Black Liberation Theology Analysis

The concept of black liberation theology is a concept that requires us to scratch away at the surface of religion to uncover a new and radical approach to understanding faith and doctrine in the face of a legacy of oppression, persecution and white dominance over the black community; whilst forcing us to look at history, politics and religion all in the same sphere to grasp the fundamental question on what it means to be black and have a relationship with God. It is in itself a growing movement that is attempting to break away from the shackles of white supremacy towards a notion of religious freedom that is both tangible and metaphorical, whilst reinforcing that although we live in a modern age where the law tells us that that we are all

born equal; is this enough when the socio-religious and socio-political infrastructure is in itself a structure built on a foundation of white ideals and interests. Scholars such as James Cone calls into question the legitimacy of theology when confronted with a history of oppression in the black community and the need to rethink what we know about God and about black religious academia in an age of black awakening and black liberation. This need to examine the role of liberation for black theology is an important step in identifying the purpose and direction of religion in the black community, as they themselves emerge from a society that has dictated the way they should think, feel and believe for generations. In this essay I will explore the key ideas behind James Cone’s black liberation theology, its weight against other black theological ideas and the criticisms it faces by those who claim it to be over militant, and with a ‘monopoly over oppression’ (Ellis, day1.org, 2015).

Firstly, it is important to recognise that Cone’s theology is formulated from what he sees as the unique experience of black people and roots itself firmly in the political activism of historical black movement leaders such as Malcolm X and Martin Luther King. Their struggle for equality throughout America in the 1960’s has served as a catalyst for other black liberation movements such as Cones black liberation theology; in which his theory acts as a response to the restrictions of white theology whilst following the momentum of black equality and diversification in America during that time. This concept of liberation has its core in the struggle to overcome white dominance in a society built on social structures that have served to segregate blacks and mark them as agents of weakness and oppression. It is from this historical basis that Cone reminds us of the need to think about black theology from the sole perspective of the black experience, making the point that ‘I am black first - and everything else comes after that’ (Cone, 2006, P. xi). He goes on to illustrate that the only truth from black theology is that which is derived from black experience, in a way implying that only black people are capable of grasping black theology and its true meaning. Cones confrontation with white theology throughout his work serves to strengthen his notion that black theology is for black people and that the move away from white theology is a step towards recognising the need for an entirely new black religious relationship. He legitimises this theory by rooting it in the historical oppression of black people through their struggle towards equality, something that is difficult if not impossible to replicate for contemporary white people as they have never undergone such a struggle for liberation. Cone’s concept of a new form of black liberation theology has a supporter in that of Gaylord Wilmore, who makes the point that:

‘Blacks have used Christianity not as it was delivered to them by segregated white churches, but as its truth was authenticated to them in the experience of suffering, to reinforce an ingrained religious temperament and to produce an indigenous religion oriented to freedom and human welfare’ (Wilmore, 1972, P 5)

This emphasis on an indigenous religion is a theme that reoccurs over and over again in the works of Cone as he repeatedly places great emphasis on the idea that it is the responsibility of black theologians to ‘assume the dangerous responsibility of articulating the revolutionary mood of the black community’ (Cone, 1990, P56) As part of this responsibility black theologians are tasked with making the way for new religious thought that will place itself at the heart of black ideals and interests. Only this new black theology that has an emphasis on black people as victims and victors over white supremacy will serve to facilitate the needs of the black community and their relationship with God. Unlike the struggle for political equality, black theology calls not simply for an equal footing when it comes to religion; it calls for its own unique way of interpreting God through their liberation efforts. To recycle white theology in the name of black theology would only serve to illustrate yet further white dominance over black people.

The way in which Cone illustrates this experience is through reinforcing it through scriptural confirmation, in which he directly compares the mission of black people to the mission of Jesus Christ to conclude that they are both liberation efforts.

