Woke in the WELS: Black History Program at WISCO #2

Compiled from anonymous sources.
   
This is the follow-on to the leaked email from Rev. Dr. Ken Fischer addressing woke shenanigans at the Black History (month) Presentation. According to my sources, more went on than was alluded to in Ken's email to delegates and pastors of the WLHS conference. 

There were several rap songs performed including "This is How We Do It" by Montell Jordan and "Crank Dat" by Soulja Boy. 

"This is How We Do It" is a party song. The protagonist drinks a "40" (ounce bottle of liquor) and spends time admiring "honeys" in their "summertime skirts." Themes inappropriate for teenagers.

"Crank Dat" is more concerning. Soulja Boy uses the word "ho" quite liberally throughout and uses two sexually loaded phrases. The first is "superman dat hoe" which Urban Dictionary defines as "When a male ejaculates on a blanket and sticks it on a female's back, creating a cape like superman." Second, "supersoak dat hoe" which Urban Dictionary defines as "to ejaculate on a hoe. making her drip in cum as if soaked with a super soaker. Both definitions linked back to the Soulja Boy song as defining the meaning. While Soulja Boy has downplayed the meaning, the song has been banned from school dances across the country. Again, sexually explicit, nonprocreative sexual activity (and certainly not between a married couple) is glorified and women are demeaned being referred to a "hoes" and objects on which to deposit sexual fluids.

But Ken seems to think it's OK. During his chapel address he said around the nine-minute mark "There's some people who we also concerned about like music and like are there some words behind this, are there things that are not biblical? Instead of maybe just appreciating the moves that you did, the hip-hop, the step dance. Wow." Wow indeed, Ken. It's not like the Bible has anything to say about the words we use and the environments we spend time in, or about how we are to judge those who are in the faith. Ken shares what the real problem is: "Now here's the problem. When it becomes something doctrinal, like, I think this might have not said things the way the Bible says - and that's what we are all about here guys - you know that we are centered in trying to share the pure message of Jesus' love with others and ourselves. So when something's doctrinal people get even more concerned like I better say something. But" - wait, we aren't to address false doctrine? - "you know what? As pastor at Risen Savior for over a dozen years, I meet people and try to share Jesus with them. And sometimes they had stuff that was wrong in their life. Like all of us have something wrong in our life" - The 'log-and-spec' in Matthew 7 is not an equivocation of sin or to prevent judging in the Church, it is a curb against hypocritical judgement - "and my first thing wasn't do address those big sins that I saw. You know, my first purpose was? To lovingly develop a relationship where I could eventually at the right time get to the right issue we need to talk about."

Winsomeness strikes again.

But it seems the thing that got under most peoples' skin was a re-enactment of the speech from Judas and the Black Messiah:

Ken defends this as "historical." Simply because something is 'historical' does not mean it is worth re-enacting.

Students were also lead by demonstrators in a chant of "I am revolutionary" multiple times.

I am told the administration would not have approved of this, if they were paying attention, but of course they weren't because "their wonderful black students would never do anything wrong..."Ken acknowledges that there was "months of preparation" Which faculty member(s) had oversight and thought this presentation was a God-pleasing endeavor?

The video has been memory-holed from the Internet and from delegates and pastors of the WLHS Conference, but apparently not to students of black parents. Twice in the last week black parents at WLHS have complained about the Black History presentation being taken down, going so far as to accuse WLHS of racism for doing so! Nonetheless they are being given the opportunity to view the video on campus. So while Ken formally apologized to call workers, they are celebrating the presentation with black students and family members.

Ken briefly mentions this in his chapel, which seems to run counter to the (non-)apology offered in his email sent out to the delegates and Pastors. In fact, during Ken's chapel, he doubles down on his approval of their performance: "You [think we] don't like what [you] did and you don't want anyone to know about it. And you disapprove like Administration disapproves. I want to tell you that is not true. That is a lie." (approx. 3 minutes into his address). Apparently, part of the reason for Ken's address in place of chapel was to prevent a "planned response" (1m30s into his address)

Tangentially related, but multiple times Ken says "as a white person..." He is clearly employing Glenn Singleton's Courageous Conversations model he and Joan Prince presented at the Lutheran Leadership Conference by "Isolating Race."

One of my sources was "appalled" at the chapel message, as Ken used a patina of actual Bible preaching at the end to justify what was otherwise pure social justice, pandering and apology to the black socially-justice minded students. For everyone else, nothing but accusation, as mentioned above - anyone who criticized did not understand the context or was not sufficiently grateful for the 'gift' that was presented. Ken throws WELS pastors/teachers under the bus when he explains that people 'outside of here' wouldn't understand their presentation or his waring of a 'black man's suit. Despicable.

"I am deeply troubled by what is going on in our synod. I appreciate that you are speaking against it and documenting it. You are doing good work. Thank you."

(If you have access to the transcript, video/pictures or any related information, please email layman@nihilrule.com and I will update this post. Anonymity, of course, is assured)