{"id":17766,"date":"2019-06-24T11:43:16","date_gmt":"2019-06-24T16:43:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.anglicandioceseja.org\/?p=17766"},"modified":"2019-06-25T11:50:17","modified_gmt":"2019-06-25T16:50:17","slug":"the-public-square-is-morally-empty-garnet-roper","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.anglicandioceseja.org\/copy\/the-public-square-is-morally-empty-garnet-roper\/","title":{"rendered":"The Public Square is Morally Empty – Garnet Roper"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Book Launch at The United Theological College of The West Indies<\/strong>
Howard Gregory, Journey to the Promised Land: Theological Reflections by Neville deSouza on Jamaica\u2019s Journey\ufeff<\/em><\/strong> <\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Lady Rheima Hall, Archbishop of the Province of the West Indies, Most Rev. Dr. Howard Gregory, Mrs. Iona deSouza, widow of the late Lord Bishop Neville deSouza, the distinguish leadership of the Anglican Communion, Dr. Oral Thomas and the members of the UTCWI community, other members of the clergy, Sisters and Brothers all, Good evening, I am deeply honoured to have been asked to give this address at the launch of this most important work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Allow me to pay tribute to Dr. Gregory on three counts.  First I salute his appointment as the\nArchbishop of the Province of the West Indies and to say how proud I am to say\nI know him and even more so to have worked and shared fellowship with him.  Archbishop Gregory, We receive your honour on\nbehalf of the Jamaican church, our collective redemptive presence. I wish also to\npay tribute to Archbishop Gregory for this fine work, Journey to the Promised Land<\/em>. I saw this work coming the moment I\nattended the funeral services for the late Anglican Lord Bishop of Jamaica, The\nRt. Rev. Neville deSouza. Dr. Gregory\u2019s sermon at that funeral service,\nincluded generous references to these 20 Synod charges that were delivered\nbetween 1980 and 2000.  I pay tribute to\nDr. Gregory\u2019s scholarship and diligence and his careful framing of the historical\ncontext out of which the reflections contained in this work have emerged.  Thirdly, I celebrate Archbishop Gregory\u2019s courage\nwhich by now ought to have been legendary: I myself have paid dearly for\nsupporting and expressing ideas that were similar to positions taken by Dr..\nGregory.  The recent statement on\nabortion by the Synod was carefully nuanced and crafted but still courageous\nenough to break ranks with the American church in these parts.  But the courage about which I am speaking is also\nthe kindness extended to me by affording me a non-Anglican the opportunity to\ndeliver these comments on the occasion of this book launch of Journey to the Promised Land<\/em>. I am\ngrateful to all of you but to Bishop Gregory, in particular, for taking a risk\non me.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I have long admired the work of the lateLord Bishop Neville\ndeSouza, I was flattered to know that he not only knew my name but my mother\u2019s\nname and the name of my sister Paulette who worked as secretary to Bishop\ndeSouza at the Anglican church house in Montego Bay.  I regard the late Anglican Lord Bishop as an\niconic figure, independent, courageous and above the fray. To have had the\nhappy privilege of transcribing the manuscript of these Synod Charges and now\nto address this book launch are together the privilege of a lifetime.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This work edited by Howard Gregory for which he has also contributed\na very useful introduction; also includes a prologue written by Patrick Bryan; the\nForeword is contributed by the Honorable Barbara Gloudon OJ. The Journey to the Promise Land<\/em> is\nindeed a seminal work.  This work shows\noff the importance of what we do when we occupy the sacred desk.  This work represents deSouza as prophet as\nscholar and as prelate and pastor.  It is\nparadigmatic of the use that can be made of the ecclesial setting as space for\nmoral reflection and contextual engagement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In making my brief remarks this evening, I have framed them\nin response to a thesis statement by erudite Caribbean theologian, and now\nretired Pastor Rev Dr. Burchell Taylor, that the public square is morally\nempty. Taylor\u2019s remark was a self-conscious reflection on the work of Richard\nJohn Neuhaus The Naked Public Square:\nReligion and Democracy in America <\/em>(1984).  Neuhaus\u2019 work was a protest against the rigid\nseparation of church and state in America that he said would result in the\ndeath of democracy. He argued that the public square ought to be occupied by\ncompeting moral visions of both the faith and non-faith or other faiths\ncommunities. Rather, the faith of persons and communities must be more\ncompellingly related to the public arena. “The naked public\nsquare”–which results from the exclusion of popular values from the\npublic forum–will almost certainly result in the death of democracy.  Neuhaus therefore warned of the danger of the\nvacuum when the Church avoids or is excluded from the public square, this will\ncreate a vacuum and will result in totalitarianism of one form or another.