April 2, 2008

The Marxist Roots of Black Liberation Theology

What is Black Liberation Theology anyway? Barack Obama's former pastor, Jeremiah Wright catapulted black liberation theology onto a national stage, when America discovered Trinity United Church of Christ. Understanding the background of the movement might give better clarity into Wright's recent vitriolic preaching. A clear definition of black theology was first given formulation in 1969 by the National Committee of Black Church Men in the midst of the civil-rights movement:

Black theology is a theology of black liberation. It seeks to plumb the black condition in the light of God's revelation in Jesus Christ, so that the black community can see that the gospel is commensurate with the achievements of black humanity. Black theology is a theology of 'blackness.' It is the affirmation of black humanity that emancipates black people from White racism, thus providing authentic freedom for both white and black people. It affirms the humanity of white people in that it says 'No' to the encroachment of white oppression.

In the 1960s, black churches began to focus their attention beyond helping blacks cope with national racial discrimination particularly in urban areas.

The notion of "blackness" is not merely a reference to skin color, but rather is a symbol of oppression that can be applied to all persons of color who have a history of oppression (except whites, of course). So in this sense, as Wright notes, "Jesus was a poor black man" because he lived in oppression at the hands of "rich white people." The overall emphasis of Black Liberation Theology is the black struggle for liberation from various forms of "white racism" and oppression.

James Cone, the chief architect of Black Liberation Theology in his book A Black Theology of Liberation (1970), develops black theology as a system. In this new formulation, Christian theology is a theology of liberation -- "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," writes Cone. Black consciousness and the black experience of oppression orient black liberation theology -- i.e., one of victimization from white oppression.

One of the tasks of black theology, says Cone, is to analyze the nature of the gospel of Jesus Christ in light of the experience of oppressed blacks. For Cone, no theology is Christian theology unless it arises from oppressed communities and interprets Jesus' work as that of liberation. Christian theology is understood in terms of systemic and structural relationships between two main groups: victims (the oppressed) and victimizers (oppressors). In Cone's context, writing in the late 1960s and early 1970s, the great event of Christ's liberation was freeing African Americans from the centuries-old tyranny of white racism and white oppression.

American white theology, which Cone never clearly defines, is charged with having failed to help blacks in the struggle for liberation. Black theology exists because "white religionists" failed to relate the gospel of Jesus to the pain of being black in a white racist society.

For black theologians, white Americans do not have the ability to recognize the humanity in persons of color, blacks need their own theology to affirm their identity in terms of a reality that is anti-black -- “blackness” stands for all victims of white oppression. "White theology," when formed in isolation from the black experience, becomes a theology of white oppressors, serving as divine sanction from criminal acts committed against blacks. Cone argues that even those white theologians who try to connect theology to black suffering rarely utter a word that is relevant to the black experience in America. White theology is not Christian theology at all. There is but one guiding principle of black theology: an unqualified commitment to the black community as that community seeks to define its existence in the light of God's liberating work in the world.

As such, black theology is a survival theology because it helps blacks navigate white dominance in American culture. In Cone's view, whites consider blacks animals, outside of the realm of humanity, and attempted to destroy black identity through racial assimilation and integration programs--as if blacks have no legitimate existence apart from whiteness. Black theology is the theological expression of a people deprived of social and political power. God is not the God of white religion but the God of black existence. In Cone's understanding, truth is not objective but subjective -- a personal experience of the Ultimate in the midst of degradation.

The echoes of Cone's theology bleed through the now infamous, anti-Hilary excerpt by Rev. Wright. Clinton is among the oppressing class ("rich white people") and is incapable of understanding oppression ("ain't never been called a n-gg-r") but Jesus knows what it was like because he was "a poor black man" oppressed by "rich white people." While Black Liberation Theology is not main stream in most black churches, many pastors in Wright's generation are burdened by Cone's categories which laid the foundation for many to embrace Marxism and a distorted self-image of the perpetual "victim."

Black Liberation Theology as Marxist Victimology

Black Liberation Theology actually encourages a victim mentality among blacks. John McWhorters' book Losing the Race, will be helpful here. Victimology, says McWhorter, is the adoption of victimhood as the core of one's identity -- for example, like one who suffers through living in "a country and who lived in a culture controlled by rich white people." It is a subconscious, culturally inherited affirmation that life for blacks in America has been in the past and will be in the future a life of being victimized by the oppression of whites. In today's terms, it is the conviction that, 40 years after the Civil Rights Act, conditions for blacks have not substantially changed. As Wright intimates, for example, scores of black men regularly get passed over by cab drivers.

Reducing black identity to "victimhood" distorts the reality of true progress. For example, was Obama a victim of widespread racial oppression at the hand of "rich white people" before graduating from Columbia University, Harvard Law School magna cum laude, or after he acquired his estimated net worth of $1.3 million? How did "rich white people" keep Obama from succeeding? If Obama is the model of an oppressed black man, I want to be oppressed next! With my graduate school debt my net worth is literally negative $52,659.

The overall result, says McWhorter, is that "the remnants of discrimination hold an obsessive indignant fascination that allows only passing acknowledgement of any signs of progress." Jeremiah Wright, infused with victimology, wielded self-righteous indignation in the service of exposing the inadequacies Hilary Clinton's world of "rich white people." The perpetual creation of a racial identity born out of self-loathing and anxiety often spends more time inventing reasons to cry racism than working toward changing social mores, and often inhibits movement toward reconciliation and positive mobility.

McWhorter articulates three main objections to victimology: First, victimology condones weakness in failure. Victimology tacitly stamps approval on failure, lack of effort, and criminality. Behaviors and patterns that are self-destructive are often approved of as cultural or presented as unpreventable consequences from previous systemic patterns. Black Liberation theologians are clear on this point: "People are poor because they are victims of others," says Dr. Dwight Hopkins, a Black Liberation theologian teaching at the University of Chicago Divinity School.

Second, victimology hampers progress because, from the outset, it focuses attention on obstacles. For example, in Black liberation Theology, the focus is on the impediment of black freedom in light of the Goliath of white racism.

