Showing posts with label Theology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Theology. Show all posts

Thursday, October 23, 2014

God as Woman: #WhyIStayed

I have no idea why I am writing this at this present moment – in the midst of theological colloquy papers and field education case studies, I should clearly be focused on writing scholastically. However, I have wanted to write this for a while in the purview of what happened with the Ray Rice and Janay Palmer domestic violence tragedy that swirled out of control in the media. After the video of Janay Palmer being physically abused and accosted by her husband (NFL player) Ray Rice surfaced, there was a storm of backlash she received for staying with Ray Rice. As woman who has never experienced domestic violence in a relationship such as Janay Palmer, I felt very conflicted as I watched people attempt to snatch every bit of Palmer’s agency by defaming her name, questioning her intelligence, and attributing her loyalty to Rice as a bi-product of her desire for material wealth. How did anything about Janay Palmer’s personhood have anything to do with Ray Rice’s actions? Needless to say, I was so happy to see the #WhyIStayed hashtag campaign arise to give space for women’s voices to speak their truths as it related to domestic violence cases.

Soon thereafter, I began thinking of relationships, spaces, and places that I remained even despite of abuse I was suffering. Though, as I stated previously, I have never had a man lay his hands on me (besides the one whoopin I got from my Dad as a child), I started to realize that I had experienced an abusive relationship – that was my relationship with my church. I had given so much of myself, so blindly, to my church throughout my time in youth ministry that I was almost shocked that my calling to ministry would not be affirmed. But on that day when I went to the church leadership to confess my calling, I was stiff armed with every scripture in the Bible containing expectations of women’s silence, submission, and servitude within the church. It was very damaging, now that I look back on it.
One would think that it would just be easy to pack your stuff and leave at the very moment that your truth, worth, and personhood was denied. But it wasn’t that simple. I had ties in my church. I had family – biological and extended. I had worked so hard to cultivate meaningful relationships with my youth and the leaders of the church. God had given me a vision for moving the young people forward in their relationship with God and that is what I was doing. My leaving, or even standing up for myself to be recognized as a minister, just didn’t seem like an option when other people’s souls were at stake. So, I stayed. I stayed because I felt that my voice wasn’t as important as the well-being of my kids. I stayed because I figured I could handle the abuse (being used for ministry excessively while not being recognized as minister) because I was comfortable with what I did have. I stayed because I thought it was where God wanted me to be. Sounds eerily similar to women who have suffered abusive relationships at the hands of their spouses.

After a time of feeling choiceless, voiceless, and suffocated – I finally left my church to seek out God’s call on my life. Even though I did enter fellowship with a church where I could affirm my calling, it has taken me up till very recently to really begin the process of healing. Abusive relationships that deny, negate, or harm your personhood have a tendency to seep into your soul in places you would never think to look. Even now that I am in divinity school, I watch as I second-guess myself and my calling time and time again; and, before now, I never had a problem with self-confidence.

In the aftermath of dealing with #WhyIStayed, I am so thankful that this theological journey has begun teaching and showing me a new way of looking at God. Just before I began my first year at Vanderbilt divinity school, God showed me a dream/vision (yes I believe that God speaks, through the power of the Holy Spirit, to people in dreams). In my dream/vision, I was asleep in my bed, the daylight had already broken, but it was still fairly early. A woman – a regal and royal Black woman – walked into my room. She had deep chocolate skin and was slightly heavy set. She had on a shiny, light blue and green looking suit and hat to match. She was a fly church mother if I ever saw one. As she walked into my room, I became so startled because I did not know who she was. She walked around to the opposite side of my bed and she stood there, looking over me. I began to try to get up and scream for help, but just then my body became paralyzed and my tongue stuck to the top of my mouth. She smiled at me, calmly, then proceeded to get onto her knees and pray. Calmness and peace quickly took over me as she prayed. And, then the vision/dream ended.

I believe that God was preparing me to understand the embodiment of God’s divinity in womanhood. Typically, in most churches (especially Black churches), we use he-language and father-language to describe God. But I reckon that the vision God gave me was something like the transfiguration experience Peter, James, and John had as recorded in the synoptic gospels. I believe that Jesus was in my room that morning, showing me a divine manifestation in the form of a woman. I know for some people this is a difficult comparison – however, I would contend that the blood and tears that flow from women make us more like Jesus, who when pierced water and blood flowed out, than any other species.

