The Insanity of Black Liberation Theology

From Crunchy Con Rod Dreher, some of the best analysis I’ve seen yet of Obama’s racist pastor and black liberation theology:

The Insanity of “Black Liberation Theology”

The more you know about Jeremiah Wright, the more appalling he is. Spengler today digs up a televised interview between Wright and Sean Hannity in which Wright upbraided Hannity for not having read the black liberation theologian James Cone, with whom Wright identifies. Who is James Cone? He’s the theologian who wrote this:

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.

Wow. Either God wants to destroy white people, or He is not worthy of worship. This is racist idolatry.

Here is an excerpt about Cone and his influence on Trinity UCC, Obama’s church, from a sympathetic profile in The Christian Century:

There is no denying, however, that a strand of radical black political theology influences Trinity. James Cone, the pioneer of black liberation theology, is a much-admired figure at Trinity. Cone told me that when he’s asked where his theology is institutionally embodied, he always mentions Trinity. Cone’s groundbreaking 1969 book Black Theology and Black Power announced: “The time has come for white America to be silent and listen to black people. . . . All white men are responsible for white oppression. . . . Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man ‘the devil.’. . . Any advice from whites to blacks on how to deal with white oppression is automatically under suspicion as a clever device to further enslavement.” Contending that the structures of a still-racist society need to be dismantled, Cone is impatient with claims that the race situation in America has improved. In a 2004 essay he wrote, “Black suffering is getting worse, not better. . . . White supremacy is so clever and evasive that we can hardly name it. It claims not to exist, even though black people are dying daily from its poison” (in Living Stones in the Household of God).Wright agrees. When I asked him whether white Americans are right to maintain that the racial situation has improved since the days when Africentric Christianity was born, Wright pointed to the racist remarks by radio host Don Imus: “And you say things have improved?”

Yes, well, we’ve gone from legal segregation and lynching to a time when not only does none of that exist, but a nationally famous radio host can be hounded out of his job for using a racial epithet. Clearly, nothing has changed one bit in this country. Ha. This is the same church that on Sunday compared criticism of Rev. Wright to one of the most infamous crimes in American history, the murder of Martin Luther King, Jr. I’m sorry, but what?!?! Utter crackpottery.


How much of this does Barack Obama take seriously? Why would he go to a church whose pastor embraces and extols the vile racist theology of James Cone, which is, as Spengler puts it, “a greased chute to the nether regions”? I’m not asking rhetorically; I honestly don’t understand it.

As Spengler says, most nations have been tempted to confuse the Almighty’s purposes with their own (I would add that just because America is defined by an idea, and not an ethnos, we are not immune). One of the problems Orthodoxy has had in reaching out to America is that too often, its immigrant congregations don’t understand why anybody else would be interested in Orthodoxy. When Julie and I worshiped with the Maronite Catholics in Brooklyn, they could hardly have been more welcoming to us, but they really didn’t understand why we, as non-Lebanese, would want to worship with them. Christianity is far more than a tribe at prayer, or it isn’t Christianity, it’s ethnic idolatry.

Still, I have never met a Lebanese, a Russian, a Greek or any other “ethnic Christian” who would assert on behalf of their ethnos the sort of thing James Cone teaches. “If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him,” James Cone wrote. Substitute the word “black” for white, or “non-Russian,” “non-Greek,” etc., and see how much sense that makes — and ask yourself how far a white candidate for the presidency would get if he came within 100 feet of a church that embraces that kind of theology.

Anyway, Obama’s going to give a major speech on this issue tomorrow in Philly. Good luck trying to square this circle. As Spengler puts it:

What played out last week on America’s television screens was a clash of two irreconcilable cultures, the posture of “black liberation theology” and the mainstream American understanding of Christianity. Obama, who presented himself as a unifying figure, now seems rather the living embodiment of the clash.

UPDATE: I won’t go as far as Derb and say that Obama is done for, but I think he’s right on everything else here:

The MSM can’t smother this, not in the age of the web, though they are trying mightily. (The Sunday New York Times “Week in Review” Section had nothing about Wright; neither did the main news section.) Americans are a fair-minded people, who find double standards obnoxious. A guy who says “nappy-headed ho’s” in an irreverent radio show is dragged round the city walls behind a chariot to the delighted howls of a mob of self-righteous “anti-racists”; yet a man who uses the authority of the cloth to damn our country and curse white people, is praised as a “biblical scholar” by a candidate for the presidency? I don’t think so. This won’t stand. The man is toast.