Third, victimology keeps racism alive because many whites are constantly painted as racist with no evidence provided. Racism charges create a context for backlash and resentment fueling new attitudes among whites not previously held or articulated, and creates "separatism" -- a suspension of moral judgment in the name of racial solidarity. Does Jeremiah Wright foster separatism or racial unity and reconciliation?

For Black Liberation theologians, Sunday is uniquely tied to redefining their sense of being human within a context of marginalization. "Black people who have been humiliated and oppressed by the structures of White society six days of the week gather together each Sunday morning in order to experience another definition of their humanity," says James Cone in his book Speaking the Truth (1999).

Many black theologians believe that both racism and socio-economic oppression continue to augment the fragmentation between whites and blacks. Historically speaking, it makes sense that black theologians would struggle with conceptualizing social justice and the problem of evil as it relates to the history of colonialism and slavery in the Americas.

Is Black Liberation Theology helping? Wright's liberation theology has stirred up resentment, backlash, Obama defections, separatism, white guilt, caricature, and offense. Preaching to a congregation of middle-class blacks about their victim identity invites a distorted view of reality, fosters nihilism, and divides rather than unites.

Black Liberation Is Marxist Liberation

One of the pillars of Obama's home church, Trinity United Church of Christ, is "economic parity." On the website, Trinity claims that God is not pleased with "America's economic mal-distribution." Among all of controversial comments by Jeremiah Wright, the idea of massive wealth redistribution is the most alarming. The code language "economic parity" and references to "mal-distribution" is nothing more than channeling the twisted economic views of Karl Marx. Black Liberation theologians have explicitly stated a preference for Marxism as an ethical framework for the black church because Marxist thought is predicated on a system of oppressor class (whites) versus victim class (blacks).

Black Liberation theologians James Cone and Cornel West have worked diligently to embed Marxist thought into the black church since the 1970s. For Cone, Marxism best addressed remedies to the condition of blacks as victims of white oppression. In For My People, Cone explains that "the Christian faith does not possess in its nature the means for analyzing the structure of capitalism. Marxism as a tool of social analysis can disclose the gap between appearance and reality, and thereby help Christians to see how things really are."

In God of the Oppressed, Cone said that Marx's chief contribution is "his disclosure of the ideological character of bourgeois thought, indicating the connections between the 'ruling material force of society' and the 'ruling intellectual' force." Marx's thought is useful and attractive to Cone because it allows black theologians to critique racism in America on the basis of power and revolution.

For Cone, integrating Marx into black theology helps theologians see just how much social perceptions determine theological questions and conclusions. Moreover, these questions and answers are "largely a reflection of the material condition of a given society."

In 1979, Cornel West offered a critical integration of Marxism and black theology in his essay, "Black Theology and Marxist Thought" because of the shared human experience of oppressed peoples as victims. West sees a strong correlation between black theology and Marxist thought because "both focus on the plight of the exploited, oppressed and degraded peoples of the world, their relative powerlessness and possible empowerment." This common focus prompts West to call for "a serious dialogue between Black theologians and Marxist thinkers" -- a dialogue that centers on the possibility of "mutually arrived-at political action."

In his book Prophesy Deliverance, West believes that by working together, Marxists and black theologians can spearhead much-needed social change for those who are victims of oppression. He appreciates Marxism for its "notions of class struggle, social contradictions, historical specificity, and dialectical developments in history" that explain the role of power and wealth in bourgeois capitalist societies. A common perspective among Marxist thinkers is that bourgeois capitalism creates and perpetuates ruling-class domination -- which, for black theologians in America, means the domination and victimization of blacks by whites. America has been over run by "White racism within mainstream establishment churches and religious agencies," writes West.

Perhaps it is the Marxism imbedded in Obama's attendance at Trinity Church that should raise red flags. "Economic parity" and "distribution" language implies things like government-coerced wealth redistribution, perpetual minimum wage increases, government subsidized health care for all, and the like. One of the priorities listed on Obama's campaign website reads, "Obama will protect tax cuts for poor and middle class families, but he will reverse most of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest taxpayers."

Black Liberation Theology, originally intended to help the black community, may have actually hurt many blacks by promoting racial tension, victimology, and Marxism which ultimately leads to more oppression. As the failed "War on Poverty" has exposed, the best way to keep the blacks perpetually enslaved to government as "daddy" is to preach victimology, Marxism, and to seduce blacks into thinking that upward mobility is someone else's responsibility in a free society.

Anthony B. Bradley is a research fellow at the Acton Institute, and assistant professor of theology at Covenant Theological Seminary in St. Louis. His Ph.D. dissertation is titled, "Victimology in Black Liberation Theology." This article was originally published on the newsletter of the Glen Beck Program. Watch Bradley’s guest appearance on Beck’s CNN Headline News show here.

Comments

Wayne Johnson: lawwheels@earthlink.net

To criticize Wright because of Obama or vice verse is not a fair. While they are both descendants of Africans, they histories are quite different in America. Obama was raised in Kansas, of a White/European mother like Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz. While he struggled financially, his only connection with poor Black people was in Chicago. His African father did not have a connection to poor Black people, at least not poor descendants of slaves in the United States. Obama cannot trace any of his family to a southern plantation. He does not know much about being taught he was inferior. Their American experiences are quite different. Wright's experiences involve generations of passed down segregation. Even many white people see a distinction between the two. Wright's theology is premised upon uplifting and educating Americans, including those of European ancestry as the true contributions of descendants of slaves. Many white people and black people are ignorant of the contributions of black soldiers in the United States beginning with the Revolutionary War. They do not know that George Washington's boat that crossed the Delaware had Black men in it and that one of them froze to death to fight for freedom in this country. When former slaves, who had no education beyond the plantation and who were not compensated nor given psychotherapy and fought in the Civil War, many entered Congress only to be run out by 1900, and not more would enter until after WWI. When the truth is taught, liberation theology will not seem like a handout.

African American are not a proud people. While African Americans are related by blood to the their white counterparts, many of whose ancestors engaged in sometimes unwilling sexual encounters, they have learned to hate their skin color, and even their hair. It is uncommon to even see a Black woman without straightened hair. Even Obama's wife straightens her hair.

