HOW DID BLACK CONSCIOUSNESS EMERGE IN SOUTH AFRICA?

One of the questions that we deal with in terms of engaging with oppressed people, is that of the emergence of consciousness.  Whether it is in the areas of religion and theology, or in the areas of the social sciences, we ask the question, "How do these branches of human knowledge contribute to awareness and consciousness raising?"  How do people come to the realization that they are oppressed and in need of liberation?  What does it mean to be oppressed?  How does liberation come about?  

In the realm of theology (God-talk), the issue of consciousness is totally relevant.  If theology is to address the issue of liberation, it must also address the issue of consciousness.  In other words, God-talk has to make people aware of their economic, political, and social condition. It also needs to make them aware that God is not apathetic or insensitive to their oppression and suffering.  

Some may say that religion and theology should be "race neutral."  That is a preposterous statement.  If theology is to address the issues of human oppression and suffering, and if race is the basic reason for oppression and suffering, then there is no way that theology can be "race neutral" or "color blind."  Theology has to take the issue of race into consideration of its God-talk.  

Gustavo Gutierrez, the father of Latin American Liberation Theology, spoke about "God's preferential option for the poor." He did not say that God was only interested in the plight of the poor, but rather that God had a preferential option, i.e. that God was specifically concerned with the poor relative to their social condition.  

In that same spirit, we talk about God's "preferential option for black people."  This is not so suggest or even remotely imply that God favors black people over white or other people.  God's preferential option for the poor is God's concern for black people because of their condition generated by racism of an institutional, structural, and systemic nature.  

James Cone, the father of African American Liberation Theology stated that if theology is carried out independently of the oppressed condition of black people, then it is demonic.  In other words, if theology does not address the suffering of black people, then it is a pseudo theology, because by default it negates God's historical concern for oppressed people.  

Through the years, blacks in South Africa had tried to retaliate, but with little success. As early as 1912, they established the Native National Congress, which later became the African National Congress.  In the early 1960's, South Africa withdrew from the British Commonwealth and became a republic.  This was an especially important period in the emergence of black consciousness.  The Sharpeville massacre (1960) in which seventy blacks who engaged in a peaceful protest were slaughtered, led to protests, boycotts, and strikes, which served to stiffen black resistance. The African National Congress, for many years under the dynamic leadership of Nobel Prize winner Albert Luthuli, took an increasingly active role while maintaining its nonviolent stance (Ferm, op. cit., p. 63).

The multiracial University Christian Movement (UCM), established in 1967, attracted large numbers of black students because of its willingness to take stands on social and political issues.  But many black students withdrew from it in 1969 to form the all-black South African Students Organization (SASO), motivated in large part by the inspiring leadership of Steve Biko (Ibid.). 

Another important organization that cultivated black consciousness was the Christian Institute, founded in 1963 by C.F. Beyers Naude. The Christian Institute later became a part of the South African Council of Churches, which in 1968, published "A Message to the People of South Africa" condemning apartheid.  As a result of its aggressive pro-black policy, the Christian Institute became a target of government espionage and was forced to close in 1977. It had been a major force in encouraging black consciousness in the 1960's and 1970's (Ibid.) 

On a theological level, the Institute had an impact in southern Africa similar to that of Liberation Theology in Latin America, which challenges Christians to accept the scriptural injunction to work and be with the poor.  The real threat posed by the Christian Institute lay not in its calls for some reform, but in its call for radical change-at the roots of society (Marjorie Hope and James Young, The South African Churches in a Revolutionary Situation.  Maryknoll, N.Y., Orbis Books, 1981, p. 84).

By the early 1970's black theology had begun to make an appearance in South Africa-at the same time that Latin American Liberation Theology was emerging.  One of the first books on this subject was Black Theology: The South African Voice, edited by Basil Moore (London: Hurst, 1973).

Both the book and its editor, the former Secretary General of the University Christian Movement in South Africa, were banned.  In his introductory article, "What is Black Theology," Moore points out that the term "black theology" originated in the late 1960's.  He goes on to stress that it is imperative for South African theologians to apply this new theology to their own historical situation.  He says:

Black Theology starts with black people in the South African situation facing the strangling problems of oppression, fear, hunger, insult and dehumanization.  It tries to understand as clearly as possible who these people are, what their life experiences are, and the nature and cause of their suffering.  This is an indispensable datum of Black Theology (Ibid., p. 6). 