I am praying that in my time of healing and preparation in becoming a theologian and minister I am able to better understand and utilize what Dean Townes calls Liberating Theological Language. We have, for far too long, made our language and our interpretation of scripture too literalistic about God. There is nothing in our language that can capture the fullness of who God is – therefore, all language about God must be seen as metaphorical as ways that we see God acting in the world and how we experience God. I stand in agreement with theologian Sallie McFague who affirms the awesome responsibility and power of metaphorical theology by saying the power of metaphor helps us uncouple our tendencies to make generalizations about who God is and who we are.



In a time when people are wrestling with the very question asked in Exodus 17:7, “Is the Lord among us or not?,” I believe we must be asking where we have seen God and through whom we have experienced God thus far. For me, I have experienced God most through the sacrifices and teaching of the women who came before me. For others, they see God in those who are sick, homeless, or oppressed. And, still for others, God may be among us in nature and creation. Either way, it is my sincere hope that we as leaders of today and tomorrow continue to find new ways to describe and experience God so that no more of God’s sons and daughters have to experience abuse at the hands of the church who continues to one-dimensionalize an infinite God.

Monday, July 7, 2014

The Potter & The Process: Re-Piecing Shards of Faith


Ever since God uprooted my whole life to move me from Little Rock to Nashville for Divinity School last year, everyone always wants to know what I'm learning, how I'm liking the program, and what I plan on doing once I achieve my Master of Divinity degree. And my answer to all of those inquiries is a resounding "I. Do. Not. Know." Sounds crazy, right? One would think that after completing my first year I should be settled in and picking a concentration area. But that has, by far, not proven to be my particular experience as an up and coming theologian, scholar, and minister. My journey to theological education was a long and protracted one – one which dropped me off at the doorsteps of Vanderbilt University not knowing at all what to expect. So, let me be honest in saying to all of you reading this – Divinity School has been a whole 'lotta hell and holy shedding of tears.


The thing about undertaking theological education is that one must consider every single portion of one's own social location (i.e. race, gender, demographic, upbringing, moral/spiritual formation and beliefs, etc.) and be ready to wrestle with why you believe what you believe, how you came to believe that, and if it is actually YOUR truth rather than a construction of truth fed to you by your parents, teachers, the church, and other guiding agents in your life. Though you may have read through that sentence swiftly, I challenge you to think about that for one moment: how does my background inform or impact the beliefs that I carry and are these beliefs really mine to begin with? If this doesn't seem uncomfortable to you, then great – you can skip the next paragraph. But if you have ever experienced any amount of discomfort or uncertainty relating to this question, then do not pass 'Go' and do not collect $200. Just keep reading.



Whether I was ready or not for answering that question, that is precisely what Vanderbilt Divinity School made me do upon my arrival. Just to be clear, I have used my engineering brain to graphically depict what this past year has been like. You can play along, just replace my labels with descriptions about your own life. For me, as a Black woman, who is now an Engineer and Minister, born and raised in the south, in a traditional Baptist setting, mostly by a single mother– my faith sphere has values and systems that were engrained in me since birth. The way I view family, marriage, identity, sin, love, economy, justice, religion, gender, virtue, and many, many more aspects of human life have everything to do with how I was raised and the journey my upbringing carved out for me.




So, when I accepted my calling to Divinity School, I just knew my well-fortified faith sphere was going to not only keep me sane but also keep me near the cross as I traversed the hallowed hallways of theological education. My, oh my, how I was so sadly misinformed. To my surprise (and dismay) my faith sphere was tugged, pushed, pulled, slapped, spat upon, questioned, squeezed, stirred, boiled, baked, and fried starting on day one. Please do not misunderstand what I am saying. I am not saying that Div School made me "lose my Jesus", which so many of the folk in the traditional Black Church were worried about upon my departure. What I am saying is that I was made to critically survey, deconstruct, and analyze my lens as it relates to my faith. There was no more resting complacently on such flowery and empty statements as: "My Pastor says," or "My Bible tells me," or "God said it, that settles it." Instead, it became questions like: "how do we adjudicate Biblical authority?" and "what are the customs, culture, and context behind this scripture?" and "how has Biblical interpretation been appropriated toward society, either helpfully or harmfully?" I don't know about y'all, but was it not so much easier when all we had to do was sing "Jesus loves me this I know."?



