Obama's Pastor on Hannity (Blk Liberation & Blk Value System) A Blog response: State your thoughts!?

Question

Black Liberation Theology is not the only Liberation Theology movement among minorities. Blk Liberation assumes Blk people speaking for themselves as in the case of Feminist Liberation Theology, Asian Liberation Theology and (the most popular) Latin Liberation Theology.

Most accuse Liberation Theology of having Marxist overtones or suggestions but I have not found that to be true. Most Liberation Theology movements are really "voices from the margins of society" who speak directly to a people who experience systematic, racial, gender discrimination or biases. (Some Evangelical Scholars make the case that Liberation Theologies are reactionary movements, I still disagree with that).

(HERE IS THE MAJOR POINT)

Most of what we consider Standards Biblical Interpretation is based on Euro-centric Evangelical models. (I will blog often on this site please ask if you want specifics).

WHY IS THIS: Most published conversations (books and commentaries) about theology are based in Europe (Germany, England, Spain and Italy).

I have been to seminary so I know this for a fact: MOST OF THE STUDY OF CHRISTIAN HISTORY IS BASED IN EUROPE. However, Europe was not the only continent to make global contributions to Christianity.

(A BASIC POINT ABOUT THEOLOGY)

Theology is not simply based on DIRECT DIVINE INTERPRETATION. Everyone who interprets a text, just as in literature, brings their history, experience, and world views to the table. This is called a HERMANUTIC OF SUSPICION. (Lord I wish I had a spellcheck. lol)

Since most conversations about theology are from European males and based on Euro male interpration of scripture and CHRISTIANITY, NATURALLY people who have different world views, experiences and come from different traditions are going to feel isolated.

(EDIT FIVE PARAGRAPHS) : Discussing Blk Libaration and Obama’s Pastor as Seperatist for espousing a Blk Value System

Conclusion

Is separatist a "pretty new" title for denominations or church communities that I am not comfortable or familiar with?

Say what you will about Dr. Jeremiah Wright, but he is right on one thing. "If you are going to talk about Theology, you must talk about it in context."

I have read Sean Hannity's bio. He attended a catholic high school that called itself a seminary.(It is no longer in existence. It closed in the 1980's). He also did not even finish a 2 yr college. Sean has NO experience or understanding of theology and it was obvious. I do not understand how FOX let's it's analyist/journalist get away with that.

Dr. Jeremiah Wright probably came across as rude because Sean came across as if he were not really interested in interviewing Dr. Wright. It seemed to me that he wanted to expose an agenda.

FOX really should demand better. Why couldn't they have atleast found a conservative journalist who understands "a little" about Blk Liberation Theology and it's prominant authors (Dr. James Cone, Dr. Dwight Hopkins, Dr. Cain Hope Felder).

PURE AND SIMPLE

Sean Hannity provoked a DOG fight with a Pit-bull. His little smart Alex comments, "Pray for me Reverend" and calling his church a cult before the Pastor even got a chance to explain what the website was about. Then when the Reverend tried to explain, he cut him off on several occasions. Sean was GRANDSTANDING. I guess that is what brings in great ratings!!

I think a "properly" seasoned journalist WHO HAS AN ACADEMIC BACKGROUND IN JOURNALISM as well as experience would have handled that differently and the outcome would have been different.

Answer 1

Two words, Time Capsule...

Answer 2

Just consider the source (Sean Hannity). He is one of those Conservative hate spewers that mouth off all that clap trap.

Answer 3

Kevin Considine, graduate student at Catholic Theological Union, comments on Obama's church for religionandspirituality.com :
"Recently the Illinois Democrat has been criticized for something that should be a positive: his church affiliation. No, not because he attends church. And not because he's being honest about rooting his politics in his faith.

No, he's taking flak because his church, Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, has linked traditional Christian faith to black empowerment and combating "middle-classness." What this means is that the church's theology preaches a foundation of loving God and loving one's neighbor by attempting to apply these tenets to real life in the community. So, the church champions ideals such as the black family, racial justice and a materially humble lifestyle as ways to live out discipleship to Christ.

To be honest, I'm not sure how this is a problem. But the revelation that an African-American family is attending a vigorous and socially conscious black church is apparently a touchy subject. One could, ahem, speculate about the motives behind such touchiness. But let it suffice to say that Sen. Obama's church affiliation has raised some hackles.

For example, Fox News pundit Sean Hannity has suggested that the church is divisive and borders on being a separatist cult. And MSNBC talking head Tucker Carlson has claimed that Obama's church proclaims a "racially exclusive theology" that seems to "contradict the basic tenets of Christianity." This is because, in Mr. Carlson's opinion, Christianity is explicitly "anti-racial."

Right. As if Christianity is far off in another dimension and completely divorced from the messiness of everyday life. As if holiness and righteousness are possible without confronting the evils that exist in our midst.

Exactly what tenets of Christianity can a church that describes itself as "unapologetically Christian" be contradicting? They seem to be doing just fine with Jesus' command to love the Lord your God and love your neighbor. And they seem to truly embrace the demand for social justice that has deep roots in Scripture. Their dedication to the gospel may be challenging to many of us, and that's a good thing, but it's disingenuous to call them divisive and separatist when they clearly focus on God as revealed through Jesus.

And if by "anti-racial" Mr. Carlson means that there isn't a clearly mandated Christian response to racism because it isn't a current problem, then he's deluding himself. The problem persists, and thus racial reconciliation and justice are indeed Christian mandates. They go part and parcel with following Christ.

Having said that, I think that the critiques of Trinity Church of Christ reveal more about us as a country than about Sen. Obama or his critics. It shows that there are some versions of Christianity that make us comfortable and some that don't.

If a church's theology preaches Jesus through self-reliance, personal morality, building wealth and colorblindness, then we don't have much problem with it. But if a church's theology talks about community building, personal and social responsibility, the sin of materialism and black empowerment or racial reconciliation, then we become uncomfortable.

This difference is similar to what theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer called the distinction between cheap grace and costly grace. Cheap grace is what makes us comfortable, because it doesn't ask much of us. Costly grace, however, challenges us to be Christ-like by sacrificing and taking up our cross. It asks us to risk our comfort and get our hands dirty in the real world. If there's any confusion between the two, it's safe to say that Jesus' call and gift is that of costly grace.

This is the grace that Sen. Obama's church seems to proclaim. For they're not out there preaching the gospel of health and wealth. That is, they don't theologize that the God of Jesus Christ is some great ATM machine in the sky that will provide goods to consume. Instead, they're dedicated to loving God, serving others, nurturing the souls of its congregants and bridging the divide between the poor, middle and upper classes within their church community. In short, they're interested in authentic witness to the Gospel within a specific context.

If this makes some uncomfortable, so be it. At least they're following Jesus in a way that aims for righteous transformation of the real world rather than a pie-in-the-sky kind of way.

Now I'm not saying that Sen. Obama is a victim here. Nor am I trying to get votes for him, although I must admit that I've sent a few bucks to his campaign. And I'm not saying he's a saint, either. Heck, I don't even know the man.

My point is simple. I'm sure there are many ways that the media can criticize Sen. Obama's candidacy. But his church is not a liability. And they should be ashamed for trying to make it seem like one. "
http://religionandspirituality.com/christianity/view.php?StoryID=20070302-020118-4065r

Answer 4

Good for Sean!

What you think doesn't matter to anyone, it is what it is. Sean Hannity is a genius.

Answer 5

I think I need a cattle prod

Answer 6

Whatever. This is just way too long to read it all.