The
BMC – A Personal Opinion
The
Black Methodist Consultation[1]
has recently come under a lot of scrutiny. It has not only been scrutinized at
the hands of white, but also black Methodists. People have displayed their
opinions, mainly at a church body that defines itself along racial lines and
how this should not be the case in the democratic dispensation South Africa
finds itself in. Like everyone else, this presents my opinion on the BMC as it
is currently. It is not my aim to discuss the relevance of such a body, but rather
if the current form of the BMC is making a difference in normal black people’s
lives. It is my assertion that the only thing people have a problem with is the
word “black” in the BMC. This is because we are a country that still finds it
difficult to speak about colour. This confirms that we are nowhere near a state
of healing as all of us, white and black; still find it uncomfortable to speak
about issues of colour. This, however, is not the focus of this piece.
The
relation between the Black Consciousness Movement[2],
Black theology and the BMC cannot be disputed.[3]
Therefore, by implication the BMC adopts the philosophy of the BCM and Black
theology presents the praxis[4] or
framework that the movement employs. Black Theology is understood, by its
proponents as the theological aspect of the BCM. Whether or not the BMC still
consciously recognizes this, I am not convinced. Black theology has also come
under a lot of fire for its insistence on using the term ‘black’. Black
theologians have gone at lengths to argue that the term only secondarily
connote skin colour. The term black carried with it huge socio-economic and
political implications, therefore the name was used as a synonym. Black was (It
still is!) synonymous with oppression, poverty, disease and barbarism. Loosely
termed, Black theology is a theology of the oppressed, the poor and downtrodden[5]. Black
theology also understands that traditional theology[6]
has done its theology through the eyes of the elite and the powerful so as to
keep to the status quo. Black
theology does theology through a preferential option for the poor. Black
theologians assert boldly that God is on the side of the oppressed. Because God
is not neutral, theology cannot be neutral and consequently this means the same
for the Church[7].
Secondly, during apartheid every other race in South Africa was not referred to
by their skin colour, but rather as non-whites (non-people). Theologically,
this implied that black people were negative images of whites, while whites
were made in the image of God blacks were made in the image of whites[8].
Therefore the term ‘black’ was compulsory because it put in perspective the
ontology of the black person in relation to God.
The
BMC, in its current form fails to reach out to the normal black person. As a
young boy, growing up in the township, I have never felt the BMC was a space I
would even be welcome in. The truth is; the BMC is a formation of not just black
people, but the black elite. The movement that claims it exists for the benefit
of the black people does so through speech. They discuss the plight of the
black person in a high tea. The paradox is mind-boggling. In order for the BMC
to be effective, the bulk of its membership should consist of the black church,
not the black elite and/or leaders. Mosala has argued that the reason Black
theology had not become the property of the people “…may lie in the class
positions and class commitments of its proponents.[9] I
believe the BMC also finds itself in the same predicament. As long as it stays
like this, it will continue being a lion without teeth and it will persist in
being a ladder for black Ministers with respect to positions. With this being said,
it is still my conviction that the BMC, as a lion with teeth would play an
imperative role in society and the Church. In my judgment, the BMC needs to
concentrate on the praxis, the framework, which is Black theology. They need to
look at society from the lens of the oppressed, poor, outcast and the
downtrodden. The movement must understand that this is who they exist for, the
poor.
Black
theologians have asserted that if you want to find God at work, go to the poor
and the outcasts. The BMC needs to employ Black theology not only as a way of
doing theology but as a framework. They need to allow people to learn that
salvation is not an eschatological escape from this world to the next. It is
not an escape from this life of oppression and hunger to a spiritual life of
milk and honey. But Jesus liberates us now, from our social, physical and
spiritual constraints. The BMC and ultimately the Church become catalysts for
this salvation. The BMC must preach Christ the liberator, who came for the sick,
downtrodden and oppressed. The BMC must remain a figure of Moses[10],
and not that of Nehemiah[11],
we cannot rebuild when there are people still stuck in the land of oppression.
[1] Hereafter referred to as the BMC
[2] Hereafter referred to as the BCM
[3] Ndikho
Mtshiselwa puts this point across in his work. Mtshiselwa, N., 2015, ‘The
emergence of the Black Methodist Consultation and its possible prophetic voice
in post-apartheid South Africa’, HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies
71(3),
[4] Praxis is a Greek term which when
translated means “to work”
[5] Black theologians who make this
assertion are to mention but a few, Simon Maimela, Bonganjalo Goba, Manas
Buthelezi and Allan Boesak
[6] i.e. Western theology
[7] Maimela, S. 1986. Current Themes and Emphases in Black
Theology. In: Mosala, I, J; Tlhagale, B. The Unquestionable Right To Be Free: Essays in Black Theology.
Johannesburg: Skotaville Publishers. pg. 101-112
[8] Balia D.M. 1989. Christian Resistance to Apartheid. Braamfontein:
Skotaville Publishers
[9] Mosala, I. 1986. The Use of the Bible in Black Theology. In:
Mosala I. Tlhagale , B. The
Unquestionable Right to be Free: Essays in Black Theology. Johannesburg:
Skotaville Publishers. Pg. 175-204
[10] A figure of liberation (the Exodus
story)
[11] A figure of reconstruction (the
rebuilding of the Temple)