After a year of much writing, reading, researching, praying, picking apart scripture, literary/historical/critical/canonical analysis – I have to be completely transparent in saying that this is what happened to my faith sphere: 



It shattered. That's right. Into a million tiny pieces. And, you know what else? It hurt. It still hurts. Yet, as unprepared as I was for this type of faith-altering phenomenon, I can say that it has been the most eye-opening and enlightening experience of my adult life. Yes, it has been painful. And, yes, I have received cuts from the broken glass. But if I could describe the sensation to you, I would say its like breaking through a glass ceiling of limitation that you never even knew existed. Rather than coming to find that my faith had been shattered beyond repair, I have come to see that my faith needed to be wrestled with – handled with brute force and thrown around with reckless abandon.



You see, while I know this journey…rather, this process, is not for everyone – I know God called me here. God, my Potter, would not have brought me to this place if there wasn't some unique assignment for me. And, I believe that is true for everybody, regardless of vocation or location. There are simply times in your life where you have to cast out every single confining and defining convention you have held on to because it is time for God to do a new thing. This is not to say that you need to throw the baby out with the bath water, so-to-speak. But everything God places in you that needs to remain will be restored back into you with more meaning, deeper value, and, perhaps, even stronger faith.



So, while it may seem strange to some that I am basically positioning myself to be the new Christian in Sunday school, I am so humbled and happy to be in this space. I reflect on the words of Isaiah who says "Do not remember the former things, or consider the things of old. I am about to do a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it?" In a time such as this, when our churches are looking for leaders who will not be bamboozled into the false faith of traditionalism and our communities are crying out for justice and not just re-heated sermons, I feel the call of the Sovereign God upon my life to remain faithful to the process. Though tears may drench my pillow at night, though family and friends may not understand my journey, though I am uncertain and timid at every turn, I am fully persuaded that God is well-able to do just what was promised and exactly as God wills for me to do.



As for the rest of my time in Div School, I pray to spend it constructively – working out my faith, my call, my passion, with God's heart and Jesus' mission of deliverance and healing. I know it won't be easy and at times it seems like re-piecing and replacing the shards of my faith is impossible. But I truly believe that God enjoys using those of us who are broken in some places. Why? Because. That means there are just more pieces for God to work with. [For any of you on this journey with me, or any of you struggling with allowing God to help you wrestle with your faith/being your most authentic self, check out this book: Daring Greatly by Dr. Brene Brown. It has been an awesome, in-depth look at the power of transparency and vulnerability.]



Monday, October 14, 2013

Scandal, The Black Church, and What (Still) Needs to Be ‘Handled’


I read a blog post recently, Why I Hate Scandal (and Other Negro Bed Wenches), spelling out one viewer’s disdain for the premise of the storyline surrounding Olivia Pope. The writer of this blog, whose penname is Grits Capone, basically provides a back-history of the Sally Hemmings/Thomas Jefferson affair saga and explicates the fact that Scandal looks to compromise the integrity of Black women by objectifying main character Olivia Pope into a role which is controversial due to her sexually adulterous affair with the very married, very White, and very powerful President of the United States.[1] I am not completely convinced of this blogger’s comparison of Olivia Pope to a Negro bed wench, yet I am neither unconcerned about the image the show projects into society as to the identity of Black women. Nonetheless, I offer the subject of Grits Capone’s personal blog not as a sacred text into the proceeding conversation, but rather as a precipice for euphemism. Imagine with me the White House as the typical racist-sexist-capitalist patriarchal society, the President as the personification of the Black Church, and Olivia Pope as the Black women who are members of that institution – you then find yourself in the reality of what it means to navigate the sexual-gender myths and socially constructed oppressions waiting in heat for the next person to seduce.