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Neuhaus argues that\nthe antidote to such a vacuum is a kind of political pluralism: a public square\nthat is filled with a wide array of moral visions and actors. Religious ideas\nmust be allowed in the public square, not simply out of fairness, but as\nundergirding moral visions that supply the ethical standards to which\ngovernment is held accountable. Those committed to liberal democracy should\nembrace this pluralist vision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What Burchell Taylor was arguing to\nwhich I am making reference is that we are now operating in such a vacuum.  My reflection on the work provided us today\nis to assert that Neville deSouza represented a voice and a presence, and in\nparticular by the use he made of the annual Synod of the Anglican Church in\nJamaica and the Province of the West Indies, ensured that no such vacuum\nexisted.  As long as he was around the\npublic square was not naked.  I am\ntherefore going to call attention to the Synod charge given in 1984, the same\nyear Neuhaus published the Naked Public\nSquare.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I am treating as paradigmatic the deSouza\u2019s\ncourage, his craft as an exegete and preacher and the use he made of the\noccasion to engage a public discourse.  I\nam further suggesting that it is the general retreat from exegesis of the text\nof scripture and the text of experience, as well as retreat by preachers from the\ncourage to be prophetic instead of only maintaining an inward looking\nperspective that has made the public square in Jamaica today morally empty.\nWhat often pre-dominates in the church nowadays, is instead of being prophets,\nwe have put in its place roles such as entertainers and fundraisers. This has\ncaused the public square to be morally naked in our time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In that regard, I would like therefore to juxtapose the 1984\nSynod Charge delivered by Lord Bishop Neville deSouza over against the charge\nof the naked public square.  This is an\nexample of how not to leave the pubic square naked or morally empty. In order\nto put this sermon in its historical context, I must remind you that the 1984\nSynod took place in the year following the US invasion of Grenada and the year\nfollowing the PNP election boycott also in 1983 in which for the first time since\nAdult Suffrage, Jamaica had a one Party Parliament.  You might say Empire and its minion were in full\nand absolute control.  The 1984 Synod was\nattended by a very illustrious company, including, The Governor General, the\nChief Justice, the Mayor and custodies. During that period the first half of\nthe decade of the 1980s when the Caribbean Basin (pan) was invented by Ronald\nReagan with Edward Seaga in tow, growing winter vegetables was the cause celeb\nin Jamaica and farmers were being encouraged to replace traditional cash crops\nand to focus instead on growing these exotic crops for export.  Also, another focus of public discourse was\non gambling in particular, casino gaming as the panacea for the woes of the\nJamaican economy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As Bishop deSouza indicated, the Synod committee chose as\nthe theme of the Synod, \u201cThy Kingdom Come\u201d. \nHis chosen text was Revelation 11. \nAnd he focused on the words, \u201cThe kingdoms of this world have become the\nKingdom of our God and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever.  His presentation of the Lord\u2019s prayer in\nspeaking about the Kingdom of God, was theologically, exegetically and\nhomiletically thoroughgoing and sound. \nBut the particular strength of the presentation was its contextuality\nand its hermeneutical imagination.  He\ndiscusses each petition of the Lord\u2019s prayer in the service of the theses that\nprayer is activism, that prayer is organized around the purpose of bringing\nGod\u2019s Kingdom and doing God\u2019s will . Prayer according to deSouza is seeking to\nknow God\u2019s will and seeking the grace to do God\u2019s will.  According to deSouza, human beings cannot by\ntheir political action bring in God\u2019s Kingdom, but may give witness to the\ncoming Kingdom of God in its breaking into human history through Jesus Christ.  His sermon was not hostage to the ideologies\nof the cold war that had been the overwhelming contextual reality of the\nday.  The sermon offered critique and\nchallenge to the policy options being pursued and contemplated while raising\nthe prospect of the ideal.  The Kingdom of\nGod is justice and justice according to deSouza,\u201cis that state of communal life\nin which society is ordered that human beings within the social reality have\naccess to those things which are pre-requisite for human survival, human\nfreedom from anxiety of survival and free from anxiety, human possibility of\nmoving forward to growth in intellect, will and spirit.  In other words, what we now call human\nflourishing. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

For deSouza, the petition \u201cGive us this day our daily bread\u201d\nrequired us to cooperate with God in providing daily bread not just for\nourselves but for the vulnerable.  As\nsuch we have to contemplate food security as the basic objective of our\nagricultural policy.  He argues in this\ntelling paragraph:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the new concept of agriculture\nin the Caribbean and Latin America, in relation to the United States of\nAmerica, we are called to complement the agriculture of the North.  We are to grow winter products, and we are to\ngrow fineries like\u2014asparagus and these types of things which the tables of the\nNorth will need.  But it is stated in the\n\u2018Santa Fe\u2019 Document that we cannot produce, cheap enough our basic foods like,\ncereals, corn, and peas, and therefore these will have to be produced in the\nNorth.  We will produce for the tables of\nthe North and we will take the foreign exchange which we earn and buy our basic\nfoods from the North. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

