“What is Divine in Man is elusive and impalpable, and he is easily tempted to embody it in a collective – from a church, a country, a social system, a leader – so that he may realize it with less effort and serve it with more profit…Yet the attempt to externalize the Kingdom of Heaven in a temporal shape must end in disaster. It cannot be created by Charters or Constitutions, nor established by arms. Those who set out for it alone will reach it together and those who seek it in company will perish by themselves” – Hugh Kingsmill

Thanks to Roger for the space.

I find BLT to be a perfectly reasonable if not completely perfect theological framework. One of my favorite sports commentators often says that “reasonable minds can disagree” and I think that this will be the case here.

My reading of scripture says that Jesus has much to say about politics and race, albeit not in the way we narrowly define those categories now. Jesus launches his ministry in Luke’s gospel by citing Isaiah 61, when he proclaims that in himself that prophet’s words have been fulfilled. Isaiah wrote,”The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” Jesus then proceeds to do just those very things. If this isn’t a socio-political mission statement, I am not sure what is. (John Howard Yoder and Obery M. Hendricks have each written books entitled “The Politics of Jesus” that flesh this idea out in different but compelling ways.)

When seeking to teach about love of God and love of neighbor, Jesus uses a Samaritan as the one who embodies true love. This would have been an extremely “racially” charged analogy considering the relationship between Jews and Samaritans and I believe that this was exactly the point.

Where I believe that BLT falters is in its desire to reduce all of the gospel to just being a political manifesto. That much, I reject wholeheartedly. The Bible is not the Declaration of Independence. However, to apply the hermeneutic that the Bible is a collection of narratives written by a people in political bondage and that God has a preferential concern for the poor and destitute — which is a mainstay of Cone, Thurman, King and others – yes, I agree with that reading.

I accept that you and others would reject the treatment that we deal with daily and I don’t want to assume your race but for the same reasons I turn a sympathetic ear to feminist theologians, I give a sympathetic reading to Black Liberation theologians.

Thank you for your questions and for prodding me to clarify my position, I hope that went beyond Wikipedia )

Have a wonderful one.

But that much can be found on Wickipedia, a not completely reliable source on most subjects, but I’m familiar with Cone, and BLT’s theological framework. I also came of age in the early ’60’s, and having once considered myself part of The New Left, liberation theology in general is no mystery either.

Perhaps the question is, do you agree with BLT? The communitarian possibilities are enormous, but so are the separatist possiblities, and maybe even a kind of Christian Non-conformism. Whether or not you see racism in it, there certainly is racialism. It revolves upon matters of race.

Jesus had nothing to say about race and little to say about politics, but one can deduce enough from his ministry to get an idea of what he thought about materialism, self-assertion, or earthly power and its conceits. The denial and suppression of The Self is, in fact, essential in Christianity, and BLT exalts the self through racial identity and grievance. Maybe it’s possible to accept BLT and work through these theological problems. I don’t know.

As for this blog, the commenters here are extraordinarily informed, and not given to absolutism or orthodox conservatism. No one here would accept, as normal, the treatment you’ve described, but most of them probably wouldn’t see BLT as the solution.

In any case, thanks for the response, and I wish you the best.

I’d be more than happy to…Howard Thurman’s Jesus and the Disinherited is a classic, James Cone, who is considered the pioneering African American thinker in this area, has a two-volume set on Black Theology. Of equal insight are the writings of his brother Cecil Cone. I would argue that much of the writings and sermons of Martin Luther King, Jr. are influenced by liberationist thought, especially from 1965 until his death when he repeatedly railed against the Vietnam War and described America as the largest purveyor of violence in the world.

My point is that I’m not the one casting disparaging attacks to Black liberation theology. The individuals who do more times than not know nothing about it other than what they have seen on CNN, FoxNews or YouTube.

I don’t claim to be an expert in most fields. But at the same time, I try to avoid making bold proclamations about things about which I have limited knowledge.

But this is our world…she has repeatedly arrived for interviews and it became clear that everyone thought she was white. Because after all, her name is not ethnic sounding and she graduated from an Ivy..then and only then did she no longer fit the job requirements, or they need to expand the search. Once, an executive came running down because she was so excited to meet my wife, only to see her and have her jaw drop…she was no longer excited. This isn’t a rare incident — this happens more than it doesn’t.

I have the highest teaching rankings in my department, have received multiple teaching awards. Yet, I continually have students every semester who will make a “black” comment that none of my white colleagues have to deal with.

I can go on and on but my point is that this country is already divided. While some progress has been made, there is still much that needs to be done. Liberation Theology, which actually was developed by Latin American theologians is designed to show that God cares about those whom society could care less about. It doesn’t profess superiority of the disadvantaged — which racism does. However, it does proclaim the humanity of the disadvantaged. Racism argues that one group is inferior solely because they have more or less melanin. I have heard nothing from Pfleger or Wright or have read nothing from any of the major liberation theologians that makes those claims. Their language may be racial — it discusses issues related to race, but racist it is not.

He thinks by quitting the church “now” will have people believe he doesn’t agree with the Trinity Church beliefs.

If he didn’t agree with the church’s philosophy and rhetoric – he would have left there a long time ago – say 20 years ago or so. Is he not very bright or does he think American’s aren’t?

Either way, he certainly isn’t someone I would choose to run this country.

Innocuous my eye … he’s one to preach a good bit but doesn’t seem to practice anything he says or preaches about. Harmless/inoffensive – hardly. The sermon at that church was meant to ridicule and demean an outstanding citizen and candidate for president. SHAME ON TRINITY CHURCH and all the parishioners who stayed in their pews instead up getting up and walking out.

OBAMA and Rev Wright as VP – that may be the ticket he’s aiming for.