----------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 1994 by the Christian Research Institute.
----------------------------------------------------------------
COPYRIGHT/REPRODUCTION LIMITATIONS:
This data file is the sole property of the Christian Research
Institute. It may not be altered or edited in any way. It may
be reproduced only in its entirety for circulation as "freeware,"
without charge. All reproductions of this data file must contain
the copyright notice (i.e., "Copyright 1994 by the Christian
Research Institute"). This data file may not be used without the
permission of the Christian Research Institute for resale or the
enhancement of any other product sold. This includes all of its
content with the exception of a few brief quotations not to
exceed more than 500 words.
If you desire to reproduce less than 500 words of this data file
for resale or the enhancement of any other product for resale,
please give the following source credit: Copyright 1994 by the
Christian Research Institute, P.O. Box 500-TC, San Juan
Capistrano, CA 92693.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Black Theology, Black Power, and the Black Experience." Part Two
in a Three-Part Series on Liberation Theology (an article from the
Christian Research Journal, Spring 1991, page 27) by Ron Rhodes.
The Editor-in-Chief of the Christian Research Journal is
Elliot Miller.
-------------
Between 1517 and 1840 it is estimated that twenty million
blacks were captured in Africa, transported to America, and
brutally enslaved. The experience of these blacks -- and their
descendants -- serves as the backdrop for understanding
contemporary black liberation theology.
During slave trading days, blacks were crammed into ships like
sardines into a can and brought across the Atlantic. Many died at
sea from dysentery, smallpox, and other diseases. "Some starved
themselves to death refusing to eat. To prevent this form of
suicide, hot coals were applied to the lips to force the slaves to
open their mouths to eat."[1]
Upon arriving on American shores, the slaves -- men, women, and
children -- were forced to work from sunrise to sunset. Even old
and ailing slaves were forced to work.
The brutality shown to the slaves is among the saddest chapters
in American history. Black theologian Anthony Evans tells us that
"black women were raped at will by their masters at the threat of
death while their husbands could only look on. Families were
separated as they were bought and sold like cattle."[2]
For tax purposes, slaves were counted as property -- like
domestic animals. Eventually, however, a question arose as to how
to count slaves in the nation's population. The Congress solved the
problem by passing a bill that authorized the U.S. Census Bureau to
count each slave as three-fifths of a person. This Congressional
compromise resulted in what one Negro writer of the 1890s called
"the 'Inferior Race Theory,' the placing of the Negro somewhere
between the barnyard animals and human beings."[3]
*_THE CHRISTIANIZATION OF SLAVERY_*
Initially, there was heated resistance to evangelizing among
slaves. Black scholar C. Eric Lincoln tells us there were three
principal reasons for this: "(1) the hearing of the gospel required
time that could be economically productive; (2) slaves gathered
together in a religious assembly might become conscious of their
own strength and plot insurrections under cover of religious
instruction; (3) there was an English tradition of long standing
that once a slave became a Christian he could no longer be held a
slave."[4]
In addition, many whites were repulsed at the suggestion that
blacks could go to heaven. Morgan Godwyn, a graduate of Oxford
University who served in churches in Virginia around 1665, wrote
that slavemasters would commonly exclaim, "What, such as they?
What, those black dogs be made Christians? What, shall they be like
us?"[5]
Some whites tried to argue that blacks were less than human.
Buckener H. Payne, in his book _The Negro: What Is His Ethnological
blacks are present with us today, they must have been in the ark.
There were only eight souls saved in the ark, however, and they are
fully accounted for by Noah's family. As one of the beasts in the
ark, the black has no soul to be saved."[6] So why try to
evangelize them?
Regardless of such preposterous arguments, missionary work
eventually began among the slaves in the early 1700s and many of
them became Christians. The brand of Christianity that was preached
to them, however, was one that justified slavery. It was argued
that Paul and other New Testament writers issued specific
instructions for master-slave relations, thus apparently
sanctioning the practice. Moreover, a curse of slavery was placed
on the "sons of Ham" (Gen. 9:20-27) -- who were interpreted to be
blacks. Furthermore, slavery was considered a "religious good," for
it amounted to importing unsaved heathens to a Christian land where
they could hear the gospel and be saved.
(However, though Paul gave instructions on master-slave
relations, his _underlying_ belief was that slaves should be freed
[1 Cor. 7:21]. Moreover, a curse of slavery was placed _only on
Ham's son, Canaan_ -- whose descendants later occupied Phoenicia
and Palestine. _They were Caucasians._ As for slavery being a
"religious good," this seems an absurd claim in view of the cruel,
inhuman treatment shown to the slaves.)
