essay questions for letter from birmingham jail

A Summary and Analysis of Martin Luther King’s ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’

By Dr Oliver Tearle (Loughborough University)

‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’ is Martin Luther King’s most famous written text, and rivals his most celebrated speech, ‘ I Have a Dream ’, for its political importance and rhetorical power.

King wrote this open letter in April 1963 while he was imprisoned in the city jail in Birmingham, Alabama. When he read a statement issued in the newspaper by eight of his fellow clergymen, King began to compose his response, initially writing it in the margins of the newspaper article itself.

In ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’, King answers some of the criticisms he had received from the clergymen in their statement, and makes the case for nonviolent action to bring about an end to racial segregation in the South. You can read the letter in full here if you would like to read King’s words before reading on to our summary of his argument, and analysis of the letter’s meaning and significance.

‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’: summary

The letter is dated 16 April 1963. King begins by addressing his ‘fellow clergymen’ who wrote the statement published in the newspaper. In this statement, they had criticised King’s political activities ‘unwise and untimely’. King announces that he will respond to their criticisms because he believes they are ‘men of genuine good will’.

King outlines why he is in Birmingham: as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, he was invited by an affiliate group in Birmingham to engage in a non-violent direct-action program: he accepted. When the time came, he honoured his promise and came to Birmingham to support the action.

But there is a bigger reason for his travelling to Birmingham: because injustice is found there, and, in a famous line, King asserts: ‘Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.’ The kind of direction action King and others have engaged in around Birmingham is a last resort because negotiations have broken down and promises have been broken.

When there is no alternative, direct action – such as sit-ins and marches – can create what King calls a ‘tension’ which will mean that a community which previously refused to negotiate will be forced to come to the negotiating table. King likens this to the ‘tension’ in the individual human mind which Socrates, the great classical philosopher, fostered through his teachings.

Next, King addresses the accusation that the action he and others are taking in Birmingham is ‘untimely’. King points out that the newly elected mayor of the city, like the previous incumbent, is in favour of racial segregation and thus wishes to preserve the political status quo so far as race is concerned. As King observes, privileged people seldom give up their privileges voluntarily: hence the need for nonviolent pressure.

King now turns to the question of law-breaking. How can he and others justify breaking the law? He quotes St. Augustine, who said that ‘an unjust law is no law at all.’ A just law uplifts human personality and is consistent with the moral law and God’s law. An unjust law degrades human personality and contradicts the moral law (and God’s law). Because segregation encourages one group of people to view themselves as superior to another group, it is unjust.

He also asserts that he believes the greatest stumbling-block to progress is not the far-right white supremacist but the ‘white moderate’ who are wedded to the idea of ‘order’ in the belief that order is inherently right. King points out both in the Bible (the story of Shadrach and the fiery furnace ) and in America’s own colonial history (the Boston Tea Party ) people have practised a form of ‘civil disobedience’, breaking one set of laws because a higher law was at stake.

King addresses the objection that his actions, whilst nonviolent themselves, may encourage others to commit violence in his name. He rejects this argument, pointing out that this kind of logic (if such it can be called) can be extended to all sorts of scenarios. Do we blame a man who is robbed because his possession of wealth led the robber to steal from him?

The next criticism which King addresses is the notion that he is an extremist. He contrasts his nonviolent approach with that of other African-American movements in the US, namely the black nationalist movements which view the white man as the devil. King points out that he has tried to steer a path between extremists on either side, but he is still labelled an ‘extremist’.

He decides to own the label, and points out that Jesus could be regarded as an ‘extremist’ because, out of step with the worldview of his time, he championed love of one’s enemies.

Other religious figures, as well as American political figures such as Abraham Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson, might be called ‘extremists’ for their unorthodox views (for their time). Jefferson, for example, was considered an extremist for arguing, in the opening words to the Declaration of Independence, that all men are created equal. ‘Extremism’ doesn’t have to mean one is a violent revolutionary: it can simply denote extreme views that one holds.

King expresses his disappointment with the white church for failing to stand with him and other nonviolent activists campaigning for an end to racial segregation. People in the church have made a variety of excuses for not supporting racial integration.

The early Christian church was much more prepared to fight for what it believed to be right, but it has grown weak and complacent. Rather than being disturbers of the peace, many Christians are now upholders of the status quo.

Martin Luther King concludes his letter by arguing that he and his fellow civil rights activists will achieve their freedom, because the goal of America as a nation has always been freedom, going back to the founding of the United States almost two centuries earlier. He provides several examples of the quiet courage shown by those who had engaged in nonviolent protest in the South.

‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’: analysis

Martin Luther King’s open letter written from Birmingham Jail is one of the most famous open letters in the world. It is also a well-known defence of the notion of civil disobedience, or refusing to obey laws which are immoral or unjust, often through peaceful protest and collective action.

King answers each of the clergymen’s objections in turn, laying out his argument in calm, rational, but rhetorically brilliant prose. The emphasis throughout is non nonviolent action, or peaceful protest, which King favours rather than violent acts such as rioting (which, he points out, will alienate many Americans who might otherwise support the cause for racial integration).

In this, Martin Luther King was greatly influenced by the example of Mahatma Gandhi , who had led the Indian struggle for independence earlier in the twentieth century, advocating for nonviolent resistance to British rule in India. Another inspiration for King was Henry David Thoreau, whose 1849 essay ‘ Civil Disobedience ’ called for ordinary citizens to refuse to obey laws which they consider unjust.

This question of what is a ‘just’ law and what is an ‘unjust’ law is central to King’s defence of his political approach as laid out in the letter from Birmingham Jail. He points out that everything Hitler did in Germany in the 1930s and 1940s was ‘legal’, because the Nazis changed the laws to suit their ideology and political aims. But this does not mean that what they did was moral : quite the opposite.

Similarly, it would have been ‘illegal’ to come to the aid of a Jew in Nazi Germany, but King states that he would have done so, even though, by helping and comforting a Jewish person, he would have been breaking the law. So instead of the view that ‘law’ and ‘justice’ are synonymous, ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’ is a powerful argument for obeying a higher moral law rather than manmade laws which suit those in power.

But ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’ is also notable for the thoughtful and often surprising things King does with his detractors’ arguments. For instance, where we might expect him to object to being called an ‘extremist’, he embraces the label, observing that some of the most pious and peaceful figures in history have been ‘extremists’ of one kind of another. But they have called for extreme love, justice, and tolerance, rather than extreme hate, division, or violence.

Similarly, King identifies white moderates as being more dangerous to progress than white nationalists, because they believe in ‘order’ rather than ‘justice’ and thus they can sound rational and sympathetic even as they stand in the way of racial integration and civil rights. As with the ‘extremist’ label, King’s position here may take us by surprise, but he backs up his argument carefully and provides clear reasons for his stance.

There are two main frames of reference in the letter. One is Christian examples: Jesus, St. Paul, and Amos, the Old Testament prophet , are all mentioned, with King drawing parallels between their actions and those of the civil rights activists participating in direct action.

The other is examples from American history: Abraham Lincoln (who issued the Emancipation Proclamation during the American Civil War, a century before King was writing) and Thomas Jefferson (who drafted the words to the Declaration of Independence, including the statement that all men are created equal).

