With those questions in mind we finish up with one last ghost from BO's past. Here is some information about Rev. Wright:
Reverend Wright:
FACTS:
- Rev. Wright subscribes to the ideals of Black Liberation Theology. Black Liberation Theology was founded by African-Americans as a way to counter radical black Muslim influences on the black community. Rev. Wright frequently cites works by James Cone and Dwight Hopkins. Cone and Hopkins are considered by many to be the leading theologians of this belief system. Note that both Cone and Hopkins were far left of center and critics of their works call the Black Liberation Theology a mixture of Christianity and Marxism. Turning Jesus into a leftist rebel, making racist statements against whites and Asians, and describing blacks as helpless victims.
- Quotes from works that Black Liberation Theology is based on:
Cone states that it should be the goal of black men to "aid in the destruction of America as he knows it.".
Cone states that to arrive at such destruction it requires black hate and white guilt. That blacks need to tell the story of their oppression so forcefully and precisely that whites "tremble, curse, and go mad, because they will be drenched with the filth of their evil."
Black Theology and Black Power, Pages 139-140 states that Jews are not the only chosen people "To be Christian is to be one of those whom God has chosen. God has chosen black people!"
Black Theology and Black Power, Pages 14-16 "It is important to make a further distinction here among black hatred, black racism, and Black Power. Black hatred is the black man's strong aversion to white society. No black man living in white America can escape it...But the charge of black racism cannot be reconciled with the facts. While it is true that blacks do hate whites, black hatred is not racism. Racism, according to Webster, is 'the assumption that psychocultural traits and capacities are determined by biological race and that races differ decisively from one another, which is usually coupled with a belief in the inherent superiority of a particular race and its rights to dominance over others.' Where are the examples among blacks in which they sought to assert their right to dominance over others because of a belief in black superiority?...Black Power is an affirmation of the humanity of blacks in spite of white racism. It says that only blacks really know the extent of white oppression, and thus only blacks are prepared to risk all to be free."
Cone makes the argument: Black Theology and Black Power, Page 139 "We cannot solve ethical questions of the twentieth century by looking at what Jesus did in the first. Our choices are not the same as his. Being Christians does not mean following 'in his steps." and on Page 140 "Therefore, simply to say that Jesus did not use violence is no evidence relevant to the condition of black people as they decide on what to do about white oppression."
Black Theology and Black Power, Page 143 "The Christian does not decide between violence and nonviolence, evil and good. He decides between the less and the greater evil."
Cone believes: "People should love each other' sounds like Riis Park at sundown. It has very little meaning to the world at large." Black Theology and Black Power, Page 135
Black Theology and Black Power, Page 24 "All white men are responsible for white oppression. It is much too easy to say, "Racism is not my fault," or "I am not responsible for the country's inhumanity to the black man...But insofar as white do-gooders tolerate and sponsor racism in their educational institutions, their political, economic and social structures, their churches, and in every other aspect of American life, they are directly responsible for racism...Racism is possible because whites are indifferent to suffering and patient with cruelty. Karl Jaspers' description of metaphysical guilt is pertinent here. 'There exists among men, because they are men, a solidarity through which each shares responsibility for every injustice and every wrong committed in the world, and especially for crimes that are committed in his presence or of which he cannot be ignorant."
Black Theology and Black Power, Pages 39-41 "For the gospel proclaims that God is with us now, actively fighting the forces which would make man captive. And it is the task of theology and the Church to know where God is at work so that we can join him in this fight against evil. In America we know where the evil is. We know that men are shot and lynched. We know that men are crammed into ghettos...There is a constant battle between Christ and Satan, and it is going on now. If we make this message contemporaneous with our own life situation, what does Christ's defeat of Satan mean for us?...The demonic forces of racism are real for the black man. Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man "the devil." The white structure of this American society, personified in every racist, must be at least part of what the New Testament meant by the demonic forces."
Black Theology and Black Power, Page 73 "Racism is a complete denial of the Incarnation and thus of Christianity...If there is any contemporary meaning of the Antichrist (or "the principalities and powers"), the white church seems to be a manifestation of it. It was the white "Christian" church which took the lead in establishing slavery as an institution and segregation as a pattern in society by sanctioning all-white congregations."