This is not to say that African Americans have nothing to be proud of. It is just that many are not aware of these accomplishments and some need to hear sermons like those of Wright to be inspired to make accomplishements, while others may not.

Chris: cwk1968@hotmail.com

Wow! Clare you have certainly pulled out all of the stops with the thesaurus. Bottom line, we all are responsible for our own actions. Our society has spent the last 30-40 years trying to explain away the basic human condition, SIN. To assign blame on someone else. No one is responsible for any thing they do, because, of course there is a condition, disease, phobia, syndrome, or a institution to blame, except for the guilty.

Linvictoria:

I was born the white daughter of a very poor man with a 6th grade education. I have supported myself since I was 16 with absolutely nothing given to me. I worked my way through college without any help. I have never owned a slave nor advocated slavery. There is not a single person in this country that has ever been a slave! Could someone please explain to me why I owe black people something simply because they exist and I am white. There is not a black person in this country that was born any poorer than I was. It is the poor me, I'm a victim and someone has to take care of me mentality that is oppressing blacks and people like Rev. Wright preaching the victomhood and hatred are moving into their $10,000,000 estates. Hatred & mental oppression is their meal ticket. It is called a con man. There are more opportunities out there than at any time in history and still 80% choose not to take advantage of them because it requires work and people like Rev. Wright are telling them it is hopeless. By the way, the largest slaveholders in the south were Creoles.

Mr. Unite Us : charles@uniteus.com

Since some people object to the mentioning of slavery, then perhaps we should remove the Exodus from the Bible,
and tell Jews no more Passover celebrations.

One thing I object is using lower case when referring to White and Black Americans.

From APA style:

http://apastyle.apa.org/race.html

Racial/ethnic groups are designated by proper nouns and are capitalized. When names of colors are used to refer to human groups, they are capitalized (e.g., Blacks instead of blacks; Whites instead of whites). Hyphens are not used in multiword labels (e.g., Mexican Americans instead of Mexican-Americans.

Election Coverage question.

What do you think about the stations mentioning race hundreds of times on election night?

Michael: Mfnbedford@aol.com

Liberation is the key for freedom justice and equality, being set free not being ruled by white’s complete and total freedom. After all that black people been through whites in this country should help black people to get land so black people can do for themselves after having been in slavery for over 350 years, they owe us that and much more. Reparations should only come in the form of land so that black people not only show the world but to show ourselves that a people who were knocked down are capable of getting up and show the world that these people are resilient and that we are truly God's chosen people(The Real Jewels). For those black people who think that there is no place to go if you profess to be such a God fearing people just remember what God told Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: And I will make of thee a great nation. The reason why black people suffer in this country is because the foundation of this country was built on exploitation of black people. The mistake that black people make is to try to save white people, in other words black people tried to play God, if the God of the universe cannot save white people if they don't want it will you please tell me how are you going to do it. Most black people think that if they separate they are practicing hatred in reverse because they start to think about what white people has done to them.

Chap Allison: captaincea@yahoo.com

For anyone to not be able to see that this does nothing but to keep rasim alive, they are pretty shallow. The problem is people in their 70's or so experienced racism, nothing like it was for people who may be 100 to 150 or so now, but what happens here is that the 20 somethings and up are being taught to think they are being kept down and opressed and treated unfairly and are being made to feel like they are owed something. People need to get over the fact that it did happen and people were treated bady years ago, but that is over and has been oover for years, and even with things like affirmative action now people of color have a lot more advantages than most whites their same age and work and life experiences. Its really time to get over it and move on. It happened, we cant help it, and we need to move on.

Gabino Suarez: gabino.suarez@verizon.net

The minimum action to be taken is an extension, expansion, and concentration on educating the American people of all races in true history, politics, economics, and social issues, all of which, of course is ANTI-MARXIST. Further action would be to put hurdles, legally, against the progress of racist and marxist activism, and to expose all marxist and racist individuals and groups FOR WHAT THEY ARE: namely, ANTIAMERICANS.

Chet: Alto330@yahoo.com

For a fairly complete analysis of Black Liberation Theology catch Dr. Cone's interview with Bill Moyers on U-tube. This theology is based in truth and love and is the only hope for America to improve the state of race relations. If you are white and BLT sounds like hate to you when you hear it preached, the information found in the interview will explain the reason why. If you are African American and it sounds like hate (Larry Elder and Juan Williams) then you are suffering from other problems. I would guess that Clarence Thomas also finds fault with this theology.

GUNNHILD: PAULSTNK@YAHOO.COM

It still amazes me that the black community does not look or study closely the history of their society or race. Slavery has been thrown in the face of the white community for decades. Slavery and racism are two separate entities and should not be confused or entwined with each other.

If anyone thinks that the Portuguese (16th century) through the Dutch and English slave traders (18th century)were skulking around Africa, hiding behind trees, throwing nets over Africans when they walked by need to study the history with an open mind. Those merchant traders (which is what they were) were too smart to be involved in such crass transactions. When the chieftain of Tribe A stated that they were going to fight Tribe B for their hunting grounds, the traders offered something for the prisoners that Tribe A did not kill. Then when Tribe C saw what Tribe A got, Tribe C went after Tribe A. And so it went.

Eventually, birthrates made up for the need of active slave traders. Slavery has been an active part of African culture and history for hundreds if not thousands of years. Slavery is active in Africa today. And tribal warfare is as much a part of Africa then as now. It is literally rife with the age old anathema. Traders capitalized on the internal strife already present.

Let us not forget that Muslim traders were slaving for hundreds of years before the first European slave trader hit Western Africa. Slave trade routes in Africa existed between the Middle East and Africa for centuries. Islam does not forbid slave holding.

The majority of slaves held in the United States were held by a small proportion of the citizenry. And as a commentator stated earlier, the vast majority of the population were present after the Civil/War between the States. Most Americans before and after were to poor to hold slaves and especially large groups of them.

Black Liberation theology is not a theology but a political stance which promotes victimology.