Most blacks accepted the slave brand of Christianity at face
value. Moreover, white missionaries persuaded the blacks that life
on earth was insignificant because "obedient servants of God could
expect a reward in heaven after death."[7] The white interpretation
of Christianity effectively divested the slaves of any concern they
might have had about their freedom in the present.
As more blacks began attending white Christian churches,
restrictions in seating, communion services, and property ownership
caused many blacks to seek autonomy in their own congregations and
ultimately, separate denominations. So, by the mid-1700s, black
slaves had begun meeting in private to worship since authentic
worship with whites was impossible. There is sufficient historical
evidence to conclude that themes later developed by black
liberation theologians were present in these early slave meetings
in at least a nascent form.
For example, God was interpreted by the slaves as a loving
Father who would eventually deliver them from slavery just as He
had delivered Israel from Egyptian bondage. Jesus was considered
both a Savior and an elder brother who was a fellow sufferer.
Heaven had a dual implication for black slaves. Yes, it
referred to the future life, but it also came to refer to a state
of liberation in the present. Because of the risk involved in
_preaching_ liberation, the slave learned how to _sing_ liberation
in the very presence of his master:
"Swing low, sweet chariot (underground railroad --
conestoga wagon)
Coming for to carry me home (up North to freedom)
Swing low (come close to where I am),
Sweet chariot
Coming for to carry me home.
I looked over Jordan (Ohio River -- border between North
and South) And what did I see,
Coming for to carry me home
A band of angels (northern emancipators with the
underground) coming after me.
Coming for to carry me home."[8]
*_THE DEVELOPMENT OF BLACK LIBERATIONIST THOUGHT_*
It was not long before slave theology gave rise to black
activism. There are many important figures who contributed to the
cause of black liberation throughout black history. We can only
mention a few here.
*Nat Turner* (1800-1831) was the most notorious slave preacher
who ever lived on American soil. Turner's hatred of slavery
propelled him to seek freedom by violence. Indeed, Turner killed
nearly sixty white people before being captured and hanged in
September, 1831. This violent revolt marked the beginning of the
black struggle for liberation.
*Marcus Garvey* (1887-1940) is regarded by many as "the apostle
of black theology in the United States of America."[9] Martin
Luther King, Jr., said Garvey "was the first man on a mass scale
and level to give millions of Negroes a sense of dignity and
destiny, and make the Negro feel he is somebody."[10] Garvey was
one of the first to speak of seeing God through black "spectacles."
*Howard Thurman,* in his book _Jesus and the Disinherited_
(1949), saw black life paralleling Jesus' life because His poverty
identified Him with the poor masses. Thurman also noted that Jesus
was a member of a minority group (the Jews) in the midst of a
larger and controlling dominant group (the Romans). Thurman thus
drew many applications for the black experience from the life of
Jesus.
*Martin Luther King, Jr.* (1929-1968) was America's most
visible civil rights leader from 1955 until his assassination in
April, 1968 in Memphis, Tennessee. Though he cannot be called a
formal participant in the black theology movement, he nevertheless
roused the conscience of black America to passionate commitment to
liberation.
King was an advocate of Ghandian nonviolent social change.
Through nonviolent suffering, King believed that "blacks would not
only liberate themselves from the necessity of bitterness and the
feeling of inferiority toward whites, but would also prick the
conscience of whites and liberate them from a feeling of
superiority."[11] To some, King's assassination indicated that
nonviolence as a means of liberation had failed and that perhaps a
more revolutionary theology was needed.
*Albert Cleage* was one of the more militant black writers of
the 1960s. His claim to fame was _The Black Messiah,_ a 1968
collection of sermons in which he set forth his brand of black
nationalism.
Cleage rejected the Pauline books in the New Testament. He said
that -- in contrast to the black Messiah -- there was a
spiritualized Jesus constructed by the apostle Paul who "never knew
Jesus and who modified his teaching to conform to the pagan
philosophers of the white gentiles....We, as black Christians
suffering oppression in a white man's land, do not need the
individualistic and other-worldly doctrines of Paul and the white
man."[12]
*_THE EMERGENCE OF A FORMAL "BLACK THEOLOGY"_*
Over one hundred and thirty years after Nat Turner was hanged,
black theology emerged as a formal discipline. Beginning with the
"black power" movement in 1966, black clergy in many major
denominations began to reassess the relationship of the Christian
church to the black community. Black caucuses developed in the
Catholic, Presbyterian, and Episcopal churches. "The central thrust
of these new groups was to redefine the meaning and role of the
church and religion in the lives of black people. Out of this
reexamination has come what some have called a 'Black
Theology.'"[13]
For the first time in the history of black religious thought,
black clergy (primarily _educated, middle-class_ black clergy) and
black theologians began to recognize the need for a completely new
"starting point" in theology. They insisted that this starting
point must be defined by people at the _bottom_ and not the _top_
of the socioeconomic ladder. So, black theologians began to re-read
the Bible through the eyes of their slave grandparents and started
to speak of God's solidarity with the oppressed of the earth.