Let me be clear, I am not typecasting all Black women into the role and character of Olivia Pope or categorizing all Black Churches as the adulterous POTUS. However, I am lodging the argument that many Black women find themselves in a crisis between identity and integrity, love and labor at the hands of the male dominated Black Church. I believe that this is the anatomy Scandal writer, Shonda Rhimes, is speaking to – the societal rules that made the premise of Scandal provocative and available. I posit that this is precisely the dichotomy of the sexual-gender struggle as outlined by Marcia Riggs in her work Plenty Good Room: Women Versus Male Power in the Black Church. Shonda Rhimes does an eloquently masterful job at portraying the codes and structures that exist as the social construct for who the President should appear to be to the public and who Olivia Pope should NOT be. It is the same idea of social construction that leads to sexual-gender myths within the Black Church that exist as a means to dictate who Black men should appear to be and who Black women should not be. Marcia Riggs includes a poignant argument by bell hooks stating:
Once the [civil rights] struggle was perceived as won…then one assertion of our new freedom was to make mainstream socialization about gender roles the norm in black life. In the age of integration, black men asserted masculinist subjectivity not by vigilantly challenging white supremacy but by first insisting on the subordination of women, particularly black women. Suddenly, black men who would never have access to jobs within this capitalist framework that would allow them to provide for families could still feel themselves to be “men.” Manhood had been redefined. Manhood was not providing and protecting; it was proved by one’s capacity to coerce, control, dominate.[2]
It is along this vein that many Black women and Black men find their strained relations within the Black Church. According to Riggs, it is the racist-sexist-capitalist patriarchy that maligns the Church pews with dogmatic strictures forecasting Black men to perpetuate the subordination of Black women and compelling Black women to attempt the subversion of oppression.
In sum, the sexual-gender relations of African American women and men are mostly reactive rather than creative responses to racist-sexist-capitalist oppression under which they both labor. Indeed, their sexual-gender relations are “a kind of social reproductive shadow work” that sustains white racist-sexist-capitalist patriarchal norms for womanhood and manhood.[3]
From my vantage point, this reactive response that leads to ‘social reproductive shadow work’ is what many overlook in the argument over the acceptability of Scandal. The argument is not really about the sexual prowess of a Black woman subverting the power of the land, nor the exploitation of masculine ideals of power; rather, it is the reactive response to the oppressive structure set in place that necessitates such behavior on both parties that should be in question. This same misjudgment happens in the Black Church. Many people are stagnated in argument over the conduct of Black men or the conduct of Black women; however, it is imperative that we investigate “the way that social myths describe and prescribe reality.”[4]

                According to Marcia Y. Riggs, the reality is a “moral corruption...[that] refers to the inconsistency between the black church’s steadfast pursuit of justice with respect to racial and economic oppression while not pursuing sexual-gender justice, and consequently [the church] becom[es] a site of sexual-gender oppression.”[5] When it is understood that the Black Church is a place in which social myths are often times taught and tethered to its traditions, it is clear that its members, then, are left with little choice as to the parts they will play in its dramatic scenes. Not unlike the complexly woven script of Scandal, Riggs includes a critical assessment of the Black church saying:
…this man and this woman enact prescribed roles for being male and female – sexual-gender scripts – into which they have been socialized according to the values operative in this context. In the sexual-gender oppressive African American church, the values inconsistency – justice versus “control of women” – that stands at the heart of the church’s moral life becomes the driving force behind why male clergy and laywomen have relationships that deny their own self-actualization.[6]
To combat this moral corruption lurking in the Black Church, Riggs proposes the requisite to re-socialize and transform the sexual-gender morality held captive in the institution. Therefore, it is the moral imperative of the Black Church to invest in the “counter-socialization of African American women and men with respect to sexual-gender mythology and roles.”[7]