Black Theology and Black Power, Page 143 "Whether the American system is beyond redemption we will have to wait and see. But we can be certain that black patience has run out, and unless white America responds positively to the theory and activity of Black Power, then a bloody, protracted civil war is inevitable."
Black Theology and Black Power, Page 136 "The revolution which Black Theology advocates … [means] confronting white racists and saying: 'If it's a fight you want, I am prepared to oblige you.' This is what the black revolution means."
Black Theology and Black Power, Page 16 "Black Power seeks not understanding but conflict; addresses blacks and not whites; seeks to develop black support, but not white good will."
A Black Theology of Liberation, pages 63-64 "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. This is the essence of the Biblical revelation. By electing Israelite slaves as the people of God and by becoming the Oppressed One in Jesus Christ, the human race is made to understand that God is known where human beings experience humiliation and suffering...Liberation is not an afterthought, but the very essence of divine activity."
A Black Theology of Liberation, p. 70 "Black theology cannot accept a view of God which does not represent God as being for oppressed blacks and thus against white oppressors. Living in a world of white oppressors, blacks have no time for a neutral God. The brutalities are too great and the pain too severe, and this means we must know where God is and what God is doing in the revolution. There is no use for a God who loves white oppressors the same as oppressed blacks. We have had too much of white love, the love that tells blacks to turn the other cheek and go the second mile. What we need is the divine love as expressed in black power, which is the power of blacks to destroy their oppressors, here and now, by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject God's love."
- Quotes from Rev. Wright:
"The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color." Meaning it is Rev. Wrights assertion that the US government created the HIV virus to preform genocide against people of color.
"And the United States of America government, when it came to treating her citizens of Indian descent fairly, she failed. She put them on reservations. When it came to treating her citizens of Japanese descent fairly, she failed. She put them in internment prison camps. When it came to treating her citizens of African descent fairly, America failed. She put them in chains, the government put them on slave quarters, put them on auction blocks, put them in cotton field, put them in inferior schools, put them in substandard housing, put them in scientific experiments, put them in the lowest paying jobs, put them outside the equal protection of the law, kept them out of their racist bastions of higher education and locked them into positions of hopelessness and helplessness. The government gives them 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 our citizens as less than human. God damn America, as long as she tries to act like she is God, and she is supreme. The United States government has failed the vast majority of her citizens of African descent.."
"The government lied about Pearl Harbor too. They knew the Japanese were going to attack."
Discussing the 9/11 attacks he said: "We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye... and now we are indignant, because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought back into our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost.". Meaning we deserved what we got.
Now lets look at some facts about Obama's relationship to Rev. Wright:
FACTS:
- Obama met Wright in the late 1980's
- Rev. Wright married Barrack and Michelle.
- Rev. Wright baptized Barrak's children.
- Obama's 2006 memoir "The Audacity of Hope" title was inspired by one of Rev. Wrights sermons.
- According to Obama's own speech titled "A More Perfect Union" he described Rev. Wright as both a role model and a spiritual mentor.
- In 2007 Rev. Wright was appointed to Barrack Obama's African American Religious Leadership Committee. This was a group of over 170 national black religious leaders who supported Obama's bid for the Democratic nomination.
Regardless of what you want to assume about Barrack's relationship with Rev. Wright, how often he actually attended the church, or what he may have thought about the sermons one must consider for themselves what they would have done in Barracks position. Would you have sat there and quietly listened while someone ranted bigotry, racisms, and anti-Americanism? I hope not and I would expect you to hold Barrack to that same standard. Why didn't he denounce Rev. Wright even once for 20 years until it became an issue during the campaign? I don't want to believe Barrak feels the same way about white people as Rev. Wright, Cone and Hopkins do. I choose to believe that maybe he lacked the courage to argue with a man he thought of as a mentor. But, then you also have to ask, how much influence on my life have people had I consider role models and or spiritual mentors? How much influence have the teachings of Rev. Wright, Cone, and Hopkins had on Obama's life?