Both Christianity and America have personal significance for King, who was a reverend as well as a political campaigner and activist. But these frames of reference also establish a common ground between both him and the clergymen he addresses, and, more widely, with many other Americans who will read the open letter.

Discover more from Interesting Literature

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Type your email…

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Letter From Birmingham Jail

By martin luther king, jr., letter from birmingham jail study guide.

Though initially begun for a specific purpose, the letter that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote while incarcerated in Birmingham ultimately addressed universal questions of freedom and inequality. It is because of its ambitious reach that “Letter from Birmingham Jail” has remained such an enduring document, arguably one of the most important American works of theology or philosophy.

In 1963, Dr. King ’s organization, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) was invited to Birmingham to aid one of its affiliates in protesting intense segregationist policies. The SCLC had become famous for such movements, having found its first success in Montgomery during a yearlong bus boycott. However, since that time, the organization had floundered, seeking its next great Civil Rights victory. A relative failure during a movement in Albany, Georgia had convinced Dr. King that the only way to affect the national consciousness was to “dramatize” the situation, as he explains in the “Letter” (172). In other words, he needed to find a situation where the violent forces of segregation could be externalized, captured in media images.

Birmingham promised such a situation, since its Commissioner of Public Safety, Eugene “Bull” Connor , was an unabashed and brutal racist. However, in the early days of the movement, Connor showed great restraint, using little violence to combat protestors so as to dissuade national media coverage. Knowing that his fame could help dramatize the situation, Dr. King led some allies on a public protest despite lacking a permit to do so, hoping thereby to facilitate his arrest.

Indeed, Dr. King was arrested for that protest, although with minimal violence. Connor had seemingly won the battle, and his oppressive methods – which included locking Dr. King in solitary, an extreme punishment for a minor offense – were conducted outside of the media’s view.

Understandably, Dr. King was angry over having been bested, but that anger was greatly exacerbated when one of his allies brought him a local newspaper. Printed in the paper was an open letter, written and signed by eight local clergymen of different faiths (Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish). Though these clergymen were ostensibly opponents of segregation, their statement criticized Dr. King and the SCLC, calling them outsiders who had come into a situation uninvited and thereby stirred up trouble that might lead to violence.

Dr. King was incensed. Not only had his career-long devotion to nonviolence been mostly ignored by the statement, but the criticisms were directed solely at the SCLC, while the racist police force had been explicitly commended. In a flurry, he began to write, using the margins of the newspapers to frame his message. Over time, he would be released from solitary and given a legal pad to compose, but he had made it clear that a lack of comfort would not hamper his expression of disappointment and perseverance.

King’s allies were overjoyed when he presented them with pages, which they quickly typed and circulated to the press. And yet the “Letter” had very little immediate impact. Instead, other developments in the Birmingham campaign would ensure that movement’s success. But the “Letter” grew steadily more exposed and admired, and was roundly applauded when published officially in Dr. King’s 1964 book Why We Can’t Wait . Though overshadowed in grandeur by the “I Have a Dream” speech he delivered only months after writing the “Letter,” it is arguably this latter work that has had the most palpable impact.

(Perhaps the only group that did not widely enthuse about the “Letter” were the clergymen quoted in the newspaper piece. While several of those men ignored the public response, some did attempt to rectify the charges by redoubling their efforts towards Civil Rights. Rabbi Grafman, a Jewish author referred to in the “Letter,” reports that he was contacted even decades later by students who had read the “Letter” and wondered whether he remained a bigot.)

What emerged in “Letter from Birmingham Jail” is a document that not only exemplifies the nonviolent crusade for American Civil Rights, but has influenced freedom movements throughout the world. It has been translated into several languages, and linked to protests in places like Argentina, Poland, China, and Iran. For its historical importance, for its clear explanation of the concepts of nonviolence and civil disobedience, and for its unmistakable eloquence and rhetoric, “Letter from Birmingham Jail” remains a seminal piece of American philosophy that is studied in high schools and colleges to this day.

Letter From Birmingham Jail Questions and Answers

The Question and Answer section for Letter From Birmingham Jail is a great resource to ask questions, find answers, and discuss the novel.

what injustices does dr. king describe in the letter from Birmingham jail.

Dr. King provides a moral reason for his presence, saying that he came to Birmingham to battle “injustice.” Because he believes that “all communities and states” are interrelated, he feels compelled to work for justice anywhere that injustice is...

How do allusions that King uses in his letter help the audience relate to him and what he is saying?

King uses allusions to align his arguments with famous thinkers of Western civilization.

John Donne : "New Day in Birmingham" allusion to "No Man is an Island" .

John Bunyan : Puritan writer, imprisoned; "I will stay in jail before I make a butchery...

The timing of the protest continued to change because

D. They did not want to interfere with the mayoral election.

Study Guide for Letter From Birmingham Jail

Letter From Birmingham Jail study guide contains a biography of Martin Luther King, Jr., literature essays, quiz questions, major themes, characters, and a full summary and analysis.

• About Letter From Birmingham Jail
• Letter From Birmingham Jail Summary
• Character List

Essays for Letter From Birmingham Jail

Letter From Birmingham Jail essays are academic essays for citation. These papers were written primarily by students and provide critical analysis of Letter From Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King, Jr.

• Rhetorical Analysis of “Letter From a Birmingham Jail”
• How Stoicism Supports Civil Disobedience
• We Are in This Together: Comparing "Letter from Birmingham Jail" and "Sonny's Blues"
• Fighting Inequality with the Past: A Look into "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" and Related Historical Documents
• A Question of Appeal: Rhetorical Analysis of Malcolm X and MLK

Lesson Plan for Letter From Birmingham Jail

• About the Author
• Study Objectives
• Common Core Standards
• Introduction to Letter From Birmingham Jail
• Relationship to Other Books
• Bringing in Technology
• Notes to the Teacher
• Related Links
• Letter From Birmingham Jail Bibliography

Wikipedia Entries for Letter From Birmingham Jail

• Introduction

• Ask LitCharts AI
• Discussion Question Generator
• Essay Prompt Generator
• Quiz Question Generator

• Literature Guides
• Poetry Guides
• Shakespeare Translations
• Literary Terms

Letter from Birmingham Jail

Martin luther king, jr..

Ask LitCharts AI: The answer to your questions

Welcome to the LitCharts study guide on Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Letter from Birmingham Jail . Created by the original team behind SparkNotes, LitCharts are the world's best literature guides.

Letter from Birmingham Jail: Introduction

Letter from birmingham jail: plot summary, letter from birmingham jail: detailed summary & analysis, letter from birmingham jail: themes, letter from birmingham jail: quotes, letter from birmingham jail: characters, letter from birmingham jail: terms, letter from birmingham jail: symbols, letter from birmingham jail: theme wheel, brief biography of martin luther king, jr..

Historical Context of Letter from Birmingham Jail

Other books related to letter from birmingham jail.

