More Active Posts
Front Page
Speaking for the black church
 |
 28 Comments |
In his now infamous remarks at the National Press Club, Rev. Jeremiah Wright said to applause from black leaders, “This most recent attack on the black church is not an attack on Jeremiah Wright; it is an attack on the black church.”
He went on to say, “It is our hope that this just might mean that the reality of the African-American church will no longer be invisible. …. Maybe that religious tradition will be understood, celebrated, and even embraced by a nation that seems not to have noticed why 11 o’clock on Sunday morning has been called the most segregated hour in America.”
He was right about a few things: American churches are still segregated and until now, many white Christians were ignorant of black liberation theology. But just how mainstream are Wright’s views?
In the Globe and Mail, Michael Valpy says Americans are finally realizing the scope of black liberation theology, calling Wright “not a radical kook but a mainstream voice” and adding, “There are a lot of Jeremiah Wrights across their land.”
Other accounts paint a more complicated picture. God-o-Meter and The New Republic note that Wright’s church is more liberal and socially progressive than many black churches. NPR quotes another Church of Christ pastor in agreement with Wright: “”It is an attack on the black church — to muzzle us to silence the preaching and the power of that form of teaching and preaching and action in the world.”
But a Pentecostal pastor disagrees: “Jeremiah Wright is not mainstream. … He doesn’t represent the majority. … My guess is maybe 25 percent of black pastors may hold that view.” Another pastor told Bloomberg.com that Wright’s comments “were just totally ridiculous and do not reflect mainstream thought in the African-American community.” A Chicago pastor said Wright has done good in the Chicago community, but he’s a “very militant minister” who “took advantage of the big stage.”
The Associated Press finds pastors divided between their admiration of Obama and Wright and their disapproval of the way they handled the disagreement. The New York Times says parishioners are less likely to defend Wright than their pastors. Bloomberg.com quotes one of Wright’s ex-parishioners saying he partly agrees with Wright, but that Wright doesn’t represent the black church: “I feel like he’s trying to be a spokesperson for the black Christians, but we don’t want different races to look at us through Jeremiah Wright.”
 |
Topic: Campaign 2008, Editor's Choice, Front Page, The Nation |  |
Email a friend |
 |
Keywords: barack-obama, black liberation theology, Jeremiah Wright, race |  |
RSS 2.0 |
 |
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed. |  |
Share this: |
Don?t blame racism
I don’t think anybody was attacking Rev. Wright or the black church. They were just pointing out the kind of teaching that Senator Obama has listened to for the last twenty years or so. And wondering about his judgment in doing so.
Yes, this is a big part of the answer as to why churches are segregated Sunday morning, but not the way he means it. Does his church welcome white worshipers? I doubt it. So then, he cannot cast stones as though “Sunday-morning segregation” is white people’s sin. Furthermore, in feeding the worst inclinations of his flock, he wouldn’t expect people who’d be comfortable in his church to turn around next Sunday and attend a white church, or even a racially mixed church. Thus, on both counts he’s part of the problem, and dare not mention Sunday-morning segregation at all without blatant hypocrisy.
I go to a mostly white church, but black people are more than welcome. (Those who have attended or do attend feel welcome and loved, by their own reports.) In Chicago I attended a mixed-race church, and found it wonderful to worship God with people of different backgrounds.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Jeremiah Wright would actually find Christ–and be reconciled with those of us he hates? I think we should pray for that. What a testimony to the Gospel’s power that would be!
Interesting choice of words Ms. Harris.
According to you many white Christians were “ignorant” of black liberation theology. Couldn’t you have as easily said “uninformed”?
Would you ever accuse black people of being “ignorant” about anything?
Doesn’t Mr. Wright accuse the U.S. government of inventing AIDS to kill black people? I guess you forgot to mention that.
P.S. The members of Mr. Wright’s church are buying him a new home. Is Mr. Wright going to live in the black neighborhood by his church? Not a chance. He is going to live in a gated community in a Chicago suburb that is over 90% white. Ironic to say the least.
No one is reporting the fact that Obama is not African American, but Arabic American.
Obama’s association with the “black church” may be politically expedient, but technically counterfeit.