Conclusion:
We can't say for sure that Obama is a racist nor unpatriotic and I do not mean to label him as such. We can assume that Rev. Wright is a bigot, racist and unpatriotic based on his comments both on and off the pulpit. We can draw clear conclusions that the Black Liberation Theology has a racist slant which is hardly Christian. The idea of the Black Liberation Theology completely washes over the historical importance that Christianity had on the abolishment of slavery in the USA. We know that Obama did not denounce a man he himself called a role model until it became necessary to maintain his political career. These points are difficult to argue against. Therefore few possible conclusions can be drawn. Either Obama lacked the courage and conviction to rise up against racism and bigotry or he agreed with it. So if he lacks the courage or conviction to stand up to one such as Rev. Wright how can we expect him to stand up for us as our President? If he agrees with the sermons then what path will he lead our country down? How many times have you sat silent while someone spewed hate, bigotry and racism? As a minimum maybe you can say, well I never denounced a hate monger but I chose not to further associate with them. All Obama would have had to do is walk away from Wright, his teachings and his church. He didn't. Maybe it was because he saw it as a means to further his career? A reverend of a church in a mostly black community with approximately 10,000 parishioners might have had something to do with it. Or maybe it was because he agrees with those ideals of Wright. How many of you call racists mentors and role models? No one I want as a friend does. No one I want as a President should.
This is the final associate from Obama's past we'll be discussing here. Of course there are other's we could bring up but I think the three I've posted about (Raila Odinga, Bill Ayers, and Rev. Wright) are the prime 3 which are "officially" in his past. They supposedly have no direct contact with him today. So now lets look at people which he is still currently in contact with. The next few posts will focus on his association since becoming President. I'd like to specifically look at the people he has chosen to elevate into positions of power in government. As we go forward please ask yourselves this: If these people are Communists, Marxists, racists, and in general radicals and extremists why then would Obama hire these people and/or associate with them if he didn't appreciate and value their point of view?
Rev. Wright, with the help of others, created the largest congregation in a predominatley (90%+) white denomination. That congregation is one of the largest financial contributors to that denomination. Rev. Wright's and Trinity's affilation with the denomination is totally voluntary. They could leave whenever they desired. The denomination does not control any of their assests. Dr. Cone claims Trinity UCC represents the best example of a church practicing Black Liberation Theology. I think these facts should also be factored into you conclusions.
ReplyDeleteRev Wright at National Press Club acknowledged the role some Christians had in opposing slavery. However, even today there are Christian churches that don't acknowledge the equality of blacks. That position was even more common in 1968 when Dr. Cone wrote his first book. It is that form of Christianity that Dr. Cone was writing about.
Mr. Smyth thanks for commenting. While I do not agree with Rev. Wright nor Dr. Cone or Black Liberation Theology I am not purposing that they don't have a right to their opinions or don't have the right to express them. Nor would I suggest that the congregation isn't their of their own free will. I would suggest that Rev. Wright and Dr. Cone have made racist statements. I would accuse Rev. Wright and Dr. Cone of manipulating vulnerable people to further their desired goals. What those are I don't know. I do know that Rev. Wright has been made wealthy by lying and by feeding people hate rather than love. I'm not sure how this is Christian. In addition, any form of racism is not Christian and any church that espouses it is not Christian.
ReplyDeleteHowever, this posting is not about Rev. Wright and Dr. Cone. It's questioning Barak Obama's affiliation. As you stated "They can leave whenever they desire.". I completely agree with that and ask why would Obama spend 20 years attending this type of church if he doesn't at some level agree with what's being preached? I'm attempting to present a sting of posts (starting 2 posts ago) detailing relationships which Obama has sought out and made over the years. This is to address friends and associates of mine who claim that the "occasional" radical assocaited with Obama isn't evidence that he is a radical. You wrote "However, even today there are Christian churches that don't acknowledge the equality of blacks.". I agree with that statement there are such churches out there....but I would never attend a church like that. Doing so would be giving my support to that church. It's possible to get fooled. I could attend such a church once but if I went back after the first time I think it would be safe to assume I agree in general with the sermons. Obama attended for 20 years Rev. Wrights sermons. I say Obama is at a minimum in agreement with radical views. I am attempting to prove that by linking him to enough radicals to make it ultimately impossible to deny that at a minimum he sympathizes with radicals.
I've read or skimmed your other posts, so I know the case you are trying to lay out. Thats all good. However, your anaylsis and frankly that of most of the media only skims the surface of who Rev. Wright is and what his goals were. The story line was never about the reality of Rev. Wright, but how President Obama would respond or did respond to the information as presented. It never mattered whether the information presented was an accurate account.
