Memphis religious leaders pen letter supporting Nathan Bedford Forrest statue removal

The 9:01 is a daily column on all things Memphis.

Good morning in Memphis, where the Brooks Museum is in play, but first …

This morning, 150 clergy members representing 88 Memphis congregations released a joint letter to the Tennessee Historical Commission asking them to support the city’s request to relocate the statue of Confederate general (and slave trader, and accused war criminal, and Klansman) Nathan Bedford Forrest. From the letter:

We are Memphis clergy white and black, young and old, Christian and Jew, transcending every political party. We want you to know how much we support Mayor Jim Strickland’s request for a waiver under the Tennessee Heritage Protection Act to relocate the statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest to a more historically appropriate site. By no means are we seeking to erase history. It is imperative that we understand history; the foundations of our society, of our country, and our faith traditions are built on that. But it is also important that we understand historical figures and events in their full context. It was not until 1905 — half a century after the Civil War and in the throes of the implementation of Jim Crow laws across the South — that the statue of Forrest was placed in a public square. This monument to Forrest belongs elsewhere, not in the center of our city’s hub. Beyond the historical inaccuracy and geographic irrelevancy of his monument, it does not represent who we are as people of faith.

Perhaps this is unfair, but there are some signees here that are surprising, or notable as an expansion of whom we’ve come to expect to be taking this stand. Those who represent largely white, perhaps more conservative congregations. This includes Rev. Dr. Steve Gaines, of Bellevue Baptist Church and current president of the Southern Baptist Convention. The Southern Baptist Convention is the largest Protestant denomination in the United States, but it was formed in 1845 in a split with northern Baptist churches over the issue of slavery. Earlier this year, the organization passed a resolution denouncing the alt-right and white supremacy.

It includes the full clergy staffs at Second Presbyterian, whose deacons denied entry to civil rights activists half a century ago, and Independent Presbyterian, which split off from Second Presbyterian around the same time in response to racial integration.

For the first time, this brings a near unanimity of community leadership behind the city’s bid to finally move the Forrest monument. The mayor, the city council, the chamber of commerce, as of this week the county commission, and now religious leaders across the racial, denominational, and philosophical spectrum. I’d throw in a basketball coach, but I doubt the swing voters on the Tennessee Historical Commission are as eager for the NBA season to start as I am.

Add in the support of Republican Governor Bill Haslam, and there’s a lot of pressure coming to bear on the state historical commission when they meet next month. Will it matter? There’s ample reason for activists to be cynical about that. What will the city do if the state still rejects their bid?

Seeing these community forces -- government, business, religious -- line up on this issue is both gratifying and frustrating. Gratifying because it's finally happening, frustrating because it took so long. These installations are no more a corruption of public history or a symbol of racist resistance/intimidation than they were years ago. What’s changed is public pressure. These community leaders didn’t suddenly get religion, pardon the pun, because of their re-reading of history. They’re moving in the direction of the wind behind them. And if that wind doesn’t continue to blow it will never topple these monuments.

You’ll notice we’ve only touched on Forrest so far, not his Confederate Commander-in-Chief down the road, Jefferson Davis. Without the Klan connection, Davis can just never get the same amount of attention. He’s less sensationalistic, I guess, even though his monument is perhaps an even greater affront to Memphis public history and should have been easier to take down.

That’s no longer the case. The headline on our story yesterday cites city “inaction” on attempting to take down the Davis monument, but as someone who’s been beating this drum for years, I have to demur a little bit on that reading.

The reason the attempt to remove Davis isn’t moving in concert with the attempt to remove Forrest isn’t primarily a result of recent inaction, but past inaction. City leaders have always taken the Forrest statue more seriously, and only because there was greater public pressure around it. The state meeting next month on the Forrest removal was initially set in motion by a call to action by then-mayor A C Wharton and subsequent city council vote in 2015. The city did not vote on Davis then, and for absolutely no good reason. Neither did Strickland begin a process on the Davis statue in the early days of his mayoral tenure. At the time, there was no public pressure to which he needed to respond. And so, while the Forrest issue falls under a 2013 state law on historical monuments, Davis falls under a more restrictive 2016 law. And here we are.

This quote from Ryan Poe’s story rankled me at first:

"My focus was the Nathan Bedford Forrest statue," [City Attorney Bruce] McMullen said. "... There was no need to rush City Council a resolution or ordinance for the Jefferson Davis statue."

But I think a charitable reading of it is this: Because the process on the Davis monument didn’t begin until last month, as opposed to two years ago on Forrest, and because that process required, as I understand it, a council vote before a waiver request could be sent to the state, and because that council vote was going to be subject to three public readings, Davis was not going to be heard by the state on Oct. 13. Why wasn’t there earlier alignment between the mayor’s office and city council on this request? Perhaps that’s the source of the “miscommunication” McMullen cites earlier in the story. Could the city have rushed Davis before the state in the same meeting in which they’re likely to vote on Forrest? It’s a good question, and one for which I can’t offer an answer. But civic “inaction” on the Jefferson Davis monument isn’t something that started this summer. It’s been going on for years.

[Confession of a daily (and then some) columnist: Sometimes I bypass a topic because I don’t feel like I know enough about it or have enough to say about it and, writing 5-plus columns a week, can’t find time to develop a firmer grounding.

But sometimes it actually goes the other way: I kick the can down the road on a topic I’m better grounded in because I don’t want to take a quick pass at it, but instead want to wait until I can put some time into it.

After writing what feels like about 30,000 words over the past several years on not only Memphis’ two major Confederate monuments, but more generally on notions of “Southern heritage,” Lost Cause mythology, and historical memory, I reached that point a few weeks ago on this subject. I wanted to get into it again, but not with a quick riff. Alas, news doesn’t wait until you’re ready for it.]

Your Best Call: Here’s hoping UCLA’s play-calling is ineffective when they take the field at the Liberty Bowl on Saturday, but there’s no questioning this decision:

Additional Reading:

The Brooks Museum of Art has announced that it will consider a move from its Overton Park location. I have thoughts on this, but ran out of time today. The 9:01 will return to this topic tomorrow.

Geoff Calkins on the biggest winners from the Tiger football season opener.

Was IKEA coming to Tennessee a good thing? (He asks from his living room, sitting on an IKEA chair.)

Yolanda Jones on the one-year anniversary of a tragic Memphis fire.

Quick-and-Pop: And Memphis says, let this be a preview of coming attractions:

The Fadeout: As a cherry on top of Geoff Calkins’ column about engagement rings, here’s a wedding proposal in song, from Memphis' own Al Green:

Reach Chris Herrington at chris.herrington@commercialappeal.com or on Twitter at @chrisherrington and @herringtonNBA.