Moore points to the concept of "Christ is black" as an important one, indicating God's identification with  an oppressed people (Ferm, p. 63).

In South Africa, there has been a vigorous effort on the part of four black theologians to relate their understanding of the Christian Gospel to apartheid and the various social evils imbedded in this society.  Four of these theologians merit special consideration (Ibid., p. 64).

Those four theologians are Steve Biko, Bishop Desmond Tutu, Allan Boesak, and Manas Buthelezi. These four theologians will be covered in subsequent articles, focusing on the content and approaches of their respective theologies.  

In the Name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer.  Amen.

Rev. Dr.  Juan A. Carmona 

                              GOD TALK IN THE CONTEXT OF SOUTH AFRICAN OPPRESSION 

In the spirit of my previous article, I continue to emphasize that theology (God-talk) takes place not only in the First World of Euro-America, but also in the countries (especially the underdeveloped ones) of the Third World. We ask ourselves, "What has God done and what is God doing in this part of the world?"  We also ask, how do people experience God and how do people engage in God-talk in this part of the world?  

As mentioned before, there is reluctance to talk about theology in the context of the African continent. Those of us whose mind has been colonized still tend to think that African spirituality and theology is  either "inferior" to Euro-American spirituality and theology, or at the very least, demonic and pagan.  

White settlers from Holland landed in South Africa in 1652 and established a sailing settlement near what is now the city of Cape Town.  In a manner reminiscent of the white invaders of North America, who pushed the Amerindians westward, the Dutch settlers forced the blacks into the midsection of Africa.  White immigrants, the progenitors of the contemporary Afrikaners, came in increasing numbers from many European countries and combined their forces against the native blacks.  British citizens began to settle during the latter part of the eighteenth century and for a time served as a buffer between the Afrikaners and the indigenous black population. The British, however, greedy for gold, moved to the interior, an invasion that led to the Anglo-Boer Wars (1899-1901).  The victorious British soon united all of South Africa into one white-controlled principality in which blacks had no rights-a wholesale oppression that was continued when England gave commonwealth status to the Union of South Africa in 1910.  The Afrikaners began to establish their own identity by emphasizing their own culture, tradition, and language. Their Nationalist Party, founded in 1914, made a concerted effort to institutionalize apartheid in a ruthless enactment of laws to keep blacks powerless.  The Nationalist Party, which had held power since 1948, reaffirmed apartheid in the constitutional referendum of 1983, allowing partial parliamentary recognition for Asians and "coloureds," but keeping blacks powerless.  In this resolute affirmation of white supremacy, most Afrikaners believed that they were building a Christian nation  and until recently, were supported by the "Christian"(that is, white) churches. The Dutch Reformed Church continued to be the largest and most influential church, often referred to as "the Nationalist Party at prayer" (Ferm, op.cit. p. 62). 

Ernie Regehr points out the importance of this church and its relationship  to the government: 

It is a potent irony that one of today's most perverted and unjust social systems is the creation of a regime that, perhaps more than any other modern state, views itself as a Christian theocracy. Since 1948, when the Afrikaner nationalists gained power, the Dutch Reformed churches have had the direct access to, if not control over, the country's political leadership (Perceptions of Apartheid: The Churches and Political Change in South Africa. Scottdale, Pa.; Herald, 1979), p.11) 

Similar to what happened in Latin America, the system of apartheid-oppressor versus oppressed- was not only condoned by the white parents of the First World, which gave financial support to their mission churches in Africa, but was also reinforced by First World investors from Western Europe and the United States, primarily through transnational corporations.  The participation of U.S. business in the economic system  of South Africa has increased in recent decades (Ferm, op cit. p. 62).  

Baldwin Sjollema says the following: Those who invest in South Africa should please do so with their eyes open...Economic growth has failed to benefit black people in any significant way.  The claim by transnational corporations that the apartheid system would change and human rights improve has also not come true (Isolating Apartheid: Western Collaboration with South Africa: Geneva, 1982, pp. 1,11). 