How can this policy be acceptable\nto a people who come into the presence of God and pray, \u201cGive us this day our\ndaily bread?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Using the pulpit as a space for moral discourse in which the\nprophet speaks at one and the same time to the congregation and to the public\nsquare, indeed to the powers that be was the paradigm being laid down for us by\nBishop  deSouza.  Policy was being critiqued in the church as\nchurch.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He used the petition \u201cforgive us our trespasses,\u201d to speak\nabout the class alienation in the Jamaican society. He argued that forgiveness\ndoes not merely address personal guilt but the underlying causation of man\u2019s\nalienation from God and from his neighbor. Forgiveness is complete therefore\nwhen it addresses our estrangement from each other.  He argued that the church must make itself\nthe agent of this reconciliation. The petition for forgiveness is seeking\ntherefore to break down the class division and class distinction and class\nseparation in the society. It is to commit ourselves to learn from each other\nand to respect each other and to break down the barriers that separate us from\neach other, including gender barriers. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I believe that deSouza\u2019s tour de force in that sermon is\nwhen he treated with the petition \u201clead us not into temptation.\u201d To begin with\nwe must notice that Bishop deSouza anticipated the conclusion arrived at by\nPope Francis recently (35 years later) when the Roman Pontiff declared that\nfrom henceforth this petition should be rendered \u201cdo not allow us to fall into\ntemptation\u201d.   deSouza is more modest so rather than ruling,\nhe merely stated his preference that the petition be rendered, \u201cSave us in our\ntime of trial.\u201d  He regarded the\nchallenge of Jamaica\u2019s economic development as one such hour of trial. He suggested\nthat the nation was yielding to the temptation and failing in the test rather than\nmaking the right long term choices for Jamaica\u2019s economic development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For deSouza the issue was whether or not Jamaica was merely\na market place rather than a nation.  It\nis also whether or not we were going to build and support the nation\u2019s economy\nso that together we would benefit from it, or whether each was to build their\nown kingdoms.  This is the context in\nwhich he offered a critique against lottery and casino gaming as the economic\noption being foisted on the nation. \nUsing the experience of what he saw in Atlantic City (with Casinos there\nin that City) he raised the following questions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How can a nation hope to build\nitself on the sweat, conflicts and frustrations of other peoples?  How can we hope to build an economy that is\nworthwhile of the Kingdom of God on that? How can we deal with the nation\u2019s\nproblem by merely saying, let us start the lottery again?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This work from deSouza means that the Public Square needs\nnot remain naked or morally empty.  In\norder to make our entrance as church into the public square we do not need in\nthe first place to march, or mount protest. It may come to that some day and in\nsome circumstances, but to mount protests needs not be our first order of\nbusiness.  We do not need to position\nourselves as lobby groups.   deSouza spoke to the public square from the\nchurch and while speaking to the church. \nhe spoke on behalf of the church, not as a mere talent but as Bishop and\noverseer of the church.  When he spoke,\nhe was not an entertainer or a fundraiser. \nHe was a theologian, he was an exegete, he was a preacher and a pastor.\nHe spoke with the clarity, courage and distance or independence of a prophet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It remains for us to ask ourselves whether or not there is\nany insight in this work as to how the church might respond to two of the most\npernicious spectres of evil (our hour of trial) facing the public square at\nthis time, in a manner that ensures that the public square is not naked or\nmorally empty.  The spectre of violence\nand the spectre of public corruption have not managed to move the needle of\npolitical accountability. The society is numb to it, to both violence and\ncorruption.  What are the take aways from\nthis work, Journey to the Promise Land:\nTheological Reflections by Neville deSouza on Jamaica\u2019s Journey<\/em>.  I will say the following: first the church has\nto respond as the church in the church, that is our first port of call. The\npulpit is a space for contextual discourse. It is not a space to conduct our\ninternecine rivalries and indulge our ecclesial vernacular.  It is for moral discourse and it is space to\nreflect theologically on the matters of moment in the society.  It is a task to be taken seriously. The\nscholarship and discipline and diligence must be in evidence throughout.  This is an impressive work from an impressive\nman whose discipline lives after him.  We\nmust live up to the record and reputation of Neville deSouza.  We have watched how preaching has been mishandled\nin our time and become the preserve of mascots in our time.  