[Dialogue] 7/16/20, Progressing Spirituality, Aurelia Davila Pratt: Breaking Free From Supremacy Theology, Part Two

[James Wiegel]

Kaira Lingo. The Heart of These Times: Please join Martin Aylward and I tomorrow, Sunday, July 19, for a dialogue exploring the Covid pandemic, racial injustice and climate emergency and how we might care for ourselves and our world. 

https://sangha.live/deep-dharma/heart-of-these-times/?utm_source=KJL&utm_medium=personalplatform&utm_campaign=Guest

Jim Wiegel
“The old dreams were good dreams; they didn’t work out but I’m glad I had them.”  Robert James Waller


> On Jul 16, 2020, at 8:02 AM, Ellie Stock via Dialogue <dialogue at lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View this email in your browser
>  
>  
> Breaking Free From Supremacy
> Theology, Part Two
>  
> Essay by Rev. Aurelia Dávila Pratt
> July 16, 2020
> Naming the Messages that Bind Us
> When I wrote part one of this article, the world was on the cusp of global pandemic. The day it was published, my family and I began our quarantine. Four months later, I am still socially distancing, wearing a mask when I venture out, and pastoring virtually. The world has changed significantly, but also, it hasn’t. COVID-19 has uncovered some long-existing truths concerning the treatment of the most vulnerable in our country. Shared outrage over the Black lived experience has led to months of historic protests all over the U.S. And yet the trauma that people of color in our country carry – especially Black and Indigenous people – is nothing new.
>  
> White supremacy, in its many systemic forms, continues to keep us all bound. Pandemic or not, the work of Liberation through anti-racism and decolonization continues. For people of faith, this work includes breaking free from supremacy informed theology. Naming these frameworks that prop up the oppression of Black, Indigenous and people of color (BIPOC) is crucial to our healing. For white people of faith, both naming and understanding how you may be complicit in perpetuating these messages should be a part of your Liberation work.
>  
> Embodiment
> Wielding harmful interpretations of the biblical text, supremacy theology has stolen the power of embodiment from us through the glorification of the spiritual and the demonization of the physical. As a result, we live our lives disconnected from our bodies, developing unhealthy relationships with over-work, food, sex, and image. Womxn[1] are especially harmed from this messaging. We’ve been oversexualized from a young age and taught that our bodies were made for two things: childbearing and the sexual pleasure of men. Alongside this message of submission, we’ve also been told not to trust our bodies. This mass indoctrination sustains the justification of violence against us.
>  
> All of our bodies need freedom and healing from this messaging, but womxn and especially BIWOC[2] have been affected the most. These harms are compounded at the intersection of race because basic human dignity is denied to BIPOC in our society. The murder and lack of justice for Breonna Taylor is but one glaring example of the Black womxn’s experience currently. A white supremacist-informed theology has nourished the roots of our political and social structures, sending the message that black and brown bodies are inferior, untrustworthy and must be policed and subdued.
>  
> Shame in the guise of humility
> Supremacy informed theology doesn’t stop at forcing shame upon our physical bodies. Along with the messages around embodiment, we are taught not to trust our voices or experiences. Scripture is used in order to keep us mentally and emotionally bound to patriarchal structures (i.e. “the heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure”). We’ve also been indoctrinated to adhere to the love and respect myth, sending the message that husbands, male faith leaders, male coworkers, etc. are more competent and capable. Furthermore, when harm from men inevitably befalls us – whether it is emotional, physical, or sexual harm – supremacy theology tells us that we are to blame. This mass manipulation has been used to keep womxn bound to systems of oppression. It’s important to acknowledge that womxn of color, especially Black and Indigenous womxn, continue to bear the brunt of this harm.
>  
> Valerie Saiving suggested that theology has defined the human condition on the basis of the masculine experience[3]. As a result, womxn will often stifle our impulses when they do not fit the patriarchal narrative. Personally, this has been true each time I neglect cultivating confidence or taking pride in my gifts as a leader. I’ve seen firsthand that suppressing my own thriving does not serve the community I pastor, but I have to work in defiance of a double standard each time I lean into these instincts. Part of breaking free is rejecting the message of shame veiled in the illusion of a “Proverbs 31-woman” humility. I untangle myself from supremacy theology every time I trust my own voice, boldly and without apology.
>  
> Feminine characteristics as weakness
> Patriarchy rears its ugly head again, using scripture to uphold and perpetuate toxic masculinity, which frames traditionally feminine characteristics as provocative, distrustful, and weak. This messaging largely informs how womxn are treated within the Church and beyond.