ReplyDeleteI became interested in Trinity and Rev. Wright in 2006 after reading excerpts from Obama's book(s). Since Trinity broadcasts their services over the internet, I started viewing their services prior to attending by own local church. During that period I found many of the sermons very inspirational. Since Rev. Wright's pending retirement was already in the works, many of those sermons were delivered by Rev. Moss III.
You accuse Rev. Wright of racism. The dictionary definition usually involves the belief that one race is superior to another. I've never heard Rev. Wright, Rev. Moss or Dr. Hopkins ever express anything but the equality of all. Perhaps you are using a different definition or standard. Again, Trinity has voluntarily associated itself with a predominately white denomination.
You assert that Rev. Wright has made himself wealthy. Do you actually know Rev. Wright's financial condition? I haven't seen anything reported on it. I have seen stories on the home the Trinity provided Rev Wright upon his retirement. As far as I can tell that home is owned by the Church. Trinity obtained a line of credit backed by the property. I don't know the details of the retirement that Trinity provided for Rev. Wright, but how would you honor someone you served your congregation for 36 years?
Prior to his arrival at Trinity the congregation was in decline and in danger of disappearing. Under his leadership not only did it grow, but it turned into a real force within the neighborhood. He challenged the congregation of mostly middle class blacks to also open their congregation to all residents of the neighborhood including the poor. Trinity, under Rev. Wright's leadership, not only provided numerous services to the local neighborhood, but also nationally and internationally. They have built schools and hospitals in multiple countries. They have supported struggling churches in the US and internationally. In short they have carried out the message of the Christian gospel with tangible actions.
They rebuilt the Church multiple times to make room for the expanding congregation. As part of those expansions they could of moved the congregation to a more prosperous neighborhood. Instead they remained loyal to their Christian calling of servicing to the least of these.
In 1993, Rev. Wright was listed as one of the top African-American preachers in the country. Clearly someone as industrious as Rev. Wright could have taken that fame and built a church for his own benefit as numerous other preachers have. But he didn't.
There are other examples of Rev. Wright not taking the path of self aggrandizement. The finally one I will share with you is that he voluntarily gave up his seat of power and authority. From all accounts I've read people were shocked when he said he was going to retire. Rev. Moss thought he was joking when Rev. Wright suggested he replace him at Trinity.
You wrote that you don't know what Rev. Wright's goals were. I would suggest that he is motivated by passages like Matthew 25:35-40. Match up the actions of Trinity under Rev. Wright and that passage. They have remained faithful to that passage by providing many ministires to comfort the least of these.
I'm not claiming Rev. Wright is above criticism or is prefect. In fact, I have disagrements with Rev. Wright on some issues, but his is a Christian message. It is not hate but love of neighbor that he has preached.
Well, first, I have not criticized the Trinity Church nor the organization. So you can stop defending them if you like. Please sight somewhere in my posting where I did criticize the Trinity Church if you can. I have not done enough research on the Trinity Church to know one way or another what I think about them to be honest. I don't believe in blaming an organization for the rantings of one man unless I were to find that organization in complete agreement with the rants.
ReplyDeleteSecond, I'm not criticizing Rev. Wright nor Dr. Cone. I disagree with them. I personally wouldn't associate with them just as I wouldn't associate with any radical. I am sure Rev. Wright and Dr. Cone have done things that people can point to as examples of their good works. However, I personally can not condone some of their beliefs, statements, attitudes, or ideals. If you can live with their statements that is your prerogative. Though I find it difficult, no impossible to believe that Jesus would agree with Dr. Cone when he states: "What we need is the divine love as expressed in black power, which is the power of blacks to destroy their oppressors, here and now, by any means at their disposal." This doesn't sound Christian to me. That said I would not say that oppression is Christian either. Can you sight an example as to when Jesus ever suggested that HATE is his way. But when Dr. Cone claims: "It is important to make a further distinction here among black hatred, black racism, and Black Power. Black hatred is the black man's strong aversion to white society. No black man living in white America can escape it...But the charge of black racism cannot be reconciled with the facts. While it is true that blacks do hate whites, black hatred is not racism." is he not stating that Hate is a tool? Is this Christian? Rev. Wright LIES to his congregation. Do you truly believe that the US government CREATED the HIV virus? This is just 1 example of his lying from the pulpit. How does one justify a pastor who LIES to his congregation? False statements to these people is not very Christian. Proverbs 6:16-19: "There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers. " Rev. Wright has a lying tongue, he was a false witness who breathed out lies and he did sow discord among his brothers with those lies. Furthermore, Exodus 20:16 "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor." and followed by 1 John 2:4 "Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him,". So yes you can point to Matthew 25:35-40 but I might question Rev. Wrights motives behind it. Especially if after inviting them in, clothing them, feeding them he then LIES to them. I suspect, based on Rev. Wrights own actions and lies, that he is more interested in moving his flock towards political goals rather than guiding them towards God's goals.