We need to dig deep when we preach and to prepare\nmore vigorously for the sake of the church and the community, so that the pubic\nsquare need not be naked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In that regard, our reading strategies by which we read the\ntext of the bible, and by the way, the bible is our most valuable resource in\nthis struggle. But we must also learn to read the text of human experience, the\nlived realities of the people, the contextual issues.  We must familiarize ourselves and remain\ncurrent with the multi-disciplinary approaches to aid us in reading the text\nthat is our context.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Secondly, at the same time, this calls for\nself-consciousness and deliberateness as we approach the public square: I call\nfor the assertion of a vigorous and rigorous independence by the church.  The church ought to be independent of the\nagendas of others in the public square.  Sponsorship has distorted the witness of the\nchurch in the public square.  Far too\noften when the church speaks in the public square unlike the legacy that is in\nthis work, the hand is the hand of Esau, but the voice is the voice of Jacob.\nThose who sponsor the church or those from whom the church is seeking patronage\nare the ones determining the agenda sections of the church are pursuing.  Political endorsement is a double-edged\nsword, there is a sting in the tail. \nThere was recently in the newspaper the proud announcement by some of the\ncoming into their own and getting invitation to spaces occupied by the movers\nand shakers because of certain endorsements. You must know the difference\nbetween when people are seeking to partner with you and when their goal is manipulation\nor to use you.  You must know when people\nonly want to use.  Partnerships are\nuseful, there will be from time to time the coincidence of objectives and in\nthose times we must learn how to work with others. But above all we must preserve\nthe integrity of what we are and for what we stand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Allow me to end with some of the\nclosing words from Bishop  deSouza\u2019s 1984\nsermon, Thy Kingdom Come, he said:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Kingdom is God\u2019s,\nbecause only God can create a kingdom because everything else that seeks to set\nup a kingdom, every person who seeks to set up a kingdom is not of God because\nthey have no power apart from God\u2019s.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Human beings only\nhave authority, that which God has given them, a power of attorney, to use authority\non His behalf, but they are accountable, and, therefore, no human being has\npower because all power belongs to God, and God is glorified not only when we\nsing his praises but when we do his will. \u2026 the glory of men resides in the\nglory of God and the fulfillment of God\u2019s purpose.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I implore and encourage you to buy this\nbook and read this book.  It will remind you\nof what was but more how what was and what is have remained the same.  You will see how insightful and\nforward-looking Neville deSouza was.  What\nit has reminded me of is how the church can place itself in a position to\nprovide a moral voice in the public square indeed to hold the public square\nmorally accountable. Perhaps Neville can inspire us to do it again. Amen.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rev. Dr. Garnett Roper
President, Jamaica Theological Seminary<\/em><\/strong>
<\/em>June 18, 2019<\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n


<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Book Launch at The United Theological College of The West Indies Howard Gregory, Journey to the Promised Land: Theological Reflections by Neville deSouza on Jamaica\u2019s Journey\ufeff Lady Rheima Hall, Archbishop of the Province of the West Indies, Most Rev. Dr. Howard Gregory, Mrs. Iona deSouza, widow of the late Lord Bishop Neville deSouza, the distinguish…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":610,"featured_media":17767,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17766","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","ctfw-has-image"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.anglicandioceseja.org\/copy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17766","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.anglicandioceseja.org\/copy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.anglicandioceseja.org\/copy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.anglicandioceseja.org\/copy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/610"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.anglicandioceseja.org\/copy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17766"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.anglicandioceseja.org\/copy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17766\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":17768,"href":"https:\/\/www.anglicandioceseja.org\/copy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17766\/revisions\/17768"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.anglicandioceseja.org\/copy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/17767"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.anglicandioceseja.org\/copy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17766"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.anglicandioceseja.org\/copy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17766"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.anglicandioceseja.org\/copy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17766"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}