This will be the third in a series of comments on the criticisms of Senator Obama in recent weeks concerning the televised excerpts of his church pastor Jeremiah Wright. The rhetoric is factually flawed, disturbingly anti-American and of concern to those who look at Senator Obama’s candidacy. I have been surprisingly supportive and cautious of Senator Obama’s positions considering the fact that I begin each comment with the disclaimer that I am not voting for the man.
The first article in the series, Mr Obama’s Problem (March 17), described the unique perception I have of Senator Obama which began with his Keynote speech to the Democrat Convention in 2004. Here is a black man who does not focus on racial grievances. Here is an urban Democrat that talks of inclusion and smoothly and articulately directs his reasonable positions at a broad audience across party lines or political prejudices. How refreshing. Now here is a candidate for President who has the most liberal voting record in the Senate, seems to think Federalism means all problems are to be solved by a tax and spend giveaway program at the Federal level – but who continues to speak in educated, reasoned tones of his vision for America which appears to include Republicans. Here is a Candidate with whom I disagree but to whom I am willing to listen. And, in this article I build the case that he is being undermined by the Clintons in a coordinated attack that seeks to build Mrs Clinton’s future solely on Obama’s race and the statements of his surrogates. I do not mind if Senator Obama loses his election in November because the American Public chooses the Conservative Republican’s philosophy over the Liberal Democrat version – in fact, I am counting on it. But I don’t want to see the decision based upon his skin color or racially based fears and hatreds. There can be no question that Senator Obama is qualified to be a serious candidate for the highest office in the land because of his equality as a citizen and the excellence of his mind, education and character.
The second article in the series, Mr Obama’s Problem – and Mine (March 19) was presented after the Senator’s “More Perfect Union” speech given in answer to the media storm concerning Pastor Wright. While my personal blog is presented in a rather antiseptic environment without much participation or comments (it is a moderated environment) these posts have been also presented in another blogging environment where the discussion and commenting is usually a bit more “rough and tumble”. Blogging can be a contact sport – but still usually enjoyable. But this post received almost no response from the usual suspects, either pro or con, despite my point of view that was contrary to the Fox News commentators following the Obama speech and, I thought, controversial for the forum. I suggested caution in responding to the Jeremiah Wright video clips because I expect that they may not be representative of the man’s total work in his communities or beliefs. And, despite the close personal relationship between Pastor Wright and the candidate, Senator Obama should not be judged solely on a message of another, no matter how outrageous, that was intended and directed at a limited audience whose frame of reference is vastly different from my own. We are on dangerous ground here and the way we deal with Senator Obama will impact our chances for meaningful dialog on race in this country for a generation.
So now I am at the head of my third article, My Problem (March 20). You can see by the progression of the titles that I am progressing in my thinking as events unfold. In this article, my concern is not for Senator Obama but for a deeper cancer at work in our society that should be brought to the surface for examination but which may become a much more destructive poison in the process. I am at a loss to recommend a course of action that can deal with these problems within the careful structure of our laws and fragile framework of our culture.
As we have examined the rise of terrorism and the threat of radical Islam in the world we have been sharply critical of the Madrasas or Islamic religious schools in the Middle East < background > particularly those under the influence of the Wahhabism which has teachings and interpretations of the Quran and other religious texts which are radical and extreme in the view of scholars more versed than I on these matters. We have criticized Saudis for permitting the unfettered teaching of anti-American programs and even support for such programs by members of the Saudi Royal Family. It appears we may have a similar problem a bit closer to home.
The scrutiny of Jeremiah Wright and the Trinity United Church has brought into focus the underlying faith and belief systems on which Pastor Wright, his church and many other black community churches are based. And the picture is not pretty. These churches are based upon a commitment to Black Liberation Theology as described by the works of James Cone as their central organizing belief in God. As I am not expert in these areas, I am attaching a Town hall.cam article from Paul Edwards to expand on the significance of Black Liberation Theology.
I continue to seek to separate Senator Obama from the practices and beliefs of his church because I really seek a dialog on race in America that is based on reason not bias and that can focus on the potential of the way forward rather than the grievances of the way back. But the climate of confrontation and distrust that will surround the media discussions of this church and the eventual need to address the teachings of Black Liberation Theology does not present a picture of improvement in race relations in this country in the near term.