                While Marcia Riggs discusses the pivotal moments reached in sexual-gender relations dating back to as recently as 1999 and 2000 (during which a female minister “won a sexual harassment case against the African Methodist Episcopal Church” and the “same denomination elected its first female bishop”), I found that it was difficult to find empirical data that illustrates disparity between the sexual-gender relation in the Black Church.[8] While the General Commission on the Status and Role of Women reports that clergywomen earn 13 percent less than clergymen, this is inclusive of all ethnicities and does not speak to the more specific sexual-gender struggle on-going in the Black Church.[9] The woman who was elected first bishop of the AME Church, Bishop Vashti Murphy McKenzie, writes in her book Not Without A Struggle:
In spite of these achievements, patterns of institutional discrimination continue to limit women in ministry. Clergywomen still face an uphill battle for pulpit assignments. Resistance to change has become more subtle than overt. Distant locations and low wages continue to plague both women and young men in ministry.[10]
I believe that the lack of statistical data illustrating the sexual-gender issues in the Black Church is a direct reflection of how much opposition the institution lodges against working toward more inclusive change and how much more re-socialization of moral codes needs to be handled by its leadership and members.

                Plenty Good Room may as well have been my own personal diary written indelibly on the pages of my life as a Black woman preacher/minister. Even as I begin to consider where to break the placenta of the impregnated womb of my experience with discrimination within the Black Church, I can hear the voices of Black men and women of old begging me to hold off on delivering my truth. But it is time for the water to break, time for the truth to be told. Though some of Marcia Riggs’ scenarios could have been read (and dismissed) as fictional or hypothetical accounts that were only isolated instances or fabricated fables, they capture the story of my life in a very real and honest way. I remember when I first informed my very conservative Baptist Pastor of my calling into ministry. I didn’t think that this would come as much of a surprise to him – seeing as though I was Youth Director (Youth Minister in all actuality) and actively involved with the Young Adult ministry as well – but still, he looked back at me with such a sad bewilderment.  He answered me with a well-rehearsed soliloquy about the works of Apostle Paul and the proper role of a woman within the Church.  He brought out a King James Version Bible, and read all the Scriptures of, or relating to, the idea that women should not usurp authority over man. He did not leave one Scripture out, having to do with women, either. He read every single one. I suppose it wasn’t the content of the message he was relaying back to me; rather, it was the tone with which he felt compelled to correct me. Instead of hearing my heart and using spiritual discernment, he immediately stiff-armed me with an antiquated Baptist adopted doctrine. I felt so voiceless. Since when had accepting a calling been made to feel like blasphemy? And why were Paul’s words so much more important than those of Jesus?

                It quickly became apparent to me that even Jesus was preached into a realm of double standards. After all, the same man that had taught me how to know Jesus, love Jesus, and be like Jesus was the same man who was now telling me that Jesus did not speak to me or permit me to do the same things as men. How, then, would I love a Jesus who denies me? And, how would I ever be like a Jesus who rejects me?  Needless to say, when I answered my call to ministry it was anything but exhilarating. As evident in the meeting with my Pastor, I could tell he probably never wrestled with his theology on women in ministry. That much was an obvious observation with how stoically and quickly he attempted to abort the truth of my calling. Yet, in all honesty, I was no different than him.  I had been half-way avoiding, half-way aborting my calling for months. Not because I didn’t know Who was calling me. Not because I didn’t understand what the calling was. But, simply, because I had never wrestled with knowing that it was okay for me to accept a calling for myself.  The thought of it, accepting a calling as a woman, made me feel as though I was spiritually in error due to the tradition in which I had been raised my whole life. I think that this is the substance Marcia Riggs works so diligently to unmask in the Black Church – the “values inconsistency” that allows both men and women alike to continually limit the work of God by limiting one another. These self-imposed and opposite-gender imposed limitations continue to fain the forward progress of the Church because it postures itself as a part of the tradition. However, we must come to understand that it is not tradition at all, rather it is traditionalism. What is more is that it is "traditionalism that is the dead faith of the living, and tradition that this the living faith of the dead."[11]

