Transcripts For CSPAN3 Confederate Flag Slavery And Modern Racism 20161226

Create a space in which we can begin to have some conversation about the lee jackson windows here in the cathedral and the larger issues of race and the legacy of slavery in our nation. If you do not know the recent history of events regarding these windows, i invite you to read about that history in the information we provided for you within your program in your program for tonights conversation. Tonight, please know is the first in an ongoing series of conversations over the next two years intended to foster conversation and a deeper understanding. While the leadership of the cathedral made the decision to remove the confederate battle flags from these windows, the larger question of whether the windows should stay in the sanctuary or be moved to a different location was intentionally left open for a period of two years so that we might engage in conversation and education around the difficult issues of race in our history and in our present life together. As i said in my letter that is part of your program, yes, these windows are about our history, but theyre also about our future. How will we move Forward Together . How will we learn from one another . How can we use the windows to write a new narrative of our history. Together. The conversation were having tonight and the ones we will have over the next two years are part of a much larger conversation that is taking place nationally. An important conversation around race and the legacy of slavery. As the cathedral community, we are hoping to create a place within this sacred space where we can listen and learn from one another with open hearts and minds. We hope to model the love of our lord, jesus christ that seeks always to reconcile all that is broken in ourselves, in our community and in our culture. These conversations may well be uncomfortable at times. They involve difficult subjects, but they are important conversation. And it is our hope that over the course of the next several years with gods help, we can create something that is positive and uplifting for us all. We are so grateful for your presence, and we invite your participation not only in this program but in future conversations. If you would like to share your ideas about the nature of some of those future conversations, and if youd like to share with us in this journey, i invite to you look at the back page of your program where there is a link where you can go and sign on to be part of this journey together. So, welcome. Were glad that youre here. And if youll permit me, id like to start with a prayer this evening. The lord be with up. And also with up. Let us pray. Grant, o god, your holy and lifegiving spirit may so move every human heart, that the barriers which divide us may crumble, suspicions disappear, and hatred cease, that our divisions being healed we may live in justice and peace through jesus christ our lord, amen. Now, lets begin. I will not repeat their bios because you have them in front of you, but it is my great pleasure to welcome our participants, dr. John coski, the reverend dr. Kelly browndouglas, dr. Rex harris and our moderator, ray suarez. Please join me in welcoming them. Thanks, dean. Welcome to monuments speak. Thanks for coming. Thanks to the panel. And thanks for being willing, both audience and panel, to wrestle with some of the questions that arise in a people, any people, when they have to face their own past and what the past tells them today. Were here this evening because symbols speak. Were surrounded by them 37 red and green traffic lights, eldpants and donkeys, gothic towers, the cross, the lamb. Saints are all around this building. They stand mutely and mostly unlabeled in statuary, paint or stained glass. They identify themselves through a language understood bit artist and by the viewer. St. Philippe with an arm full of stones, st. Peter with his crossed keys, sebastien shot through with arrows. Lucia with a platter and two eyeballs. They work as a language, in part, because of widely shared understanding, a consensus about what they mean. The red hexagon of a stop sign doesnt have parties chiming in to register their objections or insist it doesnt mean stop at all, but, in fact, it means speed up. Symbols have meaning, symbols speak. They derive their power from common understanding, except when they dont. Can they change over time . Can they be repurposed over time . Can they have layers of meaning that come from context, who displays them, who witnesses their display and can common understandings render some symbols hard to use. Can the passage of time add meanings that leave us very clear on the fact that symbols speak while some of us wish theyd just shut up. Today we come together in this Cathedral Church to discuss the display of windows dedicated while this church was still under construction to memorialize generals robert e. Lee and thomas Stonewall Jackson. As were gathered here, not in front of the memorials, which are over there by president wilson, let me tell you what lees inscription says. To the glory of god, all righteous and all merciful, and in undying tribute to the life and witness of Robert Edward lee, servant of god, leader of men, general in chief of the armies of the confederate states, whose compelling sense of duty, serene faith and unfailing courtesy, mark him for all ages as a christian soldier without fear and without reapproach. The lee windows show the general as a soldier, educator and engineer. Stonewall jackson is shown kneeling prayerfully in camp while a bug ler plays and he reads the bible. And hes shown in an adjacent window as an armored crusader, arms uplifted while heavenly trumpets play, going to glory. His memorial reads, in part, like a stonewall in his steadfastness, swift as lightning and mighty in battle, he walked humbly before his creator whose word was his guide. This bay is erected by the united daughters of the confederacy and his admirers from north and south. For the moment, the confederate battle flags have been removed from the lee and jackson windows and replaced with rectangular pieces of colored glass. The bays, the windows, they remain. Can their meanings change over time . Can what is appropriate or acceptable change over time . How has time shaped americans understanding of the civil war and the real life, flesh and blood men, the actual robert e. Lee and Stonewall Jackson . Do they belong in a church . In the windows throughout this building youll find prophets, apostles, martyrs, saints, ancient and modern, yes, and youll find political leaders. Two of them right by the front door. Abraham lincoln and george washington. What does it mean for them to be depicted in a house of prayer for all people . And what the designer of the city, pierre lonfont called a great church for National Purposes. Joining me in this conversation, from left to right, dr. John coski, historian at American Civil War museum and author of the confederate battle flag americas most embattled emblem. Sitting next to dr. Coski, the reverend dr. Kelly browndouglas, theologians, and sitting here directly next to me, dr. Rex ellis, associate director at National Museum of africanAmerican History and culture, recently opened here in washington. Dr. Coski, i want to start with you. I want you to take us back to the period when these windows were being imagined, designed and installed. It was a time when americans were preparing to look back, as the sen scentennial of the civi approached. Strom thurman for president in 1948. The departure of the finest confederate veterans. There were no firsthand witnesses to the war. They were leaving the stage. So, it was sort of a secondary memory passed down from people rather than an experience spoken firsthand. Where were we in our country and commemoration of the civil war and that period when we got to the early 50s, when these windows were being contemplated . Im going to stand, if i may, so i can see everyone. Can everyone hear me . Ray, he hasnt asked me to digest my entire 300page book, so im not going to try, but a little bit of background before the 1950s, because he mentioned ray mentioned the dixiecrats, 1948, which was a very important year in the history of the Confederate Flag in tarl. Let me just start with the immediate aftermath of the civil war. Theres an old adage the winners always write the history. As most know, in the American Civil War, an exception and unique in modern history that the lizards in the American Civil War had quite the role in shaping our noting of the history. After a brief period in which it was very clearly not a good idea to go trotting out the symbols of the confederacy during reconstruction, after that very brief period, the white south was more or less allowed by the federal government to erect statues to their dead first in cemeteries, monuments to their dead, to their seoldiers, heroe first and later in public spaces, to write histories, teach histories of the war, a type of history that witness gone with the wind and birth of a nation, for that matter. It influenced the shaping of the American Civil War. So, for this long period, from the 1880s beyond world war i, i mean, the Confederate Monument in Arlington Cemetery was erected in 1914, for example, and the last monument in richmond on monument avenue in 1929. So, this extended well into the 20th century, the last major confederate reunion in richmond in 1932. As ray mentioned, it is last veteran, last bona fide veteran kid in 1949. All the while in that long period, the confederate battle flag was part of the ritual of white southern life. In memorial day ceremonies, in the rituals of the confederate memorial organizations, in these dedication of these monuments. It was a familiar part of the ritual of white southern life but it was restricted very much to those kinds of rituals. The kinds of things many of us grew