Introduction

James Hal Cone (1938—2018) opened my eyes to the wickedness of white theology, he taught me that I must become Black like Jesus, he helped me understand that God sides with the oppressed against their oppressors, he redeemed my understanding of Malcolm X, he taught me about the mass lynchings in recent American history, he taught me that liberation theology is the gospel of Jesus Christ, and a myriad of things. James H. Cone is an exemplar Post-Barthian theologian because he started with Barth's theology and fight for the Confessing Church in Nazi Germany, and then went beyond Barth to develop his black theology from it and used his black liberation theology in his fight for Blacks and Amerindians in the United States today.

James H. Cone has been especially helpful in 2020 after the lynching of George Floyd and several other instances of police brutality were highly publicized in the media and during the protests that ensued. If you'd like to learn about James H. Cone's life and works, then I am pleased to announce that Stephen D. Morrison has written an excellent short primer on James H. Cone as the fifth installment in his In Plain English series that is a great place to begin: James Cone In Plain English (2020). 

Summary

A good way to be introduced to a theologian is to read a short introduction that includes a brief biography, a summary of writings that highlight key contributions, and a reading plan. S. D. Morrison's James Cone In Plain English accomplished this task for James H. Cone as he had previously for Karl Barth, Friedrich Schleiermacher, T. F. Torrance, Jürgen Moltmann in his In Plain English series.

The book is a quick read (126 pages) that covers much ground and includes many (but not all) of James H. Cone's important themes of his life and works. Morrison begins with a biological sketch and then analyzes Cone's significant theological ideas such as black theology, black liberation theology, God is black, etc. The book is not a substitute for reading James H. Cone, so it elides some of James H. Cone's important contributions, such as Cone's emphasis on being angry and his dialectic between Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X, and he does not discuss Cone's conflicted dependence upon Reinhold Niebuhr.

Morrison's James Cone is a good starting place to send a reader on the right course into James H. Cone's life and works.

James Cone for White People

In the introduction, Morrison admits "I almost called this book James Cone for White People. It would not be an inaccurate title." [1]. The elephant in the room is that S. D. Morrison is a white-skinned theologian (like myself) and James H. Cone was a black theologian decisively against white people (such as us) and his writings were a constant reproach of white people, white theology, white supremacy, and especially a white Jesus—without distinction. Morrison is keenly aware of this dilemma and on the very first page of the book he writes "This book is dedicated to the victims of white supremacy."[2] Morrison says "This is a hard book. It was hard to write, and it will probably be hard to read."[3] And, "Even though my primary aim is to explain the major ideas of Cone's theology, I cannot escape myself. I am white. And Cone's work forcefully disrupts the comfortable illusions of white people like me. He did not write theology for me; he wrote for the sake of black liberation. And in this struggle, I am a natural oppressor."[4] I agree with Morrison's confession, and I responded in a similar way when I read James H. Cone for the first time (and with every book henceforth). Morrison's confession is a model testimony of repentance that other white-skinned Christians should imitate as a first step in overcoming this struggle. 

Quotes

Here is a selection of quotes from the James Cone In Plain English that I shared on Twitter to give a taste for the book and are retweetable!

"So this is my confession: I am and have been racist. No white person can claim anything less. To be white is to benefit from a system of white supremacy." [5]

"It is a sure sign of white privilege when we get to pick and choose what to be angry about." [6]

"In the words of what is perhaps Cone's most difficult metaphor, we must renounce whiteness, be born again, and 'become black' with Christ in solidarity with the oppressed." [7]  

"Cone's black theology is not for me; in many ways, it is against me. But it is against me in the same way that the Gospel is against me, by calling me to repentance. It is a scandal and an offense, but it is truth. And thus, it is freedom." [8]

"This is a hard book. It was hard to write, and it will probably be hard to read. . . . To read James Cone is to be forcefully awakened from our slumber and repent of our apathy." [9]

"Cone's work is no less significant than theirs. If any theologian deserves a library of books about them, it is James Cone. Students who study Barth, Bultmann, and Tillich at university should also read Cone—for the future of the Church and the world." [10]

"Cone's work calls the Church to renounce its privileged status and embrace the discipleship of Christ . . . God is with the needy, poor, homeless, and black. It is time for the Church to live in the fellowship of Christ and not the courts of Herod." [11]

"A white person born into a white supremacist society cannot not be racist because they unavoidably benefit from racist policies. That is why I said I am and have been racist. I was born white and am guilty of white supremacy. It is an inherited sin." [12]

"It did not take long for Cone to learn that white theology, despite all its lip-service to Christian values, was an immoral, anti-Christian ideology." [13]

"White theology thinks it can speak for all people and times, and it is thus a heretical, racist illusion. All theology is contextual. Theology is never color-blind or apolitical because it is bound to actual human conditions." [14]

"No one consciously sets out to write 'white theology.' But any theology that lends support to the status quo and is more concerned with minor doctrinal points than the suffering of the poor and oppressed is a kind of white theology." [15]