                I have many other grievous personal accounts similar to the scenarios of discrimination written about in Plenty Good Room, but I am more convicted to share my hermeneutic of disclosure as a Black woman preacher and theologian-to-be. In Scandal, the President’s wife, Mellie, is antagonistic and intent on protecting Fitz and provoking Olivia Pope.  She reminds me, interestingly, of Peninnah as found in 1 Samuel chapter 1 of the Holy Bible. Peninnah, one of two wives of Elkanah, focused on provoking her sister-wife, Hannah, who had not been able to bear Elkanah any children. Referring back to the aforementioned euphemism of Scandal, if the President is the Black Church personified, then I like to view Mellie as the traditionalism, alive through both men and women, that attempts provoke and poke fun at women who have not been able to successfully bear forth ministry within the Black Church. Mellie experiences satisfaction knowing Olivia Pope cannot have what she really wants. Similarly, Peninnah relies on the fact that “Lord had closed [Hannah’s] womb”[12] much like oppression in the Black Church relies on the fact that women are not supposed to bring forth ministry. But here is where my hermeneutic of disclosure comes into play. Read this closely: Peninnah’s efforts of antagonism DO NOT WORK. Mellie’s efforts of antagonism do not work. It is already being shown in Scandal that Olivia Pope continues to defy Mellie’s attempts to provoke her. And, we see in the Bible that Hannah defies Peninnah’s pestilence by doing exactly what she said she could not.  Both Mellie and Peninah discount the fact that they are not in control. Likewise, those who continue to perpetuate harmful social myths and sexual-gender oppression within the Black Church are overlooking the fact that they, too, are not in control. Antagonism of God-ordained progress will never prosper in what it set out to do. It is this disclosure, understanding that my Peninnah (i.e. the sexist traditionalism of the Baptist Church) did not get to decide if I accepted my calling or not, that elevated me into doing exactly what sexual-gender oppression said I could not. Who is the judge? The judge is God. Why is He God? Because He decides who wins or loses. Not my opponent.[13] And certainly not my oppressor either.

                As I related earlier, there is not much accessible data in existence which corroborates the stories of Black women who are very much the Soles of the Black Church. I would be very interested to create a cadre of Black women in ministry and leadership in various locations within the mainline Black Church traditions who would conduct surveys into the perceptions and participation of Black women relating to sexual-gender oppression in the Church.  I would also like to conduct the same study as to the perceptions and participation of Black men relating to sexual-gender oppression in the Church. Approaching this topic from both genders would be helpful in appropriating how men and women view relations in the Black Church and in identifying how one another is complicit in the discrimination of certain parties.





[1] Grits Capone, “Why I Hate Scandal (and Other Negro Bed Wenches),” May 23, 2013, http://deeperthangrits.com/2013/05/23/why-i-hate-scandal-and-other-negro-bed-wenches/
[2] Marcia Y. Riggs, Plenty Good Room: Women Versus Male Power in the Black Church, (Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2008), 42.
[3] Riggs, 54.
[4] Riggs, 41.
[5] Riggs, 86.
[6] Riggs, 87.
[7] Riggs, 99.
[8] Riggs, 10.
[9] Kristen Knudson, “Women by the Numbers,” November 2011, http://www.gcsrw.org/WomenClergypersonsofColorEarnLess.aspx
[10] Vashti Murphy McKenzie, Not Without A Struggle: Leadership Development for African American Women in Ministry, (Cleveland: Pilgrim Press, 2011), Location 1274.
[11] Jaroslav Pelikan, 1989 interview, http://harpers.org/archive/2008/12/hbc-90004089
[12] “1 Samuel 1 (New Revised Standard Version)” in Bible Gateway, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20samuel%201&version=NRSV
[13] The Great Debaters, DVD, directed by Denzel Washington (2007; Metro Goldwyn Myer)

Monday, September 23, 2013

Black Liberation Theology: Response and Responsibility



Who is the judge?
The judge is God.
Why is He God?
Because He decides who wins or loses. Not my opponent.
And who is your opponent?
He doesn’t exist.
Why doesn’t he exist?
He is a mere dissenting voice to the truth that I speak.
Speak the truth.

I watched the Great Debaters again (repeatedly) in the past few weeks. And my mind keeps replaying the scene when character James Farmer, Jr. lodges his closing arguments against the Harvard debaters. He opens with the grim statement: “In Texas, they lynch Negroes.”

Following the dramatized version of history, I open this essay with the thought – in Mississippi, they lynch Negroes. I spoke with my Father earlier today, and he recounted the story of his discovery of a dead man in 1966 in Greenwood, Mississippi. Daddy would’ve been eight years-old then. He was in the woods along with his stepfather, when he looked up – there he was hanging helplessly. A young man. His age was uncertain. But his fate was clear. He had been lynched. Left there lifeless. Waiting on someone to discover him and restore a semblance of dignity that his life ever mattered. And so, it was that my Daddy – as a little child – was tarnished with morbid image of the punishment for simply being Black.