up with since the 1950s, a world in which every business dha had dixie in its name almost certainly had a con fed ralt flag as part of its logo. That was completely foreign before world war ii. It started to change in the period just before world war ii as the flag took on a meaning as a logo for the south. And i think we can agree more specifically, the white south. It manhattan not just the confederate white south, but american shortstop men from the south fighting overseas, american southern boys and their football teams when they were going to fight the northern football teams adopted the flag as their similar boshlg a totem, if you will, of what it was to be a southerner. Into that instrument, in the period roughly 1948 and just before, it did start before 1948, the flag started to have a more prominent currency on the southern landscape. A lot more people were using it. A lot of people noticed it and were against it, including the american daughters of the confederacy who thought it wasnt necessarily good for a flag to be used outside of a sfriktly memorial context. The dixicrats themselves did not adopt the symbol but most young people from College Campuses accustomed to using the flag in a casual way associated the flag with the dixiecrat movement which began to proceed the democratic partys embrace of a stronger civil rights platform in 1948. It took on a meaning of protest against incipient Civil Rights Movement as well as continuing to be all these other things. In the aftermath of that, what the headline writers all over the nation dubbed the flag fad broke out. The flag became very popular in the north. A lot of people were asking why. Was this somehow part of the dixiecrat movement against truman or was it simply like the coon skinned cats and hula hoops and other fads of 50s. They concluded the laert, its just a fad. The American Press were warning against the flag as a symbol not only of racism but also disunion in the context of the cold war. We need to present a united front in this flag suggested disunity in the nation. So, that was the context in the early 50s, was this interesting period in which the flag went from the very restricted symbol revered by its owners, the Confederate Heritage groups essentially owned it, symbolically and otherwise. And it was essentially pandoras box open for those who grew up in the 60s, 70s, 80s, culture we knew as children began in the late 40s, particularly in the 1950s with the flag fad. Interestingly the united daughters, kappa alpha fraternities and other groups fought against this. They persuade many legislatures to pass laws that punished the very thing many of us new grewing up. Beach towels with Confederate Flag on it. Were punished by law of desecration, misuse of the battle flag. It wasnt only the africanAmerican Press but the protecters of the flag, the keepers of the confederate flame initially reacted against it trying to make sure it was used only as a revered memorial symbol and not the way it clearly became by the time of the civil war centennial. Thats really the context of the early 1950s for the use of the flag. Dr. Browndouglas, would we install a set of windows like that today . If we did, how would it be different . What an easy question. As i contemplate that question, i ask a prior question, first of all, and that is, would we have even installed those windows, lets say, in 1954 or beyond . Because, of course, they were installed in 1953. And in 1954, in response to the brown versus the board of education decision, confederate symbols began to gather new meaning or different meanings, as even dr. Coski points out in his book. And those meanings began to become it became very clear that these symbols were symbols of white supremacy, at least segregationist symbols and symbols that stood against the decision of brown versus the board of education and stood against integration. And so, i often think to myself, my, my, my, the cathedral got in right under the gun in installing those windows in 1953 because the culture certainly changed in 1954. Today i think that, perhaps, a series of questions would have to be asked that maybe werent asked in 1953 when those windows were installed. And the overall question is this, what does it mean to be the National Cathedral . Wed have to ask the question, who are we . Are we more driven by the nations civil region in its sense of itself, or are we more compelled by who we are as a church and the theology of a church whose good liberated the slaves from egyptian bondage and whose god we claim is most manifest in jesus who said ive come to set the captives free. And so i think that we would find ourselves today having to ask the question of what does it mean for us to be washington National Cathedral . Does it mean we happen to be a were a social institution that happens to be religious and so we service the civil religion of the nation or are we, indeed, a church which is called to show forth a glimpse of god in the world . And perhaps these are questions that werent asked, i dont know, in 1953. But to be sure, it seems as though the lee jackson windows, at least forces us to call the question in terms of the civil religion that that even the daughters of the the united daughters of the confederacy spoke of this civil religion that in many respects, sanctions or sanctifies the confederacy and raises lee and jackson as not simply heroes of the confederate war, but that theyre also saints. So, we ask to ask those questions which would cause us to really contemplate and ask the wider question of what it means for us to be a National Cathedral. Dr. Ellis, dr. Coski was very careful to point out that when he talks of the south and talks of a logo for the south, hes speaking particularly of the white south. And in his book he acknowledges time and again that black americans were simply not asked. They had no voice in that conversation, as we came up with consensus symbols, yet black americans were speaking. Not being heard is different from not having anything to say. Lets talk about those years, from the mid40s to the mid50s, what was going on in black america and was there a very conscious sense that this all terntive narrative of the past was gaining legitimacy and gaining force and sort of hardening in the public consensus without a black american counternarrative being given enough space . If you go back to world war i and the experience of black soldiers when they fought in france under french commands and you look at the experience of most of them being one where they ate in the same restaurants as the french, they rode on the same buses and the same transportation, they fought in the same units, they trained in the same units, they were treated differently than they remember in the america of that time. They fought in the war, and then they return home with this new training, with this new expectation that if this happened in france, and if i was allowed to feel differently and to feel more like a man, to feel more empowered, to feel like i was equal to a white man, then this is something thats possible in america. So, they come back to america and it was the summer of 1919. They call it the red summer of 1919 because of the number of riots that took place during that period. They come back to a continuing environment of lynching that started back in the 1890s, but was still going on. They come back to a reminder that the equality they felt and the experienced in france, they would have to leave in france or they would have to fight even harder for that environment to exist in america. So Adam Clayton Powell and others coined the phrase, the new negro. And that new negro began to create all kinds of agencies and all kinds of organizations that in some way supported this idea of equality within the community. But even as the naacp and the urban league and the National Council of women and all of these other organizations began to exist, there also was the necessity of ida b. Welles barnett who was in memphis and who was in trying to in some way speak out about injustices that were going on in tennessee. She had to leave because they burned down her house. She had to leave and go to north. Somewhere around 6 million africanamericans left the south and headed to the north, to the urban cities of the north using the chicago defender and robert abbotts paper to give them information about where they might settle in philadelphia, where they might settle in new york, where they might settle in boston. They left the south because for them in confederacy that were discussing and we talk about, this confederacy was not for them a cultural icon that was positive. It equaled lynching. Im trying my best to be objective what were discussing and talking about, but i just remember all of this pain, when you talk about pride. I just remember all of this violence when you talk about liberty and justice. I just remember all of these i had a young white boy that lived in williamsburg, virginia, and williamsburg was they called it the restoration at that point. And everybody came to williamsburg to see the town that rockefeller built. And i lived there. We lived on the east side of the town. Right across the road from me was a White Community. We didnt have to have a wall up. We knew we stayed on one side and the White Community stayed on the other side. But one day, one day im riding my bike down this road that was, you know, an enter greated road we never used. The whites drove on the road and blacks drove on the road as well, but i was riding my bike on the road. I had gotten myself a balloon. I had blew the balloon up and i tied the balloon on the back of my wheel. You know what im talking about. So when i went down the road and i could swear i was on a motorcycle. So, i was doing it. And there was this white, young man, same age as me. There he was on his bike with a balloon as well. And so i rode and he rode. And he was