In his preface to the 1997 edition of God of The Oppressed, James Cone looks back and writes of his 1975 publication: “It still represents my basic theological perspective—that the God of biblical faith and black religion is partial toward the weak” (Cone, 1997). However, he acknowledges in no uncertain terms that the perspectives of feminist, gay, womanist, Native American, and South African theologians, in particular, have transformed the content, form, and approach of his work. This paper focuses on the significance of Cone’s critical reflection on and reconsideration of his own work – with an emphasis on the ways Cone’s perspectives on gender and sexuality evolved. Through this paper contends that Cone’s way of looking back models a politically powerful form of humility that remains one of the most effective technologies available to those who are oppressed in quests for liberation.
Building on a fresh reflection on God of The Oppressed, this paper first exegetes Cone’s analysis of his own work and demonstrates the ways he leaned into what he learned through his self-critique. Second, this paper cites womanist, feminist, and LGBTQ+ responses to Cone’s work in 1975 and, again, after 1997. Beginning with Cone’s content and “look back,” this paper presents a hermeneutic of humility as a critical tool for those who are interested in multidimensional quests for justice in public and secular arenas, religious institutions, academic institutions, and familial and private spheres. Ultimately, from Cone’s God of The Oppressed, the foundation for a powerful politics of humility is laid based on:
- STUDY. A more balanced study of biblical texts.
- SERVICE. A prioritization of serving the least among us.
- ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. An acknowledgement of who we are.
In his preface to the 1997 edition of God of The Oppressed, James Cone looks back and writes of his 1975 publication: “It still represents my basic theological perspective—that the God of biblical faith and black religion is partial toward the weak” (Cone, 1997). However, he acknowledges in no uncertain terms that the perspectives of feminist, gay, womanist, Native American, and South African theologians, in particular, have transformed the content, form, and approach of his work. This paper focuses on the significance of Cone’s critical reflection on and reconsideration of his own work – with an emphasis on the ways Cone’s perspectives on gender and sexuality evolved. Through this paper contends that Cone’s way of looking back models a politically powerful form of humility that remains one of the most effective technologies available to those who are oppressed in quests for liberation.