There is buzz going around the NBA about players, especially big name players, choosing to not play in every game. Is this a good or bad thing? What if they were a pastor? Would expectations be different?
Special Guest:
Billy J. Choi-Gekas, Founder, School of Radical Healing
& Sacred Activism
Guest Question:
What is meant by the term “sacred activism”? How does activism relate to healing?
School of Radical Healing
& Sacred Activism
Watch Billy's Presentation at Harvard Divinity School on Introducing a Theology of Relational Accountability: An Eco-Centric Anti-Colonial Theological Methodology
For Listening Guides, click here!
Got a question for us? Send them to faithpodcast@pcusa.org!
A Matter of Faith website
There is buzz going around the NBA about players, especially big name players, choosing to not play in every game. Is this a good or bad thing? What if they were a pastor? Would expectations be different?
Special Guest:
Billy J. Choi-Gekas, Founder, School of Radical Healing
& Sacred Activism
Guest Question:
What is meant by the term “sacred activism”? How does activism relate to healing?
School of Radical Healing
& Sacred Activism
Watch Billy's Presentation at Harvard Divinity School on Introducing a Theology of Relational Accountability: An Eco-Centric Anti-Colonial Theological Methodology
For Listening Guides, click here!
Got a question for us? Send them to faithpodcast@pcusa.org!
A Matter of Faith website
Well, hello everyone, and welcome again to a matter of Faith, the Presby podcast, the podcast where we respond to your questions and comments on issues of faith, justice, and church life. Don't be afraid to write in and ask your question, because if it matters to you, it matters to us, and it just might be a matter of faith. And we are so grateful to have you all with us today. Lee is gonna be joining us in just a minute. He has had a matter of dentistry going on today, and so you'll be hearing his, um, intro and welcome in just a bit. But we wanted to welcome everyone to the podcast and we have some pretty, pretty interesting things going on in our world and on the podcast today. Um, but we're just gonna go ahead and jump straight into our opening question because our time with our guest later on is a pretty good and extensive conversation. So our opening question for this episode reads, there is a lot of buzz going around the N B A about players, especially big name players choosing to not play in every game. Is this a good or bad thing? What if they were a pastor? Would expectations be different? I really appreciate this question. Uh, we've seen a number of well-known N B A stars, whether they're transferring to a new, to a new team or just on the team that they've been with for a while, choosing to sit out some games. And in some ways, that's probably healthy because they play a very physical game and they need time to rest. They need time to let their bodies recover, but at the same time, it is their job to entertain. They are paid to entertain and to perform. And I've heard this argument before that if someone pays money to get a ticket to go see a game and they really wanna see this player play, and they get there and it turns out the person is sitting out, that's kind of a letdown. So there's this question about responsibility. There's a question about performance, and there's a question about expectation in the context of the faith community, and particularly pastors and church leadership, I think this is also applicable because it's so easy to think, oh, the pastor will do it. And we've talked about that on on the podcast before. I think in some, in some cases, a lot of pastors in church leadership never take a day off. They never tap out. They never sit out or they, that's a bad, that's the improper phrase. They feel like they are sitting out by taking some time to rest and recover. And that's why it's important to have a team similar to a basketball team. It's nice to know that if you do sit out, if you do choose to not play, you have good teammates who will step up and fill that position, fill that role. And in an i in an ideal world for churches and faith communities, we should also have that so that our leadership doesn't get burnt out so they can rest and recover. But that means that there needs to be systems and relationships and trust in place so that people in leadership know they can step away to take some time for themselves and know that things will still run smoothly, or even if not smoothly, they'll still get done. And it's okay. So I think this is a very interesting question that clearly has some application for people of faith and for our faith communities. And feel free to write in and let us know what you think about this. Does the situation with these N B A players have some relevance for us in the faith community? And we are very excited for, to move to the next part of our episode, which features Billy j Choi gks, the founder of the School of Radical Healing and Sacred Activism, who's gonna talk with us about sacred activism. And so we hope that you enjoy this conversation with Billy. Well, we are so excited to be joined on this episode of A Matter of Faith, a Presby podcast by a very special guest. Joining us is Billy j Choi Gek, the founder of The School of Radical Healing and Sacred Activism. Billy, thank you so much for being with us.
Speaker 2:Uh, thank you Li and Simon for having me here. It's, uh, it's an honor. Thank you.
Speaker 3:Yeah, Billy, it's good to meet you and to have you on the podcast to respond to this question that we received. What is meant by the term sacred activism and how does activism relate to healing?