trying to go faster than me so it would be he did the same thing. And when we got to the end of the road, he looked at me and i looked at the him. He was just as curious as me as i was about him. And then he spoke to me and i spoke to him. And all of a sudden, he asked me a question and i asked him a question. We rode a little bit more. And before i knew it, we had been talking together for three, four hours. All that afternoon. He was the only one i had to play with. He was the only one he had to play with. So, we played together. At the end of the day, he goes to his home on the other side of the street, and i go to my home on my side. Street. The end of the week never saw him before. The end of the week, all my families would go to the local richs market to buy groceries. And were in our car. I sat in the middle. My brother sat on the right. My sister sat on the left. They were older than me. I sat in the middle. So, im driving down the road and i look over and theres a car over in the left and i look over in that car and there he is. Theres the white boy that i played with. So, we get to the red light and when we get to the red light, i have turned in my car and im looking at him and hoping he looks at me, because he was on the edge. He was on the he was in the backseat, but he was on the edge. Not in the middle, like i was. As were going to the stoplight, im saying, when we get to the stoplight, ill wave at him and hell wave at me so my family will know i have a white friend. We get to the stoplight and he swerves over and he looks at me. When he looks at me, he does this. As i tried to wave at him, he tried to avoid the fact that he even recognized me. That is what i remember about the confederacy. Thats what i remember about that flag. Because i found out that his father ran a barber shop, and the barber shop ran a flag that was a Confederate Flag. He did not want his family to know that he had found someone who might be his friend. And we never became friends. We never saw each other after that day. We never spoke after that day. And i think often about what would have happened if he and i had not embraced a symbol and a lifestyle and the philosophy that prevented us from ever knowing each other before we even gave ourselves a chance. [ applause ] you mentioned the defender which circulated on the rail lines throughout the country and told the story and kept the running tally of the number of lynchings. Very Important Institution in American Life for black americans. Was there an ongoing attempt to defang the civil war . To make it less creepy, less scary . To make the sectional consciousness of the country that prevailed less frightening to all americans out of commercial interest as much as anything else . When i look at disneys song of the south and uncle remis, when i look at the ole miss mascot running out onto the field with an enormous flag dressed up as a confederate cavalry officer and the running rebels and the old south balls on various state Land Grant University campuses. There was a nostalgia about the antibellum world that declaude it. It wasnt based on slavery and sufring and all that. It was based on glorified received notions of what that world was like into which black people had no input. There was no, yeah, but, moment, where you could add that stuff to the story. Was there an attempt to legitimize that story by making it less threatening, less kooshlgs less problematic for americans from all parts of the country . And are these windows part of that project . Yes, on several levels, the popular cowboys and indians, that way, but on a more significant intellectual level in the half century after the war. Many, im sure, are familiar with david blythes book race and reunion, subtitled memory of the civil war. Essentially, beginning really before the turn of the 20th century but essentially in the years right afterwards, the spanishamerican war, agreeing to disagree. Other historians karen januariy makes clear that there was still a lot of dissension but in a sense southerner and northerners, those who fought the war, very much alive, and their project any to the current day, agree to disagree on causes, to praise each others valor on the battlefield. We may not agree about what the war was about. In fact, they fought at the drop of a hat of the question of why the war were brought up in these reunions among veterans at gettysburg in 1913 and again in 1938. But just avoid talking about the causes and talk, instead, about the war itself and about the valor of both sides. There was a kind of consensus among, again, White Americans to shove the causes to the side, to essentially forget the what david calls the emancipationist vision of the war. The emancipation of 4 Million People came out of this war. Any generalization will be an exaggeration to some extent. America reunited on the basis of miring each others valor on the battlefield during the American Civil War. That continued into the period were talking about, es especially in a world war ii cold war context. It was all mores essential to talk about how the war made us stronger, made us one nation and that we could not face the threat of the soviet union and red china if we were divided. But thank goodness, were now one people made stronger in this cruise bell that was the civil war. Many people did remember emancipation. It didnt take w. E. De boys to write about it. Many people did remember. Speaking generally, the nation healed at the expense of Racial Justice. Mentioning world war i, doctor mentioned world war i, reading something the other day from a confederate veteran from one of the redshirts, Militia Company from South Carolina immediately after the war, he wrote a little pamphlet after world war i saying how it was that the south was responsible for victory in france. His thesis was by precipitating secession in civil war, painful for those who fought it, and he was a colonel of a regiment, it was all for the better because it made this nation one, it exploded the doctrine of states rights and made sure this nation was unified. If it hadnt been so unified as a result of fighting and the confederacy, losing the civil war, they be it would not have been prepared to rescue the world in 1918. It was an interesting thesis. Thats the sort of thing that was prevalent for most of the early 20th century. We are a stronger nation and as much as we may disapprove of slavery in your case or invasion you invade the us and, according to the confederate charge, the southern charge against the north, we were guilty we were victims of the invasion, but well overlook that. You people down south were guilty of human slavery, but well forget that, and admire what you did on the battlefield. That was the basis of reu. N. Fikdz. It came at the expense of Racial Justice well until the 20th century. I guess what i would say in response to that and in response to what youre saying that clearly the nation, it was a pseudo healing. Clearly the nation had not healed and had not united. We can see that today. We can only suggest that the nation was united or the nation was healed from the perspective of White America, right . And so certainly not from the perspective of those who were enslaved and the perspective of black america. And the legacy of that continues today, as we see, and which brings us to this moment of a nation not united because the nation has not been honest and looked at and talked about slavery or its legacy of which these confederate symbols are a part. Theres much to say about that. I also think when we talk about, and even as i think about the question of what the church would do today, we also have to remember that there was a church that was speaking out against these confederate symbols just as the Africanamerican Community has been ignored and some of the history about the confederate, confederacy, so has the black church. And the black church was always a firm witness against racial injustice. And against, obviously, as it emerged as an invisible institution during the time of slavery. And so, that when we ask what the church would say or even if we look at the ease by which some churches incorporated confederate symbols within their institutions, you had the black church, it was very clear about that and was very clear in terms of what it meant to be christian. The black church continuing to hold up the theology of a god that was a liberator of the oppressed, a god who stood for justice and so that it was the black church who gave birth to people like Harriet Tubman and nate turner, to david walker, to ida b. Welles. And so you did have at the same time that you had this cathedral and you had, perhaps, a wider white Faith Community that was embracing confederate symbols and embracing the lost cause ideology, you had another christian witness, which was the black church witness, that was, indeed, saying that embrace that is to compromise the faith. But it could not come into public spaces and cast a vote, a decisive vote on whether or not Stonewall Jackson would be depicted as a crusading knight with trumpets, literal trumpets, pointing down from heaven as he looks skyward. They couldnt be heard. They were there. They were witnessing, but they couldnt be heard in a way that would change the debate. Thats right. Even if we enter on a debate. It is this divisiveness, i think, that is the legacy, in many ways, of the confederacy and flag. I think about world war i and w. E. Deboise sort of advertising and advocating for blacks to fight in the war. I think about Frederick Douglas and the same notion about blacks fighting in the civil war. It all whether it was the Tuskegee Airmen in world war ii, whether it was the United States colored troops in world war ii, whether it was the the 93rd or the 92nd regiment in world war i, whether it was the color troops in the civil war, it was this, give me an opportunity to prove to you that i deserve to be a citizen. Give me this opportunity to fight and to die so that i might in some way convince you that i am not a coward, that i am worthy. That i am not what that symbol says. That i am not what that symbol purports me to be. Im something different. 1915, there were excivil war black soldiers who said, we need a building, we need something that reminds that reminds the nation what we have done, that we have fought and that we have died and that we have been not just a part of this country, but weve given everything to this country. We have fought valiantly. They held that dream until september 24th when we opened that museum. We opened that museum because of a dream that began in 1915, that was deferred, deferred, deferred. Finally came to fruition. Much of that need, that desire to want, to be a part of america and wanting to be a part of the memory of what made America Great was a dream that was deferred. And for me, that has a great deal to do with the power, the prominence and the presence of the confederacy. And until we are able to begin to do what were doing now, discuss and talk about it and begin to heal as a result of it, it will maintain itself. I worry so much about whats happening in our country and in our nation now. Just the meanspiritedness that is here. I worry about it because thats not what we need. What we need is another kind of formula. Now, if you could if you could convince me that there was a definition or a new redefinition of the confederacy and the Confederate Flag that led us to a better understanding and a better a better realization of what we are and what we can be as americans, id fly the flag, too. [ applause ] i think context is pretty important in these matters. When you want to fly a flag in your front lawn, and its your front lawn, well, thats up to you, isnt it . Is it different if its a state park in the state of mississippi, named for a general or a leader of a State Government that was segregationist, is it different if its a calhoun hall at a university named after john c. Cal hawn . Is it different if its a church . Is it even more different when its a church that in its founding documents says its a church for all people and for National Purposes . Is it obliged somehow any old church maybe isnt . And is it different when its in a stained glass window . Why is that . Again, so i think two things. This brings us back to this question of sort of who we are. As the nations cathedral. And what story whose stories are we trying to tell and whose stories are here in this cathedral. And so, lets say, that a part of who we are, because theres a lot of iconography in this cathedral thats not in stained glass windows but other monuments in this cathedral, part of who we are is about, perhaps, telling the nations story. And if that is the case, then we have to tell a broader story. And so that we have to tell the nations story, which means that the story of not just people like lee and jackson have to be told, but the people who were victims of the institution they fought to preserve also has to be told. So, a broader story has to be told. Now, when we talk about slained glass windows, stained glass windows, the history of stained glass windows in churches, first of all, they entered into churches in one respect because they provided during the medieval period, they provided an opportunity for people who couldnt afford bibles or people who were not literate the biblical story. They are religious symbols. As religious symbols they Say Something not only about the culture out of which they emerge but also saying about the god to whom they point. So, what are we saying about god in the stained glass windows that are reflections of lee and jackson . And so, thats a different question. Its different if they were one of the monuments as lincoln, et cetera, but theyre stained glass windows, so that takes on a different religious symbolism. To you see the speak in a different way from a statue or banner oh, yes. Or some other form of acknowledgment . In the inner church. It would be different if they were in a museum. But theyre in a church. And theyre stained glass windows. Is part of this problem, john cos can coski, once something is installed, the fight around getting it uninstalled, as were seeing in new orleans, as weve seen repeatedly in richmond, as we saw at the confederate state house, is totally different from the argument over whether to install it or not in the first place . Well, yes, it is. Also i want to speak to a point that all of you are making about the context for these windows in 1953, precisely because this was to be the Nations Church. And you say, observing that it was to incorporate all americans. I think, i havent read all the dournlgts i read some relating to the history of these windows, that explains why theyre here. Your point about a year later when the Confederate Flag was being used in a year later in the decade after that, used very clearly in very more widely as a symbol of opposition and violent opposition, defense of segregation, opposition to integration, that might have made it less palatable for the cathedral after 1954 is a really good point. But what it tells us is the white south was still, in 1953, as it had been, i can tell you, for the previous 50 years, since really the spanishamerican war, fighting for legitimacy. Trying to prove to the nation as a whole its patriotism. Yes, we were on the other side of a civil war, but we are all americans now. And the white south tried mightily during world war i period, just as africanamericans were trying to earn, just as dr. Dubois urged black americans to close ranks with the nation, despite what was happening to them at home. Its an opportunity to earn the respect. The white south was also fighting for that respect. And a window here for the consensus hair row of the confederacy, the man who embodied virtues, so much so that american submarines were named for him. Army bases were named for him. A consensus, a man who at the time, and in 1907 at the time of lees centennial birthday, all famous northerners were given speeches about what a great man he was at his centennial. To have him represented here, in a lot of people wanted lee and others represented in the New York University hall of fame. It was important to get respect for the white south to get respect, this many years after the war. I think that has a lot to do with why theyre here. Precisely for that reason because it was a Nations Church and an opportunity, a gesture of respect to earn our place at the table for the united daughters of the confederacy and prove once and for all were part of the reunited nation, especially in this cold war context of what was threatening the nation. To your point about taking things down, that is clearly where we are now. We have a commemorative landscape built up over centuries. A commemorative landscape that one part of it, at least, testifies to the power of relationships. A monument to a confederate on a public space says, among other things, at the time this monument was erected, the voice of black people didnt count. Thats part of its backstory. Inevitably, theres no way around it. There are other reasons why it may have been put there. But it speaks to the power, the unequal power relationships at the time. That they have taken on a life of their own over time. People get used to them. You mentioned richmond and monument avenue. Its part of the marketing of the city. Its one of the most visited places in the city. Its good for businesses. Its not about gray and blue. Its about green. Its good for the citys image because people come to see it. Its good for tourist dollars. People also get used to it. Its part of what they grew up with. I was mentioning earlier when you were talking privately about high schools that were named for confederate heroes in the 1940s and 50s and 60s and people become invested in those school names, not because of their names, but because of their own personal heritage in attending that school and remembering from their dewy youth and the glory years of being part of that school. So taking things down is an attack on a rooefd world. Most of us do not stop and think that the commemorative landscape we inherit had to come from somewhere. Those things didnt just grow out of the ground. God didnt place them there. Conscious decisions to place those monuments, to raise the money to build them, to design them exactly as they are, to write those inscriptions that ray read earlier. Those were all conscious acts and theres backstories to them that speak to who had power and who didnt. They tell us more about the people who erected them than they do about the historical subjects that are being commemorated. Theyre documents of the period 234 which they were ee reblgted. Most people dont stop to think that. We received this commemorative landscape as a given. And theres something theres a human tendency to react negatively when you are comfortable, as you were saying earlier, theres a lot of people who have good reason not to be comfortable with that landscape because they do know the backstories, but when you are comfortable with it, an attack on it is a personal attack. Its a disruption of the life you knew and the world as you received it. I think thats what well be going to your questions in just a moment. Before we do, i want to ask you, dr. Ellis, given the point that dr. Coski just made about how these become fixed values, they are physical things. Stone mountain is stone mountain. Its very hard to unstone mountain it. Those windows are part of this building. That plaque commemorating robert e. Lee that says he was beyond reapproach is a part of this building. Can you unbuild that . Should you unbuild that . I think if we i think your question was, can we unbuild the concrete and the image and the symbols that we have created. Yeah, we can. It takes a great deal of effort to do