Garvey's Ghost: Black Talk

RE: The Religious Left Fights Back

Over the weekend I stumbled across a piece on Alternet by Von Jones entitled "http://www.alternet.org/sms/23725/"> The Religious Left Fights Back. In this piece there was a reference to the "religious bigotry" that "lefties" apparently harbor towards those of practicing faith:

He also wants to challenge the Left's chronic and toxic bias against religious feeling, expression and people.

Lerner hopes to end "religio-phobia among progressives." And such efforts will not be welcome among a great many rabidly secular progressives.

As for me, I will be praying for the Rabbi's success. I am an African-American Christian who was raised in the American heartland. When I moved to the cosmopolitan coasts of Connecticut, and later California, I ran headlong into shocking levels of anti-religious bigotry among progressives.

I literally have had liberals laugh in my face when I told them I was a Christian. For awhile, I felt self-conscious about telling other activists that I preferred not to meet on Sunday mornings, because I wanted to go to church.

It is still commonplace to hear so-called radicals stereotyping all religious people as stupid dupes -- and spitting out the word "Christian" as if it were an insult or the name of a disease. I thought progressives were supposed to be the standard-bearers of tolerance and inclusion.

He then goes on to discuss his experiences in the black church in the south proudly proclaiming that:

But one key fact seems to escape the notice of today's activist crowd. The champions of the civil rights struggle didn't come marching out of shopping centers in South. Or libraries. Or high school gymnasiums.

To face the attack dogs, to face the fire-hoses, to face the billy-clubs, these heroes and she-roes came marching boldly out of church-houses. And they were singing church songs. They set an example of courage and sacrifice that will endure for the ages. And as they did it, they prayed on wooden pews in the name of a Nazarene carpenter named Jesus.

I think that Von Jones presents us with a very distorted idea of the black church as well as the origins of so called "religious bigotry" among liberals. While I cannot speak for all so called "religious bigots" I can speak for those who know what I know.

I would like to first address the issue of the Black church. While indeed the black church was often at the forefront of the Civil Rights movement, it was not always there. A cursory reading of the "letter from a Birmingham Jail" by Dr. King Jr. would show that a great many Christians were not so moved to stand up to Jim Crow. It would seem to me that this shows that in many instances it was the fact of discrimination and not some inherent morality of the Black Church that drove blacks to stand up to Jim Crow. Other examples of this would be the Haitian Independence movement, which was lead by a Hougan (So called Voodoo priest) or the Quilombos of Brazil or Maroons of Jamaica, none of whom was lead by Christians but all of whom were movements of Black people against oppression. These facts underscore a fact that is uncomfortable to most, Black Americans are Christian largely because their former owners/captors were. In places where Africans were sold to Muslim slaveholders, those Africans became Muslims. A great example of this phenomenon would be a country such as Nigeria where the population is pretty much evenly divided between Christians and Muslims, a legacy of the two colonial influences in that country. Therefore it is pretty specious to argue that somehow it was the Black Church, per se, that was the engine of change in the black community. Fact is, regardless of religious institution, where blacks wanted freedom, they used whatever tool or ideology worked for them.

The second issue with the Black Church, which is also endemic to White Churches, is the rife bigotry they have towards non-believers. I cannot count the number of times I have been personally insulted by Black Christians because I was not a Christian. It is simply hypocritical to belong to a faith that regularly damns and otherwise belittle persons who do not agree with the religion while at the same time calling for "liberals' to be more tolerant. Again, I know of many likeable, liberal Christians who have no problem sitting in a pew while a Reverend says that the only way to salvation is through Christ. These persons will say that the Reverend didn't say anything about being "damned" but it is clear that if there is one way to being "saved" then the rest of us are in for a subterranean no-joy ride for eternity. It is almost as if such Christians do not think we can understand the logic of the material presented at churches.

Let me move away from the Black Church and refocus on Christianity in general. One of the big problems that some of us "religious bigots" have is that we know the sources of the religion. We know that the Commandments were lifted from the Egyptian Oracles of Maat. We know that the Jesus story is also lifted from the Ancient Egyptian Mystery System. We know that there is Ancient Egyptian symbolism throughout the Books of Moses as well as much of what is called the New Testament. We find it particularly insulting when Egyptian Mysteries are passed off as Christian property, when it is not and were are further insulted by lay people who insist they know more than people who have dedicated their lives to the study of said systems. This particular issue underscores the larger issue of Christians co-opting things and presenting them as "their own" while simultaneously devaluing the origins of those ideas or of belief systems that share those ideas. For example I like to tell people that Jesus believed in Karma. Many Christians, especially those of "lesser knowledge" will swear up and down that Jesus did not believe in such pagan things, yet there he is saying "as ye sow, so shall ye reap." Is that not Karma?

This co-option of other peoples or faiths ideas and presenting it as ones own is a large reason why many "liberals" do not care much for religion. Such a thing is called plagiarism and a great many of us can spot a fraud when we see it. The issue is that Christians do not like being told that they have been sold recycled goods. It cuts to the very core of who they are and what they want from their faith and they get defensive about it as anyone would. However, I find it disingenuous to call the very people who are pointing out the flaws in Christian doctrine bigots when they are not bigoted at all (though I can't speak for all of them).

Lastly Van Jones states:
Number two: At the same time, any approach that fails to honor and embrace the positive contributions of religiously inspired people is also wrong-headed, and it foolishly and needlessly shuts progressives off from our own history, achievements and present sources of vital support.

I disagree with this statement because it is the "religiously inspired" person that injects religion into their "positive contribution." Where many of us may say "It was the right thing to do." The religious person says "God moved me to...." Why? Why can't it simply be "the right thing to do?" There is a portion of the Bible in which a story is told of a rich man and a poor man who go to the temple. The rich man proclaims loudly how he thanked God for what he had and his life and how he wasn't low. He made a great show of his offerings. Meanwhile there was a poor many who humbly went to the temple, went over to the corner and gave the little offering he could and quietly made his prayer. It was said that the offering and prayer of the poor quiet man was of more value to God than the one who made a big scene. You would think that Christians, liberal or not would take note of that story.