Submitted by ivan hugh walters (rev.)
A NEW CRITICAL MORAL THEOLOGY OF HUMAN RIGHTS:
THEOSOPHY MAGNUM OPUS
(PART TWO)
Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid.
INTRODUCTION
The Church must be concerned about the human living conditions. The Church is obligated by the dint of its calling and ministry to call awareness to the people so that they can become the agents of their own liberation. Development is not done to people, but it works along with people to conscientize them and brings them upliftment. It is not providing fish and bread for the people but teaching the people to fish and how to make bread. The feeding of the five/four thousand as recorded in the Bible by the Christos with very little was a convenient intervention to arrest a particular situation.
Development in the Caribbean can only be possible if we first develop the resources which we have at our disposal; these resources are the talents of our people. To face adequately the challenges of contemporary life, it demands that immediate attention be given to the development of the human resources of the region. The Church has an integral part to play in this development of natural resources, but it must perforce adopt effective problem-solving attitudes which are fresh, imaginative, and which cater for the numerous needs of the people.
However, the Church must first establish the parameters of its political capabilities. It must establish the brand of development with which it will associate and then determine the role that it intends to play in it. The Church must know the aspects of Caribbean society that seriously need to be analyzed with the view to effecting major changes to arrive at a mode of life that is more consonant with the enlightened concept of development. The long view here is to assist the leaders of the Church in the Caribbean to gear themselves to meet the inevitable challenges that a critically conscious generation of young people will present.
The inescapable fact is that the Caribbean people are underdeveloped because the Metropolitan countries used our resources to develop themselves, to the extent that very little resources are left for the continued development of the people and the infrastructures in the region. The big question is, how shall we remedy this deficit that is the legacy of our colonial past? The way forward in dealing with the issue of development, of course, is a political matter which depends on the institution of sound economic, social, and cultural policies. Christians generally have either a non-involvement or a pusillanimous attitude to political matters because they have manufactured this divide that supposedly exist between political matters that are earth bound and religious matters that are spiritual and other worldly bound. The non-involvement of the Christian in political governance of his country is an abdication of his/her political responsibility. This approach redounds to their own disadvantage in particular and the society in generally is made poorer by the Christian non-involvement in the political activities of his/her country. It is my considered opinion that this is a misconceived notion which lends itself to manipulation by unscrupulous politicians.
Related link:
Anglican Church, State and Plantocracy: Reparatory Justice Now
The Christian needs to become more aware of the fact that there are not two separate and distinct worlds in which humans live and have their being: the natural and the supernatural. There is only one history of salvation, only one human destiny irrevocably assumed by the Christ of Yahweh, whose redemptive work embraces all mankind and all its history, that is to say, all the dimensions of human existence. Therefore, it is the Church’s obligation both morally and politically to advocate the position that wherever there exists any deterioration of the human condition, there exist a sinful situation which warrants both spiritual and political redress following the example of the Christ of Yahweh. Furthermore, the Church must place itself in the moment in which it is living; in its “situationality”, to challenge it vigorously for its reorientation, and changing it according to the salvific plan of the Christos. In this way, the Church will contribute in a transcendent but realistic manner to the liberation of the people by struggling against the social sins of society; by the strength and truth which it brings to the creation of a new social order. This new social order rejects selfishness and is open to community through love and kindness. The Church must use the dynamic force of the eschatology which it possesses and through which it offers constant criticism of any smug satisfaction to threats of new forms of sin. The Church must constantly make humankind aware of the transitory nature of the material goods of the world and continue to emphasize and strive for perfection as a future goal, but the present goal is to ensure that the political powers establish the basic needs of all persons who dwell in the society.
It would seem that the challenge of the Caribbean Church is the urgent need to re-examine the appalling situation of its poor in the community of faith and to take definitive stance on the matter. The exploitation of the poor is not merely the taking away of economic power but their human rights and personhood as well. In 1981 the Melbourne Report describes the situation in this way:
The kind of poverty engendered by the economic, authoritarianism, imperialism is manifold. It is much more than the lack of material possessions. It is full-scale dehumanization; it is outright exploitation and consummate degradation. The poor, who in this case are the workers, received an inequitable proportion of the profits from the organized production. They lack the power to redress the situation. The majority poor must live by the decisions of the minority capital holder. From the point of view of the imperialist, good management actually means ingenuity in exploiting the poor more subtly and more effectively (pp. 111-112).