that. The easier thing to do is to let it stand and then create new definitions for why it should stay there. Call it culture. Call it something else. Dont call it violence. Dont call it dont talk about what it does or has done to a community. For me, what makes it even more important that we not only grapple with this, but that we resolve this, because it will always be like a scab, a sore, that wont heal. And in gods house makes it even deeper in terms of its ability to heal or its ability to destroy. In gods house. The people i knew as a child, who were the bravest, who did not allow oppression to overcome them, who did not allow their anger to subsume them, were men of god and women of god. And so gods house was always a sanctuary. Gods house was always a place to go to renew ones self. Gods house was a place to go to be inspired, so that you can leave gods house and fight the good fight. To have in gods house, something that questions your sense of what you can do, what you can be, what you can achieve, is, to me, to who god is and to his example. I affirm that. And i just wanted to add that if taking them down is an attack upon the people, we also have to recognize that keeping up certain symbols is also an attack upon the people. Is dr. Coski, is it different in a church, as we just heard dr. Ellis suggest, from ft. A. P. Hill, from a square where a general stands . Is a church a different place and a different context which demands a different kind of conversation, a different kind of response . Ive wriven about written more about the difference between private and public, as you were alluding to earlier. Im not going to try to digest an old chapter on that. Clearly as you say theres a difference between what naacp referred to as sovereignty context of state flags and flags on public property versus on private property, which the customs of free speech rule. Churches it seems to me its a matter of the church itself, the people of the church. Any number of the churches. Primarily episcopal ones, to my knowledge, that have wrestled with this issue. As someone who doesnt belong to a church, i will defer to those who do. Is it different . Yes, clearly. I thinkclearly. I think the decision belgs of that church. Lets go to questions. Let me ask you to not im sure there are deeply felt opinions about those windows, deep insights about those windows but i would ask you not to make a speech. Give us an idea of whats on your mind and please ask a question of one of our fine panelists. We have a mic in the center aisle. We have a gentleman whose hand shot up. Tell us who you are and ask a question of the panelists. My name is riley temple. Im a former member of the Protestant Episcopal Cathedral Foundation here, board of trustees. I have spent a considerable amount of time studying these windows and weighing in on it. First, i want to salute the cathedral for doing thchl this is a wonderful idea and concept and absolutely essential thing to do. Secondly, i grew up in richard, virginia, born and bred, and i grew up in a house that sat on the very ground of the largest confederate hospital. A block away from where i lived but still exists, the soldier, confederate soldier and sailors monument. Those confederate symbols are never were never benign. We always considered them to be an attack. They may have been benign with white people but never in the black community. Secondly, with respect to monument avenue, i weighed in on monument avenue, a public thoroughfare. I dont believe those symbols should come down, because they can be taught about. In the church, my question is about framing the question. In a church that honors two people in windows, two people who fought to preserve the way of life of slavery, dehumanization, i think the question should be framed differently to talk about the burden of proof. Seems to me the burden of proof should be how can you justify having those windows in a house of god. Not how do we satisfy the burden of proof they should come out, but how do you justify it . Responses panel . No. I think again thats a question, you know. It begs the hard question, questions that werent asked when they were put in e and so we now have to begin because were at hopefully, and we are, seems to me by virtue of the fact were having this discussion, that were at a different place. And have new questions and different questions. Should be hearing different voices, right . Recognizing that a history has been negated and the voices have been silenced, so that if, indeed, this is a place a church for all people, then those voices have to be heard. So i think that the question is right. Thats what were grappling with. I think that it requires these kind of discussions. And in which people can indeed begin to hear the voices that have been left out of not simply the conversation but out of the history. And the stories that are not told in those windows. Dr. Coski, does the fact they were put in, that the cathedral took the donation of the united daughters of the confederacy, that inscriptions are worded the way they are worded signaled to us in the washington of 1953, this really wasnt in an argument. Very much so. That is one of the major points i hope has come through, the discussion so far. In that period, again, clearly among Africanamerican Community nationwide, lots of reservations, lots of perceptions of them as attacks. But among the white power brokers, those who were making the decisions, lee was a hero. Almost no question. Submarines named after him in these periods, bases. Number of things, lee and jackson to a lesser degree. Only thing, he was a presbyterian, not episcopalian. It is at the very least the presence of those windows put up in that year do testify to the zeitgeist of the time. They were among White America heroes, a legacy of 75 years by that point, 80 years, four score and something years in which the white souths interpretation of the civil war had become a kind of consensus one. Also because lets face it, confederates are more fun, underdogs. An issue with reenactors, modern reenactors, have to get guys that show up as confederates to galvanize and be yankees so its even, instead of 10 confederates to one union soldier. Theres a romance about the confederatacy since the beginning of the century. The 1950s is really in the middle of all this. That is the crucial context for all of this. I think we had a good discussion. Im impressed with the panel. You really dealt with issues. As we go through this question period, hope we will raise more issues about the windows. Weve got emancipation window, which is a very emasculating window to look at and excite and throw away. Ive been picking at the cathedral. Tell people who you are. Robert hunter, retired priest, washington. One of the security guards came out to check me out and said they moved the flags out of the windows. But i want to tell you, i know those folks, they aint going to move them windows. I said, well, if they dont move them, thats okay, too. But im going to keep picketing, remove the windows. Im just 81 and will be picketing as the weather permits and health permits but thats going to be my witness. One gentleman came and said to me, i appreciate what youre doing. Im trying to make a film about reconstruction, how we can reconstruct some healing in this nation. I said you cant reconstruct this nation because it began wro wrong. You can construct the nation, billed it anew. Thats what they say about a kl, it is never finished with construction. Its always been constructed. Being constructed you will find stones that need to be thrown away. Youll find windows that need to be put out. Youll find statuary that needs to exist. Always construct a New Cathedral for a new age. Thank you. Dr. Ellis just helped open a museum that has to speak to all the people about this highly fraught, highly contentious history of ours. How do you do that . Id like to respond to the gentleman in a way thats probably surprising. The young man who was talking about richmond and talking about the monuments in richmond and talking about did you get that . Sa and not wanting to take it down because a story to be told. I want to say more about that. The confederacy and Stonewall Jackson and robert e. Lee are iconic figures. We about four years ago put together an exhibit called the paradox of liberty where we talked about Thomas Jefferson. But the title was Thomas Jefferson and the slaves of monticello. Because during his lifetime he owned over 700 slaves. We had Thomas Jefferson and behind him the slaves at monticello. They know the names of all the enslaved he owned. So we put this huge series of tiles behind him that had the names of our suggestion, in order for you to know who Thomas Jefferson was, you had to see him not just as an inventor, as a statesman, not just as an author, but he also was an owner of slaves. In order to see him, you had to see him through that prism as well. I suggest there are things that can be learned about robert e. Lee and about Stonewall Jackson that we dont know, because they have become iconic symbols of a value system as opposed to individual men who had parts of them that were good, that were bad, and were ugly. Now, you started with the Memorial Boulevard in richmond. Does that mean augmenting that part of the church, adding material, adding something for the visitor to go on, or does it mean taking out those windows. I am suggesting that a conversation is valuable in terms of asking what do we really know about the iconic men as opposed to the human beings they represent. And i am simply saying that its possible if we find out more about the good, the bad, and the ugly of who they were, it might not be necessary to take it down. It just might be expanding and enhancing a story that allows us to know more about who they were. I want to add to that in a different way because even as we talk about those windows entering the