progressive christianity part 2

<!– @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } H3 { margin-bottom: 0.08in } A:link { so-language: zxx } –>

here is another article (also posted below) that gives some self definition to progressive christianity. notice that it gives as three of the four primary sources white, american and european theological movements. also i would love to be corrected but to the best of my knowledge all of the primary theologians associated with the movements are men, though in the case of the evangelicals certainly not all the activists. i pray that this is a mistake on my part that just shows the depth to which my own theological education has been skewed.

liberation theologies are also seen as a necessary source, but all lumped into one. It is made clear that christianity is to be transformed by these voices, but that transformation is again framed as service to “the least of these”. it seems that progressive christianity is supposed to be the realm of those inheritors of the previously mentioned (white, male dominated) traditions who are now willing to listen to “the previously voiceless people” and take on/co-opt? their insights. missing, at least in this article, is a clear recognition that all of these liberation forms of christianity are critiques of traditional/ white male theology. without that recognition it remains possible for progressive christianity to be focused on white men and congratulate itself on evolving and learning from the majority of the world that has been/ is oppressed by white, christian men.

i would like to see a recognition of the reality that christianity has been a powerfully oppressive force and that many forms of it still are. i feel like the 8 points in the previous post came a bit closer in the recognition of privilege, but did so in a way that centered those people who have privilege to renounce. as i try to imagine a christianity that i would want to claim, it would center the destruction of domination systems “casting down the mighty from their thrones and lifting up the lowly” while recognizing that depending on our personal histories, identities and social locations we all have different roles in that process. different places in the struggle and different ways that we need to cooperate in our own lifting up and casting down.

September 4, 2006
By Dr. Delwin Brown
Dean Emeritus, Pacific School of Religion

Our Progressive Christian Heritage

Progressive Christianity today is not a single party line; it is a family of perspectives and practices that seek to be faithful to Christ. It is diverse because it draws from a variety of Christian expressions rooted in the biblical witness.

Progressive Christianity draws from the witness of evangelical Christians in the middle of the 19th century. These first American evangelicals were on the front lines of the movements to abolish slavery, to give women the right to vote, to mitigate poverty and overcome sharp class divisions. What can we take from their example?

• They understood that their progressive, even revolutionary, stances were required of them as Christians. They were not progressives who also happened to be Christians. They were progressives because they were Christians, in order to be faithful to the gospel.

• Their pursuit of justice was a spiritual discipline. Their efforts were not dependent on the likelihood of success. They were not based on calculations; they sprang from the conviction that Jesus came to overcome socially and culturally created injustices.

• They were united in Christian spirit rather than Christian beliefs. They understood that Christians could disagree on matters of theology and still be united in service to God and neighbor.

Progressive Christianity also draws from the witness of the liberal Christian movement around the turn of the 20th century. The liberals welcomed progress as a gift of God. They supported the advance of the physical sciences and democratic practices. They led in the analysis and critique of structural injustices in society. They were intellectuals and reformers. What should we honor in their example?

• They took seriously the doctrine of the incarnation, the Christian claim that God is in and with this world, so they, too, made their home in the world without reserve.

• They saw sin and salvation to be structural as well as personal. For them, sinful relations had to be addressed through collective action and public policy as well as through personal spiritual discipline.

• They believed that Christian faith requires, not repetition of the past, but the obligation to re-think the meaning of discipleship in each age.

Progressive Christianity learns from the neo-orthodox Christians of the mid-20th century who openly opposed the equation of Christian faith with the political ideology of the Third Reich. They insisted on the distinctiveness of Christian identity. What can we take from them?

• They proclaimed the otherness of the incarnate God. They insisted that God is always with us, but God is never reducible to our cultural practices, our political convictions, even to our religious beliefs.

• They understood the centrality of Christ as the source of Christian identity. The Bible is the primary source for knowing God’s revelation in Christ, but that revelation is Christ, not the Bible. From modern knowledge we have much to learn and nothing to fear, but our best knowledge does not displace the Christ of the biblical witness.