DG:

Reading this article and the comments are very eye opening to me. Rev. Wright's preaching and others like him in my opinion only add to discrimination and divisiveness. To continue to push the ideas of "victim" and that the government "owes" you something is only destructive and adds to the "poor black" vs " wealthy white" mentality. Many others have been victims of slavery, discrimination and persecution, not just African Americans. Discrimination does not just come from "white" Americans, it also comes from "black" Americans against whites. My family was discriminated against because of our religion. Many thousands in my religion have been martyred and are still being martyred today around the world. We were not wealthy and still aren't. I went to college by borrowing money and having to pay it back. The government didn't help me a bit. I would be more offended by "Affirmative Action" if I were black. In essence it says "you're not smart enough and need all the help you can get". The point is, you have to be responsible for yourself and want to make something of yourself not play the race card or "victim" all the time. Jesus came to save us all. We are all brothers and sisters. Jesus didn't set up a Black Liberation group and a White Liberation group. He wanted a united church and loves us all...black, white, brown, yellow, etc. We need to follow the example of Jesus. He forgave his killers while hanging on the cross! What we do with our lives is up to each individual.

Cliff Washington: cliffordw00@email.phoenix.edu

The Rev. Jeremiah Wright keynote last night at the NAACP's annual Freedom Fund dinner was a clear example of Black Liberation Theology. It clearly showed a different side of the man than the snippets that have plastered the little screens for the past 6 weeks---many will be surprised that he is NOT the quack that those behind the snippets attempted to make him out to be---I teach Ethics and Management tonight--week one of a 5 week University course and I'm sure such an issue will crop up---I look so forward to the rich dialouge that will take place!
Anthony--I look forward to your next article!:-)

I assure you that not many of the preachers mentioned or those that preach a black liberation theology have ever given MARXISM or Karl Marx much thought. Their messages are birthed from the "black protracted struggle" in America and if one dares to refer to such as Marxism....so be it!

Mr. Common Sense:

Um, whatever happened to offering up actual proof to back up your assertions? This piece is just silly. You could just as easily claim that Black Liberation Theology has its roots in the writings of Marcus Garvey as of Karl Marx. Without actual any factual proof to back these assertions up, they're just alot of noise.

While James Cone is considered the "contemporary father" of Black Liberation Theology, Marcus Garvey (1887-1940), the first apostle of Black Theology would have been a more fitting reference because such a reference demonstrates the historical perspective of this movement. Black Liberation Theology has its secondary roots in African American slave culture and life, NOT Marxism. However, I regconize that it just "One Black Man's Opinion".

I find it so strange and actually amusing to hear the Shawn Hannity's of the world scream in outrage at FINALLY being exposed to Black Liberation Theology and noting they use The Rev. Jeremiah Wright as that symbol yet so very many more Black Pastors are more easily identified with such a social gospel. I would like to direct them all to books authored by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, "African Who Shaped our Faith", and "Adam Where ARE You: "Why most Black Men Don't Go to Church, (co-authored with Dr. Jawanza Kunjufu). The Rev. Albert Cleage (1911-2000) former pastor of the Shrine of the Black Madonna Church in Detroit (author of "Black Messiah"-1968), C. Eric Lincoln, author of "The Development of Black Religion"----all preached a Black Liberation Theology. Many, many so-called "mainstream" prosperity gospel pastors of today ONCE preached a Black Liberation Theology because that is what they used to get the uninformed, misinformed, economically depressed masses to listen to because they so readily identified with its message. The foundation of the GOGIC (Church of God In Christ), one of the most powerful predominately Black denominations, is rooted in a Black Liberation Theology. I smile inward at the photos of our current President, the Honorable George W. Bush, embracing Bishop Eddie Long at Coretta Scott King's home going, Or at Pastor, Dr. Creflo Dollar encouraging his mega church in GA to support GWB---(he is the source of an congressional oversight committee for his manna from heaven, tax exempt, free market, creating wealth for himself ministry---please, go back 12-15, 20 years and listen of the messages of the younger Bishop Eddie Long and Dr. Creflo Dollar---you will hear Black Liberation Theology.

W Albert: waslatter@Hotmail.com

So much to absorb. Lots of intelligent comments. There is, however, only one truely authoritative source, the Word of God. Does it matter what skin color the jews of Jesus day were, or of Jesus? Can we not assume that there skin color would have been what it is today in those regions? Does not the Word of God proclain the captives free? Does not the Word of God proclaim the Gospel (good news) of the Kingdom to come? Does not all of the Bible tell a story that starts with creation, shows the consequence of original sin, and reveals the promise of eternal life in Heaven for those who repent and accept Jesus as Lord? How we live between the beginning and the end is up to each of us. The church SHOULD be a body of like minded believers and perpetuator of the great commision, sadly it has failed on many levels. It has also triumphed on many more. Human failings are a central theme throughout both the Old and New Testements. Lest we forget how blessed we are as a nation, let us open our eyes to the plight of human suffering around the world, many christians are willing to lay down their lives for their faith in Jesus Christ, and not by murdering innocent people. While this debate rages on many lives are lost for the cause of freedom. Recently I read a commentary by Cindy Hess Kasper written on April 9th, 2008, in the publication Our Daily Bread. In it she recounts a story of a lay minister during the days of John Wesley. The man, preaching from Luke 19:21 did not know the the term" austere man "in the text and spoke of it instead as an oyster man. He explained how an oyster diver must grope in freezing water to retrieve them and would often cut his hands, he went on to say that Christ reached down to save manking and also had blood on his hand from the nails he received to pay the penalty of our sins. According to the story 12 men came forward to accept Christ. Later that night someone came to Wesley to complain about unschooled preachers who were too ignorant to know the meaning of the texts that they were preaching on. The Oxford educated Wesley simply said, "Never mind. The Lord got a dozen oysters tonight." Jesus told his deciples that he would make them "fishers of men". No matter our skin color, gender of even age, we as Christians have the same mandate, to carry the Gospel to all world and make disciples of all nations, babtizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Ken:

Bradley's article should be read in the context of Fr. Sirico's comment made elsewhere that "envy enables politicians."
Of course this doesn't make a lot of sense unless one recalls that Envy is a sin.