cathedral in 1953, theres another story that we also arent telling. Thats the story of the Episcopal Church and its complicit, or not, in the legacy of slavery. So in many respects, the fact that those windows so easily entered the cathedral in 1953 tells the story of the Wisconsin Church at that time, because it wasnt until 1958 at the general convention, if im not mistaken, 1958 general convention, where the Episcopal Church spoke out for the first time about racial injustice. And so up to that point, of course, during the antebellum period, splitting over the issue of slavery, the Episcopal Church wasnt because the Episcopal Church wouldnt speak on it. The Episcopal Church was more concerned about unity at that time than it was about slavery. In this instance we werent talking about Racial Justice but slavery. So they were concerned about unity. So in a sense, that same concern is expressed by the fact that those windows entered the cathedral in 1953 because there was that concern about unity and not Racial Justice. So when we tell the story, i think the windows also signify the complicated story of the Episcopal Church. We need to be honest about that history and to confront those windows is also to confront that. But in that way, it may make it even harder to get those windows out of there, because people who in these latter days, we just marked 150th anniversary of the end of the war, seek validation through the maintenance of symbols and the way symbols speak to us today. They may feel the loss more keenly from here than they would a public park or the courthouse square. Yes, maam . My name is emily teller, and ive come here from boston today to be here this week. Im thrilled to be here. I think ill have to come back for the next two years to represent the north, which im happy to do. However, growing up, i was the only yankee of 75 people in my family, and i went to savannah, georgia, from pittsburgh every summer of my life. I was not allowed to sit at the back of the bus, much to my sadness. Of suggestion for Going Forward from tonight. I think it would be a huge mistake to erase history. I think that is a mistake that our country cant afford to make, and i would suggest that perhaps the stone of this building not limit the stained glass windows that are allowed to be here. Going forward a lot has happened since 1953. Weve had the Civil Rights Movement. Weve had complete increase in the number of hispanic people who are now in this country. We have a muslim presence in this country. I think about the Norman Rockwell picture of the United Nations that shows all those different aspects of the world. Perhaps there could be a window or windows built to bring our National Cathedral up to the current constituency that we have here with a history of all those different ribbons. Im not in any way meaning to minimize africanamerican pain over the confederacy. I affirm that so much. But i think also that we need to have another presence. If we have a space windows, we can have muslim representation. Youre saying keep the windows but tell a more complete story. Hang up more windows and shine spotlights on them. Well move on. Yes . That gentleman had his hand up for a while. Next. I think what i found more afterwarding were the plaques. The words that were written on the plaques. To keep the windows we would still have history, but to remove the plaques and to sort of incorporate what i think were dr. Browns interests that we show perhaps an evolving Episcopal Church. But we could keep the windows but, again, modify those plaques somewhat. Its the plaques. Should i read those blaplaqu inch descriptions again . No. My name is george albert. For better or worse im not going to talk about the windows. I live in Fairfax County. For the last 18 months in Fairfax County weve been wrestling with another confederacy stain. Ive been leading a coalition of students, alumni, community members, organizations, including naacp. The changed name of jeb stewart high school. Ive been very impressed with this conversation. Its a conversation i wish we could have somehow in our community. Right now most of our conversations are very divisive, full of rancor, full of discord, full of refighting the civil r war, full of refighting wlafr fight every fwoed has with each other. Let me ask you something. Earlier dr. Coski said in the case of these, when people go to barricades to keep the name, it isnt necessarily out of a particularly love or reference to, in this case, jeb stuart himself. They went to and graduate from jeb stuart high school. Theres a mascot, nickname for the team. Its wrapped up in who they were and how they grew up as much as what an actual guy named jeb stuart did 150 years ago. Do you buy that . No, i dont buy it, but i understand it. As revelations says, for me now theres nothing new under the sun. Thats a good argument ive heard all the time. In our discussions and arguments weve said, as you all have said, we have to find a way in this to preserve the history and the legacy of whats good about the school, but we should not be commemorating and celebrating confederate values, as they are remembered by jeb stuart, in the name of jeb stuart, just as your window type of thing. So im really looking for counsel, help, advice how to get this kind of conversation going. The school board we finally got the school board to move forward with a working group to consider over the next eight or nine months, if they ever started, over the next eight or nine months to consider all these types of issues. But i fear it will become continue to be discord ant. We have some of our opponents taking the side of traditional lost cause history, some taking other points of view of what the war was really about, what we felt it was really about. The school was named in 1959. Those of you who know the history of Fairfax County, Fairfax County slow rolled would be a kind word desegregation, never really presented a plan that was approved until about 1961. So it was named in that context. So im looking for advice how we would get this kind of a discussion going on. I suggest to you that the conversations that you are having in fairfax are very, very valuable. If this were easy to turn on a dime, it would be done by now. This is the hardest thing that you will ever do to try to change hearts, the hardest thing. And when i think of the fact that we now have a building that was that was dreamed before i was even born, and that it will that it will stand, but it took 100 years for it to happen. Now, i hope it doesnt take 100 years in fairfax. What im saying is the seeds you are creating now, i know its frustrating, i can hear it in your voice, but my suggestion to you is to continue that fight and to continue the discussion and continue to talk about it. The fact that its difficult for me means that you are having the right conversation. How many times do we have conversations because we want everybody to feel good about what were saying. We want to you feel good that you came. In the end youve done nothing. So you are obviously doing something, fighting the good fight and fighting the hard fight. So the only advice i have for you is, use this as a way to motivate you to continue the fight. Passing historys gallstones. How are you this evening . Im a little bit different because im jewish, okay. Im also first of all, i suffer from panic disorder but my Service Animal is in my vehicle outside because i thought since hes so close, ive been really good last six months because i lived in Lower Manhattan for the ninds 90s that i would be okay but im a little upset. This is because ive gone to a lot of 150th anniversary battles and stood where jackson marched on a 12mile flank attack, and ive also done the march on selma, 50th anniversary when obama spoke. I was there and i did it. Im 47. Unfortunately i wasnt alive during that those battles and wasnt alive before Civil Rights Movement. Being jewish, i have dachau. I know what intolerance does. It breaks my heart. Jackson a man of god of the way they held their battles, i cannot put myself as a woman 150 years ago, because if i showed my ankle, you could be lynched, as a woman, as a woman of historical representation of women in that era. You follow me. Weve come a lock way. I want unity. My heart is sad because i want unity. Its a part of time in our history im not happy about anybody being enslaved, irish indentured servants, native americans that were slaughtered in American History. Its all pathetic and sad. I want us to move on in 2016. Thank you for all that youre saying. I want an open, fair dialogue on American History because i want us all to love each other. The syrians, russians, they are looking at us, united we stand, divided we fall. I want us to be together at one nation. My question is are you happy with the way that the millennials or Younger Generation are handling a lot of the racial crisis that has been perpetuated since dylann roof and this whole thing that happened a year ago . Interesting question. Yes, they are calling the question, arent they in i mean, you know, which yes. Im not sure which millennials youre speaking of. But what i am happy about is that were in this place, meaning not simply this place but in this place in our history where the question has been called and hopefully we will lean into it. Because if we dont you know, as i often say and people say, theres a pit that divides us in this nation. A racial pit. There are several ways we can get around that pit. We can walk around it. We can jump over it. Theological terms thats cheap grace. And we will find ourselves continually having that pit between us because we havent done the hard work of climbing down into it and all of the mess and the dirt where its uncomfortable and we all get soiled but we tell the truth is down there. We live in the truth. And we deal with it. As uncomfortable as it is. Then we come back up the other