• Full Title: Letter from Birmingham Jail
• When Written: April 1963
• Where Written: Birmingham City Jail
• When Published: May 19, 1963 (excerpts) in The New York Post Sunday Magazine and later in 1963 in its entirety in Liberation , The Christian Century , and The New Leader magazines
• Literary Period: Civil Rights Movement
• Genre: Essay
• Setting: Birmingham, Alabama
• Antagonist: The eight white clergymen, authors of “A Call for Unity”
• Point of View: First person

Extra Credit for Letter from Birmingham Jail

A Letter in Pieces. While in the Birmingham City jail, Martin Luther King, Jr. had little access to the outside world, and was only able to read “A Call to Unity” when a trusted friend smuggled the newspaper into his jail cell. King wrote his response in the margins of the paper, in pieces, and they were smuggled back out to a fellow pastor, who had the responsibility of piecing the letter back together again.

• Quizzes, saving guides, requests, plus so much more.

Martin Luther King’s “Letter From a Birmingham Jail” Analytical Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Reasons for being in birmingham, reason for breaking laws, “letter from a birmingham jail”: analysis of historical figures, “letter from birmingham jail”: conclusion.

In 1963, Martin Luther King Jr (MLK), one of the United States’ most famous civil rights activists in Birmingham, was imprisoned for his participation in a civil rights demonstration in the city. While in prison, Dr. King wrote a letter seeking to address some criticism brought against him by the clergy. This letter from Birmingham Jail analysis essay shall highlight some of the issues discussed in the historic letter including King’s reason for being in Birmingham and why he felt compelled to break the law.

The analysis of “Letter from Birmingham Jail” will help to answer the first question that Dr. King addresses in the letter which is the reason why he is in Birmingham city. This was in light of the fact that he was from Atlanta, and some of his critics, therefore, considered him an outsider to Birmingham. Dr. King asserts that his presence in Birmingham is as a result of a direct invitation by some affiliated organizations across the South.

As the president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Dr. King feels that it is his duty to work together with his organization’s affiliates. King further states that his presence in the city is due to the injustices and tension that exist therein. He is compelled to be there to offer aid to those who he feels have been wronged by the system for as he declares, “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

Martin Luther King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” analysis will also help to define the reasons for breaking laws. Dr. King comes under attack for violating the laws of the land. His critics condemn the demonstration that King is involved in since they violate Birmingham’s laws and cause unrest. Dr. King admonishes his critics for failing to consider the social realities that have necessitated the demonstrations by the Negro community.

While acknowledging that negotiations are more suitable, King illustrates that past negotiations have failed to yield any fruitful results. Direct action is, therefore, seen as the only way through which the nation’s conscience to the racial realities of America can be awakened. Dr. King also points out that most of the laws in place, such as segregation and denial of rights to votes for some groups, are unjust.

These laws are immoral, and King affirms that he can, with a clean conscience, urge people to disobey such requirements. As such, King’s main point advocates for the obedience of the law as he acknowledges that lack of law would lead to anarchy. However, he encourages the public breaking of unjust laws to arouse the conscience of the community over the particular injustices.

In order to analyze “Letter from Birmingham Jail” substantially, historical figures should be reviewed. Dr. King mentions a number of historical figures to support his line of action. In the letter, King points to Jesus, who was branded as an “extremist for love” and subsequently crucified for the same. Paul, an avid follower of Jesus who is credited with the early spreading of the Christian gospel, is also mentioned in the letter. Martin Luther, the German priest who played the main role in standing up against the ancient Roman Catholic Church practices, is also referenced.

Mr. King also refers to John Bunyan, who was imprisoned for his beliefs and willingly stayed in jail other than perverting his conscience. The United States president Abraham Lincoln, whose administration led to the abolishment of slavery, is also referenced in King’s letter. The letter also cites Thomas Jefferson, whose words in the declaration of independence asserted that all men are created equal.

The summary of the letter shows that all of the historical figures that Dr. King refers to were branded as extremists in their time, but as history demonstrates, they were all men of integrity, and their “extremism” brought about necessary change and inspiration to the people.

This paper is set out to analyze the letter to highlight some of significant issues that Dr. King sets out to address. This essay has explained the reasons why King was in Birmingham city, his reasons for advocating the breaking of the law, and the various historical figures with whom Dr. King related. From the critical analysis of Martin Luther King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” provided in this paper, a better understanding of Dr. King’s motives and his reasoning can be reached.

• “Why We Can’t Wait” a Historical Document by Martin Luther King Jr.
• Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade History
• “A Letter From Birmingham Jail” and “I Have A Dream” by M. L. King Jr.
• "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" by Martin Luther King
• “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” by Luther King
• Black Americans in the Revolutionary Era
• History of the Conflict Between Britain and the Colonized Nations
• The Knights Templar: The Warrior Monks
• Women’s Participation in World’s Development: Importance of Understanding
• A Closer Look at the History of the Colonial America
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, May 18). Martin Luther King's “Letter From a Birmingham Jail”. https://ivypanda.com/essays/an-analysis-of-martin-luther-kings-letter-from-a-birmingham-jail/

"Martin Luther King's “Letter From a Birmingham Jail”." IvyPanda , 18 May 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/an-analysis-of-martin-luther-kings-letter-from-a-birmingham-jail/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'Martin Luther King's “Letter From a Birmingham Jail”'. 18 May.

IvyPanda . 2018. "Martin Luther King's “Letter From a Birmingham Jail”." May 18, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/an-analysis-of-martin-luther-kings-letter-from-a-birmingham-jail/.

1. IvyPanda . "Martin Luther King's “Letter From a Birmingham Jail”." May 18, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/an-analysis-of-martin-luther-kings-letter-from-a-birmingham-jail/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Martin Luther King's “Letter From a Birmingham Jail”." May 18, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/an-analysis-of-martin-luther-kings-letter-from-a-birmingham-jail/.

"Letter from Birmingham Jail"

April 16, 1963

As the events of the  Birmingham Campaign  intensified on the city’s streets, Martin Luther King, Jr., composed a letter from his prison cell in Birmingham in response to local religious leaders’ criticisms of the campaign: “Never before have I written so long a letter. I’m afraid it is much too long to take your precious time. I can assure you that it would have been much shorter if I had been writing from a comfortable desk, but what else can one do when he is alone in a narrow jail cell, other than write long letters, think long thoughts and pray long prayers?” (King,  Why , 94–95).

King’s 12 April 1963 arrest for violating Alabama’s law against mass public demonstrations took place just over a week after the campaign’s commencement. In an effort to revive the campaign, King and Ralph  Abernathy   had donned work clothes and marched from Sixth Avenue Baptist Church into a waiting police wagon. The day of his arrest, eight Birmingham clergy members wrote a criticism of the campaign that was published in the  Birmingham News , calling its direct action strategy “unwise and untimely” and appealing “to both our white and Negro citizenry to observe the principles of law and order and common sense” (“White Clergymen Urge”).

Following the initial circulation of King’s letter in Birmingham as a mimeographed copy, it was published in a variety of formats: as a pamphlet distributed by the  American Friends Service Committee  and as an article in periodicals such as  Christian Century ,  Christianity and Crisis , the  New York Post , and  Ebony  magazine. The first half of the letter was introduced into testimony before Congress by Representative William Fitts Ryan (D–NY) and published in the  Congressional Record . One year later, King revised the letter and presented it as a chapter in his 1964 memoir of the Birmingham Campaign,  Why We Can’t Wait , a book modeled after the basic themes set out in “Letter from Birmingham Jail.”