TNDallas:

I thought the article was well articulated. Thanks Anthony for your comments.

mario: tachuela32000@yahoo.com

PART I OF III
I have been reading the different opinions voiced about this article of Black Liberation Theology. First, I would like to point out that for many years "The Church" sanctioned and participated in the same practices of segregation that were instituted in society at large. We look back to the teachings and iconography of the "church" and in there we see "racism" written all over the church. I grew up in the church, the son of a very well educated and prominent minister, I never heard my father talk about race, and all that it matters nor any of its matters. We see how "the church" for many years has alienated black men by not mentioning any of the proven biblical historical facts in which black men played a vital role. We know that a blonde blue eyed Jesus, did not exist in that part of the world at that time in history. We know that the Egyptians the bible refers to, over and over again, were not white, for that is the center of the Nubian Civilization. We know that the Curse of Ham and other many other senseless teachings, are not in accordance with the Word of God, and all that foolishness has been used as powerful tools to instill a sense of inferiority among black Christians. Curiously, we see no major change in the way these false teachings are dealt with. We do not see voices rising in churches, black or white, to denounce them, hence tacitly approving them. White Christians continue to believe that Jesus and all the disciples were white, that black people are cursed for ever and this curse was declared by God through a drunken man (Noah). On the other side of the fence we have black Christians wondering how to achieve salvation, and if it is even achievable, since they are 'cursed" by the same God they look up to for salvation. Subconsciously, they also question their right to closeness with God, for they do not have the "right" skin color. There is no doubt of how easy it is for Marxist Liberation Theologians to access a fertile ground for their teachings. A ground planted with the seed of many years of lies and deception. Though I am not in agreement with their teachings, I do believe that before Mr. Bradley charges against these theologians who preach against "white supremacy" in current theology, he should carry on a more in depth look at the aberrant theological teachings that have for many years helped shape a culture of black religious inferiority which easily permeates to other aspects of society, since many black folk look up to the church as their guiding beacon.
Second, I think it is the ultimate fallacy to believe that the culture of victimization is kept alive from the pulpits of Black Liberation Preachers on Sun mornings. If we accept that premise , then we must accept at least two other that are just as incoherent. One is that blacks in America have achieved equality in all of the social arenas. Another one is that any claim to the contrary is a perpetuation of the culture of victimization. I disagree with Rev. Wright or anybody else who states that black people in this country, are opressed. Having traveled around the world, I can attest to the fact that blacks in America are not oppressed, yet they do play in an unleveled socioeconomic field, a direct result of the oppression that once existed. Anybody, black or white, who refuses to see the socioeconomic disparities between blacks and whites in this country, is just plain dumb. That's the reason why we hear words like "I can't disown Rev Wright" or "the anger is real". Senator Obama may be able to disassociate himself from Rev. Wright's rhetoric but he cannot disassociate himself from the truth.
The Church cannot preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ and sit still while atrocities are being committed against black people all over the country. A church cannot be preaching of eternal salvation while thousands of young black men will not make it past 30 years of age. It is the church's intrinsic role to call society's attention to society's problems. We see many examples of that in the different leaders that God chose to to carry on His work. In the bible, from Moses to Jesus, we see how crucial it was to fight against institutionalized "injustice" in order to bring about change.
However, if the only role the black church plays, is to point out problems in black communities around the nation without offering viable solutions, then I have to agree with Mr. Bradley that all that is being achieved is the perpetuation of the culture of victimization. A minister who is valiant enough to use the pulpit as a venue to point out social conflict, must brave enough to use that same venue to point out solutions to the conflict and wise enough to help guide in the implementation of those solutions within his community.

mikendc:

As a white guy who grew up in the Bronx and fled the brown and black "horde" which overtook my neighborhood in the 70s, you sound like some educated wasps. Very smart wasps I'll add.

As far as an apology for the wrongs committed by "white folk",the greatest apology any white person can give is to vote for Barak Obama.

What do you think the average black person would feel if Obama won the election? Every inner city teacher won't have to go back to Dr King or some other obsure but great civil rights icon to motivate these kids?

Would it be fair to say the best thing that ever happened to these sobs who have us in a three trillion dollar war was the tragedy of 9-11? Clinton and McCain and a slew of others are up to their eyeballs with these people.

John Iafet: josephiafet@yahoo.com

This notion of whites apologizing for something that they did not do just irks me. There are eight times as many whites in America as their are African Americans . This being the case, very few, if any of them, benefited from slavery of 150 years ago. Furthermore, most of the whites in America today are the heirs of the generations that landed in America in the early twentieth century at Ellis Island. This means that the forebears of most whites had no connection with slavery (racial discrimination is a different issue). Therefore, whites apologizing for slavery, a horrible and abhorrent history of this country that most had no connection with, is not appropriate nor acceptable.

Also, many African Americans incorrectly or falsely state that slavery existed in the United States for 400 years. Slavery was introduced into the Americans, a British Colony, in the early 1600s but the colonies were not the same as the United States. When the colonies did break away from the UK and declared independence with a Constitution, slavery ended 76 years later with the Emancipation Proclamation. Therefore slavery existed in the United States 76 years, not 400.

B Williams:

The radical revolutionary roots of Black Liberation Theology has its roots in the Secret Six and John Brown, as I pointed out above. The historical documentation of these revolutionary terrorists, under guise of religion, is here: http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/johnbrown/secretsixdetails.html

A greater in depth look at the history of what is now called Black Liberation Theology has its roots and foundation in the real promoters of Abolitionism, led by the Secret Six and the insane terrorist madman named John Brown, who advocated and did murder innocent whites families (including women and children) and raided the Federal Armory in Harpers Ferry (now West Virginia) in attempt to lead an Insurrection. This nakedly is what "liberation" in these radical minds is all about, i.e. social upheaval and revolution. It was this radical minority of Marxist terrorists that fueled a needless "Civil War", which cost over 600,000 lives (more than all US wars combined). Dishonest "Abraham" Lincoln promoted such Insurrection (as historians interpret it) in his Emancipation Proclamation which encouraged slaves to rise up and murder in the South with impunity, (while he admitted he had "no authority" to set free any slaves). Then "Martin Luther King", who painted himself as "Moses", leading the "children into the promised land" (of communist Utopianism, through trespassing, insurrection and revolution) continued what the radical Abolitionist terrorists left unfinished.