There is little doubt that a direct correlation exists between economic and political domination by First World Powers and the perpetuation of apartheid in South Africa (Ferm, op. cit., p. 62)

Does anyone see a similarity between Christian Nationalism and white Christian Nationalism in the U.S.A. in the era of Donald Trump?  Can you see why it is so important to engage in God-talk from an African perspective?   

Our coverage of Liberation Theology from an African perspective continues in subsequent articles.

In the Name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer. Amen.

Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona 

Past Visiting Professor of Theology 

Tainan Theological College/Seminary, Tainan, Taiwan 

                                        

AFRICAN LIBERATION THEOLOGY 

One of  the challenges of talking about African Liberation Theology is talking about African theology itself.  I say this, because there is a tendency in Western Christianity to believe that Christian theology is Euro-centered, and the failure to acknowledge that the African roots of Christian theology are much, much older than than the emergence of colonial Western Christian theology.  Some of the most well-known Christian theologians from the early days of Christianity came from Africa.  Among them are Tertullian and Augustine.  

African Liberation Theology is not a mere clone of Latin American Liberation Theology.  The diverse and rich culture of Africa, in addition to its unique experience of Christianity,  represents a fresh challenge to those seeking to understand African notions of liberation (Ferm, op. cit. p. 59).

One of the many reasons why there is reticence and resistance towards African theology in general, and African Liberation Theology in particular, is because of the notion that anything that comes out of Africa is inferior and even bordering on the demonic.  The Western theological enterprise is permeated by blatant racism, i.e. that notion that "white is right," and "universally valid in all times and in all places."  Therefore, the thinking goes, any theology coming out of the African continent must be "inferior" at best and "demonic" at worst.

As is well known, the Christian Church has existed in Northern Africa since early times.  Especially prominent was the Christian community in Alexandria (Egypt) at the time of Clement and Origen in the second and third centuries.  Later, in the fifth century, the Coptic Church of Egypt, which still flourishes today, emerged as an Egyptian nationalist movement opposing Byzantine imperialism.  But it was not until the fifteenth century, with the arrival of Portuguese explorers, that Africa south of the Sahara came into contact with Western Christian imperialism.  By the nineteenth century, Christian missionaries were spreading throughout sub-Saharan Africa, usually joining forces with Western colonial powers in exploiting the inhabitants, their lands and resources, with a "prophet, antilock, we have the truth, you don't" attitude.  As a result, racism and the aftertaste of slavery have deeply infected relationships between blacks and whites throughout Africa from the first colonial settlements to the present generation (Ferm, op. cit. p. 59).

Thus, although stressing liberation from social, economic, and political oppression like its Latin American obverse, African Liberation Theology is deeply concerned with racial oppression. This component is especially strong in South Africa, where racism in the form of apartheid had been extremely virulent.   Both African and North American black theologians have faulted Latin American theologians for failing to take the racial component seriously (Ibid.).

James Cone, the father of African-American Liberation Theology suggests the following:

The Latin American theologians' emphasis upon the class struggle, with almost no mention of race oppression, made black theologians suspicious of their white European identity (Sergio Torres and John Eagles, eds.; The Challenge of Basic Christian Communities (Maryknoll, N.Y., Orbis Books, 1981, p.266).

The question that I raise is here is whether Cone's question is a valid one.  I raise that question because I am not sure that Cone gives as much emphasis to class as he does to race.  This is not to say that one is important than the other.  This theologian is of the persuasion that if theology is to be truly liberate, that the emphases on class, gender, nationality, orientation, and race must be concomitant, i.e. that they all must be dealt with equally.  

Ruvimbo Taker of Zimbabwe note the following:

The fact that the cultures of the Indians and blacks have been ignored seems to indicate why they are absent from the larger participation in Latin American life.  The rich cultural attributes of the Indians and the blacks have been ignored by the Church in conformity with the ruling dominant class (Torres and Eagles, op. cit., p. 258)

Once again the issue of race, and also of ethnicity appears to be the dominant theme in the minds of some African theologians as well as in the minds of people like Cone and possibly other African American theologians.  Should the issue of race take precedence over all the other issues previously mentioned?  This theologian says "Absolutely not!"  