The most prolific and sophisticated writer of this new
theological movement has been James Cone. No one has matched him
either in terms of sheer volume of writing, or in terms of the
challenge posed by his books. For this reason, we shall examine his
theology in depth.
*_James Cone: Theologian of Black Liberation_*
In assessing the theology of James Cone, it is critical to
recognize that he sees _black experience_ as the fundamental
starting point for ascertaining theological truth. And his _own_
writings are a reflection of his _own_ "black experience" -- that
is, the discrimination he suffered while growing up as a child in
Bearden, Arkansas.
What was it like in Bearden? "It meant attending 'separate but
equal' schools, going to the balcony when attending a movie, and
drinking water from a 'colored' fountain. It meant refusing to
retaliate when called a nigger unless you were prepared to leave
town at the precise moment of your rebellion. You had no name
except for your first name of 'boy.'"[14] Cone concedes that "my
theological reflections are inseparable from the Bearden
experience....What I write is urged out of my blood."[15]
Cone says that "it is this common experience among black people
in America that Black Theology elevates as the supreme test of
truth. To put it simply, Black Theology knows no authority more
binding than the experience of oppression itself. This alone must
be the ultimate authority in religious matters."[16]
From the above, one may immediately suspect that Cone has a
deficient view of the authority of Scripture. Indeed, his view
seems very close to the neo-orthodoxy of Karl Barth, as when Cone
writes: "It is true that the Bible is not the revelation of God,
only Christ is. But it is an indispensable witness to God's
revelation."[17] Moreover, "we should not conclude that the Bible
is an infallible witness."[18] Cone believes the meaning of
Scripture is not to be found in the _words_ of Scripture as such,
but only in its power to _point beyond itself_ to the reality of
God's "revelation," which -- in America -- takes place
experientially in God's liberating work among blacks.
*_Black Theology and Black Power._* Based on the preeminence of
"black experience," Cone defines theology as "a rational study of
the being of God in the world in light of the existential situation
of an oppressed community, relating the forces of liberation to the
essence of the gospel, which is Jesus Christ."[19] Cone's theology
asks (and seeks to answer) the question, "What does the Christian
gospel have to say to powerless black men whose existence is
threatened daily by the insidious tentacles of white power?"[20]
In answering this pivotal question, Cone emphasizes that there
is a very close relationship between black theology and what has
been termed "black power." Cone says that _black power_ is a phrase
that represents both black freedom and black self-determination
"wherein black people no longer view themselves as without human
dignity but as men, human beings with the ability to carve out
their own destiny."[21]
Cone says _black theology_ is the religious counterpart of
_black power._ "Black Theology is the theological arm of Black
Power, and Black Power is the political arm of Black Theology."[22]
And, "while Black Power focuses on the political, social, and
economic condition of black people, Black Theology puts black
identity in a theological context."[23]
We gain insights about what Cone means by "black theology" and
"black power" by understanding what _blackness_ means in his
theology. Cone notes two aspects of blackness: the_ physiological_
and _ontological._ In the first sense, "black" indicates a
physiological _trait._ It refers to "a particular black-skinned
people in America."[24]
In the second sense, "black" and "white" relate not to skin
pigmentation but to "one's attitude and action toward the
liberation of the oppressed black people from white racism."[25]
_Blackness_ is thus "an ontological symbol for all people who
participate in the liberation of man from oppression."[26] Seen in
this light, "blackness" can be attributed to people who _do not_
have black skin but who _do_ work for liberation.
By contrast, "whiteness" in Cone's thought symbolizes the
ethnocentric activity of "madmen sick with their own self-concept"
and thus blind to that which ails them and oppresses others.
Whiteness symbolizes _sickness_ and _oppression._ White theology is
therefore viewed as a theological extension of that sickness and
oppression.[27]
Having established that the _black experience_ is the governing
principle in Cone's interpretation of Scripture, it is important to
understand how this governing principle has affected his views of
specific doctrines.
*_God._* Cone bases much of his liberationist theology on God's
deliverance of Israel from oppression under the Egyptians. He says
that the consistent theme in Israelite prophecy is Yahweh's concern
for "the lack of social, economic, and political justice for those
who are poor and unwanted in the society."[28]
This same God, Cone argues, is working for the deliverance of
oppressed blacks in twentieth-century America. Because God _is_
helping oppressed blacks and has identified with them, God Himself
is spoken of as "black."