The Abolition movement of the communists and Red Republicans led to the Feminism and further insurrection in the so-called "Civil Rights" movement (that was neither Civil nor Right), and continues to promote a radical socialist and communist agenda that pushes government toward Collectivist policies, including taxation and welfare. Its radical roots reveals its true character.

When will Americans be willing to discuss this and be willing to trace it all to its core in Abolitionism and Feminism? Marxist revolutionary communism entered America in 1861 and seeks further revolution today under Black Liberation theology and the socialist agenda within the government since Reconstruction.

Chris Manes: lokicsm@aol.com

The funny thing is, one can make the same arguments about the Acton Institute's theology, just replacing the words "black" with "put-upon millionaires" and "capitalists". If anybody promotes victimology (and a bad faith one at that), it's Acton and its constant defense of the rich and the powerful.

But to the point: While I don't endorse any ethnically oriented interpretation of the gospel, to use the word "victimology" for a group of people trying to deal with the aftermath of several hundred years of genocide, enslavement and Jim Crow, suggests a level of cultural blindness that defies description. Blacks have been and continue to be victims of racism and economic exploitation, and have a right to see in the gospel of Jesus a message of hope and liberation. To call that "Marxism" is simply namecalling by an ideologue who can't make an argument on the merits.

Ironically, Marxism probably draws on the gospel message more closely than the naked capitalism offered up by the Acton Institute.

Neal Lang: movwater@comcast.net

"However Germany is now innocent of it's sins because they paid reparations to Jewish people, so whatever damaged has happened to them, their children are able to survive despite the hell they went through. Now if America had paid some type of reparations to black people for all of the sins they have committed, then this article would definitely have some weight."

Regarding the Jews, it appears that ministers like Jeremiah Wright and the demagogues of the Nation of Islam are insuring that their flocks are taking over where Hitler and the Nazis left off. If any other church in the United States would preach such a vile theology targeting blacks, or any other minority, they would be repudiated by the vast majority of all other churches. Apparently, the same morality does not apply when the minister can claim victimhood, no matter how distorted and lie-filled the false gospel they preach from.

As far as reparations are concerned, as I recall slavery was ended in our Nation by hundreds of thousands of white soldiers offering up their lives to insure that this evil were ended. When considering what the "white people" of the United States owes to the descendants of these slaves, has anyone considered where those who owe their American citizenship to their slave ancesters would today, had they not been captured by their fellow blacks in the bush in Africa and then sold to slave traders. Doubtless not even the poorest would give up their American citizenship in order to take even the upper middle class in any Sub-Saharian country. Blacks are not the only minority to be segregated and denied their civil rights in our Nation. Each wave of immigrants have been received with bias and bigotry, whether Irish, Italian, Jews or Orientals. However, each of these groups have prevailed and prospered. The exception appears to be the majority of the American blacks. What "justice" would be served taking from Irishmen whose forbears were slaughtered in the fields at Fredricksburg, and who had to endure signs "Irish need not apply" while looking for work in New York and Boston before the Civil War in order to satisfy the overt racism of a minority of blacks who happy they are here and not in Africa. Would these "reparations" also apply to those Africans, like Obama, whose Muslim forbears probably profited also from slavery?

Interestingly, most black immigrants for Africa and the Carribean adapt and assimilate better than those born and are educated in America. Additionally, crime statistics show that black against white far exceeds the converse. Perhaps the reason is this false gospel of Black Liberation Theology, that reinforces the black concept of victimhood, is then manifest in violence against the alleged victimizer.

If you read Barack Obama autobiography, "Dreams From My Father", it is obvious that he carries this "victim-chip" on his shoulder, even before being exposed to Rev. Wright. This despite the fact that his black ancesters did suffer under American slavery, and the fact that he was raised mostly by his loving, white grandparents and was well accepted by his white peers in the schools he attended in the US. Making "race" the core of one's worldview might explain this, along with the crime statistic.

As for the sin of bigotry, anyone who has read the true Word, will realize that this sin was alive and well in the many of Christ's Apostles and disciples. This can readily be seen in the gentile prejudice manifest in the early Church. In fact, this bias was so prevalent that it took a vision from God to finally cleanse Christ's Church of this bigotry and allow the Baptism of believing gentiles, such as the Roman Centurian, Cornelius, the Bible first gentile Christian. Apparently the anti-Italian bigot, Rev. Wright, missed that part of Acts, in order to reinforce his fantasies about the "real" message of Jesus, the Christ.

Francois:

This sense of victimhood has been going on for decades and will continue for generations to come. By the late 60's civil rights leaders learned that exploiting white guilt and black helplessness were far more profitable, both financially and politically, than working toward improving the lot of black people - with the continued support of most black people at the ballot box. Both black and white socialists are more interested in fighting for "social justice and against ""racism." Simply put, hating and blaming white people takes precedence over loving black children. Just look at DC and Prince George's county: black majorities where the rate of violence is higher than Baghdad. And nobody says a thing decade after decade.

luke bobo: lbobo@lindenwood.edu

AB,

I agree that John McWhorter in Losing the Race: Self-Sabotage in Black America wonderfully illustrates what he calls the cult of victimization. Too many blacks play the victim card as a crutch not to take advantage of the many opportunities King and others fought for. I believe Dr. King was a liberation theologian. I try convince my friends at Eden Seminary or other black theologians I know that not every passage has an oppression/liberation motif; to no avail. However, this was my response to a white author's comment to Wright's sermon. My response is below. I e-mailed the white author's response to you already.