Speaker 2:Hmm. Yeah, that's, uh, I, I'm glad we're starting off there because, uh, you know, I wanted to kind of title my school collective, you know, uh, and, uh, collective of practitioners putting into practice really and embodying what is activism look like, but, uh, how does ACTO look like in the framework and the context of something being sacred now? Um, it's a school of sacred, uh, school of radical healing and sacred activism. So I'm gonna start actually with radical healing<laugh>, and then go into the sacred activism because this title came out of, not, came out of a personal journey, as well as the journeys I've witnessed with a lot of the people I work with. And, um, uh, over a decade ago, I was, I was, uh, diagnosed with, uh, terminal cancer, right? And, and met a lot of people along the journey with a similar experiences. And I'm okay now,<laugh>. So, so it's good. And, and I, I'm here to also share the story and share, uh, support with the, these folks. But the, one of the products and gifts that came out of this healing journey was this idea of how healing, especially in our day and age, has to be radical, right? And, and, and the, and even with the word, the etymology of the word radical comes from the word root to be rooted in and, and really getting at the root of, of, let's say, a challenge or a problem, or in this case, if it's physical healing, what is the root cause rather than taking care of the, just the symptoms? Right? And, you know, you're gonna hear a lot in the holistic world, uh, you know, this pushback of well, healing is trying to journey in understanding what the root cause of things are, rather than just taking care of the symptoms, right? So if we are trying to discover what the root is, then, and we get a glimpse of that root healing starts to happen. But the, i I would say one of the pathways to this healing comes through a form of activism, right? So it is, it is individual based, but it's also collective. So if somebody is going through a healing journey for ex on whatever level, physical, mental, emotional, spiritual it in, it's not only a journey that involves yourself, it also involves your relations that you're tethered to and the context, uh, that you're living out of. And it is a sacred process, right? And it, and if, and the word sacred can be contested as well, right? And, uh, something that's sacred to one person may not be sacred to another person. So a a rhetorical question,<laugh> I'll pose is how do we define what is sacred, right? And sacred can be defined differently from different traditions as well. So for my, uh, Presbyterian audience and anybody else out there, you know, and you know, the Presbyterian church, uh, you know, I hold them dear in my heart. Cause I come back, I, part of my background is from part of the Presbyterian church. It's this idea sometimes what is, how we define what activism is, has to be done in holding the relationship to the ethical work or justice work in a vessel with utmost respect in the context of, and we can, of course, redefine what holiness means, you know, to ity. Uh, but sacredness involves, again, even when it comes to radical healing, it also sacredness also involves the person, uh, the person we're tethered to as well as the journey within the person, right? So Amir famous religious scholar, you know, tries to define, uh, he wrote a famous treaties called The Sacred and the Profane, right? And, and he really wants to understand what this sacred, how do we define what is sacred? But even in his analysis, and I'll cap it here,<laugh>, that's what I wanna give a whole lecture on his work. But I think it's helpful that even this idea of sacred and profane is still a binary construct. Uh, and, and a lot of, uh, us in this world work through these frameworks. You know, what is holy, what is not holy? What is sacred, what is not sacred, what is clean or what is unclean, very biblical language. Um, when it comes to healing and, and justice work and activism work, it really does fall in this in between space, which is a non-binary space, uh, or what you would say liminal space, uh, this threshold. And it is these liminal in between spaces that transformation, healing, wisdom, revelation, uh, starts to happen. Um, so with all that said,<laugh>, I, I kind of entitled the school's kind of vocational namesake with these really fundamental ideas to honoring a person's journey and the relations that they're tethered to, uh, if it be with other humans, family or outside of family, but also to more than human members of creation as well. So to the land and to the other members of creation.
Speaker 1:I love that. And I love that it's so, it's so nuanced because we've talked about advocacy on the podcast before, and I think when some people think about advocacy or activism, there's a very specific image that comes to mind of people being angry, of people sort of picket doing a picket line or sort of like yelling. And which is one that is, that can be one way to express, um, anger and desire for change. I'm not gonna discount that by any means, but advocacy is, as you've said, not simply that is bad. And just pointing it out. It is also in a space where it's, it's not just this dichotomy of, or binary, you said of of good, bad, right and wrong. It's, this is how this practice or this system is not congruent with the values that we say we have. And this is my own, our own experience about demonstrating why that can or should be changed. And I think that that's, that's so hard to get to sometimes. Um, in the, I mean, in the United States, obviously people really like to point to the civil rights movement as like a great example of peaceful protest networking and community working together to create this, this massive change, which is so interesting because that example is so counter, I think too, that typical binary that you, that you outlined for us. And, um, I, I think that's amazing and I think it's cool that, for lack of a better word, cool,<laugh><laugh> that you've, uh, uh, that you've started this, this school and that you've tied healing to activism, because sometimes we get caught up just in the, the action part of it, or just the, maybe that a very specific part of the emotional component of advocacy. And you're saying you're reminding us that it is so much more than that.