Mr. Obama is 50% Caucasian, that from his mother. Those who want Mr. Obama to write history by becoming “America’s first African-American president” ignore the fact that his father was ethnically Arabic, with only 1 relative ethnically African Negro - a maternal great-grandparent (Sen. Obama’s great-great grandparent, thus the 6.25% ethnic contribution to the senator’s ethnic composition.).
That means that Mr. Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother’s side. He is 43.75% Arabic, and 6.25% African Negro from his father’s side.
Federal law requires that to claim a minority status, you must be at least 1/8 of the descriptor, i.e. at least 12.5% of the racial component you claim for minority status. Mr. Obama, claiming to be African-American, is half the legal threshold.”
OBAMA’S MUSLIM CONNECTION
By Jon Christian Ryter
January 16, 2008
NewsWithViews.com
In August, 2006 US Senator Barack Obama [D-IL] made a special trip to visit a special man in Kenya. The man’s name was Raila
Amolo Odinga. He is the head of the National Muslim Leaders Forum [NAMLEF] in Kenya. The political party he heads is called the Orange Democratic Movement [ODM]-although there is definitely nothing democratic about his political party of NAMLEF. The ODM is dedicated to overthrowing the legitimate democratic government of Kenya. Odinga is not really concerned how he achieves his objective. It matters little to him if he assumes power through a free election-or by revolution. But, by hook or crook, he is determined to become the president of Kenya. If he succeeds, he will be president for life and Kenya will become another Afghanistan.
When the US Senator visited Kenya to meet with Odinga in Nairobi, the Kenyan government officially denounced the visit. And, most specifically, they denounced Obama. According to a Kenyan government spokesman, Obama’s bias for his friend was so blatant that the government found it necessary to complain that Obama appeared to be Odinga’s stooge. Not only did Obama campaign for his Islamic friend, he convinced former Clinton adviser Dick Morris to become Odinga’s campaign adviser.
Odinga bothers the US State Department for a couple of reasons. First, after losing the democratic election on December 27, Raila Odinga cut a deal for support from Vladimir Putin and the former Soviet Union. Odinga knows he has to overthrow the government to gain power. When he lost the election, he protested that the vote was rigged to keep him from claiming an election he won. He incited his tribal followers to go on a murderous rampage in towns that were primarily Christian. Throughout Kenya, hundreds of people were murdered. What shocked the west is that the Kenyan media-and the political power brokers within the country-out of fear of Odinga, appear to be suggesting that perhaps the election should be held over to stop the violence and the potential for long term Muslim terrorism.
In a wave of violence aimed at protesting what they call the illegal election of newly-elected Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki, a group of Christian women and children-some entire families-barricaded themselves in a church. Muslims, inflamed by Odinga’s men, torched the church and burned to death everyone inside. This is the man Obama campaigned for in Kenya, and sang the praises of. This is also the man who claims that Barack Obama is a close, personal friend. Christianity would be outlawed.
The article above is only 4 paragraphs of the story, which can be found near the bottom to the right of a picture with Obama and Raila Amolo Odinga.
Actually, I think Creflo Dollar does the speaking for the black church.
No one is trying to muzzle anyone! In fact, I think we should know more about what goes on in the black churches. Let’s talk about it together. Let them bring their Bibles and back it all up.
What is shocking to white America is that they didn’t realize how much they are hated and that a different Christianity that they would never find in their Bible is being taught.
Xion,
Ah yes, but according to Rev Wright, Jesus was a black man….
Federal law requires that to claim a minority status, you must be at least 1/8 of the descriptor, i.e. at least 12.5% of the racial component you claim for minority status. Mr. Obama, claiming to be African-American, is half the legal threshold.
OOOH! Let’s bring back the term octoroon
I just don’t know what to say. I do remember many years ago talking to a black woman who thought the government developed AIDS to kill blacks. She also thought that the govt developed crack cocaine to keep them down. To me it is just as dumbfounding as the thought that there is a cure for cancer but doctors don’t want you to know it because they make too much money off the treatment of it. What about the white people who die from AIDS cancer and crack? How can anyone believe such pablum?