In  Why We Can’t Wait , King recalled in an author’s note accompanying the letter’s republication how the letter was written. It was begun on pieces of newspaper, continued on bits of paper supplied by a black trustee, and finished on paper pads left by King’s attorneys. After countering the charge that he was an “outside agitator” in the body of the letter, King sought to explain the value of a “nonviolent campaign” and its “four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self-purification; and direct action” (King,  Why , 79). He went on to explain that the purpose of direct action was to create a crisis situation out of which negotiation could emerge.

The body of King’s letter called into question the clergy’s charge of “impatience” on the part of the African American community and of the “extreme” level of the campaign’s actions (“White Clergymen Urge”). “For years now, I have heard the word ‘Wait!’” King wrote. “This ‘Wait’ has almost always meant ‘Never’” (King,  Why , 83). He articulated the resentment felt “when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of ‘nobodiness’—then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait” (King,  Why , 84). King justified the tactic of civil disobedience by stating that, just as the Bible’s Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego refused to obey Nebuchadnezzar’s unjust laws and colonists staged the Boston Tea Party, he refused to submit to laws and injunctions that were employed to uphold segregation and deny citizens their rights to peacefully assemble and protest.

King also decried the inaction of white moderates such as the clergymen, charging that human progress “comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be co-workers with God, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation” (King,  Why , 89). He prided himself as being among “extremists” such as Jesus, the prophet Amos, the apostle Paul, Martin Luther, and Abraham Lincoln, and observed that the country as a whole and the South in particular stood in need of creative men of extreme action. In closing, he hoped to meet the eight fellow clergymen who authored the first letter.

Garrow,  Bearing the Cross , 1986.

King, “A Letter from Birmingham Jail,”  Ebony  (August 1963): 23–32.

King, “From the Birmingham Jail,”  Christianity and Crisis  23 (27 May 1963): 89–91.

King, “From the Birmingham Jail,”  Christian Century  80 (12 June 1963): 767–773.

King, “Letter from Birmingham City Jail” (Philadelphia: American Friends Service Committee, May 1963).

King, “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” in  Why We Can’t Wait , 1964.

Reverend Martin Luther King Writes from Birmingham City Jail—Part I , 88th Cong., 1st sess.,  Congressional Record  (11 July 1963): A 4366–4368.

“White Clergymen Urge Local Negroes to Withdraw from Demonstrations,”  Birmingham News , 13 April 1963.

Letter From Birmingham Jail

46 pages • 1 hour read

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more. For select classroom titles, we also provide Teaching Guides with discussion and quiz questions to prompt student engagement.

Essay Analysis

Key Figures

Symbols & Motifs

Literary Devices

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Discussion Questions

Summary and Study Guide

Summary: “letter from birmingham jail”.

This guide is based on the revised version of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham Jail," published as the fifth essay in Why We Can't Wait (1964).King's letter is a response to another open letter, "A Call for Unity," published in The Birmingham News and collectively authored by eight Alabama clergymen who argued that the protests were not an appropriate response to conditions in Birmingham.

King opens the letter by explaining that he is responding to their criticism that the protests are“‘unwise and untimely’” (85) because he believes the clergymen to be sincere people of “genuine goodwill” (85).King first responds to the clergymen’s criticism that King is an outsider. According to King, he is in Birmingham because the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights (ACMHR), the local of affiliate of King’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLSC), invited him.

King then highlights the example of early Christians like the Apostle Paul, who preached far from home, to make the point that King’s Christian duty requires him to come to Birmingham because of the presence of injustice. Ultimately, “[i]njustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere,” according to King, so when it comes to fighting injustice, there is no such thing as an outsider in the U.S. (87).

The clergymen’s objection to the protests is unfortunate because it fails to account for what led to the protests in the first place. The decision to protest in Birmingham is the result of a four-stage process King and his peers followed: collecting facts, negotiating, self-purifying, and engaging in direct action. King provides evidence to show that they completed each step before proceeding to the next. Because they followed this process, the leaders of the protests knew their timing was right.

King next responds to the question of whether direct action is preferable to negotiation by pointing out that “[n]onviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue” (89). Far from being destructive, such tension is “constructive, nonviolent tension that is necessary for growth” (90). The choice of direct action was explicitly used to force the hands of those in power in Birmingham.

King also responds to the accusation that protests were “untimely” (90) because they did not give Mayor Albert Boutwell , the moderate segregationist who beat extreme segregationist Bull Connor in the mayor’s election, a chance to demonstrate that he was ready to loosen the segregationist regime in Birmingham. King counters this position by stating that despite his gentleness, Boutwell is still a segregationist who needs to be forced to change: “freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed” (90). King gives numerous examples of the personal and political wrongs that have occurred while African-Americans waited for racial equality. Under the burden of such injustice, impatience is understandable.

King next responds to the clergymen’s concerns about the protestors’ violation of laws by distinguishing between just and unjust laws. Just laws accord with moral law and should be obeyed. Unjust laws violate God’s law and must not be obeyed. Segregationist laws are unjust laws that transform the relationship between the oppressor and oppressed into an “‘I-it” relationship that creates separation between people and transforms African-Americans into things. Laws can also be unjust in their application. King provides the example of the law against parading as one that is unjust in application because it is explicitly applied to prevent the exercise of free speech.

King then uses the resistance of early Christians and the Boston Tea Party as examples to establish that civil disobedience is an old and respected response to unjust laws. Refusing to obey Hitler’s laws forbidding aid to Jews or Communist laws that prohibit religious freedom are two contemporary examples of such disobedience.

King expresses his disappointment in the inaction of white moderates, who fear disorder more than injustice and who believe they have the right to tell African-Americans to wait on their freedom.King compares segregation to a boil that can’t be cured “as long as it is covered up” but that can be cured if it is “opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light” (98). The clergymen’s accusation that even peaceful protests are wrong because they “precipitate violence” (98) is illogical and immoral, the equivalent of blaming Socrates or Jesus for the authorities’ role in their deaths.

King follows these examples with a discussion of white moderates’ “tragic misconception of time” (99), which allows them to believe that equality will eventually come as a matter of course. King counters this argument by stating that “time itself is neutral” and that “[h]uman progress […] comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be co-workers with God, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of social stagnation” (99). King believes that this moment is therefore the right time to act.

King also responds to the clergymen’s accusation that his actions are “‘extreme’” (99). According to King, the African-American community includes “a force of complacency [satisfaction or indifference]” and another of “bitterness and hatred,” like the Nation of Islam (100). King’s goal is to moderate these two extremes through nonviolence. Without this approach, King thinks “the streets of the South would […] be flowing with blood […] [and] a racial nightmare” (101).

On further reflection, King shifts to the position that he is glad to be labeled an extremist. Jesus, the Old Testament Prophets, the Apostle Paul, and Abraham Lincoln were all extremists for just causes. Jesus was “an extremist for love, truth and goodness,” and could perhaps serve as an example of just the kind of “creative extremist” the South and the U.S. need to overcome their injustice (103). The few white moderates who have acted by protesting are also such extremists and deserve praise.