Speaker 2:Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. And, and we can only get to that place, you know, if, if we go beyond the binary or in let's say Christian terms, you know, the dualisms<laugh>, right? That, that our hermeneutics or our ways of interpreting scripture and tradition really, really inform our worldviews, right? And, and, and, you know, hallelu to the community, you know, and the trans community especially, uh, for trying to break those categories and dismantle that categories. And I really believe it is these intersectional and liminal in between spaces where we get glimpses and experiences of healing, right? And, and healing then can be transformed into, well, healing must be embodied, right? So it, it must be healing is praxis, right? And it must be embodied in order to transform. And as an individual transforms, again, that spills over and affects, uh, the relationships that each in individual is connected with. Um, and, and it's all about re it, it comes down to relationships. And maybe we'll talk about that<laugh>. So yeah,
Speaker 3:Yeah, as you were talking, that's what I was thinking about. Like, it is all about relationships, like with other people and you know, with creation, but also with the sacred and how we ever, we, we kind of contextualize and define that for ourselves. And it's something like, of a journey that I've been on too, like recently. Like technically I'm an ordained pastor within the Presbyterian church, but there are a lot of things where even that can be kind of, you know, binary and you're kind of said in these, like, this, you have to take ordination vows, and this is what you say you have to, to believe, even though sometimes you're just like, I don't, I don't know about that. And you kind of journey along in this and you find out that there are, there's so much else out there when it, it is about the sacred and kind of also when you talked about rootedness and like, you know, finding where your roots are even in that kind of spirituality and your ancestors and, and what they, what they practiced and, and did in their spiritual lives. And so it's something that like, you know, inviting people to do that also is, what you say is a form of activism within itself is, is kind of because we are breaking down barriers that tell us, like, we're defining the sacred in a certain way, and you have to sit in this box and you're defined as this and this is what you have to do. You know, I've really gotten into a lot of other spiritual practices and mm-hmm.<affirmative>, and so I just wonder about that too. Like even in like our structures of church kind of even say in like, that is something that we should be really thinking about in this, like, you know, putting it in a box, I would say.
Speaker 2:Absolutely. And you know, it's funny cause, uh, me personally, and which is why I've brought on a team of different PR practitioners, artists activists as well, uh, which is slowly growing. But when we talk about, let's say clergy<laugh> or, or people who are directly in the ministry, you know, because of the offerings that I have, you know, I, that I can offer, that I can support with, I get a lot of clergy<laugh> and ministers who actually come to me for support because they're, like you said, it's kind of like, what, what's happening here in their experience with whatever institution that they are involved in? Because institutions have, you know, political expectations when it comes to, to how ministry looks like, um, structurally and then also on the ground with whatever communities they're serving. And let me tell you, and I'm sure you all can relate, you know, a lot of burnout, uh, of ministers everywhere. And this desire for those who are in ministry to be like, I need sustenance, I need healing, I need nourishment. And, and where can they get this kind of support and nourishment? And I, I find, you know, bringing in different traditions that I, I've, you know, that I embody that, that I've been gifted, that I've spent, you know, what, two decades or more kind of cultivating, um, I, it's an honor and it's also a sacred, uh, sacred exchange that I have with those who come under my care, especially clergy. Cuz you know, I, I've been in ministry for a long time as well, and, um, was going to become Anglican priest, maybe not on the cards,<laugh> later as well, Episcopal priests. But, um, so I, I feel like the ministry and the offerings that myself and my team can offer, you know, can help those who are in that, in that frontline ministry like yourself.
Speaker 3:Yeah. I love the, I love the, uh, the term, uh, what did you say? The exchange, the
Speaker 2:Energy spiritual
Speaker 3:Exchange. Yeah. Spiritual exchange. Mm-hmm.<affirmative>, I really love that. I want, how has that kind of manifested in your work? That kind of Oh, yeah. Exchange. Ooh,
Speaker 2:This is a, oh wow. What, we can go in different, different directions with this, especially in the context of ministry. So lemme start with there,<laugh>. Yeah. When it comes to ministry, and, you know, we're used to, in the Christian tradition, this idea of, okay, you know, self-sacrifice, let's follow the lead of Jesus, you know, Christ, and, you know, give, give, give, give, give out of the empty vessel. Your, your, your reservoirs become empty and dry. And which is why there's burnout. The, I would say the law or laws of the universe, even according to the Christian and Hebrew scriptures, do not teach that kind of theology or that way of doing, doing ministry. It, the logos, you know, or if you, if you wanna use this Greek term, which we translate, you know, to debar or like the word, which really isn't scripture, right? Like the, the logos is the, the proper or the healthy or the holistic ordering of creation, right? And if there is a proper ordering part of that, this, this economy of, of energy, energy through the spirits working, there has to be an exchange, right? If there is deficit on one recipient there, this is where harm can start to happen, right? And this is where illness starts to happen, as well as forgetfulness of the responsibilities of, let's say, two parties engaging with one another. So practical example, ministers have an expectation to serve, serve, serve<laugh>, you know, and I, I can only speak, you know, from my experience in my, my Christian denominations, it's like, this is the, the theology. Yep. You are responsible for serving until you can't serve anymore. And this idea of centering health, like wellbeing for your health is actually not centered. We're starting to say, see this change, you know, not that I'm promoting like, I don't know, uh, the author of the map ministry,<laugh>, but you know, actually just pu published a new rest is resistance, right? Like, this is this idea of sabbath, this rest and, and not just rest, but rest. That's, that is in the context of rejuvenation, so that you can not just survive the day or the workflow that you have as a minister or in any realm of life, but no, you're actually thriving. What you are giving out, you are also receiving. And there is that equal, if you call it spirit or energy exchange. Um, and, and, and this, and then I'll cap it here as well,<laugh> it, this involves consultation, right? And, and, and this idea of con con consulting and then consenting, agreeing upon how much energy are you giving and receiving is really, really important when it comes to a person's wellbeing as well as a community's wellbeing, as well as the corporation or, or institute's structural wellbeing. So this can be o on so many different levels.
