Tag Archives: secular theology

#Blerd History Month: Black Humanism

Doesn’t Ethelred Brown just look like a Blerd?

The mini-series Blerd History Month starts with a few, randomly selected topics that I wish to cover during Black History Month. In pop culture and in society, black are essentialized as religiously conservative Christians. Sure, black Christians are in the majority in the United States, but that does not mean that we get to ignore those persons on the margins who offer constructive criticism from the outside. One outsider in Blerd History I would like to discuss today is Ethelred Brown, a Jamaican expat who became a minister in Harlem. Right now, Brown’s story is told as a token in the Unitarian Universalists of America diverse pantheon of saints. Fact is, as progressive as the UUA was on the abolition of slavery as a whole [except for that John C Calhoun guy], Ethelred Brown’s ministry was not welcome in white Unitarian circles.

The difference between white humanism and black humanism is not a matter of the amount of melanin in one’s skin, but that, as Juan Floyd-Thomas puts it, “white humanists operate in a realm governed by several key presuppositions, namely that: people of European descent are human beings upon birth.” Frantz Fanon, a black humanist from French Algeria and a number of other black critical thinkers in their work, call into question the notion of humanism all together, and whether or not there is a universal definition of what it means to be human. Once one gets into what makes us generally human, wellllll, then that’s when she has stepped into the realm of religion.

As a Trinitarian and Christian post-colonial writer, I take heart at the story of Reverend Ethelred Brown, how he overcame racial discrimination in the UUA to receive a theological education, as he went on to preach liberation and justice to the downtrodden. An interesting fact about Reverend Brown’s biography that stood out to me was his “conversion” story to Unitarianism, was that he began to disagree with the congregation where he attended. The congregation apparently cited the Athanasian Creed every Sunday, and he became sick of it. After leaving Jamaica and going to seminary, Brown’s Harlem Community Church made a positive impact on the citizenry of Harlem in combatting racial and economic injustice.

What makes me wonder about Brown’s story is the practices he rejected, the recitation of the Creeds, and the Athanasian Creed was all about the Trinity. Just how prominent was this teaching of creedal Christianity, and what were the approaches to social issues in Jamaica at that time? I submit to you that Blerd History Month is not about regurgitating facts, but asking questions related to Blackness and history.

For more on Reverend Ethelred Brown, read The Origins of Black Humanism in America: Reverend Ethelred Brown and the Unitarian Church by Juan Floyd-Thomas

RE: Can Atheists Be Pastors?

Free Will, Soul Freedom, and Freedom to Be Creedal

There were a couple of blog posts I came across today that had my eyes glued to them as I was asking myself questions. First was from Scot McKnight’s Jesus Creed, When Pastors Shift Theology that linked to a survey by Baptist Press, linked here: Cultural Digest: Unbelieving Pastors? about a number of anonymous pastors admitting that they are now atheists performing as ministers of the Gospel on Sunday Mornings. My initial reaction was a little frustration, since I have some suspicions given my experience in seminary and in church circles. There’s a number of unemployed ministers right now looking for a church to work for.

It’s so funny because last night I watched the series 1 finale of the BBC Two t.v. programme, Rev., a hilarious take on the life of a Vicar, almost a mockumentary style much like The Office U.K. and U.S.A. (I highly recommend Rev., btw, it’s entire Series 1 is on Hulu.com for USA readers here: Rev. on Hulu

In the episode, “Ever Been to Nando’s?,” our Reverend Adam Smallbone, the vicar of Saint Saviour’s is having a crisis of faith after some anonymous commenter leaves a poor grade for his sermon online, a post that his archdeacon reads and mocks Adam for. Adam throughout the episode, denies God’s existence, questions his own vocational calling, and even hosts a “Vicars and Whores” party in the sanctuary of Saint Saviours. As a back story, the police are looking for a man posing as a vicar who has gone around town harassing women. It turns out that the culprit, by the end of the episode, is none other than Adam’s homeless friend, Colin, a British version of BrothaMan (from the 1990’s Fox series Martin).

It’s interesting that both of these hilarious but serious stories are being told by the producers of Rev. Adam is posing as a Vicar throughout his questioning of his faith, while Colin, whose among Smallbone’s most faithful congregants, pretends to be a minister for his own reasons. In the end however, Smallbone realizes that it was silly to look for approval from human beings, a random online criticism by the way, and Adam goes about his duty as Vicar at the conclusion.

The other blog post was by Steve Ramey from Religion Bulletin: “Can An Atheist Believe In God?” linked here. Honestly, I cannot understand from my limited context where Christians who become atheists (or vice versa) come from. I have always believed in a higher power from a very young age and the debates over doubt versus faith (i.e., beliefs in propositional truth statements) have always remained too abstract for me. I’m a Christian, but I have the same response to fundamentalist Christian apologetics as skeptics do, they just utterly fail, especially in regards to proving an invisible personal God (whom I fully trust but need no empirical evidence for).

The problem I think lies in many good Christians’ belief that our beliefs take priority over practice. Doubt versus faith, as I have written before, is not the problem, at least not according to Scripture. Rather, it is a struggle of faithfulness versus faithlessness. Now, in the study, there were pastors from both creedal and non-creedal traditions. With creedal traditions, ministers are bound by their words, their very promises to their superiors and congregations. For example, Presbyterians are bound by a number of Reformed Confessions, and sometimes in many places, these confessions take priority over Scripture itself. I would say an atheist in creedal tradition as such has a duty to come clean because it is part of their vocational contract with their denomination. The broken covenant between bishops and the pastor-turned-atheist probably should lead to a resignation.

As for non-creedal traditions, free churches such as Baptists and Congregationalists, it is a little bit more complex. I personally affirm the truth of most creedal statements in formulas prior to the Protestant Reformation, but that is my free choice. Orthodoxy should be a free choice that women and men make each day as a habit of practice, thus, orthopraxis comes before and yet remains equal to orthodoxy. The doctrine of Soul Freedom is denied by creedal denominations (Methodists, Presbyterians, Anglicans, Catholics, Eastern Orthodox) because this freedom is about the ability of every human being to have a relationship with God unmediated, with the capacity to decide for themselves. Orthodoxy thus redefined is the freedom and space to do orthopraxis. Pastors who become atheists in their churches should come clean in front of their congregations, for lies can be damaging once they accumulate up to a certain point. The individual congregations in non-creedal, free churches should alone decide the pastors’ fates.

So I ask you, should churches be lead by seekers? Should communities of faith who are filled with seekers be called “churches” in the first place? Should churches hire non-believers, for musicians or sound technicians or even nursery positions?

I look forward to hearing your thoughts. Especially Optimistic Chad’s.

Judge: TX Governor Rick Perry’s prayer rally can go on

Two weeks ago, I mentioned the Freedom From Religion foundation’s civil suit to prevent Governor Good Hair’s obvious violation of church-state separation: promoting evangelical Christian reconstructionism.

The judge yesterday threw out the suit, due to First Amendment concerns.

I really do wonder what would happen if non-Christians and non-religious Texans took up Perry on his invitation, and ask to be allowed to participate, since all religions are allowed, right?