King expresses keen disappointment over the inaction of the white church on the issue of civil rights. King praises two of the ministers who composed the letter for their concrete actions toward equality in their churches but notes that during the Montgomery, Alabama, protests, the white church leadership was dominated by “outright opponents” or those who “remained silent” (104). The clergy in Birmingham have been equally disappointing, with some advising compliance with segregation from the pulpit, focusing on trivial details instead of the central issue of injustice, or elevating “otherworldly religion” over social issues (105). In looking over the churches of the South, King finds himself wondering why they have been missing in action when government officials supported segregation and African-Americans rose up to protest.

The modern church is “blemished and scarred […] through social neglect and through fear of being nonconformists” (106). In early history, Christians “rejoiced at being deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed,” and concerned towns labeled them “‘disturbers of the peace’ and ‘outside agitators’” (107). Their willingness to live out their morals “brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contests” (107). Modern Christians are “[a]rchdefenders of the status quo” and provide cover for the power structure in many communities by standing by or opposing activism (107).

The churches’ complicity is dangerous to their survival, contends King. They have already become increasingly irrelevant for young people. King muses that perhaps his optimism in the power of churches to participate in change has been misplaced. Maybe organized religion is only capable of supporting the status quo and change can only come from “the inner spiritual church” (107). King notes that some of his fellow travelers in the freedom marches are people from organized religion. King’s hope is that all organized religions will follow their example.

Even if the churches fail in this moral obligation, King is confident that the struggle for freedom will be won “because the goal of America is freedom,” despite the longstanding oppression of African-Americans (108). African-Americans’ resilience and persistence in believing in freedom despite “the inexpressible cruelties of slavery” means that the current opposition will not win, either (108). The freedom struggle aligns with Christian morality and national values, King argues.

King’s final response is criticism of the clergymen’s praise of Birmingham law enforcement’s maintenance of order during the protests. King says he doubts they would praise law enforcement if they had seen the violence against protestors in the streets and jails. King admits that law enforcement has been more disciplined this time but notes that they are still participating in actions that support immorality in the form of segregation. Instead, the clergymen should have praised the actions of the protestors, who demonstrated great courage and discipline by not striking back when assaulted. These protestors, argues King, will one day be recognized as “standing up for what is best in the American dream and for the most sacred values in our Judaeo-Christian [sic] heritage” (111).

King apologizes for the long length of the letter. It was all he could do in a jail cell, he admits. He also begs forgiveness for any flaws in the letter, or the letter’s arguments, and expresses a wish that one day he will be able to meet the clergymen “not as an integrationist or a civil rights leader, but as a fellow clergyman and Christian brother” (112). His final thought is a vision of a nation united in brotherhood, one free from prejudice” (112).

Related Titles

By Martin Luther King Jr.

A Testament of Hope

I Have A Dream Speech

I've Been to the Mountaintop

Stride Toward Freedom

Where Do We Go From Here

Why We Can't Wait

Featured Collections

African American Literature

View Collection

Black History Month Reads

Essays & Speeches

Letter from Birmingham Jail

By dr. martin luther king, jr..

16 April, 1963

While confined here in the Birmingham city jail, I came across your recent statement calling my present activities “unwise and untimely.” Seldom do I pause to answer criticism of my work and ideas. If I sought to answer all the criticisms that cross my desk, my secretaries would have little time for anything other than such correspondence in the course of the day, and I would have no time for constructive work. But since I feel that you are men of genuine good will and that your criticisms are sincerely set forth, I want to try to answer your statement in what I hope will be patient and reasonable terms.

I think I should indicate why I am here in Birmingham, since you have been influenced by the view which argues against “outsiders coming in.” I have the honor of serving as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, an organization operating in every southern state, with headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia. We have some eighty five affiliated organizations across the South, and one of them is the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights. Frequently we share staff, educational and financial resources with our affiliates. Several months ago the affiliate here in Birmingham asked us to be on call to engage in a nonviolent direct action program if such were deemed necessary. We readily consented, and when the hour came we lived up to our promise. So I, along with several members of my staff, am here because I was invited here. I am here because I have organizational ties here.

But more basically, I am in Birmingham because injustice is here. Just as the prophets of the eighth century B.C. left their villages and carried their “thus saith the Lord” far beyond the boundaries of their home towns, and just as the Apostle Paul left his village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ to the far corners of the Greco Roman world, so am I compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my own home town. Like Paul, I must constantly respond to the Macedonian call for aid.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere

Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states. I cannot sit idly by in Atlanta and not be concerned about what happens in Birmingham. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial “outside agitator” idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds.

You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes. It is unfortunate that demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham, but it is even more unfortunate that the city’s white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative.

In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self purification; and direct action. We have gone through all these steps in Birmingham. There can be no gainsaying the fact that racial injustice engulfs this community. Birmingham is probably the most thoroughly segregated city in the United States. Its ugly record of brutality is widely known. Negroes have experienced grossly unjust treatment in the courts. There have been more unsolved bombings of Negro homes and churches in Birmingham than in any other city in the nation. These are the hard, brutal facts of the case. On the basis of these conditions, Negro leaders sought to negotiate with the city fathers. But the latter consistently refused to engage in good faith negotiation.

Then, last September, came the opportunity to talk with leaders of Birmingham’s economic community. In the course of the negotiations, certain promises were made by the merchants—for example, to remove the stores’ humiliating racial signs. On the basis of these promises, the Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth and the leaders of the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights agreed to a moratorium on all demonstrations. As the weeks and months went by, we realized that we were the victims of a broken promise. A few signs, briefly removed, returned; the others remained.

As in so many past experiences, our hopes had been blasted, and the shadow of deep disappointment settled upon us. We had no alternative except to prepare for direct action, whereby we would present our very bodies as a means of laying our case before the conscience of the local and the national community. Mindful of the difficulties involved, we decided to undertake a process of self purification. We began a series of workshops on nonviolence, and we repeatedly asked ourselves: “Are you able to accept blows without retaliating?” “Are you able to endure the ordeal of jail?” We decided to schedule our direct action program for the Easter season, realizing that except for Christmas, this is the main shopping period of the year. Knowing that a strong economic-withdrawal program would be the by product of direct action, we felt that this would be the best time to bring pressure to bear on the merchants for the needed change.

Then it occurred to us that Birmingham’s mayoral election was coming up in March, and we speedily decided to postpone action until after election day. When we discovered that the Commissioner of Public Safety, Eugene “Bull” Connor, had piled up enough votes to be in the run off, we decided again to postpone action until the day after the run off so that the demonstrations could not be used to cloud the issues. Like many others, we waited to see Mr. Connor defeated, and to this end we endured postponement after postponement. Having aided in this community need, we felt that our direct action program could be delayed no longer.

You may well ask: “Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn’t negotiation a better path?” You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood.

The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue.

