7
was radical
37
, it was likewise unique. Very few clergy and churches followed in Cleages
footsteps.
The wholehearted embrace of Black Power had the potential to shift the focus of
ones "Christianity" away from the person of Jesus Christ and towards the resolution of the
immediate crisis and towards a more existential center. Many of the attributes and teachings of
Jesus were marginalized as certain teachings truncated the entire scope of Jesus teachings.
38
The person of Jesus Christ did not appear to be preeminent in the 1968 statement by the
Philadelphia Council of Black Clergy that stated:
It is our intention that Black clergy and Black theological students commit themselves to the
liberation of Black people in the same manner that we have committed ourselves to the faith of
Jesus Christ...For us there must be no difficulty in viewing Christ and the other founders of the
worlds great religions as clearly prototypes and examples of revolutionary figures...
39
A more moderate and "timid", according to Gayraud Wilmore
40
, approach was taken
by many mainline clergy, both affiliated with black and white denominations. The 1966
Statement of the National Committee of Negro Clergy (NCNC), signed by mainline pastors and
even Baptist pastors like New York Citys Sandy Ray, affirmed the legitimacy of Black Powers
cry against racism.
41
It also denounced the racism of Americas white churches. However, the
document did not renounce any Christian doctrine nor use the language of a "black God",
"black Jesus", or separatism. Three years later, a subsequent statement distinguished "Black
theology [as] the product of black Christian experience and reflection" (emphasis mine).
42
The
statement does not cite non-Christian sources as foundational to its project. One should not
assume this "orthodoxy" to be the character of each participant but the formal statement
carried the tone of Christianity, and exclusively Christianity.
Speaking as Christians, the NCNC did not shy away from seeking to convict its white
brothers of sin because their theology "sustained the American slave system and negated the
humanity of blacks."
43
Also, due to the dehumanizing of blacks in America, the statement
encouraged the "black community to affirm itself as part of the kingdom of God."
44
These key
statements of the NCNC legitimated the outrage of blacks due to racism but crafted their
response within the bounds of Christianity. After Cleage and the NCNC went their separate
ways, one may ask which side now represented Black theology in its church-form.
Other denominational statements were more programmatic in their approach and
appeared to affirm the radical approach of Black Power.
45
The statements addressed the
policies of white Christians rather than their official theology. As black caucuses emerged in
37
Although Wilmore suggest that Cleage merely "may have gone too far." Cone and Wilmore, Black
Theology: A Documentary History Volume I 1966-1979, 1
st
Edition (Maryknoll: Orbis Press, 1979), 251.
38
Bruce L. Fields, Introducing Black Theology, 58. Fields avoids any truncation by acknowledging, "I
am not arguing that racism is the only issue that the church of Jesus Christ needs to confront."
39
Cone and Wilmore, Black Theology: 1966-1979, 1
st
Edition, 279.
40
Cone and Wilmore, Black Theology: 1966-1979, 6.
41
Ibid., 19-26.
42
Ibid., 37.
43
Ibid., 37.
44
Ibid., 37. One has to assume whether statement refers to the black community (in general) or
specifically to black Christians.
45
Both the statement of Black Methodists for Church Renewal (1968) and the statement of the Black
Catholic Clergy (1968) call for more inclusion of blacks in the programmatic aspects of the church. The timid
response of Black Catholics is particularly noteworthy considering Catholicisms propensity towards syncretism as
noted by Albert Raboteau, Slave Religion.