You mention that you've never heard Rev. Wright discuss anything but equality. That the definition of racist is when one believes ones race is superior to another. His statement "Them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me." isn't racist it is antisemitic. That isn't his first antisemitic statement either. So we can add that to the list. Rev. Wright's wording is usually more cautious however it is laced with an undercurrent of racism. He's usually careful in his method but a careful study show's his goal. First he links America as a "country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people" then he follows it up with discussing how all evil stems from America. So he is, although subtly, linking evil to whites. So he may not necessarily be bluntly spewing epitaphs he is undeniably speaking hate and lies and racism. You may try and defend this man more if you like but he is a liar, and a racist.
As far as being well of, the land "his" home is on was sold to the church by him (yes for 40K less than he bought it for). The church took out a mortgage of 10 million US$. The church spent 1.6 Million US$ on the construction of the home. I wonder what happened to the other 8.4 million US$? 1.6 Million US$ could have done a great deal of help to the City of Chicago's poor. I am not suggesting there is anything illegal about any of this. I am suggesting that this man Rev. Wright used the pulpit and the name of God to manipulate vulnerable individuals. He fed them lies. He fed them racism. When it was time to retire he did not go to some small but comfortable lifestyle. Now he's doing speaking engagements (wonder how much the Maryland NAACP paid him to speak at their Nov. 20 dinner). This man is living for free in a home that costs more than 1 million US$ and is at the same time making paid speaking appearance. I'm sure he isn't wealthy.
ReplyDeleteIf the UCC want's to associate with Trinity and the Trinity congregation have no problems with his comments then I have doubts about their Christian roots. Remember, Rev. Wright, is a man that went to visit with a know supporter of terrorism, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi. In addition, the United Church of Christ is know for it's left leaning liberal ideology. One last point to make regarding all of this, is if Dr. Cone described Trinity and UCC as the best example of Black Liberation Theology I would question again their Christian roots. After all Black Liberation Theology was created by Marxists as a tool to move people towards Marxism. This is not and never has been a Christian movement. It is and always has been a political movement.
Finally, this is not meant as a discussion about UCC, Trinity, Rev. Wright, Dr. Cone or any of the other people in this group. These private citizens and organizations have not broken any laws and have every right to practice their faith as they see it. They can even claim to be Christian. That doesn't however excuse Barack Obama from scrutiny in regards to his connection and relationship to these people and these groups. This is a discussion about how Barack Obama was influenced by these people. Why Barack Obama associated with these people. How it's is increasingly more and more difficult to say Barack Obama is not a radical when he has always and continues to surround himself with radicals.
AS you indicated, Rev. Wright sold the land to the Church at loss. Hardly a move of someone trying to take advantage. It wasn't a $10 million mortgage, it was a $10 million line of credit, with the property as collateral.
ReplyDeleteRev. Wright has been a much in demand preacher and speaker for decades. More then once, I've read about him donating his compensation back to the Church or organization that invited him to speak. Without knowing what he was paid and what he did with the money it is hard judge his generosity. Within the UCC the congregations control spending and compensation. Not being a member of Trinity, I don't know what Rev. Wright's compensation was, but it would have been voted on by the congregation.
The Christian roots of Trinity and the UCC go back in the US to the Puritans and Pligrims. Stephan Mansfield, a conservative evangelical writer, who actually visited Trinity and attended services wrote the following in "The Faith of Barack Obama", "..that it is hard for some, particularly evangelicals, to accept that the church is anything more than a black Marxist recruitment center. Yet this is part of the sometimes confusing nature of both Wright and his church. Yes, Jesus Christ is offered to sinners as the Son of God who died and rose again. Yes, the church calls men to be saved from death and hell through confessing their wrongs and submitting their lives to a crucified Christ. Yes, this is the 'born-again, new birth, blood-washed, Spirit-empowered Christianity' that the evangelicals know."
