Introduction:
The
biblical idea of liberation or liberty (freedom) has its background the thought
of imprisonment or slavery. Rulers would
imprison those whom they regarded as wrongdoers (Gen.39:20); a conquered nation
might be enslaved by its conqueror, or a prisoner of war by its captor, or an
individual might, like Joseph, be sold into slavery. When the Bible speaks of liberty, a prior
bondage is always implied. Liberation
means the happy state of having been released from servitude for a life of
enjoyment and satisfaction that was not possible before. The one who liberates the captives, or
oppressed is called the liberator.
At the Exodus God set
free Israel from bondage in Egypt, in order that henceforth the nation might
serve him as his covenant people (Ex.19:3ff.; Isa.43:2. He brought them into the promised land,
settled them there, and maintained them in political independence and economic
prosperity as long as they avoided idolatry and kept his laws
(Deut.28:1-14). The full development of
the idea of liberation appears in the NT, where the enemies from whom God
through Christ liberates his people are revealed to be sin, Satan, the law and
death. Christ’s public ministry was one
of liberation. He opened it by
announcing himself as the fulfillment of Isa.61:1 (Lk.4:16ff.). Christ had declared that he had come to
set Israel free from the state of
slavery to sin and Satan in which he found them (Jn.8:34-36, 42-44); he had
come to overthrow the prince of this world and to release his prisoners (Mk.3:27;
Jn.12:31f.). Keeping in mind the
biblical idea of liberation, we will attempt to see the emerging Christology of
the modern world.
Emerging
Christology/ Liberation Theology:
A
very important theological formulation: Latin American Liberation Theology has
arisen in colonial Africa in the 1950s, and spread throughout the Third World.
This theological formulation is also known as Theology of Liberation, or
Liberation Theology. It seeks to view
all of theology and Church practice through a contextual lens- that is, through
the eyes of the poor in Latin America; thus, it is a theology which is both
critical and reality-based. Bohache
writes: “Because the theology of liberation is a Christian theology, it is
thoroughly Christological.” Hence, the
terms “Liberation Theology” and “Christology of Liberation” are interchangeably
used. The three major themes of
liberation theology are: (i) preferential option for the poor; (ii) the
political situation as sin; and (iii) centrality of the reign of God. We will present a general view of liberation
theologies below:
1. Liberation
Theology/Christology of Liberation: The Liberation theology
originated in Latin America. From what
did they need to be liberated? From
dependence.. The terms of international
trade are such that Third World countries not only are dependent upon the rich
but are destined to remain so. Their
economies are geared to supply primary commodities at low cost to the developed
nations. These are then used in the
manufacture of expensive goods which are sold to the poor countries. There is an enormous difference between the
standard of living of the rich and the mass of the people, whether in towns
around the cities or in the countryside.
Poverty and hopelessness enter into the mind so that those who are
marginal to the main economic and cultural life of the country remain
outside. The theologians in Latin
America have now embarked on the revision of all Christian doctrine from the
perspective of liberation.
Rooted in
historical Jesus:
Liberation
Christology is rooted in historical Jesus and in the people’s pain. It is also suspicious of Christology that
is mediated by the church, because they compare it to what they see as the ignoring
of Christ’s values by Christians.
Classical Christology has failed for the following reasons: Christ was presented (a) as an abstraction,
(b) as a universal reconciliation, and (c) as absolute rather than dialectical.
An abstract Christ
cannot be meaningful to the suffering communities, universality is meaningless
without a sense of particularity; and, emphasis on the absoluteness of Christ
leads to the maintaining of the absoluteness of status quo, resulting in a
deepening of the hopelessness that is already felt by most of the Latin
American people.
Stress on
historical Jesus:
Being
deeply rooted in historical Jesus as mentioned above, liberation Christology
laid a stress on historical Jesus over the Christ of faith for the following
reasons:
(a) There
is a structural similarity between the situation of Jesus’ day and those in our
own time. It sees objective oppression
and dependence lived out subjectively as contrary to God’s historical design.
(b)
Historical Jesus puts us in direct
contact with his liberative program and the practices with which he implements
it.
(c) Historical
Jesus sheds light on the chief elements of Christological faith: that is, following
his life and his cause in our Christian life.
(d)
Historical Jesus reveals the Father
and how to reach that Father. Abstract reflection (theory) does not provide us
that access.
(e) Historical
Jesus signifies a crisis, not a justification, for the world. He calls for a transformation rather than an
explanation.
2. Black
Christology:
Christology from the
perspective of the black especially from African American context is known as
Black Christology. Its approach
addresses Christology in light of the challenges faced by people of African
descent. The defining context of Black
Christology is race. We will attempt to
highlight its origin and see Black Christology as Liberation theology.
(a)
Origin of Black Christology:
Black
Christology developed within the discipline of Black theology, which arose in
the 1960s as a religious response to the white racism against black
Americans. It has three contexts: (i) the civil rights movement of 1950s and
1960s, largely associated with Martin Luther King, Jr.; (ii) the publication of
Joseph Washington’s ‘Black Religion’ (1964); and (iii) the rise of the black
power movement, strongly influenced by Malcolm X’s philosophy of black
nationalism. It was Malcolm X who
asserted in 1963, “Christ wasn’t white.
Christ was a black man.” However, it was in 1968, the first treatise on
Black Christ came out. Most of black
Christological formulations articulate Christ’s blackness in metaphorical
terms. But Cleage argues that Jesus was historically and
ethnically black. He saw Jesus’
blackness as literal, resulting from black blood that the Israelites had
acquired during their sojourn in Egypt.