>  
> I am reminded of a conversation between a male pastor friend and a colleague, in which they pondered why men don’t go to church. My friend suggested that perhaps it’s because one is often required to risk vulnerability by turning inward and facing tough feelings at church. He suggested this is the kind of thing boys are rarely taught to do. Men, therefore, are not practiced in them. His colleague suggested that men don’t go to church when they don’t like the pastor. He suggested that “if the pastor is too feminine” they will be turned off by the church as a whole. In this case, “feminine” was used as shorthand for “weak.”
>  
> When vulnerability and emotional depth are societal markers of femininity, and when femininity is equated as weakness, everyone suffers. We live half lives as the body of Christ because the fullness of God’s image is blatantly rejected. Yet, this is the kind of thinking that is rampant in the Church. It results in men struggling or refusing to accept the leadership of womxn, resulting in the silencing of prophetic womxn voices. We must disentangle ourselves from this messaging and call out toxic masculinity for what it is: a domination system that perpetuates harmful theological interpretations.
> The “White and Polite” social construct
> White culture sets societal norms, including politeness[4]. The concept of politeness is then rooted in Scripture, whether through the “fruits of the Spirit” or through the definition of love (i.e. 1 Corinthians 13.) The power of politeness cannot not be ignored. For BIPOC, when this norm is not adhered to, tone policing and gaslighting will follow. Honesty is reframed as contentious, vulnerability that isn’t “positive” is upsetting, and pain rooted in colonization and racism is either minimized or disregarded. White fragility takes center stage, upholding the dominant culture and preventing BIPOC voices from being heard. When we speak, we speak from the margins. This is a language in and of itself, and we must alter it daily in order to be accepted. The necessity of code switching steals much of our energy.
>  
> I experience this exhaustion often as a brown woman pastor who navigates a predominately white, southern, Christian context. I have found myself apologizing for being too much. I have spent a lot of time filtering my fire. Interactions with white males have come with the assumption that it is my job to prove my competence before I will be afforded respect. This underhanded litmus test includes abiding by the societal norms of politeness as defined by the dominant culture. If I do pass the test, they hold power over me. If I don’t pass it, I am denied. Either way, I am bound.  The more I untangle myself from supremacy theology, the more I realize this is unnecessary and unloving. I must name and reject this way of operating so that I can live into the fullness of my Imago Dei.
>  
> Racial trauma through the absorption of white shame/guilt
> As we do this deeply personal work of breaking free, we inevitably discover a long road of anti racist work ahead. Navigating this as a white person looks like listening and learning. It looks like acknowledging privilege, relinquishing power, and decentering whiteness by elevating BIPOC voices. As a non Black WOC[5], my anti racist work also includes a lot of listening, learning and acknowledging privilege. But it also has its own unique set of responsibilities. Navigating this work within a predominantly white world can be difficult.
>  
> In my context, I am surrounded by incredible white people who are committed to anti-racism work. However, this work brings up a lot of shame and guilt for them. I must take great care to protect my energy, so that I am not retraumatized through the absorption of it. As a pastor of a predominantly white church, I am learning how to make room for their process, while also holding space for myself and other BIPOC, who make up a minority of our sacred community. It is important to acknowledge that we all have different relationships with white supremacy. A non-dualistic, nuanced approach is essential as we work toward the common goal of Liberation.
>  
> One of our pastors worded this challenge well. He said “When we don’t acknowledge a message’s intended audience, we are assuming audience homogeneity, which really just means we’re assuming everyone is dominant culture / white.[6]” We cannot be color blind. Our collective breaking free is not a homogenous experience. We must voice the many intricacies and intersections. Otherwise, we risk further perpetuating dominant norms. This adds to racial trauma and the continued marginalization of BIPOC through the unwanted absorption of white shame and guilt.
>  
> The path to healing
> Naming theological frameworks rooted in oppression is crucial to all our healing. We name them in order to soundly reject them. It was in my sermon writing process that I first woke up to the extent to which I am bound. I spent nearly a decade believing myself to be an imposter, both incompetent and unintelligent. Now, I can name and reject these messages each time they threaten to keep me from my work. Doing so has made me a better pastor and preacher. Most importantly, I am more whole.
>  
> We name oppressive theology so we can break free from it, both in how we understand ourselves and in how we understand God. The more we untangle ourselves, the more we discover how unnecessary it is for the image of God to be limited, exclusive, or triggering in any way. Because of this realization, we are able to love ourselves and others in a way more reflective of Christ. And we can know without a doubt that God is ever present, both within us and around us. It is the decolonized God who will gently tend to us: loving us, empowering us, and nursing us back to good health.
