Theology After Obama—What Does Race Have to Do With It?: A Racial Prolegomenon to American Theological Production in the Twenty‐first Century

Abstract

Theology After Obama—What Does Race Have to Do With It?: A Racial Prolegomenon to American Theological Production in the Twenty‐first Century James W. Perkinson My concern in this essay is one of challenging North American Chris tianity concerning the ways our racialized history continues to influence and impede our national aspirations toward democracy and justice. In lifting up this concern, my focus is not primarily one of identifying strictly theological issues for strictly theological purposes, but one of making clear the degree to which race continues to dominate perception and broker behavior both inside and outside the church, even in supposedly “post‐racial” America. In my short 60 years on the planet—moving broadly through church circles of all kinds—growing up Presbyterian, born‐again evangelical at age 19, charismatic renewal “disciple” for decades, 15‐year member of Episcopal Church of the Messiah on Detroit’s near east side, Roman Catholic seminary trained, University of Chicago schooled, (not ordained) Disciples of Christ pastor/preacher for a year, poet‐performer for 3 years for the downtown United Methodist Church in Motown—and simultaneously spending 9 years in the business world and another 15 years teaching for six different universities/colleges—I have yet to notice any generalized difference between Christian whites and secular whites in handling race. My concern then is not so much to tease out relevant theological themes as to outline racial meanings for theological consideration. In such a project, “God‐talk” is secondary and after the fact. What first must be grasped is an underground tsunami of our time, only one of whose tributaries is conscious articulation. How the Spirit is moving inside of such remains a task of discernment possible only on the other side of plunging into the waters. Framing the situation In his recent book entitled The Backlash,Philadelphia News writer Will Bunch elaborates a tripartite rationale for the recent emergence of the Tea Party into the role of public adjudicator of political speech. Whatever actual electoral successes might ensue in coming elections, Bunch argues, Tea Party‐ers have already proven potent in shifting public debate onto the terrain of right‐wing concerns for “things American” by amalgamating rank‐and‐file conservative anger and panic with talk radio and social networking jingoism under the rule of vulture capitalism, “ever‐circling” in search of popular means to further a big‐business agenda (Bunch 2010). While reason three (big‐capitalist “prescience” in funding rabid hucksterism and supporting Tea Party rancor) occupies much of Bunch’s attention, the undercurrent of anger and fear that anchors the amalgam will command consideration here. Anti‐racist activist Tim Wise has written extensively on the way the continuing subtext of race, in the United States, serves as an ever‐looming portent useful for segmenting shared interests and organizing popular resentment into political sentiments and behavior actually at odds with popular interest (Wise 2010). The interest in this essay is precisely at the point where anxiety meets elocution. It is no mystery that Obama’s own party heads into a new election season laboring under an enthusiasm‐deficit. Its own tacit covenant with corporate interest and mainstream mentality in securing electability required foreswearing strong shows of oppositional emotion. Obama as “icon of the new” could never step free from the deep shadow of our continuing struggle with race in this country. He remained intimately tethered to the great shibboleth of popular terror in the political imaginary: a public black man armed with both political power and historical anger. Gaining access to the top office of power required a clear and public repudiation of black indignation. As Wise has argued, Obama had to package himself as post‐racially “pale” to have any chance of securing the mainstream support necessary to ascend the steps of the accurately named “White” House (Wise 2009). That pallor is the subject of this writing. But as already indicated, the theological interest animating the text is one that works the intersection between word and energy, the place where palaver and passion intertwine to determine political destiny. In teasing out the argument that in many ways race today remains the most potent political fulcrum to manage “democracy” in service...