Black theology's dominant perspective on God is "God in action,
delivering the oppressed because of His righteousness. He is to be
seen, not in the transcendent way of Greek philosophy, but
immanent, among His people."[29] God is "immanent" in the sense
that He is met in concrete historical situations of liberation.
This is very similar to the idea of the immanence of God in
process theology. Indeed, process theologian David Ray Griffin,
while recognizing important differences between process and black
theology, has suggested that "process philosophy supports
liberation theologians in locating the reality of God's presence
and creative activity in this world."[30]
*_Jesus Christ._* Cone's intention is to stand in the
Chalcedonian tradition in his understanding of Jesus Christ. The
Chalcedonian creed (A.D. 451) affirmed that Christ is "truly God
and truly man." Cone agrees with this, but adds that the _role_ of
Jesus as God-Incarnate was to liberate the oppressed: Jesus Christ
"is God himself coming into the very depths of human existence for
the sole purpose of striking off the chains of slavery, thereby
freeing man from ungodly principalities and powers that hinder his
relationship with God."[31]
One of the more controversial aspects of Cone's Christology is
his view that Jesus was (is) black: "The 'raceless' American Christ
has a light skin, wavy brown hair, and sometimes -- wonder of
wonders -- blue eyes. For whites to find him with big lips and
kinky hair is as offensive as it was for the Pharisees to find him
partying with tax-collectors. But whether whites want to hear it or
not, _Christ is black, baby,_ with all of the features which are so
detestable to white society" (emphasis in original).[32]
Cone believes it is very important for black people to view
Jesus as black: "It's very important because you've got a lot of
white images of Christ. In reality, Christ was not white, not
European. That's important to the psychic and to the spiritual
consciousness of black people who live in a ghetto and in a white
society in which their lord and savior looks just like people who
victimize them. God is whatever color God needs to be in order to
let people know they're not nobodies, they're somebodies."[33]
For Cone, the Resurrection of the black Jesus -- a real event
-- symbolizes universal freedom for all who are bound. It is not
_just_ a future-oriented hope in a heavenly compensation for
earthly woes. Rather, it is a hope that focuses on the _future_ in
such a way that it prevents blacks from tolerating _present_
inequities.[34] This is closely related to Cone's understanding of
eschatology (more on this shortly).
*_Sin and Salvation._* In Cone's view, sin is "a condition of
human existence in which man denies the essence of God's liberating
activity as revealed in Jesus Christ."[35] In this view, sin is
anything that is contrary to the oppressed community or its
liberation.
Salvation for Cone primarily has to do with _earthly_ reality,
not _heavenly_ hopes. "To see the salvation of God is to see this
people [i.e., the blacks] rise up against their oppressors,
demanding that justice become a reality now and not tomorrow."[36]
Hence, though Cone often speaks of _Jesus_ as the Liberator, in
practical terms he emphasizes the _human_ work of _self_-liberation
among blacks and downplays divine help.
*_The Church._* Cone believes the black church has played an
instrumental role in the religious and social life of black
America. He says the black church was the creation of a black
people "whose daily existence was an encounter with the
overwhelming and brutalizing reality of white power. For the slaves
it was the sole source of identity and the sense of
community....The black church became the only sphere of black
experience that was free of white power."[37]
Still, Cone believes that -- since the days of slavery -- the
black church has largely capitulated to the demands of a white
racist society. He argues that in order to survive, the black
churches have given up their freedom and dignity. After the Civil
War, black churches became passive in the struggle for civil rights
and freedom while currying favors from the white establishment.
This condition, Cone says, has persisted up to the present day,
rendering the black church "the lifeless pawn of the status
quo."[38]
Only faithfulness to the "pre-Civil War black church tradition"
will issue in "an exclusive identification with black power," Cone
believes. He says that a continued emphasis on black power is "the
only hope of the black church in America."[39] (Though "black
power" as a _movement_ faded after the 1960s, the primary
_emphasis_ of the movement -- the dignity, freedom, and
self-determination of black people -- has continued in Cone's
theological writings. It is this emphasis that Cone says has been
missing in many black churches.)
*_Eschatology._* Cone rejects what he terms the "white lie"
that Christianity is primarily concerned with life in the next
world: "If eschatology means that one believes that God is totally
uninvolved in the suffering of man because he is preparing them for
another world, then black theology is not eschatological. Black
theology has hope for this life."[40]
Cone asks what good there is in golden crowns, slippers, and
white robes "if it means that we have to turn our backs on the pain
and suffering of our own children? Unless the future can become
present, thereby forcing us to make changes in this world, what
significance could eschatology have for black people who believe
that their self-determination must become a reality now?"[41]
*_Revolution and Violence._* I would be remiss to close this
discussion of James Cone without noting his views on revolution and
violence. Cone defines liberation as the "emancipation of black
people from white oppression by whatever means black people deem
necessary."[42] This definition would seem to allow for the use of
violence.
