Interreligious Lessons from Thurman’s Jesus and the Disinherited—Resource Page

Readings

WEEK 1

Please read this chapter from Reimagining Howard Thurman: The Unfinished Search for Common Ground before the first session:

Eccentric Apostles Leading from the Growing Edge, by Barbara Brown Taylor

WEEK 2

Please read the Preface, Chapter 1, and Chapter 2 from Thurman’s Jesus and the Disinherited, focusing on the excerpts below:

Excerpts from Jesus and the Disinherited, by Howard Thurman

From the Preface:

Why is it that Christianity seems impotent to deal radically, and therefore effectively with the issues of discrimination and injustice on the basis of race, religion, and national origin? Is this impotency due to a betrayal of the genius of the religion, or is it due to basic weakness in the religion itself? The question is searching, for the dramatic demonstration of the impotency of Christianity in dealing with the issue is underscored by its apparent inability to cope within its own fellowship. (p. xix)

From Chapter 1:

I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times that I have heard a sermon on the meaning of religion, of Christianity, to the man who stands with his back against the wall. It is urgent that my meaning be crystal clear. The masses of men who live with their backs constantly against the wall. They are the poor, the disinherited, the dispossessed. What does our religion say to them? The issue is not what it counsels them to do for others whose need may be greater, but what religion offers to meet their own needs. The search for an answer to this question is perhaps the most important religious quest of modern life.

From Chapter 2:

In a society in which certain people or groups – by virtue of economic, social, or political power – have dead-weight advantages over others who are essentially without that kind of power, those who are thus disadvantaged know that they cannot fight back effectively, that they cannot protect themselves, and that they cannot demand protection from their persecutors. Any slight conflict, any alleged insult, any vague whim, any unrelated frustration, may bring down upon the head of the defenseless the full weight of naked physical violence. (p. 27)

Fear, then, becomes the safety device with which the oppressed surround themselves in order to give some measure of protection from complete nervous collapse. How do they achieve this? In the first place, they make their bodies commit to memory ways of behaving that will tend to reduce their exposure to violence…Fear thus becomes a form of life assurance, making possible the continuation of physical existence with a minimum of active violence. (p. 30)

But the child of the disinherited is likely to live a heavy life. A ceiling is placed on his dreaming by the counsel of despair coming from his elders, whom experience has taught to expect little and hope for less. If, on the other hand, the elders understand in their own experiences and lives the tremendous insight of Jesus, it is possible for them to share their enthusiasm with their children. This is the qualitative overtone springing from the depths of religious insight, and it is contagious. It will put into the hands of the child the key for unlocking the door of his hopes. It must never be forgotten that human beings can be conditioned in favor of the positive as well as the negative. A great and central assurance will cause parents to condition their children to high endeavor and great aspiring, and these in turn will put the child out of the immediate, clawing reaches of the tense or the sustained negations of his environment. I have seen it happen. In communities that were completely barren, with no apparent growing edge, without any point to provide light for the disadvantaged, I have seen children grow up without fear, with quiet dignity and such high purpose that the mark which they set for themselves has even been transcended. (pp. 44-45)

WEEK 3

Discussion Questions

In Chapter 4, Thurman writes that the best way to approach is with direct sincerity, and in Chapter 5, he says the basis for hate is contact without fellowship, or having time together but without that space of understanding and sincerity. How do we create those spaces for fellowship that provide the right atmosphere for combating hatred?
How do you feel about Thurman’s statement that “Hatred cannot be controlled once it is set in motion?” Do you agree or disagree? Is it worth it to try to control it, and if so, how do we do it?
In our world of increasing polarization, is an “unscrambling” process possible? Think about your own social circle. Do you tend to be in conversation with those who are similar to you or have similar views, or do you extend into places with people who are different from you? When you do this, how do you lead those conversations with love?
How do we recognize the fear, deception, and hatred within ourselves, and how do we change it? Can we change others, or is that something people have to do on their own?
How do you cultivate authentic relationships with others who are different from you? How do you work to make sure there is balance of power (or no need for the power?)
Can our society achieve love without justice? How are the two intertwined?

Selections from Jesus and the Disinherited, by Howard Thurman

From Chapter 3

Deception is perhaps the oldest of all the techniques by which the weak have protected themselves against the strong. Through the ages, at all stages of sentient activity, the weak have survived by fooling the strong. (p. 48)

From Chapter 4

Hatred cannot be defined. It can only be described. If I were to project a simple diagram of hatred, revealing the anatomy of its development, the idea would break down as follows.

In the first place, hatred often begins in a situation in which there is contact without fellowship, contact that is devoid of any of the primary overtures of warmth and fellow-feeling and genuineness. Of course, it must be borne in mind that there can be an abundance of sentimentality masquerading under the cloak of fellowship. It is easy to have fellowship on your own terms and to repudiate it if your terms are not acceptable. It is this kind of fellowship that one finds often in the South between whites and Negroes. As long as the Negro is called John or Mary and accepts the profoundly humiliating position of a inferior status, fellowship is quite possible. Great sacrifices are even made for him, and all the weight of position and power are at the disposal of the weaker person. It is precisely because of this false basis of fellowship so often found in that section of the country where there is the greatest contact between Negro and white there is the least real fellowship, and the first step along the road of bitterness and hatred is assured.

When we give to the concept a wider application, it is clear that much of modern life is so impersonal that there is always opportunity for the seeds of hatred to grow unmolested. Where there are contact devoid of genuine fellowship, such contacts stand in immediate candidacy for hatred. (pp. 65-66)

Hatred cannot be controlled once it is set in motion. (p. 76)

From Chapter 5

Love of the enemy means that a fundamental attack must first be made on the enemy status. How can this be done? Does it mean merely ignoring the fact that he belongs to the enemy class? Hardly. For lack of a better term, an “unscrambling” process is required. Obviously a situation has to be set up in which it is possible for primary contacts to be multiplied. By this I do not mean contacts that are determined by status or by social distinctions. There are always primary contacts between the weak and the strong, the privileged and underprivileged….

It is necessary, therefore for the privileged and the underprivileged to work on the common environment for the purpose of providing normal experiences of fellowship. This is one very important reason for the insistence that segregation is a complete ethical and moral evil. Whatever it may do for those who dwell on either side of the wall, one thing is certain: it poisons all normal contacts of those persons involved. The first step toward love is a common sharing of a sense of mutual worth and value. This cannot be discovered in a vacuum or in a series of artificial or hypothetical relationships. It has to be in a real situation, natural, free. (p. 88)