Rev. Wright traces the roots of liberation theology in the US to the 1700s when blacks were excluded from white churches. Dr. Cone has written about not being a Marxist. Do either of these men seem like people who would hide their intent or beliefs.
Rev. Wright never met with Qaddafi. He was part of an interfaith group that visited multiple African countries, including Libya.
Clearly it is your blog, so I'm commenting at your pleasure. There is a lot of misinformation out there about Rev. Wright and BLT. I can understand people disagreeing with some of Rev. Wright's positions, but the charges of racism and Marxism just don't fit the reality.
Well you fail to address the comments he has made, some of which I have posted (if you'd like links to video or newspapers which sight the comments from Rev. Wright I'll happily do it), that are clearly racist. The Black Liberation Theology is a racist ideology and has Marxist beginnings. Cones himself has made racist comments such as "About thirty years ago it was acceptable to lynch a black man by hanging him from a tree; but today whites destroy him by crowding him into a ghetto and letting filth and despair put the final touches on death." The comment "whites destroy him" is racist. In addition, I while your fact that Black Liberation Theory has roots going back to the 1700's it was, in fact, founded in 1966 and developed in the following years. This is a time period in America when Marxist, Communist and Socialist ideals were on the increase amoung the younger generation. It's little wonder then that James Cone thought to tie Black Liberation Theology to Marxism and Communism. One need only read his essays "The Black Church and Marxism: What do they have to say to eachother" and "Black Theology and Marxist Thought". I find it VERY difficult for any reasonable person to claim that Black Liberation Theology isn't in bed with Marxism. James Cone and Jeramiah Wright are not men of God. God does not desciminate men do. James Cone and Jeramiah Wright have spent their lives and made money on formenting black hatred rather than focusing on black pride and equality. They are eductated men and yet they twist the reality and history of America so as to better manipulated people of lesser eductational backgrounds. Hitler and Musilini were Socialists and had no room in their cultures for anything other than "purity" which didn't include blacks. Someone must have failed to inform Rev. Wright and Dr. Cone that it was the "liberal" left that enslaved black people, and fought to maintain slavery, and further fought every attempt to give equality to all races. While it was the "conservative" right that ran the underground railroad, that fought the slave owners to free the slaves, that wrote the 13th, 14th and 15th ammendments, that ended segregation in both the military and the society, that purposed the most of the civil rights legislations. What claim to fame does the left have for furthering civil rights in America? Let's not forget that the White and Black people in America fought together in the struggle of equality for all and none of it would've happened had it not been for that combined effort.
ReplyDeleteI'd be glad to address any of Rev. Wright's comments that I'm familiar with. Having followed the coverage since 2007 and having heard some of the sermons live (well live internet stream), I am aware of many of Rev. Wright's comments.
ReplyDeleteAddressing the ones you included in your post:
"The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color."
Rev. Wright has declared some level of belief in Dr. Horowitz's theories on HIV/Aids (www.originofaids.com). Horowitz's theories are in part based on a Nixon era National Security document declaring that third world population growth is a national security threat to the United States. Having scanned the material online, I don't think Horowitz makes a convincing case between that document and HIV/Aids. However, that document, implemented during the Ford administration does advocate making Abortion more available in third world countries with the goal of reducing population. Pretty offensive if you ask me. I'm not sure what you can derive of Rev. Wright's belief based on the proven historical record.
Rev. Wright's "Confusing God and Government" sermon from which the "God Damn America" statement comes. The sermon was about keeping your faith in God and not in human Governments (all governments, not just US), because governments will fail, lie and change and God will not. He wasn't appealing to God to punish America. His point was you can't ask God to bless or condone the listed actions of the Government, which is how the congregation would have heard it. The part that normally isn't quoted or played when he asked the congregation in the sermon to forgive him for his wording.
The government lied about Pearl Harbor. I'm not sure what Rev. Wright is implying by the statement. It is known today that the government knew a lot more about the attack then was published at the time.