Speaker 1:As I'm thinking about that consenting and receiving dynamic, it's making me think about what we were talking about earlier about relationships and the relationships between, as you were saying, between people, between communities, between institutions and also with creation mm-hmm.<affirmative>. And I'm, I was struck by something that was on your organization's website that you've spoken on previously, which is related to relational accountability. Yeah. And I'm wondering if you can help us unpack that a little bit and think about it in the context of what we've been talking about here. Because if there is to be this consenting and receiving, there is also an element of accountability in that relationship and in that dynamic, which if it was always present, I'm not entirely convinced we would have all of many of the injustices mm-hmm.<affirmative> and inequalities that we see today. So yeah, I was just wondering what you could, uh, say to that and help us understand that a little bit.
Speaker 2:Ooh, Simon, that's feels like it's been my life's work so far up to now even just discovering, defining living, uh, like getting that imperial knowledge, or sorry, the empirical wisdom of, of what is relationship and accountability looks like. So something, uh, uh, I think you're alluding to what you saw on, on the organization's website is I gave a talk, uh, at Harvard, uh, divinity School last April, uh, sharing a bit of like my thesis work, which will eventually turn into a book. Uh, but I felt that academically in the theology world, a gift I want to offer the church, big Sea Church is, is creating a space to understand what a theology of relational accountability looks like. Because we are all in relationship to things we are conscious of and things we are unconscious of, and things we might be consciously not wanting to even acknowledge<laugh>. So this speaks to racism, colonialism, anti, anti anthropocentric human practices that express themselves, you know, harmful like climate change,<laugh>, environmental degradation, which impacts, um, the first peoples of whatever land and environment is being compromised. Right? So, um, you know, I'll, if you want, I'll give you a bit of a little definition of what this theology of Relational accountability is. And so like the acronym Theology of Relational Accountability, you know, I, I say this, this t r a must begin with a method, right? We a lot of times, uh, for those who are in school and university, you know, we, we tend to be like, methodology. This is so technical,<laugh>, this is so boring. I wanna get to like the writing and the imagination. I'm like, Ooh, but if only we under not just understood, you know, this idea of relationship account, like it's method that is the foundation. Like how do you get to your, what you're theologically reflecting on, right? So it, it, so it really, the theology of relational accountability is birth primarily, or is rooted radically, uh, from, uh, this understanding that a method implements contextual and intersectional theologies, which create spaces or liminal spaces within one's theological framework to recognize the importance of having to cultivate relationships by spending the time and the energy to do the work in learning as well as an application theology of relational accountability must, and this is where my thesis comes in, it must embody an ecocentric and anti-colonial methodologies, which teach that all things are interrelated. And each member of this relationship is always accountable to one another. Everyone is always, always relationally accountable to their contextual relationships, if they're aware of it or not. Or even in denial. A theology of relational accountability and its methodology has the ability to provide any theological discipline to begin a discourse on theology and justice because of its primary focus on a global wide scope of an oppressed earth. The oppression of earth members, as well as the first peoples of the land.
Speaker 1:Yeah.<laugh>, I, I love that. I think that I can't wait for the book<laugh>.
Speaker 2:Me too. Me too. Thanks Simon. Thanks.
Speaker 1:I, I guess first you'll have to go through the methodology of writing the book, but<laugh>
Speaker 2:Oh yeah. This is this, this is the labor right now. Yep.<laugh>,
Speaker 1:I appreciate that you also, you used the word earth, the phrase earth members in thinking instead of just saying, people, animals, creatures, earth members, because that implies we're all part of this family, this community, this ecosystem together. Absolutely. Which is absolutely beautiful. I think it's pretty fair to say we don't do that very often, especially in mainstream discourse. And even within progressive faith communities, we often we're just like, oh, there's creation and there's us
Speaker 2:Binary again. Right, right. It's the, the dichotomy. So
Speaker 1:Yeah. Right, right. Mm-hmm.<affirmative>. Um, and so you've gone against that grain and, and sort of used a more encompassing term, which I think is really amazing. And I'm wondering if you can help us think a little bit more if we think about what you described, cuz we've also talked about reparations on this podcast before. Yep. And the difficulties in nailing down what reparations means in a broader sense, but also for specific communities. On one of our previous episodes, um, our guests said that we often get bogged down in making things like reparations, very abstract, which makes it so hard to actually say, oh, this community was impacted by these decisions and this practice, and therefore they are seeking this type of reparation, whether it be land mm-hmm.<affirmative>, financial, whatever it is. So if we were to take the framework that you've just described, how would you help us think about reparations mm-hmm.
Speaker 2:<affirmative>? Well, first, uh, I would suggest a question, uh, who is determining the metrics and the framework of the reparations, right? If let's take, um, the indigenous communities across the globe who has created the frameworks and the expectations of reparations. Have those communities, those nations, uh, the people, even at the individual, have they been consulted and have they been, um, not just invited, but centered in a space to actually come to have how reparations actually look like? My general answer,<laugh>, it would be no<laugh>, which is, which is the problem of colonialism. And, and, and I say that because of what you mentioned, Simon, about how these ideas or frameworks seems like they're very abstract, abstract thinking is a very settler colonial Eurocentric epistemology and practice, right? And, and this is how our legal system, our economy, how our politics revolve in, in this world, in this cerebral world, which is very, um, contrary to indigenous, uh, ways of wisdom and knowledge and ways of being as well. And part of, and I think we need to, if we're talking about reparations and looking at indigenous communities in particular, we need to center their models which are actually foreign to, to settlers, right? To those who are non-indigenous. And let me say that the use of the term settler, um, you know, uh, is not, you know, it's oftentimes used as a pejorative, right? Oh, there's like, again, this practice of, you know, dichotomy binary, the othering, right? Us and them, no, no, no. If, if we're not indigenous to the land that, that we were living and working off of, let us actually kind of claim that the, the title of being a settler as as an act of reconciliation. So that trust can slowly be built if it's invited or not, by who you are, who are you're trying to build a relationship with and become accountable too. Right? And, and I wanna, and very quickly to share this idea that this, this idea of, uh, identifying as a settler, uh, as a reconciling act, you know, comes from, uh, a really beautiful book, uh, by a Adam Barker and Emma, uh, Lowman called Settler Identity and Colonialism in 21st Century Canada. But even though it's Canadian context, they're, the American context is a very dense in this account as well. And, um, they, these two authors encourage us to claim that, all that to say, coming back to, okay, it's not us versus them. If we're not indigenous to this land, then why are we not taking lead from those whose land this belongs to? Because really land is stolen if we're not, if we're in internal islands, you know, Canada and the States. So, so that would be my first step in, in, in responding to how do we, you know, what does reparation look like is first who created the metrics and the framework of this, and is it a settler framework or is it coming straight from the communities that we are, uh, we are accountable to for these reparations?
Speaker 3:And I often, like, I really, I really like love the fact that it's like we are, like with the, with the l classification of a settler, that it is something that we are just like, it is like something that you're just kind of like defining without, without emotion kind of attached to it. But it is what it is and this is what it is. And this is kind of how, you know, we should be living into that specific identifier of who we are. I know a lot of the times Yeah, things get, so there's a lot of emotion around it, there's a lot of politicization around it, no matter what binary side you want of the political sphere specifically here in the States. And we probably just need to just go ahead and say like, you are located in Canada, and that is something that it, there is a different, somewhat of a different context in many, many ways, which is why we always love having different peop different people from different places on the podcast because it, I I, I appreciate it because even, even though you're not that far away, there is a, there is very different experiences that happen within the specific context of whatever classified as a nation or all those things. But I just wanted to say that too. So if people are kind of like not very clear about that, but just wanted to say that. But I think, I think it's just so helpful because it is such a, you know, with academia and all these westernized ways of just trying to like, explain things like you were saying in these abstract, almost hypotheticals and like, almost like just trying, there's always like an arguing of the point, and there's like a, the idea of debate and there, and that's a, that happens a lot in our church. Like, we're a part of the reform tradition and all, we're just like mm-hmm.<affirmative>, oh, we just really love to debate and we really loved like, like academia and we have to get educated. But as I'm hearing you talking, it's like, what if we just like took things and said, like, it's, it's pretty simple to say we are a settler. We came here, we took, it's, it's pretty simple to kind of think about. And I don't know what my question is, but I wonder like, the part of the, like, the injustice is the, sometimes it is the flowery language and the academics intentionally put on top of everything to confuse everybody or just to, just to create chaos that nobody wants to take things at face value. And like, simple, like in a simple term to say, we are settlers. We came here, I mean, as historical fact, it was very simple. You got on a boat, you came here, you stole land from people, and you, you destroyed a whole culture of people. And it's like, it's kind of like a simple thing to face. And, and, and what we hear you, like, what I hear you saying in other people who have been on this podcast is that, you know, it is very simple and we've just added all this other stuff on top of it and binary it all. And my, and sometimes I wonder, it's like that's all intentional and it's all to create chaos that we're not facing up for things.