One of the basic points in your statement is that the action that I and my associates have taken in Birmingham is untimely. Some have asked: “Why didn’t you give the new city administration time to act?” The only answer that I can give to this query is that the new Birmingham administration must be prodded about as much as the outgoing one, before it will act. We are sadly mistaken if we feel that the election of Albert Boutwell as mayor will bring the millennium to Birmingham. While Mr. Boutwell is a much more gentle person than Mr. Connor, they are both segregationists, dedicated to maintenance of the status quo. I have hope that Mr. Boutwell will be reasonable enough to see the futility of massive resistance to desegregation. But he will not see this without pressure from devotees of civil rights. My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals.

Justice too long delayed is justice denied

We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word “Wait!” It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This “Wait” has almost always meant “Never.” We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”

We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God given rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jetlike speed toward gaining political independence, but we still creep at horse and buggy pace toward gaining a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, “Wait.” But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate filled policemen curse, kick and even kill your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six year old daughter why she can’t go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five year old son who is asking: “Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?”; when you take a cross county drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading “white” and “colored”; when your first name becomes “nigger,” your middle name becomes “boy” (however old you are) and your last name becomes “John,” and your wife and mother are never given the respected title “Mrs.”; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of “nobodiness”—then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience.

You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. This is certainly a legitimate concern. Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws. One may well ask: “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.”

Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality. It gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority. Segregation, to use the terminology of the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber, substitutes an “I it” relationship for an “I thou” relationship and ends up relegating persons to the status of things. Hence segregation is not only politically, economically and sociologically unsound, it is morally wrong and sinful. Paul Tillich has said that sin is separation. Is not segregation an existential expression of man’s tragic separation, his awful estrangement, his terrible sinfulness? Thus it is that I can urge men to obey the 1954 decision of the Supreme Court, for it is morally right; and I can urge them to disobey segregation ordinances, for they are morally wrong.

Let us consider a more concrete example of just and unjust laws. An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself. This is difference made legal. By the same token, a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself. This is sameness made legal.

Let me give another explanation. A law is unjust if it is inflicted on a minority that, as a result of being denied the right to vote, had no part in enacting or devising the law. Who can say that the legislature of Alabama which set up that state’s segregation laws was democratically elected? Throughout Alabama all sorts of devious methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters, and there are some counties in which, even though Negroes constitute a majority of the population, not a single Negro is registered. Can any law enacted under such circumstances be considered democratically structured?

Sometimes a law is just on its face and unjust in its application. For instance, I have been arrested on a charge of parading without a permit. Now, there is nothing wrong in having an ordinance which requires a permit for a parade. But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain segregation and to deny citizens the First-Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and protest.

I hope you are able to see the distinction I am trying to point out. In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.

Of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. It was evidenced sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake. It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire. To a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practiced civil disobedience. In our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represented a massive act of civil disobedience.

We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country’s antireligious laws.

I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.

In your statement you assert that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. But is this a logical assertion? Isn’t this like condemning a robbed man because his possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery? Isn’t this like condemning Socrates because his unswerving commitment to truth and his philosophical inquiries precipitated the act by the misguided populace in which they made him drink hemlock? Isn’t this like condemning Jesus because his unique God consciousness and never ceasing devotion to God’s will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion? We must come to see that, as the federal courts have consistently affirmed, it is wrong to urge an individual to cease his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest may precipitate violence. Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber.

I had also hoped that the white moderate would reject the myth concerning time in relation to the struggle for freedom. I have just received a letter from a white brother in Texas. He writes: “All Christians know that the colored people will receive equal rights eventually, but it is possible that you are in too great a religious hurry. It has taken Christianity almost two thousand years to accomplish what it has. The teachings of Christ take time to come to earth.” Such an attitude stems from a tragic misconception of time, from the strangely irrational notion that there is something in the very flow of time that will inevitably cure all ills. Actually, time itself is neutral; it can be used either destructively or constructively. More and more I feel that the people of ill will have used time much more effectively than have the people of good will. We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people. Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability; it comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be co workers with God, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. We must use time creatively, in the knowledge that the time is always ripe to do right. Now is the time to make real the promise of democracy and transform our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. Now is the time to lift our national policy from the quicksand of racial injustice to the solid rock of human dignity.

You speak of our activity in Birmingham as extreme. At first I was rather disappointed that fellow clergymen would see my nonviolent efforts as those of an extremist. I began thinking about the fact that I stand in the middle of two opposing forces in the Negro community. One is a force of complacency, made up in part of Negroes who, as a result of long years of oppression, are so drained of self respect and a sense of “somebodiness” that they have adjusted to segregation; and in part of a few middle-class Negroes who, because of a degree of academic and economic security and because in some ways they profit by segregation, have become insensitive to the problems of the masses. The other force is one of bitterness and hatred, and it comes perilously close to advocating violence. It is expressed in the various black nationalist groups that are springing up across the nation, the largest and best known being Elijah Muhammad’s Muslim movement. Nourished by the Negro’s frustration over the continued existence of racial discrimination, this movement is made up of people who have lost faith in America, who have absolutely repudiated Christianity, and who have concluded that the white man is an incorrigible “devil.”

I have tried to stand between these two forces, saying that we need emulate neither the “do nothingism” of the complacent nor the hatred and despair of the black nationalist. For there is the more excellent way of love and nonviolent protest. I am grateful to God that, through the influence of the Negro church, the way of nonviolence became an integral part of our struggle.

If this philosophy had not emerged, by now many streets of the South would, I am convinced, be flowing with blood. And I am further convinced that if our white brothers dismiss as “rabble rousers” and “outside agitators” those of us who employ nonviolent direct action, and if they refuse to support our nonviolent efforts, millions of Negroes will, out of frustration and despair, seek solace and security in black nationalist ideologies—a development that would inevitably lead to a frightening racial nightmare.

Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself, and that is what has happened to the American Negro. Something within has reminded him of his birthright of freedom, and something without has reminded him that it can be gained. Consciously or unconsciously, he has been caught up by the Zeitgeist, and with his black brothers of Africa and his brown and yellow brothers of Asia, South America and the Caribbean, the United States Negro is moving with a sense of great urgency toward the promised land of racial justice. If one recognizes this vital urge that has engulfed the Negro community, one should readily understand why public demonstrations are taking place. The Negro has many pent up resentments and latent frustrations, and he must release them. So let him march; let him make prayer pilgrimages to the city hall; let him go on freedom rides -and try to understand why he must do so. If his repressed emotions are not released in nonviolent ways, they will seek expression through violence; this is not a threat but a fact of history. So I have not said to my people: “Get rid of your discontent.” Rather, I have tried to say that this normal and healthy discontent can be channeled into the creative outlet of nonviolent direct action. And now this approach is being termed extremist.

The question is not whether we will be extremist, but what kind of extremists we will be

But though I was initially disappointed at being categorized as an extremist, as I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a measure of satisfaction from the label. Was not Jesus an extremist for love: “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.” Was not Amos an extremist for justice: “Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever flowing stream.” Was not Paul an extremist for the Christian gospel: “I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.” Was not Martin Luther an extremist: “Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise, so help me God.” And John Bunyan: “I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a butchery of my conscience.” And Abraham Lincoln: “This nation cannot survive half slave and half free.” And Thomas Jefferson: “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal . . .” So the question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice? In that dramatic scene on Calvary’s hill three men were crucified. We must never forget that all three were crucified for the same crime—the crime of extremism. Two were extremists for immorality, and thus fell below their environment. The other, Jesus Christ, was an extremist for love, truth and goodness, and thereby rose above his environment. Perhaps the South, the nation and the world are in dire need of creative extremists.