• Being Christian means being something in particular, so the purpose of Christian community is to explore, develop, and sustain Christian identity through preaching, liturgy, and education.

Finally, progressive Christianity must hear and be transformed by the manifold witnesses of the liberation forms of Christian faith that emerged in the last part of the 20th century and continue with force today. These include the voices of the racial/ethnic communities, the feminists and womanists, those who have suffered from colonialism, the poor and other previously voiceless people, and indeed the silent cries of the earth itself! From them, to be authentic, progressive Christianity must learn that:

• God is on the side of the powerless, human and non-human. God loves all equally, but to overcome injustice God joins with those who are its victims. Those who would follow God in Christ are called to serve “the least of these” among us.

• The search for truth must be undertaken in the company of the powerless. Wisdom and virtue is to be found in all people, in all classes, in all races and ethnic groups. But the persistent habit of humanity is to demean and ignore what the “least ones” have to say, their insights into the gospel, their voices as vehicles of judgment and grace.

• Salvation, in the biblical view, is the promise for all dimensions of human life and for all creation. To be sure, salvation is the promise for individuals, too, but as St. Paul insists, salvation is also for “the entire creation”–as unbelievable as it seems, for individuals, communities, and even the earth.

Progressive Christianity draws from each of these traditions in its distinctiveness. But it must share, too, the one belief that adherents of these traditions held in common, namely, their Christian hope. They believed that a radically better day is possible, by God’s grace and through human faithfulness, and so they each sought, in their own ways, to serve its coming.

ave maria

Ave Maria, of the third world, full of grace, all you who know pain, know the anxieties and the subhuman condition of your people, the Lord is with you, with all who suffer, who hunger and thirst for justice, who know neither letters nor figures.

Blessed are you among women, the women of the roads and pueblos, of furrowed faces, of brawny muscles, of calloused hands of forlorn eyes, but with hope.

Blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus. Because without him, our life and the struggle for human dignity has no meaning.

Sancta Maria, all of you holy, a thousand time holy, by your lives,by the times you carry water, that you smudge your face at the hearth, trusting and hoping in God. He has made you Mother of Goid.

Pray for us sinners, for it is our fault, in one way or another by our egoism and envy, that you joined with the rest of the women and men of the poor, the third world, suffer misery, totalitarian governments,economic repression,wars and blood and hatred.

Now, so that we change, so that there will be a conversion of heart and of all men and women towards your son, our brother.

And at the hour of our death, so that the Lord have mercy on all who have offended him in our brothers and sisters, in the men and women of a world which is struggling desparately for life.

Amen

This prayer I swiped from Megan Mckenna who swiped it from the oral tradition of South America. I think maybe it shows the beginning of where a proper white theology might start in meeting god in the oppressed and being responsible and judged by god through the oppressed… or is it just more white exoticism? I believe that where i stand before god is where i stand before the oppressed, and I know that not one person oppressed by my privilege asked for the role of being the face of god to me.

chosenness and judgement

I think that part of the core of approaching theology from the perspective of privilege and taking seriously the claims of the various liberation and political theologies that god sides with the oppressed is to learn to look at the powers that be and our connection with them as a people who stand under judgement.

chosenness is a powerful biblical theme and has translated itself into the sickest expressions of genocide and history when it is taken on as a mantle by people already privileged and in power (think slavery, manifest destiny, inquisition). no doubt in the bibllical narratives the chosen are often the poor outcasts and slaves, but even there when they are not you get divine genocidal mania (the conquest narratives and the whole of the book of joshua). when white folks appropriate liberation theologies born in anticolonial struggles and say god is for the poor and so am i so i am with god we jump the necessary recognition that if god is for the poor and we benefit from their exploitation then god is necessarily against us and we stand under judgement.