Cone _does not_ advocate armed revolution against white
society. But some violence, he says, seems unavoidable. He points
out that "the Christian does not decide between violence and
non-violence, evil and good. He decides between the lesser and the
greater evil. He must ponder whether revolutionary violence is less
or more deplorable than the violence perpetuated by the
system."[43] Injustice, slave labor, hunger, and exploitation are
all violent forms that must be considered against the cost of
revolutionary violence.
*_LIBERATION THEOLOGY AND THE BLACK CHURCH_*
We have seen that James Cone has developed a full theology
based on a reading of Scripture through the eyeglasses of
"blackness." The question is, How influential has black liberation
theology been in the life of the black church in America?
C. Eric Lincoln and Lawrence H. Mamiya have recently completed
a ten-year statistical study of the black church in America.
They've published their findings in a hefty volume entitled, _The
Black Church in the African American Experience_ (1990). Part of
the Lincoln/Mamiya study dealt with black liberation theology: "In
our urban questionnaire we asked the pastors of 1,531 urban
churches, 'Have you been influenced by any of the authors and
thinkers of black liberation theology?'"[44]
Responses to the urban questionnaire were quite revealing. Only
34.9 percent of urban black clergy said they had been influenced by
black liberation theologians as opposed to 65.1 percent who said
they had not. _Little more than one-third of the black pastors
interviewed claimed any influence from this movement!_
Lincoln and Mamiya discerned that age and education were among
the most significant variables in determining clergy responses:
Clergy who are forty and under claimed to be more
strongly influenced by black liberation theology than
those who are older. Education was also very strongly
associated with knowledge of black liberation theology.
Pastors with a high school and less educational
background said that they were minimally influenced by
liberation theology, while those with a college education
have the most positive views of the movement. The
majority of the less educated pastors have neither heard
of the movement nor of the names of theologians
associated with it. Among educated clergy familiar with
the movement, James Cone has the highest name
recognition.[45]
These differences are not that surprising, Lincoln and Mamiya
say, since black liberation theology is a relatively recent
intellectual movement "occurring largely among the educated elite
of the black clergy."[46]
Another significant variable was found to be denominational
affiliation. According to Lincoln and Mamiya, the black
denominations with higher educational levels among their clergy --
such as the African Methodist Episcopal Church -- are the major
proponents of liberation theology. "The fact that the Pentecostal
ministers of the Church of God in Christ, which has the largest
sector of lower-class members among the seven [major black]
denominations, have been scarcely influenced by this theological
perspective suggests some of the class limitations of this
movement."[47] This would seem to indicate that the formulators of
black liberation theology have not been able to move beyond their
middle-class origins, even though black liberationists have sought
to do theology from the "bottom up" -- that is, from the
perspective of the oppressed in American society.[48]
Based on their nationwide field experience, Lincoln and Mamiya
have observed that the majority of black clergy are educated as
apprentices -- learning "on the job" under the direction of senior
clergy. What little academic education they receive is usually at
the local Bible school level. Moreover, most of their reading is
denominationally oriented. "It is this local level of clergy
education," Lincoln and Mamiya suggest, "that the new black
liberation theology has thus far failed to penetrate."[49]
Lincoln and Mamiya close with this warning: "Unless the
movement of black liberation theology reaches beyond its present
location in an intellectual elite and gives more attention...to a
mass education of clergy and laity in the churches, the movement
will continue to have minimal influence among its key
constituencies."[50]
Lincoln and Mamiya are probably correct. However, the problems
of black liberation theology go much deeper than a simple failure
to reach the masses. This I shall make clear in what follows.
*_A CRITIQUE_*
It is difficult for a white person such as myself to critique
black theology. As I write, I am mindful of James Cone's conviction
that _any_ criticism of black theology by a white theologian will
be influenced by white racism and is thus invalid.[51] To help
disarm this objection, I will draw support for each of my points
from one or more black theologians.
I want to begin by affirming that black theology has made some
important contributions. I will mention only four here. First,
black theology has reminded us that theology -- if it is going to
meet the needs of twentieth century (and beyond) Christians -- must
find practical expression in society. Second, black theology has
reminded us that God is involved with His people in real-life
situations. Third, black theology has focused our attention on the
need to reach out to others in the body of Christ who are
suffering. And fourth, black theology serves as an indictment
against the racist views that have been all-too-often (but not
always) present among white people. These contributions are
important and extremely relevant.
Despite these contributions, however, there are some serious
problems that must be addressed. As a preface to my criticisms, I
want to draw attention to Part One of this series in which I
criticized the hermeneutic of Latin American liberation theology.