side. Thats a just reconciliation not just reconciliation. So were in this moment, and we have a decision to make. That decision is whether or not were going to tell the truth about who we are as a nation. If we dont tell that truth, then we are going to continue to be in these moments of division. And so yes, whomever millennials are youre talking about, im glad were in this moment. Now the question to us is what are we going to do about that. Ill say this in theological terms, we call it a kyros time. Its disruptive and chaotic because god is trying to lead us into a new generation. Tearing down things as they are so we can get somewhere else, so it is uncomfortable. So but its our task as a Church Community to live into the kyros. We can miss it or grasp it. Dr. Coski, im glad the question brought up dylann roof because one of the acute manifestations of this argument, a mass murderer walks into a church and kills nine people and somehow circuitously this ends with a solemn ceremony outside the South Carolina state house with an honor guard of state troopers in full dress uniform taking down the Confederate Flag to be put in a nearby museum for which they are building a multimillion dollar additional wing to house this object like its a piece of the true cross or relic of the head of a saint or the thigh bone of a saint, and its just a weird set of outcomes that begins with a heavily armed man walking to a church full of hate and killing a bunch of people. Its almost like throwing a boomerang. You end up hitting some target that you maybe never even intended. What did you see going on with that . A lot going on obviously, just the way you phrased it. I mean, the charleston murders galvanize opposition to the confederate symbols. Its not knew. As all of you know, this has been going on for decades. The undoing of the symbolic landscape has been going on really since the middle of the 20th century. The removal of flags from public places. There have been some peaks and valleys in that. It reached a point of stasis after the georgia flag in 2004 and the compromise that brought the flag down from the dome of South Carolina to confederate soldiers monument. I think everyone realized it was an armistice awaiting something, developments. Evolution, if you will, of feeling in the country and demographic change as well. All these things occurring. So the taking down is one part of what youre saying. I think that to some degree it came at a time when theres Political Movement to do that anyway. For one thing, there was an Election Year coming up, and the Confederate Flag has been a divisive issue in South Carolina politics, get out political table before the election. The treatment of it in a reverential way, presumably made in america, has nothing to do with the real flags carried by actual Confederate Flags in battle that are revered as pieces of the true cross because of their association but this is not one of them. They had to get their pound of flesh in order for that flag to come down. The people that wanted it to remain had to be made whole in some publicly perceived way in order for it to end well. I think its called compromise, the bringing down of that flag, demanded and resisted. Of course when you read legislative history of how the compromise was reached in 2000, something very similar. Those who did not want the flag to come down at all, what they insisted on as a precondition for it coming down from the dome in 2000 was treat it with respect. A statement accompanied it saying this act does not in any way reflect any dishonor upon the men who fought under this flag. That was one of the conditions that senator mcconnell and others who fought for it to remain on the state house needed to accept. Simply what happened last year was an extension of this 30 someyearold fight in South Carolina to reach the point where we are now. Honoring those who fought the confedera confederacy, confederate soldiers part are any youre talking about doing this with a piece of cloth thats maybe ayearold as if its a relic is spot on. Its odd and underscores the difference between the actual flags, relics of the war, the symbol, representation of modern pieces of fabric, just as theres fund memorabilia distinction between public and private display, i think there should be fund mental distinction between historic flags used by confederate soldiers and representations made in china in 2014. Dr. Ellis, does that example say is it a happy ending for some thats really tinged with satisfaction . Because the state is still unable to speak arnold say this was not a great cause. This was to offend a breakaway white supremacist revere in 2016. Is this need to strike a balance something that leaves you still dissatisfied even though coming down from the dome might be a good thing, it has to also come with some other goodies that come in the other direction in order to make it happen. It could be my evil twin. Bait and switch. I leave it here or i put it down here, but i put it back up over here. I dont lose a thing except geography. Its possible that its my evil twin. That the change of heart i was talking about earlier has not taken place. And the need for that symbol is greater than the need for that symbol is greater than the need for healing. In the back there. Im kathy, episcopal. I love the cathedral. Its a house of god but a little bit inattention with your panel in that its like the great cathedrals of europe filled with donor memorials, tiny kneeling donors over here by the altar, stained glass windows to peoples ancestors. Our history in the United States, in america, is a history of oppression. From the very beginning the oppression of natives peoples, impression of enslaved people, immigrants. If we erase every trace of that terrible history, what have we got left . Lets be like the europeans, just move on. [ applause ] yes, in the back, way in the back. You walked by. There you go. Hold up your hand. Stand up, maam. Goong, im a member of the cathedral, episcopal. I have a comment and a question. Its uncomfortable for me to come into a space that is a sacred space, a place for me to come and pray and be at one with god when there is a representation of the injustice that has occurred to people, particularly black people. My question, kelly, for you, why is it not enough the data youve given in regards to stained glass windows and their origination . Why is that not enough to simply remove the Confederate Flag and place it downstairs in the crypt . For those of you who are not fully up to speed with the state of play, the windows are there but the Confederate Flags that were part of the windows in both the lee and jackson memorizations have been removed and replaced with just colored glass. So there are they simply just cease to exist in the window. Is that enough . Yeah. First, thank you for answering that. I think whats important is that we engage in these conversations. I think thats important. Theres a part me very much that says that it would be easy, though its obviously not very easy, it would be easy to take the windows down and place them somewhere else as in the case with the Confederate Flag in South Carolina and move on business as usual, just as it would be easy to leave them up and do nothing. I think the harder point would be to engage in these conversations and confront the multiple meanings of those windows. When i talk about the multiple meaning of those windows, i mean the things we have talked about here and to tom pell the community and who we are as a community to confront the complicit of the church, of the church in general, the cathedral community, et cetera, in the legacy of slavery, and then make determinations about what that means and what were going to do. I guess for me i just dont want to take the easy route out. I really want to do the hard work of becoming a different kind of community and pointing away to how we can become that. [ applause ] actually, i just have a question. Did you particularly mean to leave out abject and rival brutality, sexual abuse of africanamericans, the murder, the selling of children . This is what these people fought for unequivocally. Robert e. Lee and his com patriots are traitors. I havent had you mention any of these words and why this flag sits in the National Cathedral. Id like to hear your opinions. I havent heard you mention any of that. Thank you. No. I think im very clear on all of that in which they stood for, and thats the story i think thats got to be told. I think thats the honesty and truth of our history that has to be told. It cant be white washed. That brings us into, as i said earlier, real conflict. Weve got to ask who we stand for and who we are. If those are discord ant with who they claim to be. This is a core part of the ongoing argument, isnt it, dr. Coski. Lee and jackson, try to answer it efficiently knowing were short on time. Lee and jackson certainly fought for their services to a nation that fought to preserve slavery. Its fund millennial purpose for being was to protect slavery from perceived interference by the Lincoln Administration in the federal government. Im sorry . Can everyone hear me . So there is that inevitable stain of having fought for, their services, the military expertise, fought very effectively, in fact, why they are celebrated as military heroes for that very noble cause. To talk about to talk about the brutality and those two men, you need to separate them by a couple of degrees because they did not do it personally. There was accusations about lee whipping slaves but did they fight for a nation in which that kind of thing happened . Most definitely. I can see peoples backs getting up and direct charges about these men being responsible for that. I dont think its helpful to talk about robert e. Lee and Stonewall Jackson and brutality because i can hear all these other people about how jackson taught his slaves to read even