the question becomes how to repent and defect completely from our privileged identities to side with god and the poor. there can be no questions of charity or somehow “pulling the rest of the world up to join us”  we are damned. in racial terms the question for me is how can a blue eyed devil be redeemed. of course oppression is not only racial and it is not only whiteness that is damned all social and identity categories that rest on oppression are damned if god stands with the oppressed.

priveleged folks talk about being allies in the struggle. i think that theologically this is inadequate there is no possibility of reaching out from a damned position (privilege) and joining the people of god. an ally gets to try to be a “good” straight, white, wealthy, western, christian…… but if god is for the oppressed those things don’t exist. can our demons be exorcised? or do we try to be allies and just do damage control?

white male power structure

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBmkvLEhNvs

isn’t it amazing how direct folks can be sometimes

liberation theology

I was first exposed to liberation theology in high school. From that time I devoured latin american theologians for a while and have followed with phases of reading feminist, womanist, queer etc political theologies. These writers and their thoughts have helped to make life seem meaningful to me and to push me forward in having a life of political concern and involvement (meaning attempting to engage the world for justice, not electoral politics).

Throughout I have had what I am beginning to consider a very immoral and shallow relationship with the theology though. It is easy to agree that god is on the side of the oppressed and then decide that you also will take that side. To say that you oppose the oppressive powers that be and even do work that opposes government policy or other institutions. What is missing is a strong recognition that the powers that oppress are most often me. I think that it is irresponsible for me as a white western man…… to appropriate other peoples struggles for liberation and not deeply delve into how my identity is tied to oppression. Theology from the margins is beautiful, but what of a theology from the center that denies the right of the center to exist and honestly takes responsibility for where it comes from.

We need a clear end to the idea that the center is as it should be and we will just bring others in, bring them up to our level. The challenge is to discover an approach to our spiritual lives that focuses on the destruction (not ignorance or denial) of the categories that center us. It will never be enough to be a good man, a progressive christian, an unprejudiced white, an accepting heterosexual. I want to learn how to be not.

I know that in some senses I can’t just drop an identity, say from now on I am no longer_____________, but if first I can learn not to act the oppressive identity that would be a step. Maybe when my masculinity and sexuality are always in question when white people begin to refer to me as self hating…. Maybe I’ll be able to glimpse what is next. And thus my penance.

I’m not looking to create guilt to feel bad about life. I am looking for real ways to change how I act in the world at each level of interaction from how I walk into a room to who I read, towhat social movements I align myself with and how. I’m hoping the journey will be exciting.

(my) original sin(s)

I don’t remember anymore how long ago it was that I threw out the idea of “original sin” as being morally offensive. The idea that anyone is responsible for another’s failings or wrongdoings just couldn’t sit as a part of a rational ethical system for me.

 

Now I am convinced that there is a place for the concept in my personal theology. I still have enough of my evangelical upbringing at heart to believe that theology/ religion is a personal affair and a personal relationship. In my life there are sins of my ancestors that I feel I am culpable for (whiteness, maleness, heterosexuality, middle classness and christianity to name a few). Yes I believe that they are sins/crimes against humanity. Each of these identities describes a set of behaviors and ways of being in the world that is built on the assumption of greater value in life than others who don’t fit the category. To steal from the biblical story of the “fall” the desire to be like god in relation to another, or even more the assumption in action that I am. It is fair in my mind that the guilt of these crimes is inherited because I have fully accepted and adapted to my own use the ways of being in the world they describe.

 

This blog is an attempt to work out my salvation in fear and trembling and find a theory and practice of repentance. I hope that it will also lead to connection with others who are attempting a similar journey and/or will provide critique to help me clarify. Yes I want your help. I’m not looking to feel guikty or sorry for myself I expect the trip to be at least as exciting as it is hard and more than worthwhile.

 

To say I am responsible is not to let god off the hook. I think it is only right that the divinity/divinities be held criminally responsible for the ways their followers relate in the world. It is way to easy an answer to say that perpetrated by christians are bad interpretations. If something serves a purpose often enough you have to stop just saying it’s misused and begin to examine whether it is a tool designed for exactly that purpose.