In that article, I pointed out that Latin American theologians have
approached Scripture with a preunderstanding that has led them to
interpret Scripture with a bias toward the poor. I emphasized that
if we are to understand the biblical author's _intended_ meaning,
it is imperative that preunderstandings be _in harmony with
Scripture and subject to correction by it._ This same point must be
made with reference to black theology. However, since I will not
repeat any material from Part One, I urge the reader to review my
comments on preunderstandings in that article.
*_"Blackness" and Scripture_*
In my critique of black liberation theology, I will focus my
attention on the particular preunderstanding which interprets
Scripture through the eyeglasses of "blackness." More specifically,
I shall address the question: Is it legitimate to make the _black
experience_ the fundamental criterion for interpreting Scripture?
Certainly I do not wish to minimize the importance of the black
experience. Nor do I want to come across as unsympathetic to the
plight of African Americans in a white-dominated society. There can
be little doubt that black liberation theologians have a legitimate
gripe regarding the treatment of their people throughout American
history. But imposing the black experience (or _any other_
experience -- including feminist, gay, anti-supernaturalist, New
Age, mystic, etc.) onto Scripture _robs_ Scripture of its intrinsic
authority and distorts its intended meaning.
Theologians who make black experience all-determinative have,
in a way, made the same mistake some white racists did during the
days of slavery -- only in reverse. Just as some whites imposed
their "experience" as slavemasters onto Scripture in order to
justify slavery, so some blacks have imposed the "black experience"
onto Scripture to justify their radical views on liberation. _Both
positions have erred._ For blacks to use such an
experience-oriented methodology is to condone the very _kind of_
method used by those who enslaved them. In my thinking, this is
self-defeating at best.
Black theologian Anthony Evans directly challenges Cone's
methodology by arguing that the black experience must be seen as
"real but not revelatory, important but not inspired."[52] Black
writer Tom Skinner agrees and argues that "like any theology, black
theology must have a frame of reference.... There are some black
theologians who seek to make their frame of reference purely the
black experience, but this assumes the black experience is
absolutely moral and absolutely just, and that is not the case.
There must be a moral frame of reference through which the black
experience can be judged."[53] That frame of reference must be
Scripture.
To produce a _biblical_ liberation theology, Scripture -- not
the "black experience" -- must be the _supreme authority_ in
matters of faith and practice. By following this approach, a strong
_biblical_ case can be constructed against racism -- something I
would think _should_ be at the very heart of a biblical black
theology.
The unity of the human race, for example, is a consistent
emphasis in Scripture -- in terms of _creation_ (Gen. 1:28), the
_sin problem_ (Rom. 3:23), _God's love_ for all men (John 3:16),
and the _scope of salvation_ (Matt. 28:19). The apostle Paul
emphasized mankind's unity in his sermon to the Athenians: "From
one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the
whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact
places where they should live" (Acts 17:26). Moreover, Revelation
5:9 tells us that God's redeemed will be from "every tribe and
tongue and people and nation." Because of the unity of humanity,
there is no place for racial discrimination -- white, black, or
otherwise -- for all men are equal in God's sight.
*_Transcending Culture_*
In Part One, I criticized the hermeneutic of Latin American
liberation theology for its inability to develop a
culture-transcending theology. Black theology's hermeneutic -- with
its emphasis on the "black experience" -- is open to the same
criticism.
A passage relevant to this is John 4 where we find Jesus
confronting a Samaritan woman. Here Jesus deals with the
relationship between _truth_ and _culture._
The Jews considered the Samaritans an "unclean" mixed breed --
with Israelite and Assyrian ancestry. Because of this, the Jews
were harshly prejudiced against the Samaritans and discriminated
against them. This cultural hostility led the Samaritan woman to
ask Jesus: "'You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you
ask me for a drink?' (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans)"
(John 4:9).
During the ensuing discussion, the woman asked Jesus about
which cultural place of worship was valid: Mt. Gerizim where the
Samaritans built their temple, or Jerusalem where the Jews built
theirs. Anthony Evans alerts us to the significance of Jesus'
response: "Jesus does not hesitate to let her know that once you
bring God into the picture, the issue is no longer culture, but
truth. He informs her that the question is not Mt. Gerizim or
Jerusalem, that it is not according to Samaritan tradition or
Jewish tradition (v. 21). In fact, He denounces her cultural
heritage in relation to worship, for he told her, 'Ye worship ye
know not what' (v. 22). When she began to impose her culture on
sacred things, Christ invaded her cultural world to tell her she
was spiritually ignorant."[54]
Jesus transcended the whole issue of culture in discussing
spiritual issues with the woman. When it came to her relationship
with God, the issue moved from her cultural _heritage_ to her
_heart_ and the criteria for that relationship was _truth._ Jesus
acknowledged cultural distinctions, but disallowed them when they
interfered in any way with truth about God. A principle we can
derive from this is: Culture must _always_ take back seat to the
truth of God as revealed in Scripture.