Speaker 2:I wanna affirm what you just says. Oh, hundred percent. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. And I wanna affirm what exactly what you said about intentionality, right? Yeah. Because yeah. Um, you know, I i, if we can go, it could be another program we can talk about, right?<laugh>, but me, part of my research is looking at primary documents of Canadian, like historical prime ministers as well as your for forefathers and presidents and primary texts. And it is quite disturbing what these primary archival texts that have now we have actually some access to look at that. There is an intentionality to literally take care of. And in this case, if we're talking about the indigenous nations that quote unquote Indian problem and the intentionality of erasure through, um, take, so in Canada, we of course, the residential schools, right? And, and literally taking the children from their FA families and taking the language away, making ceremonies illegal, taking the land, and then your ceremonies and language. This is the, these are, this is what, this is the agenda. This is the, the best way to actually wipe out, uh, whole people and multiple nations because we're on this topic. I, I do wanna maybe, if that's okay, if I can share just a kind of a definition to kind of help frame what settler colonialism is. And this def definition comes from Richard Horvath. And, uh, Richard says that settler colonialism consists of, uh, the following three major, major, uh, areas. One, domination over territories and behaviors of other groups by the migration of permanent settlers to the exploitation of the dominant territories, natural and or human resources for extraction and profit. So this is extraction capitalism of a great, uh, book recommendation as well for folks after this on that. And third and enforced culture change process involving destruction of indigenous lifeways. So if this is destruct, if this has been destroyed and wiped out, of course there's not gonna be hard access to even understanding. How do we even relate? How do we even have a dialogue or discourse on reparations when those categories aren't even in our frame of reference? Um, so one last quote,<laugh> on this, on the subject, which I, I find I always share this in my classes and in my writings. Um, this one's by, um, harsh, rather than debating the dichotomy of victim or oppressor, we have focused on cultivating an ethic of responsibility based on understanding ourselves as non-indigenous as the beneficiaries intended or not, of an illegal appropriation of indigenous people's resources and jurisdiction. Whether we define ourselves as migrants or settlers, it is undeniable that we are on lands, unjustly seized, and are complicit in a culture that sees Indians, quote unquote, rather than settlement as the problem.
Speaker 1:That's really powerful. And as I'm thinking about this in the context of reparations and the things you've shared with us today, if we're, if as you said, start with the, you have to first be centering the people who actually would be asking for reparations and what that looks like. You can't just come in and be like, what do you want<laugh>? Yeah, yeah. Like, well, I feel bad that we did bad things to you. What do you want? That's already, like you've, you have missed the point and are actually just perpetuating, um, this cycle of oppression and colonialism again and doing that. But what I'm also hearing you say is that if we acknowledge that complicity allow ourselves to be vulnerable and invited into the conversation, What actually the reparations and whatever that conversation looks like, it however it manifests may be very different than anything we could have ever imagined. For example, it may not be we want money. It may be, again, I only can imagine from my own, uh, socio echo location, which is sort of, it's, uh, limited, but it could be maybe we want money, maybe we would want land, maybe we would like some more folks to come in and help expand our culture through resources, participate in some of our own traditions, that the ones that do remain allow for that con what you said, consenting and receiving in a, in a very intentional way, as opposed to just give us money and we'll call it even, or we'll call it, okay. Because that's, you know, as a, you know, as cuz I think sometimes when people think about reparations, that's what they want. They just wanna know, what can I give you to sort of like, make myself feel better or make ourselves feel better and you stop making noise about this, or we don't to wipe away guilt, for lack of a better words. But you're saying that there's a lot more that that conversation and the direction that those conversations can go, um, then we may have any idea about currently with our sort of limited understanding.
Speaker 2:Yeah. What you've described this transactional kind of exchange is very, it's the antithesis to relationality as well as relational accountability. And it is birthed out of, and I'll be very frank, saying that it's a capitalist, you know, extraction, capitalist economic worldview, right? It, it, it is, it's the language of, of this capitalist worldview is so powerful that it has, IM implemented into our actual language and how we actually relate to people. No wonder, right? Like the first thing we go to if it's re reparations is what is fiscal, what do you, what, what can we do? And coming back to, uh, theological or Christian experience, you know, this almost a messiah complex of, you know, being the healer or like, what can I do to fix the problem? Uh, and also imposing y your own expectations, assumptions and experiences without consulting<laugh> with who you are trying to form healing with. And this is why it, it, it is a radical, you know what radical healing is? It is, it is very non-normative. It is actually a very subversive practice to be able to go against these powers and principalities that are established in, in our, in our culture. It calls for really, uh, radical healing process through the practice of, of activism that is hold in sacredness, right? And what is sacredness? Sacredness also is all about relationship. Sacredness is the relationship with the divine, you know, source or creator God, Christ, holy Spirit, um, but also the sacredness with humans and more than humans, part of the, the earth members, right? Because they hold spirit, right? And everything is tethered to each other. These are, again, very non-normative, subversive worldviews and then practices that can come outta. So if somebody has, if you want to cure a disease, if that'd be a physical disease, an illness, or if you want to cure the disease, a structural disease, you need something totally radical, you know, that gets to the root of it. And that's actually at the heart of I think our Christian theology when we look to Christ's, and here's the thing, what Christ, what Christ did, and I'm gonna say something maybe kind of radical and non-normative and subversive right here. Uh, is that the question I wanna pose it as a question, was Christ's purpose to come onto the earth, if it is even this coming onto the earth from somewhere outside, first of all, rather than as part of creation, was Christ's purpose just to alleviate and be the appreciation of sin, which is at the basis of atonement theology that is the normative, uh, you know, theology that is at the foundation of our all denominations work. Things are slowly changing, right? And we get, we get more of a different option. And I would li love to hear your thoughts or just reactions to, rather than an atonement theology, consider more of an incarnation theology that maybe Christ didn't just come to save us all from sin. Maybe Christ came because cri Christ is the matrix of all of creation, as Paul says, you know, Christ is the firstborn of all of creation, all of creation comes through and is in Christ, Punta Panta, panta, all, all, all in the Greek, right? And it, and I wanna, I'll tap it with this, relating it to like plant medicine, which is what one of my specialties is when I, when I serve my community and, and what I work with my elders with in Manitoba is, let's say a particular plant or a flower is its purpose on, on earth for humans usage for their healing. No, that wouldn't be a single purpose, that's just a one facet of its purpose. Uh, so much healing, so much engagement, so much relationship to its beauty, its function, and its local ecology. And, and the stories and the narratives around this particular plant pass down through generations and generations and generations holding those teachings. Same thing. Christ, Christ has a lot of faces more than this, again, this, this atone that atonement theology offers. And, um, yeah. I'll I'll stop there for a moment,<laugh>.
Speaker 3:Well, and and it's such a, it, it is that theology is also something that is, it erases the complexity and it erases the, the depth of, of what Christ, of, of who Christ is and, and, and, and, and that embodiment and in that incarnation, like what that even means mm-hmm.<affirmative>. And, you know, for me, the, the evangelical movement specifically in, in the US but around the world has simplified, has used that and simplified it so much so that even that has become in and of itself, kind of of a binary mm-hmm.<affirmative>, you either get saved or you don't. And if you don't, good luck, you're gonna burn. Like that is a pretty simple message that you can sell, sell, that's one thing. You can make money off of it. It's very easy to make money off that. And it just instills these things like fear and, you know, even more oppression. And because of the ways in which it has just been, I mean, you know, Christ has been whitewashed and un and nuance and the nuance and everything about Christ has just been boiled down to the cross and salvation, which, you know, I don't necessarily know if the biblical folk would even have like, thought that, you know, at that time, you know, like when Jesus was dying, when Jesus was on the cross, they, the only thing they really knew was that the Roman empire did this to him because he did some things, the corrupt system, this is what happens. And they all were scared, they all were terrified of it. And like, that is something that, you know, in that like simple, it's not a simple story, but it is a story that you can read and say like, and take at face value and was like, this is, this was a terrible event of oppression that is pretty much there that you don't have to infer really, but when you add the theology of westernism, white theologians coming in and saying, this is what it all really meant in reality, where'd y'all get that from? It's like there's no, like, I mean, there's like a, yeah. It's just a very interesting thing. And I, I have, I mean, I, I have always, I mean, the atonement stuff has been an oppressive thing for me personally as a person growing up in the South and the us that is something that, you know, you learn is like, this is not what it was meant to be. And, and that is something that I really appreciate about what, just in that question saying was that all Jesus was to you,<laugh> was all Jesus was, was your ticket to get to a place of, you know, where I'm from, they say the land of milk. And I mean, you know, like there are hymns about the land of milk and honey and they called it bula land. And that's like all these hymns of like, of this place far away. And it takes you out of where you're at and it takes you out of the moment and the relationships and everything else and individualizes it. So yeah, that's, I mean, I appreciate that question because if that's all it is to, I think that's, that's very problematic.