> ~Rev. Aurelia Dávila Pratt
> 
> Read online here
> 
> About the Author
> Rev. Aurelia Dávila Pratt is the Lead Pastor and a founder of Peace of Christ Church. She is a licensed Master of Social Work and sits on the Board of Advocates for the Diana R. Garland School of Social Work. Aurelia is President of the board for the Nevertheless, She Preached conference and co-chair of the Religious Liberty Council for the Baptist Joint Committee. You can follow her on Instagram @revaureliajoy to keep up with her sermons and writings at the intersection of justice and theology. 
> __________________________
> [1] An alternative, intersectional term for women inclusive of those who are trans and nonbinary
> [2] Black, Indigenous and womxn of color
> [3] Womanspirit Rising, Carol P. Christ & Judith Plaskow, 1979
> [4] I am speaking specifically from within a U.S. context
> [5] Womxn of color
> [6] Rev. Matthew Hanzelka, Pastor of Community Care at Peace of Christ Church
> Question & Answer
>  
> Q: By Jennie
> 
> I enjoyed the column by Dr. [Thew] Forrester Living Christs of Touch, but John 8:44 has always been problematic for me.  For example, in 8:44 Jesus tells the Jews who don't believe in him that they are children of the devil.  What is the Progressive commentary on this passage?  Is this where some anti-Semitic tropes find a source?  Even Luther has vile language that could have come from this.
> 
> A: By Kevin G. Thew Forrester, Ph.D.
> Dear Jennie,
> Let me begin by saying there is no commentary which is “the” Progressive one. There is a range of possibilities when interpreting any passage, which is why we continue to return to the scriptures from our ever-changing circumstances to discover different shades of meaning in the texts.
> 
> Historical context is critical. Those communities of the early Christ movement that are shaped by John’s spirituality felt under attack and on the defensive. We know that Jesus was born, lived, and crucified a Jew. His preaching and healing and table-gathering ministries were for the Jewish people. His earliest followers were overwhelmingly, if not exclusively, Jewish. He was a Jewish Rabbi committed to reforming 1st century Judaism. In the end Pharisaical Judaism would evolve into Rabbinical Judaism and, in a sense, its vision became the primary expression of Judaism and not that of Jesus (although they shared much more in common than many realize).
> 
> When Jesus’ message failed to take hold within mainstream Judaism, the early Christ movement struggled with its identity. In its fear for survival, John’s community defensively produced some writings that placed harsh blame on Jews, such as in 8.44. This was an ominous development, wherein John’s rhetorical anti-Judaism sowed some seeds of later anti-Semitism. The tragic irony is now quite clear since Christianity is an offspring of Judaism unable to be whole without a complete embrace of its Hebrew ancestry.
> 
> Inchoate in John’s spirituality, which at times is stunning in its beauty, is the unfortunate distortion of Rabbi Jesus into an “object of belief” that invites later dogmatic orthodoxy and intolerance. This spirituality vacillates between a Logos of Love that would draw us into an ever-deepening realization of Jesus as an embodiment of a spiritual path rooted in direct experience of Belovedness; and, Jesus as an exclusive, divisive, Divine figure. In one way, this is the tension between the gospels of John and Thomas: John tends to make Jesus into an exclusionary fulcrum, whereas in Thomas, Jesus-as-Christ is who we are each called to be.
> 
> Harvey Cox’s, The Future of Faith, catches what is at stake. In the early Christ movement, experience, not belief, is what captured and motivated the heart. What we find in some passages of John, and not him alone, is the tenacious tug of fear in the face of difficult experiences. This gravitational pull will, in time, all too often draw the Christ movement away from exploring the direct experiences of Belovedness in our lives (which is the heart of Rabbi Jesus’ spiritual path). Instead there will be an increasingly reactive instinct toward a mental dogmatic theology that will draw boundaries that divide, disparage, devalue, and demonize what is not understood.
> ~ Kevin G. Thew Forrester, Ph.D.
> 
> Read and share online here
> 
> About the Author
> Kevin G. Thew Forrester, Ph.D. is an Episcopal priest, a student of the Diamond Approach for over a decade, as well as a certified teacher of the Enneagram in the Narrative Tradition. He is the founder of the Healing Arts Center of  in Marquette, Michigan, and the author of five books, including I Have Called You Friends, Holding Beauty in My Soul’s Arms, and My Heart is a Raging Volcano of Love for You and Beyond my Wants, Beyond my Fears: The Soul’s Journey into the Heartland. Visit Kevin’s Blog: Essential Living: For The Soul’s Journey.