What does this passage say to the relationship of Scripture to
the black experience? Evans answers: "It says that we as black
people cannot base our relationship with God, or our understanding
of God, on our cultural heritage....Jesus is not asking blacks to
become white or whites to become Jews, but he insists that all
reflect God's truth as given in Scripture. Where culture does not
infringe upon the Word of God, we are free to be what God created
us to be, with all the uniqueness that accompanies our cultural
heritage. However, the truth from Scripture places limits on our
cultural experience."[55]
*_Reconciliation: The Better Way_*
A _biblical_ theology of liberation must include an emphasis on
_reconciliation_ among men, without which the theology _ceases to
be Christian_ (Eph. 2:14ff.). Black liberation theologian DeOtis
Roberts (b. 1927), though committed to liberation, agrees with this
and insists that black theology must speak of "reconciliation that
brings black men together and of reconciliation that brings black
and white men together."[56] Roberts says "it is my belief that
true freedom overcomes estrangement and heals the brokenness
between peoples."[57] However, Roberts argues, "reconciliation can
take place only between equals. It cannot co-exist with a situation
of Whites over Blacks."[58]
Roberts's point is well taken. _Reconciliation and racism_ are
birds of a different feather; they never fly together. Genuine
reconciliation can come only if people -- both black and white --
commit to a _scriptural_ view of their brothers of a different
color, seeing _all_ people as created in the image of God (Gen.
1:26) and of infinite value to God (1 Cor. 6:20; 1 Pet. 1:18).
There is much more that needs to be said on this important
issue, but space forbids. As the theological dialogue continues in
coming years, I would like to suggest the following goal: Let us
all -- both black and white -- seek to build a body of unified
believers who are so committed to the Scriptures and to Christ that
the name _Christian_ becomes truly descriptive of who they are, and
not the color of their skin.
*NOTES*
1 William L. Banks, _The Black Church in the U.S._ (Chicago: Moody
Press, 1972), 12.
2 Anthony T. Evans, _Biblical Theology and the Black Experience_
(Dallas: Black Evangelistic Enterprise, 1977), 19.
3 James W. English, "Could Racism Be Hereditary?", _Eternity,_
September 1970, 22.
4 C. Eric Lincoln, "The Development of Black Religion in America,"
_Review and Expositor_ 70 (Summer 1973):302.
5 _Ibid.,_ 303.
6 Millard J. Erickson, _Christian Theology_ (Grand Rapids: Baker
Book House, 1983), 543.
7 James H. Cone, _Black Theology and Black Power_ (hereafter
_Theology_) (New York: Seabury Press, 1969), 121.
8 Emmanuel McCall, "Black Liberation Theology: A Politics of
Freedom," _Review and Expositor_ 73 (Summer 1976):330; cf. C.
Eric Lincoln and Lawrence H. Mamiya, _The Black Church in the
African American Experience_ (Durham: Duke University Press,
1990), 352.
9 Lindsay A. Arscott, "Black Theology," _Evangelical Review of
Theology_ 10 (April-June 1986):137.
10 Quoted by Clair Drake, Foreword to _Garveyism as a Religious
Movement,_ Randall Burkett (Metucher, NJ: Scarecrow Press,
1978), 15.
11 James H. Cone, "Black Theology in American Religion," _Theology
Today_ 43 (April 1986):13.
12 Albert B. Cleage, _The Black Messiah_ (New York: Sheed and Ward,
1969), 4.
13 Charles V. Hamilton, _The Black Preacher in America_ (New York:
William Morrow, 1972), 140.
14 James H. Cone, _God of the Oppressed_ (New York: Seabury Press,
1975), 3.
15 _Ibid._
16 Cone, _Theology,_ 120.
17 James H. Cone, _A Black Theology of Liberation_ (hereafter
_Liberation_) (Philadelphia: J. P. Lippencott, 1970), 66.
18 _Ibid.,_ 67.
19 _Ibid.,_ 17-18.
20 _Ibid.,_ 32.
21 Cone, _Theology,_ 6.
22 James H. Cone, "Black Power, Black Theology," _Theological
Education_ 6 (Spring 1970):209.
23 James H. Cone, quoted in K. Bediako, "Black Theology," in _New
Dictionary of Theology,_ ed. Sinclair B. Ferguson and David F.
Wright (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 103.