12 Comments

  1. Well, the more I look into liberation theology, and the more Obama talks about it, the more I agree that it is a huge political setback — and rightly so. Obama is losing any credibility of being a uniter if he believes this stuff.

  2. Jay,

    This is serious trouble for Obama, and he’s only compounded it by morally equating Wright’s spreading of racial hatred from the pulpit with his white grandmother’s private fears, which he further compounded by then calling her a “typical white person”.

    Obama is shaken.

    He doesn’t understand why everyday America doesn’t embrace this “nuanced” equivocating like the Democratic elite…and he never will.

    He’s been separated from everyday America by Harvard degrees and black liberation theology for far too long.

  3. Jay, excellent points. We just can’t emphasize enough that this is not a “guilt by association” issue, as many Obama aplogists allege. It’s an issue of judgement. If Wright had merely endorsed Obama, this would not be newsworthy in the least.

    However, Barack chose this man as his pastor and mentor for more than two decades, and it goes to the heart of the judgement he claims to uniquely posess and is the primary argument he makes for why he should be the next Commander-in-Chief. This seriously undermines his credibility, and in my opinion should disqualify him altogether.

  4. If this is a setback for Obama, than John McCain should have a setback as well. After all, his spiritual guide is Rod Parsley. I personally don’t have a problem with Parsley but many would align his comments with those of Rev. Right. Parsley appears to believe that it is the job of the US to destroy Islam. Not saying that’s a bad idea, but still…

  5. LorMarie,

    Wrong. Rod Parsley is not racist and anti-American. Rev. Wright is.

    Fighting global Islamic terrorism is a worthy goal and hardly compares to blaming our government for 9/11, claiming that whites invented AIDS to kill black people, etc.

    John McCain will NOT have a setback because Rod Parsley isn’t a racist.

    This is Obama’s problem and his alone. Making weak comparisons to other candidates and their pastors will only exacerbate Obama’s troubles.

  6. I NEVER said that Rod Parsley was a racist. What I did say is that people are comparing him as a spiritual guide to Rev Wright…calling his views extreme. The comparisons are in no way weak, but are strong in the eyes of today’s mindset. Whether we admit it or not, christian fundamentalists are considered extreme. Having Rod Parsley as his spiritual guide (publicly) will hurt McCain in the long run.

  7. Racism is extreme. Blaming America for 9/11 is extreme. Blaming our government for AIDS is extreme.

    Calling for a stop to the spread of global Islamic terrorism is not.

    Stop comparing the two.

  8. This is fairly disingenuous. I recommend, before one critiques, that serious theological study should be done on subjects like this. This is after all, theology, which is incredibly complex – not to mention the social circumstances in which theology is grounded in (past and present). Otherwise you come off incredibly ignorant.

  9. Mr. Horstkoetter,

    I appreciate your scholarly approach; your “nuanced” exegesis; your “contextual” analysis.

    Unfortunately, Wright’s and Cone’s and Obama’s words cannot be redeemed, no matter how many layers of context and nuance you attempt to wrap them in.

    You, Sir, are disingenuous. Not I.

  10. “I honestly don’t understand it.”

    It is understandable. And for those who make the long trek to understand it are enriched by the journey. The journey demands a cross-cultural trek which has the benefit or bringing one’s own culture under the Lordship of Jesus (where all culture belongs).

    And don’t worry, one is perfectly free to make the trek and not vote for Obama or feel obligated to agree with Wright.

    It is not insanity. And why would we choose shouting at each other when we could choose to have a richer dialogue with a church demonstrating the power of the Gospel to heal and save?

  11. And the fact that there is arrogance and knee jerk reactions on the part of GMH says a lot about his posture and position.

  12. As an African American who is a Christian, I want to say that I’ve learned about something much better than “black liberation theology.” It’s the Gospel of Jesus Christ, that will truly liberate you no matter what color you are.

    I’ve been going to congregations that were predominately black for three decades. I’ve never heard anything like what Wright was preaching. Do not fall into the familiar trap of division that divisive people of all colors would like us to join them in. This isn’t a “black church” thing (and there technically is only one church anyway and it’s not “black,” “white”, or any other ethnicity). In the end, there are two types of churches after all, but the differences have nothing to do with color. There are churches where they preach the Word of God. And there are churches that don’t.

    God is concerned with our lives, including disparities and injustices wherever they exist. But He is also concerned with bringing us together into Christ and not having divisions and having us segregate ourselves into angry little groups. We all need to recognize divisive and hateful people wherever they are and whatever their skin color is and just ignore what they say.


Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a comment