though he broke the law. There was a book, Stonewall Jackson, the black mans friend. You can read it for your selves and find out whether or not you find it persuasive. There was another look, i lose my train of thought very easily these days. Im losing my concentration. Ill plow through and finish this answer, then ill be happy to entertain a question on that. Whether or not they are traitors is still kind of open to debate. I will accept that as they did violate their oath, their west point oath. Lee him self, if you read the work of Elizabeth Brown prior find the book on lee, reading the man. You will see new insights very much like dr. Douglas was talking about, things we can learn about lee in slavery and africanamericans and race that she has unearthed things about lee and how he valued the fortunes of his own family. The idea is that lee was, according to those who revered him much, lee did not like slavery. He professed not to like slavery because of its affect on the white man. Yet lee clearly wanted to preserve his own fortune and familys fortune by keeping the slaves that his fatherinlaw in his will slaves as long as possible and even to get out of the terms of the will in order to continue to work those people because he did not want to impoverish his family. Men like jackson and lee at the very least, and jefferson and all those before them, regardless of the professions to hate slavery and whatever gestures they made to enslave people to read, they were part of a system that clearly valued white fortunes and freedom over liberty over africanamericans and property and fundamental problem of slavery really people tend to overlook because we tend to think too much about the django unchained kind of brutality, it treated people as property and allowed the separation of families that treating people with property was the most profoundly immoral part of slavery. [ applause ] there is a conversation that we had in the museum back in 20 2008. Mobley called the director of the museum and said they are disfiguring and disrespecting the casket of my son, emmett till. I would like for you to consider bringing it to the museum. We had never as curators thought of a casket as ank item we would collect. The more we talked about it and the the more we considered it, the more we realized it was an iconic object that was important and the story about emmett till was important. For those of you who dont know emmett tills story august of 1955, emmett till was in, mississippi, 14 and they never saw emmett again until his body was floating in the Tallahatchie River with a fan that was tied around his neck to weight him down, industrial fan, so that his body would not come back up, but it floated back up. Emmett tills here was so destroyed by what they had done to her son, she said his face was unrecognizable and looked brutal and horrible. She said, i want the world to see what they did to my boy. Jet magazine displayed it. It was something that shocked the nation. Rosa park, john lewis, so many of us said that that was the reason they entered and went into the Civil Rights Movement was because of that event. We decided that it was important for us to tell that story. Even though we put signs up and let folk know, this is history at its most raw, but we decided it needed to be part of the story we tell at the museum. Thats what i mean by examining and talking about the good, the bad, and the ugly. You have to see it all, mr. Fairfax. Have you to argue with it all in order for some healing, some modicum of healing to take place. You cannot overlook the violence, because that was a part of the story as well. And healing can be take place until its laid bear and the truth is there for all to see. And can i just ditto that and say thats what i mean when i talk about going down into the pit, and that youve got to tell the truth and all the brutal facts of the truth. I think weve got more here. Thank you very much indeed. You wont give it to me . Not allowed to. You think im going to steal it. I hold onto it like everybody else. I dont dare put my arm around you, otherwise ill get locked up for something, right . Anyway, i did want to thank you all for this very interesting presentation. I have been involved with this wonderful cathedral for about 50 years. You see, i am now 87, older than y you, and i think we need to celebrate also while were talking about difficulties with racial injustice, we need to celebrate the fact that we have made significant progress racially in our nation and in this cathedral. In our nation, we happen to have a black president who i voted for a couple of times. We havent recognized that at all tonight, that great progress. Also in this cathedral we had a black dean, nathan baxter, with whom i worked for decades. So we have made some very good, substantial progress indeed. So i think that while we had this window that offends some people, its part of history. And we cant just go around throwing away parts of history that we feel offends us somehow. If we did that, i would be very busy, because theres a hell of a lot of history that offends me. Im concerned that once we get through with this windows thats been there for so long, the next person is going to go into War Memorial Chapel and take a look at the windows in War Memorial Chapel where were blowing up people and blowing up tanks and battleships and Everything Else and say oh, my god, we cant have that kind of thing in a cathedral. So i believe that we have to give thanks for what we have, and we have to accept the history of this place as we accept the history of our nation. Because this place represents the history of our nation. Thank you all very much for being here, though, it was a very interesting program. That gives us an excellent opportunity to get final thoughts from the panelists and say good night to you all. Respond to what you just heard, and you will take us out, the three of you, with your response to what you just heard. I think that the gentleman is right. We are not where we were 20 years ago. Were not where we were 30 years ago. But there is still a great deal of work to do. I congratulate the cathedral and all of those who planned this event. I hope this is not the last event. I hope that the conversation continues because the work must continue if we are to realize the dream that this young lady talked about when she said she wants us all to get along and to be better together. I think that we can do that. But its going to take some work. So i congratulate you and all of you all who put this together. Thank you for inviting me to allow me to be part of the conversation as well. Well, first i thank everyone for being a part of this conversation. I echo dr. Elliss comments. My response is that we arent where we were, and we arent where were supposed to be. So that i hope we continue this hard Work Together and that this is, indeed, the first of many conversations. Dr. Kovacoski. Thank you for inviting us. Its been a privilege to be on this stage in this space. Its a profound experience and very profound things particularly my copanelists said as well. My first love of history from my college days and before that, studied mostly turn of 20th century, Theodore Roosevelt and woodrow wilson, who are so much an integral part of this cathedral. You talk about some complex history of those two men, those two president s and the difficulties they present. We think of the civil war as the only the messiest part of our history, the most conflictive and divisive part of our history. You look closely at the presidency and men themselves, Theodore Roosevelt and woodrow wilson, they are very difficult and potentially divisive chapters. We have opened more cans of worms for you all to consider. Just to go to the gentlemans point about the difficulty of history and messiness, these pits were talking about. Its all mess y. The way to confront it, i believe, is not through debates, not through some sort of Jerry Springer show adversarial panels, because all you get is argument very much like the election were all enduring right now. The way to tackle it is through a collective discussion like this. Were all in it together, whether we like it or not. Were all trying to live with ourselves and our history. The only way we do this effectively is not through adversarial means but all of us getting together and realizing we need to Work Together for the sake of understanding. Were never going to agree. We simply need to understand as best we can. We may agree to disagree on the fine points. But its collective effort to understand our past, mess y as it is, that is the profitable direction for all of us to go. Thanks for your excellent points and questions. Please thank dr. Rex ellis, dr. Kelly browndouglas and dr. John coski. Thanks a lot. [ applause ] let me remind you, this conversation will be posted and streamable on the cathedral website and also cspan was here tonight. So watch cspan find out when this was scheduled for broadcast. Tell your friends. Well be having further discussions in this series. Watch the cathedral website to find out more about those as well. Thanks a lot. We thank you ray suarez. Youre watching American History tv, covering history cspan style with tours of museums, archival film, eyewitness accounts and discussions with authors, historians and teachers. You can watch us on cspan3 every weekend during congressional breaks and on holidays, too. For more information visit our website, cspan. Org history. Join us on tuesday, january 3rd, for live coverage of the opening day of the new congress. Watch the official swearing in of the new and reelected members of the house and senate and the election of the speaker of the house. Our all day live coverage of the events of capitol hill begins 7 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan or cspan. Org or listen to it on the cspan radio app. Each week american artifacts