I had hoped that the white moderate would see this need. Perhaps I was too optimistic; perhaps I expected too much. I suppose I should have realized that few members of the oppressor race can understand the deep groans and passionate yearnings of the oppressed race, and still fewer have the vision to see that injustice must be rooted out by strong, persistent and determined action. I am thankful, however, that some of our white brothers in the South have grasped the meaning of this social revolution and committed themselves to it. They are still all too few in quantity, but they are big in quality. Some -such as Ralph McGill, Lillian Smith, Harry Golden, James McBride Dabbs, Ann Braden and Sarah Patton Boyle—have written about our struggle in eloquent and prophetic terms. Others have marched with us down nameless streets of the South. They have languished in filthy, roach infested jails, suffering the abuse and brutality of policemen who view them as “dirty nigger-lovers.” Unlike so many of their moderate brothers and sisters, they have recognized the urgency of the moment and sensed the need for powerful “action” antidotes to combat the disease of segregation.

Let me take note of my other major disappointment. I have been so greatly disappointed with the white church and its leadership. Of course, there are some notable exceptions. I am not unmindful of the fact that each of you has taken some significant stands on this issue. I commend you, Reverend Stallings, for your Christian stand on this past Sunday, in welcoming Negroes to your worship service on a nonsegregated basis. I commend the Catholic leaders of this state for integrating Spring Hill College several years ago.

But despite these notable exceptions, I must honestly reiterate that I have been disappointed with the church. I do not say this as one of those negative critics who can always find something wrong with the church. I say this as a minister of the gospel, who loves the church; who was nurtured in its bosom; who has been sustained by its spiritual blessings and who will remain true to it as long as the cord of life shall lengthen.

When I was suddenly catapulted into the leadership of the bus protest in Montgomery, Alabama, a few years ago, I felt we would be supported by the white church. I felt that the white ministers, priests and rabbis of the South would be among our strongest allies. Instead, some have been outright opponents, refusing to understand the freedom movement and misrepresenting its leaders; all too many others have been more cautious than courageous and have remained silent behind the anesthetizing security of stained glass windows.

In spite of my shattered dreams, I came to Birmingham with the hope that the white religious leadership of this community would see the justice of our cause and, with deep moral concern, would serve as the channel through which our just grievances could reach the power structure. I had hoped that each of you would understand. But again I have been disappointed.

I have heard numerous southern religious leaders admonish their worshipers to comply with a desegregation decision because it is the law, but I have longed to hear white ministers declare: “Follow this decree because integration is morally right and because the Negro is your brother.” In the midst of blatant injustices inflicted upon the Negro, I have watched white churchmen stand on the sideline and mouth pious irrelevancies and sanctimonious trivialities. In the midst of a mighty struggle to rid our nation of racial and economic injustice, I have heard many ministers say: “Those are social issues, with which the gospel has no real concern.” And I have watched many churches commit themselves to a completely other worldly religion which makes a strange, un-Biblical distinction between body and soul, between the sacred and the secular.

I have traveled the length and breadth of Alabama, Mississippi and all the other southern states. On sweltering summer days and crisp autumn mornings I have looked at the South’s beautiful churches with their lofty spires pointing heavenward. I have beheld the impressive outlines of her massive religious education buildings. Over and over I have found myself asking: “What kind of people worship here? Who is their God? Where were their voices when the lips of Governor Barnett dripped with words of interposition and nullification? Where were they when Governor Wallace gave a clarion call for defiance and hatred? Where were their voices of support when bruised and weary Negro men and women decided to rise from the dark dungeons of complacency to the bright hills of creative protest?”

Yes, these questions are still in my mind. In deep disappointment I have wept over the laxity of the church. But be assured that my tears have been tears of love. There can be no deep disappointment where there is not deep love. Yes, I love the church. How could I do otherwise? I am in the rather unique position of being the son, the grandson and the great grandson of preachers. Yes, I see the church as the body of Christ. But, oh! How we have blemished and scarred that body through social neglect and through fear of being nonconformists.

There was a time when the church was very powerful—in the time when the early Christians rejoiced at being deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Whenever the early Christians entered a town, the people in power became disturbed and immediately sought to convict the Christians for being “disturbers of the peace” and “outside agitators.”’ But the Christians pressed on, in the conviction that they were “a colony of heaven,” called to obey God rather than man. Small in number, they were big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be “astronomically intimidated.” By their effort and example they brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contests.

Things are different now. So often the contemporary church is a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. So often it is an archdefender of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church’s silent—and often even vocal—sanction of things as they are.

But the judgment of God is upon the church as never before. If today’s church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. Every day I meet young people whose disappointment with the church has turned into outright disgust.

Perhaps I have once again been too optimistic. Is organized religion too inextricably bound to the status quo to save our nation and the world? Perhaps I must turn my faith to the inner spiritual church, the church within the church, as the true ekklesia and the hope of the world. But again I am thankful to God that some noble souls from the ranks of organized religion have broken loose from the paralyzing chains of conformity and joined us as active partners in the struggle for freedom. They have left their secure congregations and walked the streets of Albany, Georgia, with us. They have gone down the highways of the South on tortuous rides for freedom. Yes, they have gone to jail with us. Some have been dismissed from their churches, have lost the support of their bishops and fellow ministers. But they have acted in the faith that right defeated is stronger than evil triumphant. Their witness has been the spiritual salt that has preserved the true meaning of the gospel in these troubled times. They have carved a tunnel of hope through the dark mountain of disappointment.

I hope the church as a whole will meet the challenge of this decisive hour. But even if the church does not come to the aid of justice, I have no despair about the future. I have no fear about the outcome of our struggle in Birmingham, even if our motives are at present misunderstood. We will reach the goal of freedom in Birmingham and all over the nation, because the goal of America is freedom. Abused and scorned though we may be, our destiny is tied up with America’s destiny. Before the pilgrims landed at Plymouth, we were here. Before the pen of Jefferson etched the majestic words of the Declaration of Independence across the pages of history, we were here. For more than two centuries our forebears labored in this country without wages; they made cotton king; they built the homes of their masters while suffering gross injustice and shameful humiliation -and yet out of a bottomless vitality they continued to thrive and develop. If the inexpressible cruelties of slavery could not stop us, the opposition we now face will surely fail. We will win our freedom because the sacred heritage of our nation and the eternal will of God are embodied in our echoing demands.

Before closing I feel impelled to mention one other point in your statement that has troubled me profoundly. You warmly commended the Birmingham police force for keeping “order” and “preventing violence.” I doubt that you would have so warmly commended the police force if you had seen its dogs sinking their teeth into unarmed, nonviolent Negroes. I doubt that you would so quickly commend the policemen if you were to observe their ugly and inhumane treatment of Negroes here in the city jail; if you were to watch them push and curse old Negro women and young Negro girls; if you were to see them slap and kick old Negro men and young boys; if you were to observe them, as they did on two occasions, refuse to give us food because we wanted to sing our grace together. I cannot join you in your praise of the Birmingham police department.