"Indeed, white supremacy, not Christ's Gospel, is the controlling ideology of white theology." [16]

"the rejection of all things political, the common claim that "I'm not political," and the idea that the Church is an apolitical institution are subtly racist ideas because, by our silence, we support the violence of the status quo. Silence is violence." [17]

"Thus, white theology is heretical not only in its ethical affiliation with white supremacy but in so far as it professes a different God. . . . Their God is not the God of liberation but rather the upholder of the status quo, a God who condones injustice and sides with the privileged and powerful. In short, the God of white theology is an idol." [18]

"White theology cannot know the God of the oppressed because its knee remains on the neck of the black and powerless despite their cries for help. These are God's cries. God died with George Floyd. God suffered and suffocated at the hands of white supremacy. . . . The radical conclusion we must draw from Cone's theology is that these cries of unrest are God's Word to white America. It is a call for us to repent of white supremacy and turn to the God of the poor and powerless. . . . White supremacy, the white theology that supports it, and the silent white Churches that do nothing in the face of injustice are culpable; they murdered God in the death of George Floyd." [19]

"Trying to understand the Gospel in America from the white perspective is like trying to understand Jesus from the perspective of the Roman soldiers." [20]

According to Cone: "Ontologically, blackness is a symbol of all oppressed people, and whiteness is the symbol of oppressors. Physiologically, black is the historical color of oppressed people, and white is the color of their oppressors." [. . .] "The ontological is universal, the physiological is particular, and they are dialectically connected. . . . In other words, we could also say that 'whiteness' is a mindset, and white skin is a physical trait that most often results in a mindset of whiteness. The two are not always the same, but white people often adopt whiteness by default." [21]

"White people are supposed to feel uncomfortable when reading Cone." [22]

"We lack the imagination to hope for a world beyond prisons and the police. A world of justice and equality in which criminals are rehabilitated rather than violently robbed of their humanity. … The white Church fails to imagine such a world because it has aligned itself with unjust power structures. … But God is on the side of the underclass, the prisoner, and the poor, nor on the side of those in power who support the status quo because they benefit from its injustices" [23]

"charity props up an oppressive status quo by failing to confront the underlying systemic issues … hides those issues and thus makes matters worse for the oppressed. Charity is when a billionaire gives money to the poor while … exploiting their labor for profit." [24]

"Why is America the 'richest' country in the world but cannot provide healthcare for its citizens as a fundamental human right or pay everyday people a living wage? Yet we can frivolously afford endless wars and a limitless supply of bombs? … The truth is, there are more than enough resources to meet everyone's needs, but because we consciously choose to exclude vulnerable people from the table, we enforce a system of sinful oppression." [25]

Conclusion

I am delighted to review Stephen D. Morrison's recently published fifth book on James H. Cone in his In Plain English series: James Cone In Plain English (2020). I've reviewed all of Stephen D. Morrison's previous books in his In Plain English series including Friedrich Schleiermacher in Plain English (2019), Jürgen Moltmann in Plain English (2018),  T. F. Torrance in Plain English (2017), and Karl Barth in Plain English (2017). And I'm pleased to say that each book has been better than the last—including this newest volume!

Morrison's James Cone in Plain English is a helpful introduction to James Hal Cone—especially for white people (like myself). The strength of this book is that involves the reader by encountering the reader with James H. Cone. It is a concise and well-written primer that exemplifies the fact that amateur theologians may and should publish theological works and cut through the hubris of scholarship. Each of Morrison's books has improved in his writing style as well, the quotations are not excessive and support the point at hand, and he draws in contemporary examples such as references to Ibram X. Kendi's works in the book. I enjoyed reading the book, and it was hard to put down, and I was sad to read the last page—all the hallmarks of a great primer. 

My primary criticisms are the topics that Morisson did not discuss, and this is a superficial criticism. I would like to see an analysis of Cone's dependence upon Reinhold Niebuhr, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King Jr, and I'd like to see a discussion of James Cone as an angry theologian, and these may be remedied in a future revised edition. 

Bibliography:

1. Stephen D. Morrison, James Cone In Plain English, (Columbus: Beloved Publishing, 2020), v.

2. Ibid. v.

3. Ibid. v.

4. Ibid. v.

5. Ibid. viii.

6. Ibid. ix.

7. Ibid. x.

8. Ibid. x.

9. Ibid. v.

10. Ibid. xi.

11. Ibid. xi.

12. Ibid. xii.

13. Ibid. xviii.

14. Ibid. 1.

15. Ibid. 3.

16. Ibid. 3.

17. Ibid. 7.

18. Ibid. 10.

19. Ibid. 12.

20. Ibid. 11.

21. Ibid. 16.

22. Ibid. 18.

23. Ibid. 28.

24. Ibid. 53.

25. Ibid. 54.

Related: Ibram X. Kendi, In Plain English, James Cone In Plain English, James H. Cone, Review, Stephen D. Morrison, Stephen Morrison