Add new comment

Out of all the theologians I've ever listened to, Father Rohr is most gifted in his ability to articulate the original intent of the "gospel to the oppressed," which the African-American church hears in a way that perhaps is more sensitive than the dominant culture, or the "Pharisees" and the "rich" that Jesus also addressed. "Black theology" as articulated by Dr. King contains those core truths, but I'm not so sure the syncretism of Rev. Cone represents it in the same way. It's different. In contrast to the inclusiveness that Jesus revealed as he walked around as love-in-action or "Living Water," and the inclusiveness Dr. King sought, the theology Rev. Cone articulates seems to have many exclusive elements in it, beginning with having "African American" in the name of the church. What does that mean? Is it social inclusiveness on African-American terms, or exclusiveness on Malcolm X terms? Is it about justice, or reverse racism? Is it a declaration that only the "black church" really understands the Gospel, and the white infidels don't? If that is so, how do they explain the sexism that Bishop McKenzie articulated? I'd like to know more. It really seems that you have bumped into the tip of an iceberg here.