It is true that the police have exercised a degree of discipline in handling the demonstrators. In this sense they have conducted themselves rather “nonviolently” in public. But for what purpose? To preserve the evil system of segregation. Over the past few years I have consistently preached that nonviolence demands that the means we use must be as pure as the ends we seek. I have tried to make clear that it is wrong to use immoral means to attain moral ends. But now I must affirm that it is just as wrong, or perhaps even more so, to use moral means to preserve immoral ends. Perhaps Mr. Connor and his policemen have been rather nonviolent in public, as was Chief Pritchett in Albany, Georgia, but they have used the moral means of nonviolence to maintain the immoral end of racial injustice. As T. S. Eliot has said: “The last temptation is the greatest treason: To do the right deed for the wrong reason.”

I wish you had commended the Negro sit inners and demonstrators of Birmingham for their sublime courage, their willingness to suffer and their amazing discipline in the midst of great provocation. One day the South will recognize its real heroes. They will be the James Merediths, with the noble sense of purpose that enables them to face jeering and hostile mobs, and with the agonizing loneliness that characterizes the life of the pioneer. They will be old, oppressed, battered Negro women, symbolized in a seventy two year old woman in Montgomery, Alabama, who rose up with a sense of dignity and with her people decided not to ride segregated buses, and who responded with ungrammatical profundity to one who inquired about her weariness: “My feets is tired, but my soul is at rest.” They will be the young high school and college students, the young ministers of the gospel and a host of their elders, courageously and nonviolently sitting in at lunch counters and willingly going to jail for conscience’ sake. One day the South will know that when these disinherited children of God sat down at lunch counters, they were in reality standing up for what is best in the American dream and for the most sacred values in our Judaeo Christian heritage, thereby bringing our nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the founding fathers in their formulation of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

Never before have I written so long a letter. I’m afraid it is much too long to take your precious time. I can assure you that it would have been much shorter if I had been writing from a comfortable desk, but what else can one do when he is alone in a narrow jail cell, other than write long letters, think long thoughts and pray long prayers?

If I have said anything in this letter that overstates the truth and indicates an unreasonable impatience, I beg you to forgive me. If I have said anything that understates the truth and indicates my having a patience that allows me to settle for anything less than brotherhood, I beg God to forgive me.

I hope this letter finds you strong in the faith. I also hope that circumstances will soon make it possible for me to meet each of you, not as an integrationist or a civil-rights leader but as a fellow clergyman and a Christian brother. Let us all hope that the dark clouds of racial prejudice will soon pass away and the deep fog of misunderstanding will be lifted from our fear drenched communities, and in some not too distant tomorrow the radiant stars of love and brotherhood will shine over our great nation with all their scintillating beauty.

Yours for the cause of Peace and Brotherhood,

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Racism — Letter From Birmingham Jail

Essays on Letter from Birmingham Jail

Martin Luther King Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham Jail" stands as a cornerstone document in the history of civil rights activism, eloquently arguing against injustice and the importance of nonviolent protest. Recognizing the profound impact of King's letter, GradesFixer has curated an extensive collection of essay samples that provide insightful analyses and perspectives on this pivotal work. These essays are invaluable resources for anyone seeking to understand the letter's enduring significance in advocating for social justice and equality.

Exploring the Multifaceted Impact of King's Letter

Our collection encompasses essays that tackle various aspects of the "Letter from Birmingham Jail," from its rhetorical strategies and ethical arguments to its historical context and relevance to contemporary social movements. By offering essays that cover such a broad spectrum of analyses, we aim to provide a comprehensive understanding of the letter's complexities and its role in shaping the civil rights movement.

A Resource for Academic Exploration and Reflection

For students tasked with writing a "Letter from Birmingham Jail" essay, our samples serve as an invaluable resource. These essays demonstrate how to critically engage with King's text, offering models for how to incorporate textual evidence, analyze rhetorical devices, and interpret the letter's broader implications for civil rights activism. Drawing on our collection, students can find inspiration for their essays, refine their analytical skills, and contribute thoughtfully to the discourse surrounding civil rights and social justice.

Fostering a Deeper Appreciation for Civil Rights Literature

Beyond serving as academic resources, our essay samples on the "Letter from Birmingham Jail" encourage a deeper appreciation for the power of civil rights literature. They invite readers to reflect on the moral courage it takes to stand against injustice and the role of persuasive writing in mobilizing social change. Through engaging with these essays, individuals can gain a richer understanding of King's legacy and the ongoing struggle for equality.

Join Our Community of Engaged Learners and Thinkers

At GradesFixer, we are committed to fostering a community of learners and thinkers passionate about exploring significant historical texts and their implications for today's world. We invite you to explore our collection of "Letter from Birmingham Jail" essay samples, use them to deepen your understanding of Martin Luther King Jr.'s message, and join the conversation on civil rights and social justice.

The "Letter from Birmingham Jail" is more than a historical document; it is a blueprint for understanding the dynamics of protest, the ethics of civil disobedience, and the pursuit of justice. With our curated collection of essay samples, you are equipped to engage deeply with King's letter, enriching your academic work and personal growth. Dive into our collection today and take a significant step toward understanding the complexities of civil rights activism through the lens of one of its most iconic figures.

The Struggles in Maya Angelou's Life

Analysis of "letter from birmingham jail", made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Personification in Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" Speech

Analysis of rhetorical strategies used by martin luther king in the letter from birmingham jail, a comparison of "civil disobedience" and "letter from birmingham jail", rhetorical analysis of martin luther king jr’s letter from birmingham jail, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Martin Luther King’s Message in The Letter from Birmingham Jail

Letter from birmingham jail: the rhetorical analysis, letter from a birmingham jail and historical discourse: the context of the inequality, rhetorical appeals used by martin luther king in his letter from birmingham jail, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

Application of Pathos, Ethos, and Logos in The Letter from Birmingham Jail

Martin luther king's use of ethos, pathos and logos in the letter from birmingham jail, rhetorical analysis of the letter from birmingham jail, letter from birmingham jail and sonny's blues: the importance of unity, stoicism and civil disobedience interconnection, pathos, logos, ethos in letter from birmingham jail, ethos, pathos and logos in the letter from birmingham jail, letter from birmingham jail, comparison of king’s letter from birmingham jail and lincoln's inaugural address, the relevance of dr. king’s letter from birmingham jail nowadays, rhetorical analysis of the letter from birmingham jail by martin luther king jr, depiction of the injustices of birmingham in martin luther king jr’s letter from birmingham jail, analysis of rhetorical strategies in the letter from birmingham jail by martin luther king jr, analysis of pathos, ethos, and logos in the letter from birmingham jail, just and unjust laws: an analysis by martin luther king jr., rhetorical analysis of king's 'letter from birmingham jail', primary sources used by martin luther king jr. in "letter from birmingham jail", america: the multinational society, martin luther king jr.'s letter from birmingham jail, importance of taking a stand, relevant topics.

• I Have a Dream
• Black Lives Matter
• Martin Luther King
• Jim Crow Laws
• Gun Control
• Police Brutality
• Illegal Immigration
• Pro Choice (Abortion)
• Death Penalty

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Bibliography

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free