He has never shared intimate details with me. Only the bare necessity of factual information so that I could understand the truth. Having blocked out the memory until he was 28 years-old, he tried desperately to erase it from his psyche for the early part of his young adult years. But it never could be erased nor washed anew. It was there. Not gone, and not hardly forgotten. And, it occurs to me, that this is where Black Liberation Theology finds itself – smack dab in the middle of ugliness of lived experience of oppression and the freedom found in the love of God.

In God of the Oppressed by James Cone, he outlines the basic truth of Black Liberation Theology. He says:
Jesus Christ is not a proposition, not a theological concept which exists merely in our heads. He is an event of liberation, a happening in the lives of oppressed people struggling for political freedom. Therefore, to know him is to encounter him in the history of the weak and the helpless. That is why it can be rightly said that there can be no knowledge of Jesus independent of the history and culture of the oppressed. It is impossible to interpret the Scripture correctly and thus understand Jesus aright unless the interpretation is done in the light of the consciousness of the oppressed in their struggle for liberation (Cone, 32).
Cone asks a very provocative question that he says Black theologians must face head-on: “To what extent is the God in Black Theology limited to the biological origin of its advocates (Cone, 77)?”  It is to this question that I gather in my mind and spirit an insight that I do not readily know the answer to. My Daddy told me that his Father, my Granddaddy, taught him this one very important thing as a Black man: dying is better than bowing down to any White man. My paternal Grandfather was a reverend who was the product of a slave owner and slave – and he vehemently rejected every part of the White in him. Similarly, my maternal Granddaddy – an austere deacon and Civil Rights activist – lived to his dying age of 93 still calling White people peckerwoods (which is a derogatory name for Whites). There is a liberty that I think my Grandparents never got to experience for themselves. Regardless of the good of Black Liberation Theology, I do not think that it was able to help my Grandparents (and people with similar experiences) see a God past the limits of biological origin.

Maybe Black Theology was never supposed to help them get past this vision of Jesus. Maybe it was only supposed to help them achieve liberation from racism. Yet, I often times wonder about if my both my Granddads, along with the other great cloud of witnesses to Black Jesus, ever got to see just Jesus. It is not as though I am trying to negate the prime necessity for Black Theology. Nor am I trying to overturn its credence. But I struggle with knowing if Black Theology really gave our people, my people, an applicable knowledge of how to overcome oppression and how to rightly identify with Jesus by treating others with love and grace. If so, then why are there so many oppressions that presently exist within the Black Church. We preach liberation, yet are we really free? I believe that we like to think that freedom is the absence of oppression. But this is not so. Taking from the laws of physics, it is darkness that is the absence of light. Therefore, it is oppression that is the absence of freedom. Anywhere there is injustice, there is no freedom. And if my foremothers and forefathers felt that the proper response, in light of Black Theology, to their own oppression was to secretly (or publicly) disdain, mistreat, or look down upon White people, women, gays, or any other group of people – then we have failed.

Black Theology must distinguish its origin and its action. It has equipped us with a response to hatred and bigotry. But has it showed us our responsibility? Yes? No? Maybe? Those are all valid responses – yet it would be irresponsible of us to simply say ‘I don’t know.’ We need to know what kinds of implications a Black Liberation Theology has had on those who have reared us. Did Black Jesus help wash my Dad's memory as white as snow? Did He liberate him from the understanding of race or just the reality of racism? We must ask our parents and grandparents the tough questions about their understanding Christ and Church. For it is their experiences that taught them. And without engaging them on those experiences, we miss out on some of the directives of Black Theology.

Who is the judge?
The judge is God.
Why is He God?
Because He decides who wins or loses. Not my opponent.
And who is your opponent?
He doesn’t exist.
Why doesn’t he exist?
He is a mere dissenting voice to the truth that I speak.

Speak the truth.

Who's the Judge?

Cone, James. 1997. God of the Oppressed. Maryknoll: Orbis Books.