I remember showing a clip from the movie Crash to an all white class at a predominantly white seminary in St. Louis. The clip shows a white cop fondling/molesting the wife of a white collar movie producer who is played by Terrance Howard. I asked the class, what option did this African American have? A white kid in a wheel chair piped up and say, "none." He was right. I told the class how angry I was when I saw this scene; I wanted to hit a wall and curse. I went on to say, until white America gets angry over such things, it is business as usual. I often refer or quote from Drs. Christian Smith and Michael Emerson's book, Divided by Faith. They reach this chilling conclusion: our theology and practice actually perpetuates the racial divide. Sermons in the suburbs for example, rarely touch on race. Whites worship, live, and congregate with other whites who are of the same socio-economic strata. Likewise for blacks. But the other discovery was more telling. They found that white Christians said we can solve the race problem by building friendships with blacks on an individual basis; blacks said we can solve the race problem on an individual basis plus we must attack the institutional issues too. Here's the plain truth: white privilege blinds whites of the institutional problem. Blacks suffer at the hands of the institution; whites benefit from these same institutions. Watch the ABC Documentary True Colors (filmed here in St. Louis). Here in my own backyard, two men - one white, the other black - with the same educational backgrounds go under cover and get treated quite differently when buying a car, looking for an apartment, and shopping.

I often tell whites you need to become a minority in other to feel our pain. Whites interviewed for Emerson and Smith's work found this to be true. In other words, whites who lived in the hood witnessed first hand injustices and therefore were able to empathize with blacks. Whites for instance, don't have a category for this story I tell about my son. I tell white audiences, I was glad my son was born but I worry when he starts driving a car in a predominantly white area. Why? Racial profiling. Whites have no clue what I am talking about because officers have been their friends; the opposite is true for blacks.

Again, until whites get as angry as blacks; our country will continue to years behind in resolving this issue. Said another way, I remember a preacher used this analogy of the church. He said (as a criticism of the church) the following, "the church is like a stage coach on jet runway." Similarly, our country is much like a stagecoach on a jet runway in terms of race relations.

After being married for 25 years, I try to extract the truth from my discussions with my wife. I think we need to do as this white author did; extract the truth from Wright's sermon.

Luke Bobo

MDub:

Good job of shuffling! Way to avoid theological reflection on the sickness in the body of Christ and turn it into a Fox news approved piece to show his boss he’s a good dancer.
It’s sad and funny to me how today’s Pharisees never critically reflect on their faulty “middle age’s European/American legal premises” on Jesus; YHWH incarnated as a Palestinian Jew. No matter what the Bible says they always stoop and strain to see God as a mad German Priest, Adam Smith, or the grand old American flag. Jesus only advocated the Kingdom. If dancing tony would read the bible instead of mindlessly accepting his master’s interpretation he would recognize that neither capitalism nor communism, or any systematic theology is a divine mandate. Keep shuffling for your coins. Whose image are you created in?

Robert Promm: rpromm@pacbell.net

The Lord Jesus said what about secular political involvement beyond "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and render unto God the things that are God's." and "My kingdom is not of this world otherwise would my servants fight." ???

Absolutely nothing.

There there is no such "theology" as "black liberation theology", "Hispanic liberation theology", "social gospel" or any other gospel other than the gospel which the Apostle Paul preached which is "Repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ". The gospel is to individuals, not groups, who need to be saved from the "wrath to come" which will be far worse than the social oppressions of this material world. This does not excuse oppression it is a simple statement of priorities.

Tyree A. Anderson: andersontaa@yahoo.com

Whether it is Black Liberation Theology, Marxist Theology, American Theology, Process Theology, Existential Theology or whatever theology one intends to argue, all of them are fruitless and pointless in the final analysis. None of them makes a case for the Kingdom of God.

The focus that theological and "religious" thinkers should have is that of introducing the Kingdom of God to people. This has and will be the hindrance of every thread of theology pronounced by thinkers who sit in the ivory towers of academia and never enter the battlegrounds of reality common people must face on a daily basis. It is in these places that theologies are formed and divisions are solidified. If it is not about the Kingdom of God it is essentially a hindrance to those who seek to be liberated from the clutches of an egotistical humanistic society.

Clare Krishan: Clare.krishan@comcast.net

In response PART I OF III

Justice to our Creator is a demand deposit, in a current account of Truth, with an eternal time value upon maturity. A statement of the balance is revealed by the Accountant as recorded in His Books. Even without access to the Book or the Accountant, all human persons can discern credit or debit (good or evil) using their inate practical reason (the natural law). One can await the gains of fruit of the tree in season, or one can trade the harvest to those who desire it by letting the orchard in which the trees now blossom to a tenant farmer for a just price, a value proposition at a subjective price determined by perceived advantage at what cost to the purchaser and what gain to the seller covers his perceived risks or loss.

However, an original injustice perturbed the social economy when a certain ancestor of ours sought a future good she desired without having the means to attain it. A disreputable vendor claimed assets in "current rights" to consume the good that he would lend to her for a fee. This was an irrational proposition, a temptation: the ancestor had no means to pay the fee for the "rights" being offered. The vendor promoted the features, advantages and benefits that consuming the delightful good would elicit, and offered her a payment plan for the fee (a deceptive business practice, since he knew that the owner of the goods was not party to the trade).

The ancestor, blinded by desire for the present consumption of the future good, failed to use her practical reason. If she had consulted her domestic partner, he may have advised them both to go to market and inquire of the owner what plans he had in mind for the good. One of the many possibilities open to them in their freedom would have been to enter negiotiations with him. By offering to purchase the good in exchange for their labor services at a "just price" they may have persuaded him to alter his plans.

The tragedy was that the owner planned to share the goods with them in an unlimited liability partnership with his Son, secured by the assurance of their Advocate. But, selfishly, the ancestor burdened herself and her progeny to uncertain indebtedness (the terms of the fee were not disclosed) to the deceiver's, by whose lies she was persuaded to steal the good (that was never his to trade with anyway) that was intended to be a mutually enjoyed gift for her and her partner to enjoy procreation in conjugal partnership as parents.

The just price? Exclusive fidelity of the partners in their mutual exchange: a timeless covenant. No temporary contract at any price can satisfy the plans that the owner has for the good called charity, His is the power alone, He is the justice of the peace.