John Pobee points out:

With the exception of the Republic of South Africa, racial prejudice is not so bad in Africa as in America...Consequently, African theology, though interested in liberation, is not preoccupied with liberation as much as black theology is (Toward an African Theology. Nashville:Abingdon, 1979, p.39). 

In addition, African theologians have in recent years had a far greater appreciation for indigenous religions than have their Latin American counterparts.   Even the African churches have begun to show a willingness to incorporate indigenous beliefs and practices into their teachings.  This, however, has not always been the case.  The early missionaries who came from the First World brought with them a westernized version of Christianity that looked upon the African blacks as heathen and Africa itself as the "empire of Satan."  These missionaries were convinced that either the Africans had no religion at all or what religion they had was pagan.  In fact, perhaps the most potent factor in the development of independent churches throughout Africa was the failure of mission programs of the established churches to come to terms with the African religious heritage (Ferm, op. cit., p. 60).

Even today, the "indigenization" issue has not failed to generate controversy. On the one hand, the Christian churches would have difficulty coming to terms with certain African customs-for example, polygamy.  On the other hand, some theologians, especially in South Africa, have complained that the return to African roots has amounted to a digression from the burning social, racial, and economic issues of the day.  Unlike most of their Latin American counterparts, African theologians have been more sharply divided between those who favor indigenization as a way of liberating the oppressed.  Indeed, the latter group would not consider the former group to be liberation theologians in the true sense of the term.  It is surprising to discover that many African theologians, for whom indigenization is important in liberating African religion from foreign intrusion, are less involved than most South African theologians in the social problems that impede human liberation (Ibid.).

How then shall we begin a discussion of African Liberation Theology?  There are no easy answers to this question.  In subsequent articles, we will focus on how it functions in South Africa.  We will also consider a brief historical sketch of Christianity prior to the emergence of black theology on the 1960's. ( Ibid.). 

In the Name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer. Amen.

Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona 

Past Visiting Professor of Theology

Tainan Theological College/Seminary                                                         

 

    LATIN AMERICAN LIBERATION THEOLOGY 

    THE ISSUES OF POVERTY AND VIOLENCE 

   PABLO RICHARD 

I have stated several times, and other theologians of liberation have also either stated directly or intimidated that if theology (God-talk) avoids mention of the human condition of oppression and suffering, then it is not a valid theology.  If it fails to address these conditions, then it is God-talk in abstractions. It is, in essence, a theology of accommodation and avoidance. Liberation Theology is, on the other hand, a theology of denunciation and resistance.  It is a prophetic theology which seeks to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. 

How can we claim to be engaging in God-talk while ignoring  the human condition?  How can we engage in abstractions, semantics, and speculation and not address what human beings are going through?  How can we claim to decipher the mind of God when we avoid the clear voice of God that says, "I have heard the cry of my people?"  Pablo Richard reminds us of the need to deal with these issues in his theology.

Pablo Richard was a native of Chile and taught at the National University of Costa Rica.  He was one of the writers of the book, "The Idols of Death and the God of Life," Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1983 (Ferm, op. cit., p. 138). 

In an engaging essay, "Biblical Theology of Confrontation with Idols," he traces the concept of idolatry in both the Old and New Testaments, noting how the Bible both denies and affirms liberation (Richard, chapter 1). 

In this affirmation of liberation there is the need for continuing struggle to free the oppressed from their idolatrous religious beliefs.  Richard sees the book of Exodus in terms of violence: violence on the part of the Israelites against the violence of their Egyptian oppressors. Richard sees the inevitability of violence in the movement from idolatry to liberation as crucial for our times as it was for the world of the Bible (Ferm, op, cit. p.52).  

What does "violence" mean?  Is violence something that people resort to when they don't get their way?  It is only when physical violence is imposed on innocent people, or does it also entail the auction of people as an act of rebellion against oppression?  Liberation theologians tend to view violence (armed struggle) as a just response to structural and systemic violence.  

