“I know of no assembly of Christians, where there seems to be so much of the presence of God, where brotherly love so much prevails, and where I should take so much delight in the public worship of God in general, as in my own congregation.” David Brainerd, Presbyterian missionary to the Native Americans (1718-47)
Some Christian friends of mine, who also write, batted around the question “how do we refer to ourselves, Evangelical, Reformed, orthodox?” For me all of those names fit and I stubbornly refuse to let any of them go. But, of course, reformed includes Presbyterian and the designation Christian comes first, I belong to Jesus Christ.
I have decided to use the names as a way of explaining the problems I have with the prevailing philosophies among grassroots socialist and Marxists movements and the defenders of those movements within the mainline Churches.
So while I look at the new “buzz” word “cosmovision” and its relationship to Marxist and Socialist movements among indigenous groups of people, I will place along side it my thoughts about what it means to be Evangelical. And for me that word, evangelical, is at the heart of Christian discipleship.
Jesus Christ, the incarnate One, the second person of the Trinity died on the cross so that humanity could be redeemed. That is good news. And to be Evangelical means to be a herald of that good news, to proclaim in small ways and large ways, in silent and voiced ways that Jesus Christ came to save his people from their sins.
That understanding will come into conflict with those who seek to see indigenous people groups as part of their wider social movement yet insistently define them in such a rigid way that it totally destroys their individuality.
Cosmovision is the term that some anthropologists and many leaders within the peasant and revolutionary grassroots movement use in explaining the world view of indigenous peoples. It usually includes their land as well as what they believe about the sacred, transcendent or God. It means the people are viewed and do view themselves as a whole. Supposedly no decision is made without agreement by the whole community. It also means that what ever it is that they hold as sacred that is what keeps the land healthy, fertile and holy.
How does this fit with Marxism or socialism today? Originally Marx held to the idea of a class revolution springing from the workers whom he saw as exploited. For Marx economic conditions determined the historical outcome of people and nations. Since he was a positive thinker; there was no doubt that the working classes would revolt against their oppressors who were supposedly in their final stage capitalists.
In the seventies, in Latin America, many revolutionary groups were influenced by liberation theology. To put it very simply, this is a theology, birthed out of both Marxism and Christianity. It does not begin with God’s revelation of Himself, but begins with the human experience of oppression. It is human experience over God’s revelation. And in this case the poor are God’s revelation along side of Jesus Christ.
Additionally sin is generally seen and focused on within the limits of a particular community or culture. That is, oppression of the poor or marginalized in a particular society, (which certainly is sin), is seen as the prevailing sin for that society. The solutions are political: basically communal decision making, communal property and redistribution of land. Along side the solutions are educational opportunities to realize both the extent to which you as an individual are complacent in the oppression and the extent to which you are the oppressed.
Stanley J. Grenz & Roger E. Olson in their book 20-th Century Theology: God & the World in a Transitional Age, explain this action and link it to Marxism. They write, “This means that each person must gain awareness of one’s own vested interests and subject them to scrutiny and criticism. By becoming suspicious and critical (dialectical) in relation to the dominant thought-forms of one’s own culture, a person’s knowledge can rise above the social-environmental conditioning.” This is a way to prevent relativism within a culturally bound ideology, but it also can and does turn into a control mechanism.
In the beginning some liberation theology was biblical in its content, meaning that Jesus Christ was central to the theology. For instance Oscar Romero the martyr Bishop of South America wrote:
" Progress will not be completed even if we organize ideally the economy and the political and social orders of our people. It won’t be entire with that. That will be the basis, so that it can be completed by what the church pursues and proclaims: God adored by all, Christ acknowledged as only Savior, deep joy of spirit in being at peace with God and with our brothers and sisters."
But such theology has either disappeared or changed. Now, for most, it is not even Jesus Christ along side the poor as God’s revelation. Instead Christ has departed and it is the sacred or holy by whatever name within the various communities.
And now leaders and intellectuals among the various socialists and Marxists revolutionary groups, who still supposedly speak for the working class, incorporate various other groups in the category of class including indigenous peoples. But indigenous peoples, like the working class in a prior time, are seen by the extreme left as one entity; the individual is not important. The difference is that these groups are held by sacred bonds to their lands and that in its self is linked to a reworked socialism.
In fact, if one listens carefully one hears a supposed embryonic Marxism tied to the ancient lands of indigenous people and socialism is made holy by its relationship to a sacred land. For instance, Stephen Bartlett Coordinator for Constituency Education, with Agricultural Missions Inc., writes:
"It was gratifying to hear Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez Frías, outspoken promoter of a socialist future, say that socialism in its broadest sense existed in the Americas before the arrival of Europeans. … To hear Evo Morales leader of a socialist party upon his innauguration [sic] to the presidency of Bolivia declare that he would, in the words of Subcomandante Marcos, [The leader of the Zapatistas, an indigenous people group of Mexico.], lead in obedience to the peoples, a concept that serves both as a fundamental principle of indigenous governance as well as of true Christianity. (See [reflections from the AMI (Agricultural Missions, Inc) Agrarian Delegation to the World Social Forum, Jan 19-31, 2006]."
To return to the title Evangelical and its discipleship meaning, one writer, an indigenous person, Tink Tinker of the Osage Nation and Professor of American Indian Cultures and Religious Traditions at the Lliff School of Theology, has written his views of early American missionaries in an article entitled “Fundamentalisms, columbusday, hate speech, and American Indians.”
While his aim seems to be to turn his words toward capitalism as a new kind of Christian fundamentalism, of missionaries and his people he writes:
"The community had been a coherent and integrous whole, intricately bound together in complex structures of family, clan, village, sodal and modal organizations. People woke each morning with a clear sense of who they were and what needed to be accomplished that day. If there were a ceremony, it would be a tribal ceremony in which all were involved as participants. Suddenly, with the appearance of the powerful White colonial official (and the missionary was always a colonial representative), people are faced with a choice as to whether to participate with the community for the good (salvation) of the whole, or to make an individual decision for personal salvation. … (4)1"
Respect for others which also means upholding their freedom demands that Christians treat indigenous peoples with great care. However, Christ commands his disciples to proclaim the good news to every tribe and nation. That is not an option; it is the command of Jesus Christ the Lord of the Church.
Cosmovision is an important tool for understanding groups of people and relating to them within their worldview. But naming their cosmovision as a central truth to be advocated for because the holiness and health of the land demands it is unthinkable for a Christian. The worth of the human soul and fellowship with Jesus Christ is far greater than any material good whether it is land, community or an ideology.
“But, blessed be God! I enjoyed liberty in prayer for my dear flock, and was enabled to pour out my soul into the bosom of a tender Father. My heart within me was melted, when I came to plead for my dear people and for the kingdom of Christ in general. Oh how sweet was the evening to my soul!” David Brainerd, Presbyterian missionary to the Native Americans (1718-47)
1 http://www.whrnet.org/fundamentalisms/documents.html#Canada. This is a sister site to AWID at http://www.awid.org/. There are some good articles here dealing with the abuse of women and focusing on the misuse of women in many lands. But it is a mixed bag. This site is linked to by Presbyterian Women’s Advocacy, advertising “The 11th AWID International Forum on Women's Rights and Development” at http://www.pcusa.org/womensadvocacy/involved.htm.
No comments:
Post a Comment