In response PART II OF III

So let's parse this proposition

"Black theology is the theological expression of a people deprived of social and political power."

for "peace" and apply a "mercantile discount" to any prejudicial "interest" adjectives applied to the "time value" of the object's "trade exchange" agency or the subject "contract value" terms.

removing [Black] as an ancestral bias of universal affliction (see above narrative concerning selfish passions)

removing [theological] of indeterminate origins (see above narrative concerning fallibility and deception as to ownership, whose Truth?)

removing [social] and [political] as collective avoidances of personal responsibility

we are left with the innocuous expression of the obvious:

"Theology is the expression of a people deprived of power."

This begs the question:
Why are these faithful people ignorant of the means God employs to share his power?

SIN.

This begs a further more consequential question:
What force traps these people in their self-deluding deprivation of ignorance?

EVIL.

Which begs a final question:

What deficit in liberty and charity permits this evil to prevail?

And there's the fulcum to the crux of our conunundrum:

Evil prevails because bad public policy on the part of our ancestors (state-mandated curtailment of social liberties) has wounded the fabric of our civil discourse in profoundly injurious ways... and poor private remedies on the part of present actors (a chilling isolationism bred of political puritanism) ensures a sinful, irrational praxeology of closed minds and hardened hearts.

Acton's critique fails to lift the lid on the ignorance of the consumer: it offers no explanation for the protagonists of their role (their own economic practices, or sins) in the perceived deprivation, nor does it identify the forces at play that encourage these practices (the malappropriation of capital under the temptations of evil)

Please, instead of cheap shots at the underprivileged and ignorant, could we see a more non-partisan treatment of this topic that would help a multigenerational, middle-class family to prudently apply their "laissez faire" liberty in these uncertain times?

In response PART III OF III

For so long as such an analysis is lacking, the solidarity of collective action offers sorely tempting "hope" as real purchasing power is being eroded by a fiat currency that trades on our government's fiduciary trust with its creditors (while blasphemously printing on the private commercial papers we use as legal tender "In God we Trust")

see Canadian animator Paul Grignon's short film http://www.moneyasdebt.net/
(viewable online at GoogleVideo or YouTube) for concerns that Acton may care to refute - is the power battle between Keynsian fiscal policy wonks and Saysian monetary policy geeks in many Western bureaucracies irrational and if so, how do we proceed rationally? How to liberate our brethren suffering material deprivations in Africa and our sistren in China and India (where predatory lending is the least of their worries) fighting for their daughters' right to breath air outside the womb!

What value "prudentia" to mater oeconomica in this annus horribilis of "the reality of true progress"? Our narrative's "disreputable vendor" claimed to offer "true progress" to our mater oeconomica senescens at a price... a deceptive annuity that upon maturity yields deprivation in perpetuity.

Protestant pastors have preached a similar "victimology" deception for half a millenia (or more, if one considers Mohammed a protoprotestant, then this "divinization of labor" heresy has been circulating for 1400 years) focusing attention on the "obstacle" of the impediment to freedom of the dogmas of the Catholic Church. May I indulge in a paraphrase to illustrate my point:

"For "protestant" theologians, Sunday is uniquely tied to redefining their sense of being human within a context of marginalization."

Class warfare began when a certain English King took Church property, without making plans to institute "royal feeding troughs" for the folks who used to be self-sufficient tenant farmers of the Abbots... the sons of the starving revolted and marched in protest to his heir, unable to redress the unprecendented injustice... we struggle with the consequences to the present day, as I remarked on Acton's Commentary thread on this same topic posted last week (can repetition be a good thing? Apologies to those who got my point the first time!):

"Smith really set back economic thought by injecting the purely British doctrine of the labor theory of value, thus throwing economics off the sound track for a hundred years. Here I might add that the labor theory of value has had many bad consequences. It, of course, paved the way, quite
logically, for Marx. Secondly, its emphasis on “costs determining prices” has encouraged the view that businessmen push up prices or that unions push up prices, rather than governmental inflation of the money supply."

Murray Rothbard, "Catholicism, Protestantism and Capitalistism"

So please, unless Acton is willing to tar ALL our separated Christian brethren with the same uncharitable brush, since they all exhibit the same "victomology" apropos the Lord's infinite wisdom in consigning them to their state in life, promptly cease and desist the racist calumny of a certain segment of Our Lord's ignorant, but beloved, flock.

Make good on your promise to educate us in liberty...

Shade: shadeofgood@yahoo.com

I would agree with some of the points that are made in this exert. However I would strongly disagree with the idea is that this Black Liberation Theology is what keep racism alive. If I was to take this written piece from a ideological point of view, I would say that it is thought out well and it makes valid points about the black community. But to make this article true about the part that says that Black Liberation Theology is what keeps racism alive, we will have to make a case to say that Blacks are the only ones that are harboring racsim and whites has no racist behavior in them whatsoever.

I would agree with this article, however reality paints a strong case against it in many ways. We can look at schools, churches, jobs, and communities, especially in Chicago that would otherwise state that racism does exist and it does not originate from black people. Reality only tells me that Black Liberation is the results of the cause of white racism.

This article will only have real credentials if white people would have somehow apologize for what had happened to black people in the past and the results that are now in the present. I am aware that many of the things that have happened are in generations past, but if the forefathers of whites would have apologized, then it would have been a different story and this article would have some weight.

Now if things were fair, I am aware of the Holocaust that has happened to Jewish people during World War II. It was terrible, horrible in every way, just like what has happened to black people. However Germany is now innocent of it's sins because they paid reparations to Jewish people, so whatever damaged has happened to them, their children are able to survive despite the hell they went through. Now if America had paid some type of reparations to black people for all of the sins they have committed, then this article would definitely have some weight.

Of course no such things were made and now we have the cause and effect case here. If the writer of this person is white, then this particular person would not have much weight in understanding issues that pertain to the black community because they are strengthened not only in the structure of their family, but also their civillization which is predominately white, which brings strength to their own identity, which is a concept that is oftened troubled in the black community. Black Liberation Theology, which I haven't been much of a supporter of, is something that helps give blacks an identity in a still predominately white nation.

Acton Commentary

The Marxist Roots of Black Liberation Theology

Black Liberation Theology as Marxist Victimology

Black Liberation Is Marxist Liberation

Comments

The Marxist Roots of Black Liberation Theology

Recent articles by this author: