When
sitting on the porch and visiting with your family and neighbors it is
important to truly listen. At times when a person listens, they may hear things
that disturb them yet in listening, one knows the reality of another’s
perspective. This chapter is an exercise of deep listening as I explore the data
from the surveys. This data will be used to clarify the impact of the course
materials on the participating students in reference to the research question. Qualitative
results obtained from conversations held with the participants and various
community/university individuals during interview sessions will provide
anecdotal data on the formation of hollering theology. Also, the final group
discussion in the Appalachian Liberation
Theology course provides qualitative
insight into the impact of a semester long course on students. At the
conclusion of this project, it is apparent that the need to continue to develop
these courses and especially hollering theology becomes more pressing as I
learned that students struggle seeing their own internalized oppression. This
hidden oppression powerfully impacts their critical engagement in their
community.
After
the completion of the semester, all students from the New Testament courses were offered a chance to be interviewed. Eight
students elected to participate in the follow up interview. The following
students interviewed were: Codie, Dustin, Isaac, Jeffrey, Jordan, Sheila, Shelby,
and Wes. These interviews provided insight into their struggles, the concerns
they faced, and the hopes they had for their region/people. Their answers
provided helpful insight into the invisible tensions they felt when it comes to
family and Appalachian identity.
When asked about biggest
obstacles to their educational journey and their dreams of self-improvement,
all expressed concerns that family and friends were not supportive of their
majors and/or they were pushed into a different career tracks to help pay the family
bills. Codie shared that he was really hoping to use college as a place to find
his path, yet “business was strongly recommended as the only path because with
it, I could help make money.” Jordan said that his family was very supportive
of his dream of going to college yet when he decided to pursue religion and
social work his family was angry because “why would he waste his time in going
after things that cannot make him money.” Dustin reported, “The
biggest obstacles I faced while attempting to get a degree at UPIKE were the
desire of my family to have me working instead of in school or getting an
education in the field of their choice and not my own. The ability to pay for
education is still an obstacle I am dealing with to this day.” Shelia reported
that her family was very supportive of her education path because she is
pursuing medical school. Despite this, money has been a huge limiting factor
for her educational dreams. She said, “with mom on disability and dad trying to
work, money is a constant battle.” Jordan admitted that having an hour commute
to college every day nearly took him out of college although he had a 4.0 grade
point average. He said, “Man, going to class and getting good grades was the
easy part, trying to get gas money was the battle.” Shelby stated, “I will be
the first in my immediate family to go and graduate college. Throughout school
I have had many people behind me supporting me to go to college, which I am
very thankful for. However, financially I always knew it was up to me.” Poverty,
money and the pursuit of escaping financial hardship defines the educational
pursuit of many in Central Appalachia.
One
of the limiting factors to students pursuing more non-profit/social justice
related careers has to do with “making money.” Jordan summarized this finding when
he said, “I really want to have a job that does good and improves people’s
lives, yet I do not see many people who are doing it and still paying the
bills. If college could model for me people who are serving the poor and needy
without becoming poor and needy themselves, then I would be all in.” In spite of
obstacles, however, hillbilly students endure. Jeffery highlights the
resilience and persistence of students when sharing, “College is hard, being a
first-generation student is hard, witnessing the mother you’ve protected since
I was four years old battle between life and death is hard, witnessing your
father’s suicide attempt is hard, but for some reason, for me, giving up was
even harder.”
Students reported a love for their home, their family,
and Appalachia. All spoke with pride about the resiliency of the people, and the
ideas of collectivism. They shared of how they believe the people are hardworking
and fiercely independent, which helps to pave their own way. Dustin was direct
when saying, “Appalachian people are a very dedicated, direct people. They are
uniquely driven and direct by their quirks and hard way of life. They either come
with a strong determination and drive or a sense of no hope. It all stems from
the raising and upbringing they have experienced.” Shelby shared about how she
believed that people misunderstand Appalachia and if they knew of the
kindnesses of the people, the nation would change their mind. She shares her
own story,
I also remember being the girl who did not
have anyone come to overnight trips for basketball because my family just
simply could not afford it. However, all the other ‘basketball moms’ always
made sure I did not feel left out. My high school would even make sure my
brother and I was taken care of food wise throughout the year, along with other
students who needed it. Little things like this is what makes our region
special.
When
asked about why they stay in Appalachia when so many of their peers leave, they
were candid. Two students reported that that they could not leave as their
spouses were “tied” to their Appalachian families and leaving would be
impossible. One student reported that they had no desire to leave as they love
Appalachia, yet another said, “I left Appalachia at the first chance I got. Since
my youth, I have always felt there had to be more in this world than just my
little holler and hills…The sense of no opportunity and cultural relevance is
key in the reality of brain drain in Eastern Kentucky and I believe Appalachia
as a whole.” All students reported a deep desire to make a difference and help
their community. Jordan said, “It is just so hard to make it here. There are
hardly any decent jobs, and the decent ones are controlled by one or two of the
local monopolies. There is just so much infrastructure that needs to be
changed.” Even in difficulty there is a great sense of Appalachian pride. Wes
said, “Being Appalachian is about being adaptable. We are a proud and strong
people, and we survive by the sweat of our brow. Our stories keep our way
alive, even if they aren’t all true.” Shelby made a key point about the love
for the area, which motivates her staying in the region as she says, “One day I
would like to start a business and leave my mark here in Pikeville in any way
that I can. The way I think about it is that I was born here, why would not I
put my hard work into where my family and friends are.
As
the conversations moved toward stereotypes, the students became passionate
regarding the things they have heard throughout their lives. More than half of
the students reported feeling dumb and shamed because of their accent. Codie
said, “As soon as you open your mouth, people think you are a dumb hick who is
isolated only in the hills.” Sheila echoed this sentiment when she said, “If
you sound like me, then people automatically say in their head…wow, she is
uneducated and stupid. They then start imagining me in overalls and living on a
farm.” Dustin said,
“The biggest stereotype I face daily is
when I open my mouth and my twang comes out, I sadly have been looked at as
less educated and unequal to those with the same credentials as me. I have
seriously considered looking into ways of working on losing my accent, so I am
not seen in a negative context in a professional setting.”
Hearing the power
of shame related to the student’s accent was heartbreaking yet to hear their
vision and hope for the region was electrifying. Students shared their passion
for breaking through isolation and why it is so critical. Codie said, “Now with
the internet and global travel, we can expand our horizons and be empowered.”
Sheila said that diversity and expanding horizons is not just having to leave
the region and travel the world, “We can improve our image of education and
support things like trade schools. Students need to know that there is a whole
world between the choices of university and fast food.” Students are hopeful
that change is possible, and it can be done through resourcing. All the
students mentioned the need for further tools and opportunities. When asked
about how the region can change and what liberation would look like for the region,
Sheila said that people need help, but government programs need to change. “Government
assistance is being abused as food stamps are going to people who do not need
them while so many others are falling through the cracks.” Jordan said that
this assistance must be for empowerment and leveling the playing field. “We
need to get to a place where it does not matter which part of the region you
are born; government assistance should target and help those who are
disadvantaged by their zip code.” Codie echoed these thoughts and further
emphasized the need for help. “I am not sure people need nor want just a direct
handout of food or money, what we need are trainings and tools such as great
clothing for interviews, etc.” Wes was cautious about looking to help from
others, especially the outside. He said,
However, a dangerous stereotype that
exists for the people in Appalachia is that we need help from those outside
Appalachia. People want to speak for us but know nothing about our ability to
overcome and push on through hardships. They interject political ideologies
onto us that not many people would find hard to support or even give the time
of day. The people of the hills are able to speak for themselves, let them.
Dustin said that the region needed
empowerment through expanded opportunities.
Growth is the result of being met with
challenges and alternative ways of thinking and doing. Once you can see things
in a new light, acting on those said things without fear of looking through
that alternative lens truly allows for the best solutions. In short do not be
narrowminded, believing that the way you know is the only and right way. Most
often it is not, and you can learn something from others to incorporate into
what you know that will leave you a better person following the interaction.
For liberation of the region, the
students shared a similar hope and vision as Sheila. They shared a vision where
there are not hungry people and people are not limited due to a lack of money. Sheila’s
vision is as follows: “People here could explore and pursue their dreams, not
having to stifle their big plans because they are broke.” Jordan said
liberation “would be a path to meaningful work so that people can fuel their
own escape from poverty and be released from the vicious cycle of drugs”
whereas Dustin said, “The Kingdom of God. I know it is short and maybe cliché,
but it’s the truth and the reality. We must live like and be welcoming like the
kingdom of God. Speaking up for the voiceless, fighting for those who cannot
fight for themselves, and being our brothers/sister’s keeper. Full of service
with another first type of mentality.” All had hopes and dreams of people not
struggling and for people to have what was needed to make a difference. Shelby
also has a vision of new employment and changes for jobs.
Liberation for Eastern Kentucky would be a
release from just coal miners or poor dumb hillbillies. Being a coal miner is
hard work on your mind and body. Now, coal mining is being taken for granted
and decreasing day-by-day. Liberation will be more than unemployment rates,
businesses closing down or communities falling apart due to drug related crimes.
Jeffery, however, stood out in his
response as he embraced the painful stereotypes as opportunities to change
realities.
Many people here literally are toothless,
many are uneducated, many are rough around the edges. So, it’s not that I would
like the stereotypes to be changed in the sense of ‘stop saying that, it’s not
true,’ but rather changed in the sense of investing into better access to
dental care, more quality education from teachers that genuinely care (because
I had plenty that could not care less), and programs that help kids learn how
to network and work collaboratively because people in Eastern Kentucky really
can just be awkward a lot of times. I am.
In
the last section, students were asked about what systems cause the major
sources of oppression in Appalachia. Students differed vastly on this question.
Jordan believed that the fundamental cause of oppression was the limited
sources of work and how only a few companies controlled the workforce. “Just
look at Pikeville, there are two main employers and if you cross either one of
them then you are done. Very little has changed in 100 years, it was previously
the company store in the coal mines and now it is the hospital or the
university.” Wes provided helpful insight as he said,
There is an aversion to science in
Appalachia, which drives many generations to believe contrary to factual
evidence. Education systems must be reformed, and emphasis placed on critical
thinking and asking questions about the world around us…. Unpopular opinion,
but churches are often oppressive in themselves. Not all churches are, however,
in Appalachia I have witnessed fear of science, fear of change, and fear of
facts from the pulpit. Churches need to embrace change and honor the compassion
that is needed for the betterment of Appalachia. Many churches are doing good
works! We should continue to feed those in need, provide legal service and
medical services at reduced or free cost! Churches have a lock on the older
generation that other institutions may lack. The older church going generations
are teaching our younger people, I believe churches must begin to embrace the
change and support the older generations with doing the same.
Codie believed that the mountains
were the main issue as people are “just so isolated and geographically
alienated from others.” Sheila believed that people are getting in their own
way as “so many are just trying to abuse the system when we could be helping
each other get better and help those who truly need the help.” Whereas Dustin
believed that people need to be disturbed and have their ideas challenged.
The idea that anything new is wrong, the
concept that Mayberry R.F.D. is just fine as it has been. It’s time to
be more open to the idea of racial integration in leadership, way of life, and
community development…. I feel in Appalachia folks know very strong racial
undertone lines that no one likes to speak openly about…. I came to UPIKE fresh
from a police force that gave me a gun and a badge, not to mention way too much
authority without training. It was due to crooked politics and systems that I
learned I had to find a way out or I would go down with the ship.
Shelby wanted a revolution of a
classless society.
I believe the class system needs to be
challenged. Everywhere you go, you can tell the difference in the class of
others by the way you are treated by them. If this were challenged, I believe
people would be kinder, and the world would be a different place than it is
now. Even with race, they are automatically judged to a class. Systems are all
about the strengths, weaknesses, and differences of others in some way.
Equality will never be reached in this direction.
Jeffery wants a major overhaul to
the political and educational system.
For so long the political systems in
Appalachia have been especially corrupt, slaves to the good ole boy method that
is a downfall of Appalachia’s tight knit way of life. The educational system
needs to be radically transformed in order to make our youth competitive in the
job market that they will enter. Kids can literally get a more relevant
education on YouTube, than most of their classes in school.
All students
believed that change was possible, and that the region could thrive through
resources, tools, and a chance to improve. All but two students were committed
to staying in the region and making it better. Both Dustin and Wes believed
that life in Appalachia was too painful and narrowing for them. Dustin said, “I
am so thankful for the soldiers who are laboring in the mountains of
Appalachia, yet that is not for me! I needed to get out, I needed to see the
world. I cannot image a scenario that would have me back in Eastern Kentucky.”
Although Dustin’s words echo loudly in the hearts and minds of the thousands
who have also left, Dustin is not different from those ancestors who traveled
the Hillbilly Highway[1] or
who packed up from Italy, Ireland, or Scotland to pursue better horizons.
Surprisingly, however, only two of eight wanted to permanently leave. Most are
committed to the region and yearn to make it work despite the obstacles. The
biggest challenge was made evident in these words, “how does one make money and
help out others who are struggling and suffering?” The students long to be
change agents but also are faced with the realities of paying bills and
supporting family members suffering in poverty. Jeffery provides a different
vision of a liberation on the near horizon.
Liberation in Central Appalachia would
look like changes made in education to give students a chance at a job in the
digital economy. Advancements in broadband access is also critically important,
so that we can work from home in our remote area that we love. Given these
freedoms, people in Appalachia can gainfully contribute to the world through
work, while living in Appalachia.
In
addition to the interviews, five of the critical reflection writing assignments
(four biblical and one from the textbook) from the New Testament course have been selected as a sample to show how
critical pedagogy engages students when teaching hollering theology. To my
surprise, students verbalized significant push back which at first led me to
believe that the liberation project was ineffective. Now I see their push back
as helpful and a critical part of the process of hillbilly student’s finding
and owning their voice.
Assignment One: Explore and Understand Questions in De La Torre Chapter
5.
Critical Engagement of De La Torre chapter
five will focus on: Engaging in critical reading that invites reflection,
examination and assessing of his ideas. Discover your own ideas in response to
the reading and connecting them and your experiences to find your own stance on
the views of Christ being raised by the author. Material to be engaged, Chapter 5: “Who Do People Say I Am: Looking at the Christ,”
of Reading the Bible from the Margins
This material presents students with questions, challenges, and a dialogue
around the power structure of “imaging God.” This chapter is the most
challenging of the semester as it pushes a discussion of racism, white
privilege, feminine images of Jesus, and issues around human sexuality. Austin shares
some tension felt in this reading,
In my opinion, Jesus is white.
I was raised to believe that Jesus was a Jew and white. I can’t prove this
because I have never seen him except in the everyday pictures that are hanging
on walls of buildings or churches, or the ones floating around on social media
such as Facebook. Everybody was brought
up seeing Jesus Christ in the image that they were taught. Nobody can prove
what race he was, it’s just the image of how you see him in your own head.
Although very intelligent people used very advanced technology to try to come
up with the best image they could of Jesus, nobody really knows. I see Jesus as
that white skinned, blue eyed, long hair guy that most Christians today see him
as.
Austin does
not understand why his views are problematic as it is just the way that he
thinks most Christians see it. Austin provides an example of traditionally
imported views of Jesus and Christianity which are entrenched in many of the
students. When I raise questions or present alternative views about traditionally
held views, especially religious views held by the family of the student, it pits
me against a student’s “upbringing.” Austin shows how the lack of visible diversity
in Eastern Kentucky has caused a limited perception of diversity and ethnicity.
Timothy’s reflection highlights further strain:
Again, De
Torre is forgetting about those who are considered white. The author never once
refers to the margin of society as being white, but also insist if we are to
understand Jesus then we must read from the margin. What he doesn’t understand
is that white people have been oppressed, poor, and treated as they are not
equals in a society that represents democracy. If we are to truly understand
the Bible, then we must include all who has suffered and been forgotten by
society.
Timothy is
bothered by what he perceives as a slight on poor white people, so then he challenges
the author to see the oppression of hillbilly poverty. Timothy provides insight
into the way many Appalachian students perceive conversations about oppression
and suffering. Often students feel left out because traditional conversations
of oppression dealing with racism, sexism, immigration status, or sexuality, yet
rarely address the oppression of hillbillies. After reading his response, I
followed up with Timothy, and asked him a few other questions. I asked, “How do
you think poor whites are being marginalized by society?” In response, he
recounted ways in which, growing up in rural Pike County, Kentucky, that people
in the county seat of Pikeville received much attention whereas the “county
kids” felt forgotten. He said that racism was not a reality in Eastern Kentucky
but classism is a painful reality. He said,
Rob, I know plenty of black
and Indian kids who could get private piano lessons and play travel ball
because their parents were doctors working at the hospital, yet because my dad
was disabled and my mom worked at the local dollar store, no one was reaching
out to us trying to give us a hand. We were forgotten and had to make it. We
did not make a big deal of it and we never protested that we were being
discriminated against, it was just the way it was.
Timothy shows
the pain in many Appalachian people who feel forgotten, yet this assignment
gave him the space and theological platform to begin to push against false narratives.
Not all students echoed the
entrenched and painful realities of Austin and Timothy. Karri shares a
different Appalachian lens.
Just like
any normal human that lives within the Eurocentric society, I did believe that
Christ was only white, and he couldn’t be any other color. However, this isn’t
the case anymore, after reading this book from a privileged white American’s
point of view, I can see how messed up today’s modern society is. Although, I
feel as if I was sheltered from all these people who are suffering because of
the way society is structured. My biggest issue so far is, how can you claim to
be a Christian, yet shun out your brothers, and sisters because they aren’t the
same race as you or come from the same social background. These people are not
true Christian’s, they are wanting to be Christians that do not want to give up
their privileged way of life. I agree with the author in order for us to be
more Christ like, and to gain salvation we do need to try, and search for
Christ through people who are crucified. Once we learn what it’s like to
worship outside of the Eurocentric dynamics, we start to see life in a
different perspective, not everything in the bible is to be taken literal, and
to be used for justification against people. Reading this book has gave me such
a better outlook on how others believe, and how much closer they are to Christ
than I am. I believe that living outside of the margins is a better place to be
because if you have nothing to give, yet you give everything you have, God will
accept you for you are not influenced by society’s greed. If you live for God
you live for the poor, people who aren’t the same color as you, and people who
are aliens from foreign countries.
Kerri
expresses a sense of shock and remorse at how her worldview had been shaped
only by those around her, as she admits that she was blind to other voices.
Kerri shows how critical pedagogy begins to empower students to ask greater
questions of their surroundings and to remove the barriers that limit their desired
voice. Kerri represents the Appalachian students who are hungering to hear
something different, something that challenges the dominant and monolithic
narrative of the poor, white, conservative, images of Appalachia.
Tiara echoes these sentiments when saying,
Nobody
really ever talks about the possibilities of a different Christ. De La Torre
takes a walk through each possibility of Christ there could’ve been. For
example, a Hispanic Christ, a gay Christ, a black Christ and even a female
Christ. De La Torre gives insight to people like me who have never seen or
heard of Christ being represented in a way different from a white male.
Tiara
shares her own appreciation for diversity but also admits her limited view of diverse
perspectives by saying, “people like me.” Also, in this phrase she is referring
to how her neighbors lack a more nuanced view of diversity. When asked a follow
up question Tiara said, “I am talking about all the kids I went to high school
with. Most of us have only been to Tennessee or Myrtle Beach, we have no idea
how other people see things, that is why it is so important for us to be
challenged and forced to read stuff like this.” She admits that she would never
read anything like this (De La Torre) on her own nor did she believe all that
the author was writing, but she knew that it was helpful.
Finally, MacKenzie shows the wrestling that happens among
the students as they engage these new theological ideas.
De La
Torre’s point of this chapter is to make people see how some people see Christ.
I will admit that he makes some really great points. On the other hand, nothing
he says can really be proven because no one knows what Christ looks like. He
says some things that are true and I agree with them. There are many things
though that I do not believe. One of them would be a gay Christ. There is no
way that that is possible. The reading of this book has really opened my eyes
to how other people view Christ and read the Bible. I may not agree with most
of it because of the way I believe, but there are people out there who will
agree with everything De La Torre says. It is not my job to judge them and I
believe everyone has the right to think what they want to.
Mackenzie
shows Appalachian hospitality while also holding to her beliefs. She flatly admits
that some of the issues presented by the author are just wrong yet she is open
to hearing from the author. She is also open to allowing others to hold
alternative views but she does admit that her eyes have been opened. She admits
to an appreciation of seeing other perspectives. The opening of a student’s critical
voice and critical awareness is a central piece of critical pedagogy especially
in Appalachia where stereotypes oppress and silence.
In this first assignment, I presented
students with materials that provided various views on Jesus and how he
identifies with the most marginalized in society. I was reminded of how polite
Appalachian students can be when listening to new ideas yet also I was
challenged to hear students pushing against the author due to the neglect of
not accounting for hillbilly marginalization. Although some students shared how
they felt slighted by the lack of diversity int heir high schools and hollers,
I was challenged to finally understand how these new ideas can put students in
a difficult cultural bind. When students are given new ideas, especially those
which go against traditionally held family views, this puts students in a bind
of upholding family traditional views or embracing the new ideas. At times it
feels like the students have to choose fitting into their family or fitting
into the educational system of college. I had never fully appreciated this
tension until evaluating these student insights.
Assignment Two: Reading John
5:1-18 with your home in mind
Review the gospel of John 5:1-18. In this
story a man is laying at a pool for 38 years and Jesus heals him. Later Jesus
warns him to not sin again. Overall, in the text the story has conflict between
Jesus and the Jewish leadership. They argue about the Sabbath. In your
writing, please answer these questions:
·
How
does Jesus treat the man in the story?
·
What
role does the religious establishment play in the story and how do they treat
the man?
·
How
does personal responsibility play out in this story?
·
Where
is justice in this story?
·
If
this story is a metaphor for something greater... what truths do you pick up
from this story?
·
If
the man were a symbol for something else, what do you think he is a symbol
of?
·
Finally,
if the man were a symbol for Appalachia, please give me your thoughts of this
story if Jesus were talking to Appalachia rather than the man at this
pool.
This assignment seeks to
empower students to critically engage the Bible and their community while also
giving them space to name specific Appalachian issues. Appalachian students
took this story and contextualized it in many ways, yet each student pointed
out deficiencies and stereotypes in their region. Only a few pointed out the
role of faith, belief, trust, and faithfulness of the region. Common themes
developed when it came to seeing regional forces as stumbling blocks to hillbilly
liberation.
I find
that living in Appalachia carries a certain way of worship, and this certain
way can make it seem very hard for people to be healed. If we aren’t reading a
certain version of the Bible, or if it isn’t specifically a form of worship,
I’ve even heard that if a called preacher doesn’t lead someone to the Lord in a
conversation then they actually aren’t saved. In many ways, it can seem hard,
because there is just a specific way, or it is false. Indoctrinated religion
rather than the love of Christ.
Joey
identifies how traditional and legalistic church structures are keeping people
from experiencing healing. Dacota shares how she thinks the metaphor of “the
ill man” applies to the stubborn nature of dependent/lazy Appalachian people.
In Appalachia, people would probably not
believe that things like that could be done. Then when they found out that
these types of miracles could be done, they would try to take advantage of his
works.
Dacota models
internalized oppression by vocalizing the stereotype of the lazy, free loading
hillbilly. Student Kelsie similarly shares as she names the stereotype of the
ignorant and foolish hillbilly.
If the man were a symbol for anything in
the Appalachian region, I think that it would be ignorance. I think that the
man is oblivious to the corruptness of the Jewish leaders and that is how many
people are in Appalachia. They assume and judge prematurely and many do not actually
know or understand what things mean.
Not all
students had a negative way of seeing the power of stereotypes. Some students
embraced the stereotypes of a spiritually deficient hillbilly, yet also
declaring that Christ would provide compassion and help. Sidney says,
I think that if the man was the
Appalachian region, he would tell the people that he would heal them no matter
how much poverty or how many drugs or diseases they may have. I say this
because the Appalachian region has many negative things that affect the
population due to the fact there is nothing else for the people to do.
Joey C says,
Given
that the region of Appalachia is so poverty stricken, drug abuse is rampant,
and hope is lost to so many people, I believe that Jesus would heal someone or
many that has lost all hope and turned their lives over to drugs and sin. I
believe that He would state that same words, ‘whoever hears my word and
believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has
crossed over from death to life.’ He
would say, ‘stop sinning or something worse may happen to you.’ He would save
them through His grace. His words would not change, because He does not change.
Both
Sidney and Joey C emphasized a poor and needy people group who are lacking a
touch from Christ, yet because of what they believe about Jesus, they emphasize
how Jesus would be compassionate on their needs and heal the region. Noah affirms
this deficit mindset,
If this story were told as the man being
our Appalachian region then I think that he would give us a lot of money
because this area struggles with poverty, so just as he enabled the lame man to
walk, he could give our region money to get the economy going again. When he
tells the man to sin no more, I guess he would tell our region to get rid of
all our drugs.
Noah also
affirms the stereotype of the hillbilly addict who is looking for assistance.
Noah however highlights an important dynamic at work in much of the student
reflections; hillbillies need help, yet hillbillies have the potential to do
good things with the help, but also are hesitant in believing their situations
will change. Dr. Andrew Sung Park, professor of theology, provides a key
theological insight regarding the phenomena of hurting one another based on negative
insights of one’s own culture. He discusses the Korean theological concept of han.
Han sheds light on hillbilly internalized oppression.
Han is a festering wound generated by
unjust psychosomatic, social, political, economic, and cultural repression and
oppression. Since sin is dynamically correlated with sinister traditions,
customs, and systems, it can never be understood by itself. Sin can be grasped
far better in light of han. Sin causes han, and han procreates sin. Sin is of
sinners; han is of the sinned-against. The sin of sinners may cause a chain
reaction via the han of the sinned-against. Sometimes han reproduces sin.[2]
Due to
the pains caused by stereotypes and dominating systems of oppression of
hillbillies, now the Appalachian people continue to tear each other up, thus
participating in their own oppression. The limiting of one another, cultural
shame, lack of pride of place, is seen in the student writings.
Not all students however voluntarily shamed hillbillies as Korissa
used her writing to call out the damning stereotypes.
I feel
that this man could have been a symbol for Appalachia because people always
assume Appalachia doesn’t ever have any victories. They think we have no money,
clothes, or shoes. They are very quick to stereotype the area. When something
positive does finally happen for an area like ours, it is usually overshadowed
by those of places with constant victory. Another example is that people
sometimes do need help in this area. Rather than worrying about helping them, people
are quick to just worry about their own wants or needs. Jesus was selfless and
helped people no matter what day or time it was.
Korissa
provides insight into the ways that stereotypes internally oppress as they lead
to the need for a perpetual overarching narrative of the poor and ignorant
hillbilly. Madi, an international student who has been in Eastern Kentucky for five
years, names external oppression as the damning reality in the region.
If the man were a symbol for Appalachia,
and Jesus were talking to the area at the pool of healing, I think he would
give the area a second chance on some of the issues in the area. I think one
thing would be the coal mining and how it has caused people damage and also I
think also about those people who are extremely religious who don’t accept
others who are different from them
Madi is
the only student who labels coal as a complicating factor for the region while
also seeing how the industry has created pain for the hillbilly.
Assignment Three:
Matthew 25:31-46
Review Matthew 25:31-46, who does God identify with in this
passage and why is this shocking?
In this prompt, students
overwhelmingly highlighted the humility of Christ and how God identifies with
the least as a way to model lowliness. Because humility is a cultural value in
Appalachia, it is understandable that the students read it in the text. Isiah says,
We are taught to be kind and
accepting and loving and compassionate all throughout the Bible, just as Jesus
did throughout his life and as he does in all the stories of the Bible. So, if
you think about it, it makes sense that God doesn’t instead claim to be
something else, he knows that even though shepherds are what they are, they
still are important and should be accepted. What better way to try and get
people to stop looking down on them than to claim that God himself will perform
his separating of people on judgement day just as a shepherd does when
separating goats from sheep.
Isiah sees
how God is not trying to be pretentious or haughty but is one of low esteem and
compassionately connected to the people. Megan also shares this,
I find it interesting that God compares
himself to a shepherd and his angels to sheep and goats. I thought before
reading, that God would have identified with something much more elaborate.
However, this identification makes perfect sense. I think God was humble, and
accurate, whereas the shepherd leads the herd; Christians are God’s herd.
Megan applies
her own cultural lens to the story and shows how God reflects her deepest
cultural values. Ultimately Shane states the majority view of the passage when expressing
shock at God’s lowliness and connection to the marginalized.
I think that it is shocking to
see that God is identifying himself with the “less of the people” and
“strangers” because God is not usually associated with this title. God is a
creator and a powerful divine. Everything associated with God is virtually
positive. He is extremely wise and holy. It’s also how God is portrayed in pop
culture that makes this so shocking. We know him as the man in the clouds, in
control of everything. Usually he is depicted as having a long white beard,
wearing an elegant robe, and has rays of sunshine surrounding him. So, when he
says that he was that homeless person on the street or the prisoner in jail, it
is shocking to people.
Before the
course Shane viewed God as an omnipotent and transcendent being who is not
connected to the deepest of human suffering and shame yet in this critical
engagement project, Shane was empowered to see God in these previous “no go”
zones.
Assignment Four: Luke
10:25-37 & 16:19-31
What is your reaction to the parables of Luke 10:25-37 and Luke
16:19-31. What important lessons do you learn?
Casey wrestles openly with the implications of these
parables,
Obviously, the moral of the story is that
we should help others. Just like the rich man, we all have plenty of
opportunities to help someone we see on the street or go out of our way to a
food kitchen or somewhere to really make a difference. It’s hard sometimes, to
put someone else before yourself but that’s the whole point — to love others
just as you would want someone to love you if you were in their shoes.
Pointedly,
Casey shows that this type of focus on the poor and needy is a hard shift to
make. When reading these type of student comments, for years I would hear this
and feel offended that the Christian students were not instantly wanting to do
what Christ has made clear, yet through this project I have learned that it is
more nuanced in Central Appalachia. Ryan exemplifies this complexity,
Caring and looking out for your neighbor
is such an important value a person could have. Especially if one is wealthy
and able to provide for others more often.
Here Ryan
shows that helping is a desired trait, yet the reality is that at times this is
not possible especially in Appalachia where the needs abound and survival is a
pressing problem. John expands this when saying,
Many people may read this story and think
it means that rich people cannot get into heaven. However, I believe it depends
on what a person does with the money. For example, In the passage there is no
mention of the rich man helping Lazarus, but what if he had. If the rich man
had helped Lazarus and helped others who had needed it, his judgement and his
final location may have been different. I believe that the lesson in this story
is to take care of yourself and your family, but also use the extra to care for
others.
John shows
how family is the first place of service and the “extra” should be given if
available. When previously reading these words, I would be stunned as I have interpreted
the parable showing how the rich man ignores the poor man yet shows concern
about himself and his family. Many Appalachian students however, see the poor
man as their family who is laying in the curves of their hollers while the rich
man is the greater system which ignores Appalachian plight. So often students
attend UPIKE to advance financially so that they can care for their family.
Assignment Five: 1
Timothy 6:11-18
In 1 Timothy
6:11-18, Paul gives advice about money. What do you think about this teaching
and where do you agree or want to challenge?
Rodney
admits that Paul’s words are hard to handle and not easily applied.
Paul’s teaching is kind of tricky. It’s
almost like he doesn’t want anyone to be happy for being rich, but some people
work very hard for what they have. But Paul knows that money doesn’t last
forever. Knowing that God allowed you to be wealthy, and that he can take it
away at any time is essential, but I feel like you should be able to live your
life because of that. If it was so wrong, why has God allowed it?
Appalachian
students do not like the idea of having a church or theology tell them what to
do with their money. Students are facing very serious financial constraints in
the mountains. Hollering theologians need to be aware of the challenging
realities of rural Appalachian living especially as it influences a student’s
view of money. In a follow up interview with the student Jordan, he said,
It takes money to get money and right now
I am broke and I can see how to get money, but I have no means to get to the
places where I can make the money.
Poverty
creates many barriers in the lives of hillbillies and Hannah is cautious with
Paul’s teaching,
Money does indeed cause a lot of problems
in the world. However, money
specifically cannot do any evil in this world.
It is the way we treat it, view it, and love it that does. We make money have a colossal impact on the
world. It did not show up and instantly control our lives. We created it and
put it in this position. I think if we did not treat money the way it is now,
and put a lesser emphasis on it, it would not be so dangerous.
Finally,
Coy shares how poverty is overly romanticized without truly being good. Coy is
self-described as “a dirt-poor kid growing up, who had nothing.” He is also a gifted
student who is paying for his tuition through academic scholarships. Having
gone without, Coy says that even God must make allowance for people to have a
little enjoyment.
Paul believes that humans should be
satisfied with just food and water that can sustain them so they can continue
to praise Christ through worship. I think that Paul is being too harsh on
humanity on this one. I believe that it is fine to want to have something that
you cherish because it makes you happy and I think that is what Christ would
want for us to be, happy.
Coy illuminates
the impact that poverty can have on hillbilly hermeneutics. Coy has been poor
his whole life and now does not want to voluntarily sign up for a further path
of limitations.
Through these short biblical
reflections, students were given space to express their insights into key
passages. I was shocked to hear of the deeply negative views many students had
of their Appalachian region and how many shamed hillbillies. Internalized
oppression is seen in many of these reflections. I thought more students would
discuss outside forces that oppress the region yet most students had a negative
view of the region and its people. As poverty plays a big role in the region, I
was moved in hearing how much poverty shapes the way students hear and read
these particular biblical passages. I was moved to hear how students honestly
wanted to be comfortable as much of life had already included hardship due to
poverty. In Eastern Kentucky, having money is a key way to care for family and
do the work of Christ, rather than sell all one has and give to the poor. For
many of the students, “the poor” is their family. This insight has deeply
changed the way that I approach teaching these passages as I now appreciate the
impact of poverty on hillbilly hermeneutics.
Beyond the student reflection papers, pre-course and post-course
survey results play a great role in the data analysis of this project. After
analyzing the results of the pre/post surveys, I was stunned to realize that New Testament students did not report
any statistical change or positive improvement in their engagement with their
community after experiencing the course. With at least six hours of community
service, liberation readings, and hours of liberation themed lectures, out of
135 students, not one reported starting a practice of community service. The
course did not convert or motivate any students into actively volunteering when
the students were not already an engaged volunteer; 28 % of students however did
report a more positive tendency to volunteer now because of the course yet
surprisingly 15.6 % of students reported that they were volunteering less after
the course. In the Appalachian Liberation
course, all students verbalized the desire to serve and help in their
community, but they wanted to do it in a systematic and helpful way. Students
reported desiring to serve and to give which “helps in the long term rather
than giving a handout. I want to help change the system.”[3]
In relationship to empowering
Appalachian students to make their voice known, 32.4 % of the students
confirmed that they are now more likely to speak up, whereas 15.6 % are now
less likely. The study did not expect to see students regress when it comes to
volunteering or speaking up, yet the numbers show that some students were
turned off by the challenging nature of the ideas presented. A liberating faith
is not appealing to some, as 30.4 % of students said that now religion would be
a factor in their career or major selection whereas 23 % said it was not going
to be used as a consideration. Another surprising result was the impact the course
had on the students’ view of the Church’s involvement in law and politics. 21.5
% of students believed that the Church should be actively involved yet 28.1 % did
not believe the Church had a role in these functions. This was unchanged from
the pre-course survey to the post-course survey.
The results regarding political engagement merit a follow up,
especially on how students understand the role of politics in improving laws
for the poor and oppressed. If further follow up is done through surveys, there
should be an examination of the wording of the survey questions regarding
political engagement. The following alternative phrasing is proposed: “The
Church should be involved in politics and law making to help the poor and
injustices of society?” Also, generational shifts need to be considered as
researchers indicate that the DotNet generation is less politically
involved but desire to volunteer more and use their purchasing power to express
their social concerns.[4]
Further, the liberation concept of “oppression
as sin” and “the treatment of the needy as having eternal consequences,” did
not make a dramatic impact on the students. Although 37 % of students reported
positive growth when being asked if oppression was a sin against God, 8
students or 6 % moved from having a positive to later having a negative view.
33 % of students reported holding positive views of how their eternal lives are
impacted by their current treatment of the poor and oppressed, whereas only 6 %
reported being converted to a positive view.
The most positive impact of the study was seen in empowering
students to value faith as a way to work against injustice, challenge unjust
laws, and seek out the poor and needy, even if one has to sacrifice. In the
survey, there are three questions addressing these topics. In these questions, students
reported significant affirming movement. When asked about if it was the
responsibility and role of people of faith to challenge injustice, nearly 20 % of
students had their opinions positively changed while 37.8 % reported
strengthening of their affirming view. 18.5 % of students moved from
disagreeing to agreeing when it came to seeing faith as the agent to impact
unjust social realities, especially when they saw oppression of the poor. 46.5 %
of students reported strengthening of their positive and affirming convictions
in this area. Finally, 41.5 % of students reported becoming more supportive of sacrificing
for the poor and needy whereas over 14 % of students shifted from negative to
positive views of this area.
When students were asked about God’s concern for those who suffer
and are in need, 28 % of students reported having their convictions
strengthened whereas 28 % of Appalachian students reported positive growth. It
is important to realize that Appalachian students did not vary in the impact of
this course. The statistics are nearly
identical for both Appalachian and non-Appalachian students.
All questions on the survey, with one exception, used the Likert
scale for responses. At the end of the survey, students were given an open
response question. The question asked students what they believed was the
biggest problem facing Appalachia. 31 % of students stated that drugs are the
biggest crisis, whereas 26 % named poverty, and 13 % listed jobs and the economy.
Students did report higher than expected concerns about ignorance/prejudice of
the people at 8 % and negative stereotyping of the people at 3 %. It should be
noted that only two students named anything with the coal industry and only
four students mentioned lack of education or dependency as critical issues. Complete
survey results can be found in appendix
twenty.
|
Issues in Central
Appalachia from Appalachian Students |
Not in Study 154 |
In Study 126 |
Overall 280 student |
percent |
|
|
cell phone service signal
issues |
2 |
0 |
2 |
0.001 |
|
|
dependency on government |
2 |
0 |
2 |
0.001 |
|
|
discrimination/prejudice |
9 |
8 |
17 |
0.06 |
|
|
diversity, lack of it |
5 |
2 |
7 |
0.01 |
|
|
Drugs |
45 |
43 |
88 |
31 |
|
|
education is bad |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0.001 |
|
|
Environmental |
0 |
3 |
3 |
0.001 |
|
|
ignorance |
5 |
0 |
5 |
0.002 |
|
|
Isolation/ lack of
opportunities |
7 |
4 |
11 |
0.04 |
|
|
jobs/economy |
16 |
20 |
36 |
13 |
|
|
Lack of progress in
comparison |
2 |
0 |
2 |
0.001 |
|
|
law, not obeying it |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0.001 |
|
|
lazy |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0.001 |
|
|
politics |
2 |
0 |
2 |
0.001 |
|
|
poverty |
41 |
33 |
74 |
26 |
|
|
Protest Groups |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0.001 |
|
|
resources, lacking |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0.001 |
|
|
selfishness |
7 |
1 |
8 |
0.003 |
|
|
spiritual |
1 |
3 |
4 |
0.002 |
|
|
stereotype negative |
7 |
5 |
12 |
0.004 |
After all the data were analyzed, I began to build a case
for the impact of hollering theology. In this project I am aware of the many
who have gone before me to lift up the hillbilly voice. This project stands on
the shoulders of the pioneering work of, The Telling Takes Us Home: Taking
Our Place in the Stories that Shape Us, a People’s Pastoral from the Catholic
Committee of Appalachia, and the early pastoral letters from the bishops of
Appalachia. This study seeks to advance a hollering theology and the thesis
that the most oppressive and death-dealing force in Appalachia is internalized
oppression from the hillbilly stereotype. Therefore, this thesis argues that critical
education at UPIKE, as a church-related higher education institution, is
imperative to discovering hollering theology because UPIKE provides ways to act
in the region for liberation. As I dive deeper into UPIKE, it is important to
not only hear from the students but I must also hear from faculty, staff,
administrators, and key community members.
In the creation of hollering theology, it is vital to perform
field interviews with Appalachian activists who are tied to UPIKE and/or the
Pikeville community. Those chosen to be interviewed were either directly
employed by UPIKE or tied to UPIKE through regional influence. Each
interviewee was given a series of questions to answer. Appendix twenty-one provides the list of
interview questions and the list of those interviewed in the process of creating hollering theology.
The
first person interviewed was Dr. Jennifer Dugan, the Dean of the College of Arts
and Sciences at UPIKE, as she is the academic leader for religion courses. She
is a faithful Roman Catholic and her Ph.D. work was on the political views of the
Cuban liberation movement. Secondly, Rusty Justice was interviewed as he is a
local Appalachian expert, proud hillbilly, economic leader for innovation, and
a board member of the local community college. Rusty was sought out to give
insight into the idea of how the term/concept of the hillbillly can be
reclaimed while also Appalachian identity can be a badge of pride used to move
forward in communal development. Next was Dr. J. Michael King, who is an
Appalachian scholar, poet, and Professor of Education at UPIKE. He was
interviewed for his engagement with training teachers and his work on
Appalachian mental health and poverty issues. Dr. Mathys Meyer was also
interviewed as having developed critically-engaging concepts of education in
South Africa under apartheid. He has a keen eye for liberation and he is a
focused practitioner of critical pedagogy, especially as he impacts the
learning structures of UPIKE. He is the current dean of student success at
UPIKE. Pastor Darcy Owens was interviewed as a local pastor with a keen
interest in liberation theology, yet also as an Appalachian pastor who serves in
Hindman, Kentucky.
A
key interview was with former governor and current chancellor of UPIKE, Paul
Patton as he is one of the most significant living leaders in Eastern Kentucky.
His work for the region cannot be overstated. Rev. Scot Robinson was
interviewed as an UPIKE alumni and local minister who now serves in the Presbyterian
church that birthed UPIKE. He seeks to implement liberation ideas in the
community. Rev. Scot is also an alumnus of my course, Liberation Theology in the Haitian Context. The next interview was
with Dr. Amanda Slone, who is an Appalachian scholar, Assistant Provost, and Associate
Professor of English at UPIKE. She was interviewed to add a clarifying insight
into cultural sensitivity and regional awareness regarding Eastern Kentucky.
The
final two interviewees were engaged in relationship to the power structures of
UPIKE. Dr. Burton Webb is the current president of UPIKE, a leading thinker for
change, and a lay Christian leader deeply interested in theology. As the leader
of UPIKE, he was interviewed for his insights into how UPIKE can significantly
impact and help liberate the region. Finally, Katie Williams was interviewed as
she is the faculty development educator at UPIKE who teaches the professors how
to teach and she is completing her doctoral degree in critical pedagogy with
special insight on how to advance critical pedagogy in university classrooms.
These
interviews provided a wealth of information about liberation attempts in
Central Appalachia through various government projects and grants while also giving
me first hand accounts of how hillbilly stereotypes impact people in the
region. Although all interviews provided helpful materials for a better
understanding of Central Appalachia and UPIKE, the most helpful for the project
were the interviews with Rusty Justice, Gov. Paul Patton, Dr. Amanda Slone, and
Dr. Michael King. Rusty Justice provided the framework for Appalachian
oppression and the complex nature of how people in the region see things like
coal mining and land development. Rusty’s insights were essential to understand
the various levels of stereotypes of the region. Gov. Patton provided a key
window into the historical nature of attempts at changing the economics and
educational achievements of the region. Drs. Slone and King provided first hand
knowledge into UPIKE students, Appalachian homes, and how things like
“code-switching” and “hillbilly accents” impact students and Appalachian
persons. It is through the interviews that this project ultimately took its
final form as I was struggling to find a root to the oppression of the region.
Although I attest to the multiple factors at play in the oppression of the
hillbilly, I sought to avoid blaming coal mining or other extracting economic
structures as the sole forces of oppression. Environmental degradation is very
important in the oppression of hillbillies yet it is a story widely told in
other theological projects. The interviews however empowered me to expand my
view and see how the hillbilly stereotype is a root to so much of the pain and
despair in the region.
I learned
many valuable lessons in this project. Firstly, my research expectations for transformational
change were not feasible nor logical for a one semester course. Also, I underestimated
the financial and family commitments of the students, especially how these
realities impact their choice of careers and majors. These factors should have
played a greater determinative role in the courses’ design and survey questions.
As the students discussed, shared, and wrote, my research bias was exposed. It
became evident that my vision of liberation and communal justice was being
imposed on students rather than being discovered organically. It is clear that
if students are struggling financially, with a vicious cycle of survival
wearing them out, then better jobs and relief from the poverty is a way for
liberation. Asking students to take on a lot of debt through university studies
and then choose careers that only trapped them in low wage-earning careers
could lead to further economic oppression.
In many ways my eyes were opened and my heart was more
connected to the authentic needs of my students. Although I am an Appalachian
American, I had distanced myself so much from the hillbilly stereotype that
before this project, I was unable to see its shadow casting on my life. Even
with much misguided bias, overall, the project did have a positive impact on
empowering students to see the role of faith as a tool for social liberation.
Beyond my bias however, the project was limited in many ways. Firstly, the
project did not make space to distinguish between students of Christian faith
and those who were coming from other religious traditions or no active faith.
The project and the statistics are now believed to be skewed by this lack of
distinction. Just as UPIKE’s survey on spirituality made clear, the campus is composed
of many students who do not label themselves in any faith tradition and
therefore the lack of distinguishing students regarding their religious
identity altered the impact of the project. As a few students made clear, when
they do not believe in a God, they cannot honestly report on whether God wants
them to care about the poor and oppressed, or how God might impact their
major/career choices.
I am
encouraged to see how students engaged in the topics and I considered the
project successful as students challenged and push against many ideas while
growing in expressing their voices. By the end of the course, students were
appreciative of the engagement required by the final compassion/liberation
projects. Students desire to get involved and want to help others but are
conflicted due to competing university demands. One of the big gaps of the
project was in attempting to evaluate the impact of liberation on students for
their career choices. Also, there was a gap in exploring any changes to their
own self-image regarding stereotypes. A three-month project cannot fully
capture the impact or processing of such critical matters. To properly research
the transformational change I sought, I would need to dually enroll students in
sequential courses with follow-up readings over the summer and incentivized programming
to keep students engaged all year. With yearlong exposure and periodic evaluation,
the impact of these theological ideas could be better implemented. Overall, the
project sought to accomplish and measure too much for a semester long course.
A key
insight in the project was discovering how students would like to see social
transformation and engagement modeled for them. Students in the Appalachian
Liberation course rated the guest activists as the best part of the course,
as they were able to “hear and meet the people who are making the changes,
while also getting to bounce ideas off of them.”[5]
With this insight, I will now move the engagement with social change to earlier
in the New Testament course. This way
students will have the opportunity to meet activists that use the New Testament
for inspiration as they work for social change in Appalachia.
Critical
pedagogy positively impacted the students as they were empowered to speak up
and question. A failing, however, in the New
Testament course, was the limited work done on stereotypes and internalized
oppression that comes from the domination imposed by the hillbilly cultural
image. The next time the course is taught, more time will be devoted to
discussing the role of stereotyping and discrimination. Biblical parallels can
be drawn by exploring the tension of the early Jewish Christians and inclusion
of Gentiles along with the Samaritans. Also, work will be included on the
connection of poverty, purity, and ritual in the practice of first century
Judaism and how that impacts the path of Jesus in dealing with the oppressed
masses. Also, space will be created in one or two writing reflections to deal
with the stereotypes that students face living in Central Appalachia.
Consideration will also be given to exploring a project on the hillbilly Christ
where students may seek to look at traditional views of the hillbilly stereotype
and wrestle with the implications of contextualizing the Christ in this hillbilly
lens.
Further,
the project grew in its development over time and the Appalachian Liberation course, if taught again, will be
significantly altered. The goal will be to have this course partner with an
upper division sociology course to help with research and evaluation. Also, this
project can be improved by teaching the material in a less politically charged
environment. At UPIKE 77 % of the student body[6]
supported Donald Trump for the presidency in 2016 and 71 % in 2020. Materials that
hit on the issues being discussed in the national news were received by the
students as “against the president,” and thus turned away some students.
Further work needs to be done to parse out politically nuanced materials
without it feeling partisan. The issue of coal mining must be addressed in a
sensitive way. Previously coal mining was barely addressed in either course due
to the painful loss of jobs impacting so many students. Coal mining is not a
theoretical concept in Eastern Kentucky as each semester some students were
having to file amended FASFA forms because their income changed significantly
due to the loss of their father’s coal related job. Although the project did
deal with some sensitive and politically charged materials, this work can be
improved, and better appreciated for its complexities.
A major downside to the project, was the fact that it did not give
enough consideration to the ways in which offense may lead students to a more
negative view of the work of liberation. In Central Appalachia there are sensitivities
that need to be honored. For example, in April of 2017, in Pikeville, a group
of diverse alt-right white supremacist groups gathered to “Unite the Right” and
stand for the people of Appalachia. Although this event was shocking and
horrifying to nearly all community members, the counter response was also deeply
offensive. When a handful of local people, in addition to hordes of members of Antifa from Louisville, Chicago, and
Milwaukee, came to provide a counter protest, they shouted profanity, met the neo-Nazis
with threats of violence, and wore offensive clothing. On that day, it was
miraculous that no violence occurred, yet it was also eye opening that profanity
and public displays of offense caused more sympathy for the neo-Nazis than was previously
evident in the town. Local Appalachian people were hurt and deeply troubled by
the Antifa “public disgrace” and people voiced the following statements, “I absolutely
do not agree with those alt right guys yet there is no way I could ever support
Antifa after today. What they did was as bad or worse than those other nuts.”[7]
The same is true for Appalachian
students in my classroom. This type of offense is heard when reading student
responses to De La Torre’s work on the gospel’s teaching of the Christmas
story. In his work, A Colonized Christmas Story,[8]
De La Torre uses the setting of Mexican immigration and the pains associated
with US immigration policy to shape his story of Maria and Jose. Although the
work is powerful by providing insight on how immigrants may read the Bible and
be empowered by this section of the gospels, it also pushes Appalachian
students too far/fast for its theological views. Student A.J. says this when
being asked, “what would you say to the author about his work,”
The author constantly referred Jesus as a mutt and inbred
refugee…The part where Jesus was called an inbred stood out to me as well
because he wasn’t conceived in a normal way and I can see why people would look
down on Maria because pre-marital sex was a big deal back then but Maria and Jose
didn't have premarital sex Jesus was conceived by God for Maria to carry and
give birth to so I could see why people would look at his parents in a way but
he wasn't inbred. For the most part the
author had everything right about the story but the points and the different
phrases that the author used to describe Jesus I do not agree on because the
way I see it is downgrading. And to me I cannot agree with that.
Students can agree with envisioning Jesus as a hero among
the poor and forgotten, yet challenging Jesus’ identity with crude language is
too much. Again, another student, Lance, shares this offense,
The language with which the author
addressed Jesus was also a big point for me. It honestly felt weird down to the
pit of my stomach. It just didn’t feel right to feel Him addressed that way.
Also, the story of Mary not being a virgin was completely new to me as well. In
all my years, I had never heard anything remotely close to that. Both of those
things struck me as odd, but I do agree that it was interesting to see someone
else’s viewpoint.
Religion
is at the heart of a person’s identity and existence. When presenting critical
materials that challenge a student’s beliefs and theology, it can feel like I
am personally attacking their very way of life, especially the persons who have
helped to shaped their beliefs. Often times students wonder if I am even a
Christian or at least one who knows the Bible when I provide critical materials
in the syllabus. When introducing liberation theology to Appalachian students,
students do not resist change, they are resistant to being changed[9]
because in the change, systems that have created their identity may need to be
confronted. This study found that when hollering theology challenged
theological ideas that push on political perspectives held by family members or
influential community members, students preferred to disengage from politics
rather than get involved in the class materials. The resistance of the students
is a sign of them owning their voice. When I continued to push, the tension was
fueled by my imposition of my ideals rather than honoring their views and more
deeply listening to their desires. A key takeaway from this tension is hearing
the Appalachian students desiring familial harmony and relational connection
rather than “truth” or “justice.” One student shed light on this reality by
stating, “I am all for learning new things and growing in my diversity, yet I
love my papaw and my church. Yes, some of the people in my church might be a
little old fashion yet they are good people and I have known them my whole
life.”[10]
Although
politics motivated students to check out from the class materials, students
were deeply interested in making an impact in their community. In this
research, I was troubled when learning that the students do not engage in a
level of volunteering that I deemed sufficient. A further study needs to
investigate obstacles to student volunteering, possibly using insights from
campus dean of learning support, Dr. Landon Shephard’s study on student
volunteer engagement. Dr. Shephard indicates that leading experts say that
college students have a deep interest to volunteer yet students cited various
reasons or barriers for their low civic engagement. Many barriers are reported
by students, such as: competing work and school commitments creating issues;
too busy and had no time for civic activities; previously they had been more
involved in high school because of class, scholarship, or graduation
requirements or assignments; their responsibilities increased to include car
payments, jobs, family responsibilities; ultimately, students reported a lack
of interest in politics and little sense of urgency to act civically.[11]
My
study in the formation of hollering theology did show that students
overwhelmingly saw God as acting on behalf of the poor and that God wants them
to do the same. Students want people of faith to challenge systems of injustice
and to fight for those who are being oppressed. After having hollering theology
introduced, students are more likely to see that their voice matters. 31.7% of
students showed positive growth in the belief that their voice mattered for the
improvement of society. 50 % more students were moved from having a negative
view of their own voice in society to a positive and affirming view.
This project has proven to provoke more questions than it
did answers and it reaffirmed the challenge of contextualizing theology in a
diverse setting. My research interests were peaked when thinking about how
liberation concepts would be embraced and enacted in a classroom full of
students who all embraced the same religious system. The goal of forming a hollering
theology was to help make the Church in Central Appalachia more relevant to the
students as the Church took on a more “local cultural
context, presenting Christianity in such a way that it meets people at the
deepest needs and penetrates their worldview.”[12] Regretfully a few times, hillbilly students were culturally
offended. This type of offense was apparent more than once. For example, in a lecture
in which I was discussing stereotypes and the ways in which internalized
stereotypes can create a self-fulfilling reality for hillbillies. I compared
this situation to how circumcision in early Christianity, when enforced by the
Judaizers, became a barrier to keep out gentiles and fuel negative internal views
about Gentile Christians. I tried to connect this to how non-Appalachian people
see hillbillies as dumb, lazy, and dependent. I then pushed and said that
Appalachian students needed to work twice as hard, make greater sacrifices, and
demand places at the table of society, all the while calling out self-made
barriers that affirm the stereotypes. As an Appalachian insider I sought to
provoke students to see the cultural shaming that happens and be fueled to
reverse this national script. One student was so offended that she wrote in her
evaluation, “The professor even had the audacity to shame people for being
Appalachian and he even went as far as saying that Appalachian people are seen
as lazy!” These types of experiences illuminate how hollering theology, when
not properly contextualized, can cause offense. When one fails to contextualize
the risk of oppressing is much greater. This then has the potential of fueling students to
turn to non-Christian explanations and non-kingdom attempts at liberation. If
not properly contextualized for Central Appalachia, students will see the need
for social change but see the Church and hollering theology as relics from the
past which are inept to deal with modern pains. [13]
Overall, the study was positive but
it did not achieve the type of transformation originally sought. Transformation
however did occur but in subtler ways. In a follow up with the students from
the Appalachian Liberation course, six
students were in careers where they work to make social impact. One student was
leading a campaign to improve mental health awareness and create avenues of support
for college athletes. One student intentionally shifted to working in one of
poorest school districts in Eastern Kentucky, while another student was working
as a social worker for those who struggle with drug addiction. Another student was
pursuing a law degree to help the poorest find justice in West Virginia.
Finally, a fifth member of the class halted their medical school journey as they
strongly felt the call to teach science and empower high school students in a
very poor school district. This student shared how he longed to enhance science
knowledge in this high school so that these students can pursue STEM careers.
The sixth member was teaching in a school district close to their home due to
major changes in their family caused by a divorce. Only two students directly
credited the course to their career choices and/or current path of social action.
This course had a lasting impact on students and helped them move toward a
positive view of social action in their Appalachian context, thus making the
project worthwhile although less dramatic than originally planned.
[1] “Hillbilly
Highway,” Wikipedia, Accessed December 28, 2020, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillbilly_Highway
[2] Andrew Sung Park as cited in Handbook of U.S. Theologies
of Liberation, Miguel A. De La Torre, ed., Chalice Press, 2004, 115.
[3] Teddy, Appalachian
Liberation Theology, December 12, 2018, UPIKE.
[4] Landon P. Shephard, "Civic Engagement of Community
College Students: A Qualitative Research Study On Community College Curriculum
And Civic Engagement," 2012, 55. Electronic
Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. 2243. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/2243
[7]
Carl, discussion with author, one hour after the event, April 2017. Pikeville,
KY.
[8] Miguel A. De La Torre, “A Colonized Christmas Story,” Interpretation:
A Journal of Bible and Theology 2017, Vol. 71(4) 408— 417
sagepub.co.uk/journals https://doi.org/10.1177/0020964317716131journals.sagepub.com/home/int
[9] Margaret Wheatley and Deborah Frieze, Walk on Walk Out:
A Learning Journey into Communities Daring to Live the Future Now,
Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2011, 45.
[10]
Jeremy, February 11, 2020, UPIKE.
No comments:
Post a Comment