>  
>  Please continue to send us your feedback… we are listening. We aim to give voice to many different perspectives that are relevant and inspiring along this spiritually progressing path. We are not here to tell you what to believe or how to act. We are here to support your journey, to share and learn together.
> Thank you for being a part of this community!
>  
> Join our FB community today!
> Spread the word, share with friends. Thanks!
> Bishop John Shelby Spong Revisited
> 
> The Origins of the New Testament, Part I: Introduction
> 
> Essay by Bishop John Shelby Spong
> September 17, 2009
> I launch today a series of columns that will appear regularly over the next twelve to eighteen months. As I always do in this column, this series will augment the essays that are time sensitive and that seek to illumine contemporary issues through my theological lens. Last week’s column on the health care debate is a case in point.
> 
> The purpose of this unfolding series is to take you, my readers, deeply into those books that constitute the New Testament. There are twenty-seven in number and together they form the volume that arguably has been the most influential and shaping piece of narrative writing in the history of the world. The earliest book of the New Testament is probably I Thessalonians, generally dated around the year 51 CE, while the latest is probably II Peter, generally dated around the year 135 CE. The influence of this book, while always powerful, has been both positive and negative. On the positive side it is clear that the institution called the Christian Church, which grew out of these twenty-seven books, has inspired quite literally millions of people in many ways. Most of the great universities of the world were begun as part of the Christian Church’s commitment to knowledge and, in particular, to impart to people the saving knowledge of the sacred scriptures. Most of our healing institutions, from hospitals to hospice, arose out of that Christian sense that every human life is of infinite worth, which carried with it the compelling need to alleviate suffering insofar as it is possible. Most of the great art of the ages, at least up until the 17th century, has as its content scenes from these twenty-seven books. These art treasures are of such immense value today that for the most part they are stored in the world’s greatest museums as a constant source of enrichment for the people. Most of the great music of the ages, at least up until the dawn of modernity, was an attempt to put the primary themes of the New Testament into the indelible sounds that we today still recognize and sing. One thinks of the St. Matthew Passion and the St. John Passion by Johann Sebastian Bach and of the Christmas Oratorio, “Messiah” by George Frederick Handel as familiar and much loved cultural treasures. One cannot understand the history of the Western world or explore these cultural artifacts without becoming deeply aware of the impact the New Testament has had on the life of our civilization.
> 
> There is, however, also a dark side of the New Testament that must be faced and lifted beyond the stained glass accents of antiquity into full consciousness. The New Testament has had victims whose lives have been diminished at best and destroyed at worst by the direct impact of reading from this “sacred” source. I think of the Jewish people who have suffered throughout Christian history because of this book. The words attributed to the Jewish crowd by Matthew in his narrative of the crucifixion, “his blood be upon us and upon our children,” have caused much Jewish blood to flow in everything from the Crusades to the Holocaust. The Fourth Gospel’s use of the phrase “The Jews,” spoken so often through clenched teeth, has not infrequently been used to legitimize anti-Semitism. The portrayal of a man called Judas, a name that is nothing but the Greek spelling of the name for the entire Jewish nation, as the anti-hero of the Jesus story, served to give permission to Christians through the ages to justify their feeling of revenge against this ethnic group of people. Lost in this hostile passion is the truth that Jesus was a Jew, the disciples were all Jews and the writers of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament were also Jews. The only possible exception to this statement is Luke, thought to be the author of both the gospel that bears his name and the book of Acts, who is believed to have been born a Gentile, but to have converted to Judaism and thus to have come through the Synagogue into the Church. This means that when we read the New Testament, we are reading only the words of Jewish writers, interpreting the experience and impact of the Jewish Jesus primarily in the light of the Jewish Scriptures and under the ongoing influence of the Synagogue traditions of the Jews. Yet these books have fueled over the centuries a killing frenzy of anti-Semitism. The single greatest carrier of this hostility has been nothing less than our Sunday school curricula and materials. Jewish people thus have a hard time seeing these twenty-seven books as “sacred scriptures.”