Senator Obama, It's About Far More Than Rhetoric
By Paul Edwards
Wednesday, March 19, 2008Senator Obama’s “A More Perfect Union” speech was political rhetoric at its finest. While skillfully denouncing the words of his pastor and spiritual mentor, Barack Obama left intact a tacit endorsement of the philosophical worldview that fuels the incendiary rhetoric of Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
Rev. Wright is not merely ranting when he says things like the following:
The government gives them [black people] the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law, and then wants us to sing “God Bless America?” No, no, no! Not “God BLESS America,” God DAMN America. That’s in the Bible. For killing innocent people. God damn America for treating her citizens as less than human ….
These words betray a commitment to a dangerous political theology. Rev. Wright’s worldview is a poisonous mixture of Marxist socialism and a distorted view of the gospel of Jesus Christ which has as its chief goal the obliteration of Anglo/European influence on American life, culture and politics. Rev. Wright’s worldview comes across loud and clear:
… [Jesus] cares about what a poor black man has to face every day in a country and a culture controlled by rich white people … Jesus was a poor, black man who lived in a country, and who lived in a culture that was controlled by rich, white people. The Romans were rich. The Romans were Italian, which means they were European, which means they were white. And the Romans ran everything in Jesus’s country.
Senator Obama has a two-decades-long association with Rev. Wright and his church, Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. In the mission statement at its Web site, Trinity’s commitment to Black Liberation Theology is clearly outlined. Furthermore, in an interview with Sean Hannity, Rev. Wright confirmed the work of James Cone, considered by many the founder of Black Liberation Theology, as a primary influence in the shaping his worldview. Evangelical blogger Joe Carter, in a recent post, quotes Cone:
Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community ... Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. 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.
The media, both conservative and mainstream, is focused on the incendiary rhetoric of Jeremiah Wright while totally ignoring the political/religious philosophy fueling the words. Obama skillfully (and successfully) convinced us that he repudiates the words of his mentor and spiritual advisor, but what politician wouldn’t? The more important question we should be asking the Senator is, Do you repudiate the philosophy of Black Liberation Theology espoused by your church?
Obama can distance himself from Rev. Wright, referring to him twice in his speech as his “former pastor” (the Rev. Wright retires at the end of March), but the fact remains that Obama is a member of a church whose mission is rooted in Black Liberation Theology.
Christian apologist Robert A. Morey characterizes the goals of Black Liberation Theology as, “… to turn religion into sociology, Christianity into a political agenda, Jesus into a black Marxist rebel, and the gospel into violent revolution. They are more interested in politics than preaching the gospel.” Morey points out that ministers like Jeremiah Wright who espouse this worldview seek to, “… manipulate embittered young blacks by turning their feelings of inferiority, alienation, jealousy, hopelessness and self-hate, into racist rage against whites, Orientals and affluent blacks who are conveniently blamed for their lack of personal initiative to better their lot in life.”
If you are bewildered as to why an up-and-coming politician would remain a member of a church whose pastor preaches hate against whites and Europeans, the answer is probably not because he agrees with the rhetoric. He rightly condemns the rhetoric. The only logical answer has to be because he agrees with the church’s particular theological worldview. Senator Obama has yet to publicly denounce the political theology that inspires the rhetoric. And, in fact, Obama’s “A More Perfect Union Speech” bears the marks of Black Liberation Theology in at least two parts.
First, the call for a merging of spirituality and political philosophy:
In the end, then, what is called for is nothing more, and nothing less, than what all the world’s great religions demand: that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Let us be our brother’s keeper, Scripture tells us. Let us be our sister’s keeper. Let us find that common stake we all have in one another, and let our politics reflect that spirit as well.
By the way, nowhere does Scripture command us to “be our brother’s keeper.” On the contrary, it was Cain who, after killing his brother, justified the killing on the grounds that he was not his brother’s keeper. It is this kind of Scripture twisting that is used to justify wealth redistribution and to condemn the capitalist system in which our democracy is rooted.
Second, his veiled assertion that the private creation of wealth is “the culprit” in racial tension in America:
Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze—a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many.
There is no question Senator Obama repudiates his pastor’s hate speech. However, still unanswered is whether or not he repudiates a political theology that calls for the suppression of more than half of the American population and is fundamentally at odds with American democracy?
0 comments:
Post a Comment