Kim, the black community has always been traditionally pro normal hetero marriage. I think lots of blacks resent the way homosexuals link the gay rights struggle with the civil rights movemt of the late 50s early 60s.
If OBama’s prohomo agenda were fully revealed, black voters would distance themselves and he would maintain his lead only thru his appeal to liberal collegiates who buy into his claim of being post-racial.
Barack Obama on Civil Rights
We need strong civil unions, not just weak civil unions
Legal rights for gays are conferred by state, not by church
Opposes gay marriage; supports civil union & gay equality
“Trinity United Church of Christ’s Web site says its teachings are based on the black liberation theology of James H. Cone and his 1969 book “Black Theology and Black Power.”
This book says,
“What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.”
Mr. Cone, a professor at the Union Theological Seminary in New York, added that “black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy.”
I did not know that this kind of racism existed in America. I mean, of course, like what XION posted. I don’t know; do they really want all whites killed so that they can take over America or something? You say Cone is a professor at Union in New York? Are there white professors there too, or just blacks? Who gave him a job and keeps paying his salary? Any white person writing or saying these kinds of things wouldn’t have any kind of professorship or probably much of anything else, either.
Our church welcomes all people. All the ministries I support help all peoples they find that need help, and in any country they can get in. I think many of the ministries would be considered conservative, if that means that one takes the bible seriously. And that means taking God’s will seriously, not reinventing Him to fit your own image or make him do what you want.
Mr Wright, must have missed something when he said attacks on his words are an attack on the Black Church. There’s only one Church, those who believe in the God of the Bible and are born again. The group he lead is just a group of rascist socialists. His group ought not to drag Jesus’ Name in the mud. There’s only one Race anyway, the Human Race.
Joanneb,
Don’t worry about it my friend, Wright is only dragging himself through the mud along with those who go to his church, or agree with his racist “Black Liberation Theology” -
Xion provided a quote for us. This part “intrigued” me:
“Mr. Cone, a professor at the Union Theological Seminary in New York, added that “black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy.””
Here’s my question back at Mr. Cone and Trinity:
You’ve been following this belief for a long time. How’s that working for you?
We all know that there is no black or white in the kingdom of heaven, no male or female. Rev. Wright has missed the point of Christianity entirely.
Joanneb, You are correct. There is ONE church.
I must comment on the United Church of Christ denomination. I have found it a good general rule that “United . . . ” means that they really don’t stand for anything. Now I know that is an overstatement, but in my experience it is true. The Church of Christ has a wide range of congregations from extremely legalistic to very liberal, but even the most liberal ones are more conservative than the United Church of Christ. More specifically, any assembly that rejects the Bible as God’s Word is not a Church of Christ. This is what has happened in the mainline denominations like the United Church of Christ who have rejected the authority of God’s Word (Bible). This has been caused by accepting developmental (Evolutionary) views of scripture, rather than it being the work of the Spirit of God. If scripture is man made than it can be changed and modified according to the prevailing wind. That “obscure passage in Romans” mentioned in the quote in #13 above is far from obscure! It cannot be more straight forward! The quote calls into question all of that apostle’s writing (most of the New Testament).
Regardless of denominational names, The Church of Christ is all those who have accepted God’s offer of forgiveness through the sacrifice and resurrection of Christ and so live faithfully according to the Scriptures.
I absolutely believe that racism of all sorts still pervades many areas of American society, having lived in Deep South, southwest, and midwest. And while I do believe these men started their “careers” with the intention of combating racism and bridging racial divides — they grew up in the civil rights era, remember — I now wonder how much a person like Wright has invested in fanning racial flames.
Wright, like a Sharpton or Jackson, matters only so long as racial tension matters. How much more difficult would the job of agitating minority communities be with a black man at the head of an apparently oppressive white machine?
(seems similar to what’s happened to the pro-life movement, where ultimate success might cripple the GOP in some areas and demographics)
Rev Wright verbally attacked Hannity on Fox this week asking him “Have you read Cone?” “Have you read Cone?” “Have you read Cone?” I wish Hannity had the wherewithal to actually quote from the racist James H Cone.