24 Cone, _Liberation,_ 32.
25 Nyameko Pityana, "What Is Black Consciousness?" _Black Theology:
The South African Voice,_ ed. Basil Moore (London: C. Hurst &
Co., 1973), 63.
26 Cone, _Liberation,_ 32.
27 _Ibid.,_ 29.
28 _Ibid.,_ 19.
29 H. Wayne House, "An Investigation of Black Liberation Theology,"
_Bibliotheca Sacra_ 139 (April-June 1982):163.
30 David Ray Griffin, "Values, Evil, and Liberation Theology," in
_Process Philosophy and Social Thought,_ ed. John B. Cobb
(Chicago: Center for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1981),
185. Process theology espouses a finite God that evolves, is
subject to change, and is intrinsically related to the world.
31 Cone, _Theology,_ 35.
32 J. H. Cone, "The White Church and Black Power," in G. S. Wilmore
and J. H. Cone, _Black Theology: A Documentary History,
1966-1979_ (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1979), 116-17.
33 James H. Cone, interviewed by Barbara Reynolds, _USA Today,_ 8
November 1989, 11A.
34 Cone, _Liberation,_ 21.
35 _Ibid.,_ 190.
36 _Ibid.,_ 227.
37 James H. Cone, "Black Theology and Black Liberation," in _Black
Theology: The South African Voice,_ ed. Basil Moore (London: C.
Hurst & Co., 1973), 92, 96.
38 Cone, _Liberation,_ 236-37.
39 Cone, _Theology,_ 109.
40 _Ibid.,_ 123.
41 Cone, _Liberation,_ 241-42.
42 Cone, _Theology,_ 6.
43 _Ibid.,_ 143.
44 Lincoln and Mamiya, 178-79.
45 _Ibid.,_ 179.
46 _Ibid._
47 _Ibid.,_ 180.
48 _Ibid._
49 _Ibid._
50 _Ibid.,_ 181.
51 Cone, "Black Power, Black Theology," 214.
52 Evans, 8.
53 Tom Skinner, _If Christ is the Answer, What are the Questions?_
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1975), 112-13.
54 Evans, 13.
55 _Ibid.,_ 13-14.
56 DeOtis Roberts, _Liberation and Reconciliation: A Black
Theology_ (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971), 152.
57 DeOtis Roberts, "Black Theology in the Making," _Review and
Expositor_ 70 (Summer 1973):328.
58 _Ibid.,_ 327.
-------------
Using RonRhodes@aol.com you can reach the author via e-mail.
End of document, CRJ0081A.TXT (original CRI file name),
"Black Theology, Black Power, and the Black Experience."
release A, April 30, 1994
R. Poll, CRI
(A special note of thanks to Bob and Pat Hunter for their help in
the preparation of this ASCII file for BBS circulation.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Christian Research Journal is published quarterly by the
Christian Research Institute (CRI) -- founded in 1960 by the late
Dr. Walter R. Martin. While CRI is concerned with and involved
in the general defense of the faith, our area of research
specialization is limited to elements within the modern religious
scene that compete with, assault, or undermine biblical
Christianity. These include cults (that is, groups which deny
essential Christian doctrines such as the deity of Christ and the
Trinity); the occult, much of which has become focused in the
contemporary New Age movement; the major world religions; and
aberrant Christian teachings (that is, teachings which compromise
or confuse essential biblical truth).
Regular features of the Journal include "Newswatch," witnessing
tips and book reviews.
CHRISTIAN RESEARCH JOURNAL RATES: (subject to change)
One Year Two Years
U.S. Residents [ ] 20.00 [ ] 37.00
Canadian (U.S. funds) [ ] 24.00 [ ] 44.00
Other Foreign (U.S. funds) [ ] 36.00 [ ] 66.00
Please make checks payable to CRI
To place a credit card order by phone, call us toll-free at:
(800) 2-JOURNAL
To subscribe to the Christian Research Journal, please print this
coupon, fill in the necessary information and mail it with your
payment to:
CRI, P.O. Box 500-TC, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92693-0500
[ ] Yes! I want to subscribe to the Christian Research Journal.
Name: ___________________________________________________
Address: ___________________________________________________
Address: ___________________________________________________
City, State, ZIP: __________________________________________
Country: _______________ Phone: ____________________________
------------------
YOURS FOR THE ASKING
Did you know that CRI has a wealth of information on various
topics that is yours for the asking? In fact, a free
subscription to the Christian Research Newsletter is yours if you
contact CRI and ask for one saying that you found out about the
offer from this computer text file. We offer a wide variety of
articles and fact sheets free of charge. Write us today for
information on these or other topics. Our first-rate research
staff will do everything possible to help you.
Christian Research Institute
P.O. Box 500-TC
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92693
(714) 855-9926
---------------
End of file.