As part of this argument he clearly outlines that there is a white God and a black God and it is the responsibility of ‘black theology to show that the black God has nothing to do with the God worshipped in white churches’ (Cone, 1990, P62). This is an attempt to make the gospel relevant to the struggles of his community with an aim ‘’to teach people how to be both unapologetically black and Christian at the same time.” (Black Liberation Theology, in its founders words (July 17, 2011) 5 Minutes 5 Seconds). Through this process he aims to enable the black community to form a theology that is unique to black needs and free of the restrictions put into place by white theologians who have monopolized doctrine and engrained white purpose into it. Cone does this by directly confronting the historical facts of segregation and slavery to reinforce a somewhat active and militant approach to overcoming the injustice experienced by blacks. He fuels this movement through discourse by making doctrinal references in his book Black Theology & Black Power such

as:

‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
Because he has anointed me to preach the good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives
And recovering of sight to the blind,
To set at liberty those who are oppressed,
To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord’ (Luke 4:18-19, RSV)

This emphasises the mission of blacks in their role as ‘chosen people’ who are tasked with overcoming the evil nature of their white oppressors. The basis of this argument is drawn directly from the Exodus story, in which Cone is making a direct reference to the nature of black people’s liberation to the Jews and their liberation effort in the Old Testament. Boesak illustrates this point in that he tells us:

‘The Exodus is not a myth, but the opening up of history in which God’s liberating act was revealed to his people….Yahweh comes openly to the aid of his downtrodden people for all the world to see and know that he lives with and for his people, that he is the Liberator of the oppressed and the One who uprightly defends the poorest.’ (Boesak, 1978, P19).

Giving his liberation theology doctrinal roots is a smart move for Cone in his effort to directly relate the mission of the black community to the role of God as the liberator of the oppressed and persecuted. It gives him divine legitimacy that white people do not have because they have never suffered in the same way as black people, and emphasizes the manipulative nature of white theology in how it has misinterpreted the bible in a way to serve its own goals throughout history. As part of Cones theology, and in connection to what Boesak tells us of the relevance of black theology in relation to the Exodus story, both imply that there can be not Christian theology that does not have social and political implications. The aim of using doctrine and theology in this way is something white people have done throughout history to place themselves above black people in all areas of society. It is through this similar systematic use of doctrine that Cone attempts to raise black theology and its purpose above that of white theology, for black theology has divine purpose that speaks of black experience and of black people as ‘chosen’.

Roberts raises a good critique of the use of doctrine in that it is extremely malleable when used to meet the needs of person(s) reading it, in this case Cone. He tells us:

‘The real question is whether the gospel of Jesus Christ is like aspirin or like dynamite, whether it is a gospel of pacification or a gospel for revolution, whether it is a gospel of the status quo and the establishment or a power for the liberation of the oppressed’ (Roberts, 1974, P144)

This question is important because it helps us understand Cones theology in the context of a revolutionary mood that aims to overcome the engrained white nature and purpose of doctrine. The gospel almost acts as a guidebook to point to the way for blacks to overcome their white infliction in somewhat similar ways white people have used doctrine to justify their own claims of dominance. The idea of using the gospel in a revolutionary sense can be seen as a criticism for Cones theology in that his experience as a black citizen throughout his life has significantly influenced his own prejudices and frustrations. He grew up in a political system that constantly reinforced that black people were inherently and undeniably inferior to whites, and that this was the social order of things as legitimized by doctrine. Historical persecution it seems has only served to fuel Cones frustration with the white institutional nature of American life and the ongoing struggle for blacks that transcends simply law and social prejudices. Cones theology has purpose and action as described by Wogaman:

" It is to analyze the nature of the gospel of Jesus Christ in the light of oppressed black people-so they will see the gospel as inseparable from their humiliated condition, bestowing on them the necessary power to break the chains of oppression." (Wogaman, 1996, P.359)

For Cone, he cannot escape the idea the theology is solely concerned with the struggle for liberation, as it is directly linked to the idea of black humiliation and the oppressive condition in which they live.

As part of this ongoing struggle Wogaman further critiques Cone by highlighting that he cannot escape the idea that Christianity is solely concerned with liberation and that without it, it could only ever be a symbol of white supremacy and exploitation. If this were the case then in a way it would imply that the message of Jesus in relation to unconditional love and salvific emancipation would be rendered false. Cones lack of maneuverability in relation to this is further amplified by his constant referral to Jesus as black. ‘’He is black because he was a Jew. The affirmation of the Black Christ can be understood when the significance of his past Jewishness is related dialectically to the significance of his present blackness" (Cone, 2006, P. 123). In saying this he is of course making the argument for an ontological affirmation of Jesus’ blackness, and as a result of this blackness Jesus has become a metaphor for the oppressed blacks of America, to which his obligation is also exclusively

black.