The situation of the poor has not changed significantly over the years. The salient question now is, how far remove is the 1981 assessment from the current economic circumstances of the poor. If we can effectively make that comparison, we would come to the realization that not much has changed in the economic arrangements in the Caribbean.
POLITICAL CHRISTOLOGY:
BENEVOLENCE AND RIGHTEOUSNESS
It is my considered opinion that Christian political thinking can relate much more positively to some form of social democratic ideology. I am not thinking of a laissez faire political or economic form. I believe this is the human channel through which God’s political sovereignty can best be illustrated. Christians in other words, clearly do hold political power which holds them responsible to a transcendent frame of reference. Any human claim to sovereignty in the divine scheme of things is a mere pretension. Ultimately only God is sovereign. But the question arises as to who should represent God politically. There are strong theological reasons to consider popular sovereignty to be more compatible with the Christian faith than any alternative that is currently available. Social democracy recognizes in political terms the ultimate responsibility of every man/woman before God. Most of the other political concepts imply some self-designating person who stands between God and his people. Social democracy sees everyone as a citizen and a subject, but some will be singled out for particular offices. The first Assembly of the World Council of Churches holds that:
A responsible society is one where freedom is the freedom of men (sic) who acknowledge responsibility to justice and public order, and where those who hold political authority or economic power are responsible for its exercise to God and the people whose welfare is affected by it. Man must never be made a mere means for political economic ends (Harper & Brothers, 1918, p.200).
Here the emphasis is on responsibility to God and people. In the Caribbean this calls into question certain strong-arm would-be dictators who previously confiscated the constitutional electoral system (as in Grenada, Cuba, and Nicaragua). It also calls into question the attitude of the capitalist elite class who thinks that it is their right to determine the future destiny of an entire people without any consultation with God or people.
In a social democracy, all persons are equal, but on the matter of policy the view of the majority must be given preference without overawing the views of the minority. There must be balance because this does not necessarily mean that the larger number is necessarily right just that there is a greater probability of rightness in some circumstances. In this system, the economies will be controlled by the indigenous forces.
Slavery has left indelible marks on the minds of our people. In a slave society, one’s social worth was determined by the color of one’s skin. This is still the case today. The non-whites are given a social status depending on where they fall on a graded scale of shades of colors ranging from black to white. The two poles representing bad and good respectively. Any opportunity for social and economic advancement depends on one’s status which is in turn determined by one’s color.
The value system of the white man was imposed on our forebears when they came to the region. Many of the values of Africa were undermined and substituted with white values. Although the system is somewhat modified in recent times, white values are still seen as superior to black values, the result of which is the inferior mind set which is suffered by many black people. This is seen in black people’s debilitating lack of self-confidence in the face of anything white. It is appalling but true that most of the educated Blacks are more prone to this feeling of inferiority than their unlettered brothers and sisters. They have willingly coopted themselves and conspired with the White value system to keep their brothers and sisters in subjection. This is the active working out of Eurocentric hegemony in the lives of Black folks so that we become our own gaolers. Many of the Blacks with university education easily succumb to the demands of those symbols of White authority after being disenchanted with reform measures which their education represented as strong possibilities. In this way the oppressed becomes the oppressor. For example, we are a republic but in the Court System we must bow and say, “Yes my Lord/Lady” and “No my Lord/Lady”. And among Senior Attorneys there is a ruckus whether they should be called ‘Senior Counsel’ or ‘King’s Counsel’ (laughable). And of all epithets: “Yes Master Barefoot” and in the Church System, “Yes, my Lord”. What is this!
The Church, education, the social clubs, the court system have all acted in concert at the behest of those who instituted them to keep the masses of the Caribbean people in ignorance and subjection to White authority symbols. Education has been at best misguided, at worse downright irrelevant to our circumstances. The Church has mystified us with promises of happiness in the hereafter (I am not here refuting the Church’s eschatological hope), while acquiescing in our suffering on this earth terrain and stuffing their guts with our things.
They have sanctioned most of the racial prejudice and intolerance in our society and cooperated with the politicians and ruling classes to keep the masses in submission to them. The courts have represented the interests and property rights of those who have power (synonymous with almighty money) over against the oppressive conditions which shackle the people. Laws have been on the ‘statute book’ since slavery has not been repealed. Some typical examples are the flogging (reminiscent of slavery) of juvenile offenders for petty criminal offences and school children for even minor infraction of school codes, the Vagrancy Acts. Just to name a few.
To be continued
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.