In "Day of Jerusalem's fall" sermon given on 9/16/2001 Rev. Wright preached on Psalm 137. Particularly the last verse were the Hebrews moved towards vengeance for their loss, including the wiliness to kill innocents. In the portion of the sermon you quoted Rev. Wright was listing military attacks where large numbers of civilians were killed. Rev. Wright's point being that we shouldn't respond to 9/11 in ways that will just continue the cycle of violence. The quoted portion of the sermon is also a paraphrase of Am. Peck who had appeared on Fox News claiming that 9/11 was a result of U.S. actions in the Arab world.
You referenced Dr. Cone's essay "The Black Church and Marxism: What do they have to say to each other?". He claims in the essay that he didn't address Marxism or Socialism in his initial writings. It wasn't until the late 1970s based on his encounters with socialists that he began to consider the relationship between Black Theology and Marxist theories. To put it another way his initial books including the 1969 "Black Theology and Black Power" were not based on marxism or socialism. They are based on the Christian gospel.
ReplyDeleteSo how does Marxism and socialism influence his thoughts? In the essay, Dr. Cone claims that "Marxism may be understood as scientific tool for analyzing the economic, political and social structures of this society..". But ultimately he rejects the the answers provided by Marxism. He provides the following quote "if modern Marxism gives the wrong answers, at least is asks the right questions". In the essay he rejects of all the communist and socialist states in existence.
Dr. Cone also wrote the following about future directions. "If we blacks today limit out hope to what is, that is, to the Democratic and Republican parties, then our vision is severely limited. If we define our struggle for freedom only with the alternatives posed by capitalism, then we have allowed our future humanity to be determined by what people have created not by God. To believe in God is to know that out hope is grounded in Jesus Christ, the crucified Lord whose resurrected presence create a new hope for a better world."
While critical of the failing of Capitalism, he doesn't accept Marxism and Socialism, at least as we know them today, as acceptable alternatives.
"..rather than focusing on black pride and equality". Rev. Wright has focused on Black Pride and equality so much that some have accused his efforts as being anti-White. Trinity's motto of "Unashamedly Black, Unapologetically Christian" was adopted, prior to Rev. Wright, to address this very issue. As for Rev. Wright's understanding of the history of the civil right's movement, I suggested you read or reread his speech at the National Press Club. I would suggest that one of the reasons Rev. Wright was comfortable changing denominations from Baptist to United Church of Christ is the historical record of the UCC and its predecessors in the civil rights movement. The same is true of Trinity's current minister, Otis Moss III. In fact one Baptist minister at Moss' installation noted that losing Moss to the UCC could be viewed as partial payment of a debt owed for past UCC efforts.
ReplyDeleteDr. Cone noted in his essay that communist societies didn't eliminate racism and discrimination. I believe he also wrote that Russians dominated the power structure of the Soviet Union.
I think you would find the congregation of Trinity intentionally composed of people across the economic and educational spectrum.
Marxism does not ask the right questions. Capitalism has never failed. The governments lack of concern to prevent the corruption of Capitalism by Monopolism is the reason for economic woes. To even begin to suggest that Capitalism does not raise people up is exactly the issue.
ReplyDeleteIn the essay, "The Black Church and Marxism: What do they have to say to each other?", Jame Cone states:
"Although the socialist tradition among black churchpeople is small, it is still present and we black theologians and historians should rediscover it in order to enhance our vision of liberation."
"It was an intelectual failure on my part that I did not deal with marxism and socialism when I wrote Black Theology and Black Power which was published in 1969....Since that time, I've been convinced that the black church cannot remain silent regarding socialism, because such silence will be interpreted by our Third World brothers and sisters for the support of the capitalistic system which exploits the poor all over this earth."
"We cannot continue to speak against racism without any reference to a radical change in the economic order. I do not think racism can be eleminated as long as capitalism remains intact. It is now to for us to investigate socialism as an alternative to capitalism."
"I think that blacks can overcome the problem of marxism being white and racist the same way we overcame the problem of Christianity being white and racist. We can indigenize marxism, this is, reinterpret it for our situation."
and finally....
"Together black religion and marxist philosophy may show us the way to build a completely new society."
Those statements do not appear to me to be neutral with regards to James Cones attitudes to both the US society and marxism. It is blantently evident and virtually universally known that James Cones is sympathetic, at a minimum, to Marxism and it's philosophies.