Richard also takes pains to clarify the meaning of the phrase "people of God."  Some thinkers have sought to identify the "people of God" with the popular, hierarchical church.  But Richard prefers a more concrete, specific meaning, using the phrase to refer to the poor and oppressed, who because they have no power, are engaged in a constant uphill battle for justice and freedom.  This is where the real Church is to be found. Indeed, " to say 'church of the poor' is almost a redundancy; the church is either of the poor or it is not the church. Richard by no means wishes to exclude the rich from the church, but he does believe that the rich should cease to rich ("The Latin American Church, 1959-1978," Cross Currents, vol. 28, no. 1p. 36). 

Richard does not believe in advocating for what some would call "a theology of captivity."  He believes that this view leads to a defeatist attitude that can only weaken the determination of the oppressed and harm their course (Ferm, op. cit, p. 53). 

I do not believe that either Richard or any other liberation theologian are advocating for a "glorification" of poverty. In the same manner that they denounce excessive abundance, they also advocate for a just distribution of the good of the land. 

Is Richard advocating for socialism?  If he believes that the church should be the "church of the poor," then it would appear that Richard views the church as a model society which the secular society should try to emulate.  If this is the case, then what we are dealing with is Richard advocating for the non-poor members of the church to divest themselves of their opulence and become just like the regular members of the church (the poor).

Feel free to comment on this brief coverage of Pablo Richard 

In the Name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer. Amen. 

Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona  

Past Visiting Professor of Latin American Theology

Tainan Theological College/Seminary, Tainan, Taiwan      

 LIBERATION THEOLOGY IN A CARIBBEAN PERSPECTIVE 

NOEL ERSKINE

DECOLONIZING THEOLOGY 

One of the functions of Liberation Theology in seeking to engage in God-talk from a Third World Perspective, is to decolonize the the theology which the Europeans imposed on people from the Third World and also in the U.S.A.  By decolonize, I mean stripping theology (God-talk) from those colonial elements that maintain non-white people in a position of economic, political, and social subservience. 

Noel Erskine is important for relating liberation theology to the Caribbean context.A native of Jamaica, Erskine is much more sensitive to racism than are his Latin American counterparts. Noel Leo Erskine was a member of the faculty of Candler School of Theology at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia (Ferm, op. cit., p. 127).

In his book, Decolonizing Theology: A Caribbean Perspective, he develops the theme that, just as the Caribbean has been wrongly interpreted from a First World Perspective, so too would it be incorrectly analyzed "through Latin American lenses (Maryknoll, Orbis Books, 198, p. 118). 

Erskine traces the unique history of the colonization of Jamaica, which involved the importation of Africa as slaves, and points out how the black experience of slavery in Jamaica differs from slavery in the context of North America (Ferm, op. cit. p. 51).  

For Erskine, the "decolonizing" of theology must recognize a powerful racial component that goes beyond socio-economic factors and class distinctions. Liberation from economic oppression is only part of the task. Integral freedom must be the goal of liberation (Ibid.).  

We find in Noel Erskine the same thing that we find in James Cone (the Father of African-American Liberation Theology) in the United States.  Both Cone and Erskine focus on liberation on something that needs to include race as much as the issues of gender, and social class.  

While Father Gustavo Gutierrrez, the Father of Latin American Liberation Theology focuses on "God's preferential option for the poor," Noel Erskine would focus on "God's preferential option for black people."  Neither Cone nor Erskine would imply that God favors black people because they are black, but rather because they are oppressed by the white power structure in the Caribbean and. in the U.S.A. 

Like Cone, Erskine would believes that if theology (God-talk) is done independently of the situation of oppression of black people, then  it is both demonic and irrelevant. Theological abstractions and speculation do not mean anything to people who are in economic, political, and social bondage.  

This particular Afro-Puerto Rican theologian (Yours truly) resonates with Erskine.  In order for theology to speak to colonized groups, it must raise the question "How can we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?"  Theology has to address their colonial bondage and poverty, otherwise, it is empty talk and rhetorical sensationalism.  

In the Name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer. Amen.  

Dr. Juan A. Carmona 

Past Visiting Professor of Latin American Theology 

Tainan Theological College/Seminary, Tainan, Taiwan