> 
> The institution of slavery was affirmed throughout history from words in the New Testament. Slavery was practiced in the west by God-fearing, Bible-reading Christians. The popes at various times owned slaves. The section of the United States that fought fiercely to preserve this evil institution was also known as the Bible Belt. It was the Bible-reading people of the South who made lynching legal, who replaced slavery with segregation and who resisted every effort to keep racial justice from being achieved. Much of their justification for this behavior came from quoting St. Paul, who in his letter to Philemon urged the runaway slave Onesimus to return to his master, while simultaneously urging Philemon, his master, to be forgiving to his slave. In the Epistle to the Colossians, Paul, or one of his disciples, instructed slaves to be obedient and masters to be kind. Perhaps it could be said that a kinder and gentler slavery is better than a cruel and harsh one, but it is to be noted that Paul clearly accepted the legitimacy of this cruel institution, making no effort to abolish it and thus legitimizing it in the minds of others for centuries. One wonders how those who were enslaved and their descendents might view the New Testament from which texts were cited to justify both slavery and second-class citizenship. These scriptures were not sources of life to these victims of our prejudice.
> 
> Women have also not fared well at the hands of these male written, male read and male interpreted books of the New Testament. They have rather fed the deep-seated cultural misogyny of the ages with such admonitions as those found in Ephesians for wives to obey their husbands, or in Corinthians for women to keep quiet in church, or in Timothy where women are forbidden to exercise authority over men. Under the influence of the New Testament women in the Christian world were denied higher education for centuries. As a result they were denied entrance into the professions, denied the right to vote, denied the ability to own property in their own name and denied leadership roles in the Christian world until well into the 20th century. When progress did come for women it was driven by the secular spirit while organized religion as expressed in the Christian Church resisted these changes with scripture-quoting vehemence. In major sections of the world this anti-feminist Bible-laced rhetoric continues to be articulated both officially through ecclesiastical bodies and by individual believers. One wonders how women would ever be drawn to the texts of this book.
> 
> The same could also be said for the victimization of the gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender segments of our population. They too have lived throughout history with Bible-fueled hostility that manifested itself in gay bashing and in actual murder. Texts were quoted from Romans that called homosexuality “unnatural” and condemned it, to references in other epistles that mistranslated the Greek word arcenokoitus, which refers to a passive male, as deviant, sodomite or pervert, even though its original meaning appears to have been male prostitutes. There is no doubt that the center of homophobia in the western world today remains the Christian Church, now ghettoized from the mainstream of society, and is regularly articulated by Christian voices from the Pope to Pat Robertson. One wonders how homosexual people could ever appreciate the message of the New Testament.
> 
> In my experience, I do not find it possible to overestimate the levels of biblical ignorance present today inside the Christian population. Most of these just-cited abuses rise out of that ignorance. Much preaching that emanates from both Catholic and Protestant pulpits not only reflects that ignorance, but also continues to spread it.
> 
> In this series of columns I will, therefore, attempt to counter this biblical ignorance and to break the grip that it has on much of our population. While seeking to avoid the technicalities of biblical scholarship that seem to amuse so many in the academy, I will try to state clearly how these books came to be written and so endeavor to oppose the rampant literal misunderstanding that embraces so much of our culture today in regard to the Bible. I will go into both the meaning and the key points of each book in the New Testament, as I have done in past years with the books of the Old Testament. I will try to show the differences among the four gospels that reveal more contradictions than most people believe to be possible. I hope you will enjoy the journey. I know I will.
> 
> One final note. A number of small churches across the English-speaking world now use this column for their Sunday morning adult education classes. These essays are subscribed to by the members of the various classes with extra copies reproduced for visitors so that the class and the discussion can have a common basis for discussion. The leader of the class simply convenes the group and introduces the topic. That leadership role can be constant or rotated so long as the purpose is accomplished to allow people to discuss issues openly, to raise any questions they wish and to engage in any debate that arises. When the group gets too large for discussion, it subdivides into two groups. I am gratified to learn this and rejoice that this column might be an instrument in the New Reformation for which many of us yearn. At the very least I hope people find a richness in this book that small ecclesiastical minds have tried for centuries to hide from the average pew sitter. Have fun!
> ~  John Shelby Spong
> Announcements
> 
> 
> Love in Action – Conversations with Andrew Harvey
> 
> Join Andrew Harvey for a powerful LIVE lecture and Q&A session, Thursday July 23rd at 4pm PT, 7pm ET. Find the meaning you’ve been searching for in this global crisis… and discover how love-in-action, compassion, and sacred activism can reshape your experience of these unprecedented times. READ ON...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dialogue mailing list
> Dialogue at lists.wedgeblade.net
> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue-wedgeblade.net/attachments/20200718/4837e8be/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 346198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue-wedgeblade.net/attachments/20200718/4837e8be/attachment-0001.png>