelessly in the southern freedom movement alongside him. do you agree with this statement? if so, how do you deal with the human martin king? >> i think the first thing we have to do is to be charitable. if you look at earlier books by me, i readily say his and her's. we talk about man. later on, you change that because you weren't really thinking. yes, you mean by man, everybody, but that's not what you are saying. martin grows up in a society where he -- remember, our's is a very socialable society. after a point, social ability

has to follow certain forms. you look at the early malcolm x and early mlk. i don't mean to draw a tight connection there. there is a business of acting out certain forms of interaction which have you speaking in a polished way and accustomed way and trying to excite the interest of folks. martin obviously did that. but i don't see that that is what one should be obsessed about. the important thing is the trajectory of growth which is demonstrated in this life. it is always not just a life, but an interaction between the individual, but also the communal. martin obviously has very deeply embedded ideals about improvement, about humanitarianism which are contradicted by which is what he

finds around him. he would easily have been your lawyer. he could have gone into medicine, which he contemplated at one point. he could have done something different. he was good at it. he grew enormously in the process. i don't think that it's all together -- if you were taking someone like many of your mystics who start off with this orientation, you don't see growth. you just see someone as what they are. st. francis of assisi would. they are staying on the course that they are set upon. that is not martin's growth. so you have this movement. >> i want to also take a stab at

that. king is like me. there are men of their generation. so, they have clay feet just like everybody else. martin king was the exception of sexism. if you asked the great civil rights lawyer and later priests, thurgood marshall, they all prevented from excelling at howard university law school. sexism said jane crowe instead of jim crowe. this is why it was called movement. pushing the boundaries.

it was jim crowe, but these women knew there were jane crowe. then other people came along and said, if two men or two women or whatever, the boundaries of democracy should be for everybody. everybody has entitled to the right to live in a democracy. and the boundaries get pushed. clearly ella baker said this about king and all black preachers. they were used to being in control. they were the spokesman for the community. you know, you ask every black preacher who really runs a church and they will tell you, don't make the deaconess mad. if you make her mad, you will not have a church. there is a give and take going on there. king was part of his generation

sexist. if i watch rap music, it ain't too much better. we have the possibility of growth. >> thank you. >> this is probably our last question. yes, sir. >> fortunate for me. thank you. good evening. i would like to thank morehouse college for holding the forum. i'm a visitor to campus. i teach at augusta state university. as soon as i heard about it, i made plans to drive down i-20 to be part of it. my question is for dr. jelks. a number of the of the inner circle, particularly jesse jackson and james lawson say dr. king made little secret of one day seceding dr. mays of morehouse college. it seemed that at one point, dr.

king thought he could be the president of morehouse college. we know that didn't happen. i'm curious based on your een ds say anything specific about the possibility of a future role for dr. king on the morehouse campus? >> i think mays absolutely saw king as a spiritual son. i think he hoped that someone of king's statue would be able to succeed him. he had a trustee board and we don't know what they thought. he certainly hoped that martin -- say had the montgomery movement stopped right there. martin would have been the perfect candidate to become president of morehouse college.