It is shocking that Wright would defend himself by deflecting America’s attention to someone even more racist and incendiary than himself. But Wright embraces Cone and Black Liberation Theology more fervently than ever.
As part of his theological analysis, Cone argues for God’s own identification with “blackness”:
“The black theologian must reject any conception of God which stifles black self-determination by picturing God as a God of all peoples. Either God is identified with the oppressed to the point that their experience becomes God’s experience, or God is a God of racism. The blackness of God means that God has made the oppressed condition God’s own condition. (A Black Theology of Liberation, pp. 63-64)”
So then, God is not the God of all people. God, the black God, is only God of the black people. To Cone, there is black theology and white theology. God supports only the former.
Needless to say, this false doctrine has nothing whatsoever to do with Christianity. For this reason the Union Theological Seminary of New York has named James Hal Cone the Charles Augustus Briggs Distinguished Professor of Systematic Theology.
Xion,
The ignorance of those who have distanced themselves from the truth, concerning what Cone and Wright preach, not wanting to own up to the disgraceful racism, but hide….. either because they can’t face what has been discovered, OR they don’t want to bring “Black Liberation Theology” to the very FRONT of the United States of America as one of the most devisive, manipulative measures, couching itself in Christianity……and we wonder why racism cannot be solved? It probably can’t be, when hatred ‘belched’ from the pulpit and elsewhere continues on Sunday’s and throughout the week in churches, and elsewhere.
James Hal Cone founded Black Liberation Theology in July of 1966. His views are so skewed that one can’t really call them Christian. So what has Rev Wright been preaching for 20 years? Has Obama ever heard the gospel?
James Cone has in effect created a new black religion that blends the views of Malcolm X who converted to Islam and Martin Luther King Jr. Cone says he can blend the two because he is black first and Christian second. But if he teaches a false gospel, then is he even Christian at all?
In the same year that this new religion was created, black nationalists fabricated a new black holiday ‘Kwanzaa’ as an alternative to Christmas, saying “Jesus was psychotic”, and that Christianity was a white religion that blacks should shun. Later, these views were softened to not alienate Christians.
You can listen to an NPR interview of James Cone on “Fresh Air” May 4, 2008 (13 min.).
Here are some excerpts from that interview. It is clear that he is talking about ‘another gospel’, not the gospel of Jesus Christ.
“In a white supremacist society like America … in a society where white domination is so powerful … where black has been defined as evil … we have to turn that definition of black on its head”
“Black is black self-esteem. King taught us to love the enemy [i.e. whites], which is right because if you’re going to be Christian you have to love the neighbor, but before you can love anybody you have to love yourself.”
“As Malcolm X says, ‘The worst crime white people have created is to teach black people to hate themselves.’ That’s why we kill each other in the ghetto.”
“The main thing that disappointed me about the white church is that it did not talk of the gospel in terms of black people’s struggle for justice.”
“The gospel is not about going to heaven when I die. The gospel is what happens to you now, in this world”.
“Salvation is to be delivered from bondage. That’s literally what salvation means in the Bible”.
“Jesus was crucified because he was a rabble rouser. He disturbed the consciousness of the people. It was because he came to preach to the poor and free the oppressed.”
Can anyone who has no idea why Jesus came or why he died be a Christian?
Correction: The NPR interview with James Cone was on March 31, 2008.
Xion:
You ask a QUESTION: ——– “Can anyone who has no idea why Jesus came or why he died be a Christian?”
ANSWER: No they can’t.
Once we accepted the notion that God is our creation than black liberation theology or any theology reflective of a particular cultural experience becomes understandable. Cone creates God in a manner to satisfy the black experience in America. American evangelicalism creates God in manner to satisfy the white working and middle class experience. The notion of the end of times and the rapture are a unique feature of American Christianity developed in a response to American exceptionalism, frontierism, etc
#26 HRW James Hal Cone has created his own religion which barely resembles Christianity. Christians who follow the Bible cannot create their own brand of Christianity.
To create one’s own version of Christianity is no longer Christianity.
RE 21. Wow. What a messed-up place Union is. If Cone didn’t have this job, I wonder if he’d convert to some other religion, one that supports his views better?