Speaker 2:How instrumental is that way of, of relating to Jesus or to God, right? Like for your own own benefit, right? Again, it becomes a, again, this individualization, right? Which is also very, very, you know, we pride ourselves on the autonomy of the in individual, you know, like, um, which is why we have these, but this other, or you know, like the individual and the other me versus you or me versus the other or all the binaries, all the dualisms of gender, social class as well as human to more than human members of the earth.
Speaker 1:I also appreciate that perspective because what you're pointing out is that Jesus is coming Jesus' birth, Jesus' death, everything Jesus did, it wasn't the end. It wasn't just about the end of sin or the end of suffering. Mm-hmm.<affirmative>, it was about Jesus came because Jesus is the beginning. Mm.
Speaker 2:Mm-hmm.<affirmative>.
Speaker 1:And similarly, if we are to, if we are to be followers of Jesus, it means when we go into advocacy, when we, uh, think about things like reparations, advocacy, making a change to a system is not the end. It is the beginning of a new way of being. Similarly with reparations. It is a new way to be in relationship with each other as opposed to just being like, oh, Jesus came, died. Sins are forgiven. I believe again, like you said, simple. None of it's that simple. It's actually calling us to begin something new in that new relationship. I love that. Absolutely love that.
Speaker 2:Thank you. This reminds me of a really awesome, another quote,<laugh><laugh> being an academic of course, but I really, I adore Randy Woodley, who is our, um, you know, indigenous theologian from, from the states who is, you know, who's done this work for so long and is now actually devoting a lot of his time in ministry to the land. So doing agriculture, right? You know, like, like justice oriented agriculture and indigenous, uh, agriculture's a whole other topic to debate reclaiming what even ag agriculture is, which is also a settler, you know, originally a settler practice. But he, his newest book that came out, uh, just a year ago, actually almost in April, uh, this, uh, coming April, uh, is called Indigenous Theology and the Western Worldview by Randy Woodley. And he says, and we're talking about Jesus as our topic at the moment. Jesus, like every Jewish person would have included land as part of his own understanding of who God is. Narratives around place naturally compel us to define our social location in a story, a non-local theology, like what we've just been talking about, a more abstract theology makes it easier to ignore social location and place. So this Western view encourages an objective view of reality over a subjective view of reality relationship again. Right? Like the only things that matter are those we can prove as opposed to our thoughts or hearts and our experience.
Speaker 3:It, it's amazing how the spirit works because Dr. Woodley is, so, I'm also the editor of Unbound, which is a publication under the church of the P u s A and he is actually written for our lint series that is coming up and Yay. And, and he, and, and in his reflection, you know, he, he kind of references some things to his book and, and the work that he's doing right now. And, and it is such a gift to, to kind of have that, like we were saying, this exchange of energy together and, and even now in this moment, having this exchange with you has been such a wonderful experience and such a wonderful interaction and, and we are so thankful that, that you've been on the podcast with us mm-hmm.<affirmative> and anytime that you want to return to
Speaker 2:Us<laugh>,
Speaker 3:Just let us know because I, cause I think it really does help we're, we are, I mean, this podcast reaches a broader fate audience, but we are housed under an institution that within and of itself doesn't have the best history and within and of itself is now going through a journey of what does it mean to, to kind of get rid of these, this binary thinking and really live into something that is, is different and active and more rooted in the relationships that we should all be kind of cultivating. And so I really appreciated this conversation and I hope, yeah, I hope people get something out of it. And thank you for being with us.
Speaker 2:Well, thank you for having me. It's been an honor and yes, I, I will return, uh, as, as you wish<laugh>, and you know, by, as you see, my practice is very thank you Kimberly Crenshaw on acquainting the term intersectionality. We finally have language finally, uh, to talk about how things intersect and things are not binary, right? And, um, even my practice being, uh, uh, a lover of Christ but committed, you know, to the Red Road and my indigenous family and, and then initiated in different religious traditions, but seeing Christ in all things. Right. Um, yeah, I'm, I'm willing to come back and speak to whatever you, whatever you'd like to pick my brain and heart about. So yeah. Thank you.
Speaker 1:Awesome. Well, we'll also be sure to have links in the show notes so that folks can check out all of your work. And I'll also put a link to that, uh, uh, lecture that you gave at Harvard Divinity School as well on, on, uh, relational accountability. So folks can check that out. But yeah, thank you so much, Billy.
Speaker 2:Thank you. Thank you so much, Lee and Simon.
Speaker 3:Hey everyone, it's Lee. I'm back from the dentist and I'm feeling a little better. I couldn't talk earlier today because you know, I sounded very awful. But I miss you Simon. And thanks to Billy for being with us from the School of Radical Healing and Sacred Activism. It was a great conversation and we will have Billy back to talk more with us. But thank you for listening this week. We would love for you to subscribe and we would love for you to leave us a review wherever you get your podcast. And if you have any questions for us, send them to Fate podcast@peaceusa.org. And we want you to check out our website, a matter of fake podcast.com. And until next week, we will talk to you then.