Recent studies suggested that there may be some truth in Cleage’s
assertion, even though it sounds to be controversial. In contrast to Cleage, James Cone favors a
metaphorical approach to black Christ.
He likes to base his Christology on the historical Jesus- the one who he
was. For Cone, the most important
characteristic of the historical Jesus is his identification with the poor of
his time, and therefore he is able to interpret Jesus’ solidarity with the poor
and oppressed Christologically as the hermeneutical key for imaging Jesus as black. Starting point of black Christology is black
experience.
(b) Black Christology as Liberation Theology:
It
is one thing to proclaim black Christology and quite another to give it
theological substance. Many white
Christians and almost all white theologians dismissed black
theology/Christology as nothing but rhetoric.
Since white theologians controlled the seminaries and university
departments of religion, they made many blacks feel that only European persons
who think like them could define what theology is. In order to challenge the white monopoly on
the definition of theology, many young black scholars realized that they had to
carry the fight to the seminaries and universities where theology was being written. The first book on black theology was written
by James Cone (1938) under the title of ‘Black Theology and Black Power’
(1969). It was he who first articulated
Black Theology. He was of the opinion
that traditional Christian Theology had been complicit in perpetuating a white
supremacist theology that continued to enslave the blacks in America. He argued that a black theology is the only
hope for improving the plight of black Americans by means of the Christian
gospel. He further stated that a
theology can be Christian only when it is liberative, because Christ Jesus was
involved in liberation of all people.
Therefore, Black theology is related to the idea of liberation and Jesus
Christ in his humanity and divinity, is the point of departure for a black
theologian’s analysis of the meaning of liberation.
During the beginning
of 1970s, black theologians of North America began to have some contact with
other forms of liberation theology in Africa, Latin America, and Asia. Recently a feminist consciousness has also
emerged among black women, and this has led to the beginnings of a black
feminist theology.
3. Feminist
Theology:
Feminist
theology has had its primary development in the USA. Much of Feminist Theological thought has been
associated with the period after1968.
Feminist theology takes as its first agenda the criticism of the
masculinist bias of Christian theology.
This bias has excluded women both from ordained ministry and from higher
theological education throughout much of the church history. Feminists therefore see Christian theology as
having been done in exclusion of women’s experience. The second agenda of feminist theology aims
at the discovery of alternative historical traditions supportive of the
personhood of woman and her inclusion in leadership roles in church and
society. Many feminist theologians have
expressed discomfort with the ‘maleness’ of Jesus, since maleness is often used
to justify oppression. Colored women
around the world doing Christology is called Femenist/Womanist Christology.
There are diverse
approaches to Christology among women doing Christology. “Women of color have
sought to differentiate their theological thinking from that of white,
middle-class feminists,” says Bohache.
Women’s movements since 1970s have argued that their voices too to be
included in any theorizing. There was an increasing demand to include the
voices and views of women from the Two –Third World. The Third World is a cross-ridden universe of
economic, political, and religio-cultural oppressions within which women are
doubly or triply burdened. For our
purpose, we take the Asian context.
Asian context is very unique: it is the context of diversity, colonial
past, poverty, multi-religiosity, caste and culture. Christ is one among the many christs in
Asia. Therefore, Asian Women’s
Christology emerges out of the creative tension between religious-cultural and
Western imperialism. Feminist
Christology in the Asian context takes into accounts the patriarchal, racial,
casteist, and economic oppression along with cruelty of sex tourism. Thus it is a stand against every demeaning
and oppressive structure that refuses to acknowledge the equal participation of
men and women in all aspects of life and religiosity. These women use an epistemology of the
‘broken body’ to understand the nature of God, the nature of humanity and the
nature of Christ; their brokenness, pain and suffering cannot be extracted from
their theological pursuits because it is such an integral part of their social
location, which is the major element of their life experience. In short,
liberation of all men and women from whatever binds them, both internally and
externally is the focus and goal of Feminist Christology.
4. Minjung
Christology
Minjung theology is a Korean contextual theology. The term Minjung may be used for those who
are excluded from the elite who enjoy prestigious positions. The Minjung are
those people who have suffered from exploitation, poverty, socio-political
oppression, and cultural repression throughout the ages. Their lives have been rooted in the age-old
experience of suffering and the present experience of it. They have suffered for changing Korea into a
just nation.
In the context of
Korean Minjung theology, Jesus is seen as a shaman (priest) People are in the grip of han (han
means negative energy in the universe that oppresses people) and Jesus as a shaman
undo the han and restore humanity to peace and tranquility. Jesus is the spokesperson for the
Minjung. He speaks to God on behalf of
the Minjung. He is the Christ who is
facing God from human being’s side.
Human beings are concrete Minjung who are suffering. Therefore, the Jesus who is with the
Minjung-he is Christ. He identifies
himself with the Minjung and exists for the Minjung. He is the savior of humankind. This salvation is given to human beings for
their liberation, the liberation Jesus realized in the action of transforming
himself by listening to and responding to the cry of the Minjung.
Conclusion:
There is the danger in Latin America that instead of liberating
theology, contact ith the movement will lead Christians simply to legitimize
revolution with a few biblical proof texts.
There is the danger in the USA that black theology will in its
desperation to show that it is entirely freed from white domination, fall into
legitimizing black fascism. And there is
the danger that feminist theology will, in escaping from Genesis 2, fail to
rediscover Genesis 1. But liberation
theology is itself an idea whose hour has come, and while it can be improved,
it cannot be denied.
+++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment