Rethinking Hell: Evangelical Conditionalism (Annihilationism), Part 1

When Considering Hell, Which Position is

the most consistent with Divine Love?

Introduction

For myself, conditionalism (annihilationism) seems the most appropriate when considering the love of God. Why do I say this? Consider the following...

God is holy. God is good. God is love. But the greatest of these is love. Love is how God makes one holy and good through Jesus. Not of human will but divine.

God's love cannot be preached enough. All Christian doctrine must proceed on God's love. All missions of the church must go at this sublime thought. No other church dogma must be higher than the grace of God. And all church doctrine must revolve around this one thought.

The holiness of God is meaningless without the grace of God. The goodness of God has no affect if it isn't bathed in God's atoning grace. Holiness without grace is austere. It proceeds in judgment first, last, and always. Goodness is without effect if not given in love. It is wholly utilitarian and bare of God's mindful relation to His creation if not met in love.

The love of God is the most sufficient descriptor of the Christian faith, of God Himself, and God's relationship to His creation. None else may proceed above this thought.

- R.E. Slater, June 2, 2014

Three Views of Death

When considering the Christian view of death, we might think of these views as second-tier doctrinal discussions. The two most popular views are (i) eternal conscious torment (ECT) and (ii) universalism, and the very similar Catholic concept of purgatory. To these is mine own personal view of annihilationism (here termed conditionalism but inferring conditional immortality) for reasons that have been stated in past documents (do a Google search of Relevancy22 or read through the "hell" section on the sidebars).

However, as second-tiered doctrinal discussions, these may also be deemed Christian theologoumenon referring to theological statements or concepts which are made in the area of individual opinion rather than upon doctrinal authority. Primarily, the "authority" perceived within Scripture is usually the most "popular view" of hell within a given society or culture at the time of its usage. However, it is only authoritative based upon the prejudice of public opinion towards the idea of death at the time of its discussion.

But for myself, annihilationism (or conditionalism) seems the most appropriate biblical view to hold in consideration of the love of God, as opposed to the two more popular views. Which is an odd thing to say when thinking of God's love and then thinking of a mortal soul's immortal loss and destruction. Which is why the concept is referentially linked to the idea of conditional immortality. An immortality that is linked to one's actions, life, and circumstances, as well as to a sovereign God's wise judgment and outreaching love seeking for redemptive completion.

Consider what one universalist recently said to me: "Certainly there are children who die before they reach the ambiguous and unscriptural 'age of accountability.' As are there plenty of people living into their adult years who are incapable of understanding so they don't have the ability to respond to the Christian idea of salvation. Then there are people who never hear the Word of God, or are victimized in such a way that they could never respond positively...."

My response was to flatly state that this is what is meant by the sovereign wisdom and gracious judgment of a loving God who wishes to bring all creation into reconciliation with Himself. However, with regards to the Christian concept of accountability - as versus sin and evil (including the idea of antinomianism, referring to lawless living) - the Bible is clear that all men everywhere are held to the act of redeeming this life now as it is. Not later.

By this is meant that we are to:

• avoid wickedness, treachery, lying, unrighteous anger, debauchery, idolatry, murder, and on, and on, and on.

• That we are held accountable for our acts of morality and ethics towards others - and even towards thoughtless use of nature itself.

• That we are therefore to provide a goodness, a kindness, a gentleness towards all men and women and creation.

• And that there will be an spiritual accounting for these acts both in this life - as in death itself - while preaching Jesus' forgiveness for all sins made, committed, or affected.

• And finally, that none are beyond the forgiving reach of God's grace and mercy.

More importantly, all things - both in the heavens and in the earth - will be reconciled to the redeeming God of the universe as respecting human free will. Even the human will refusing submittal to  God's divine will and rule. But if, for all these many reasons and more, a human soul steadfastly refuses to redeem life, or to live in a lifestream of redemption (I am trying to speak ambiguously here to allow the fullest, least formulaic, least creedal, idea of God's gracious redemption in Christ), than that soul may continue to experience a mortification of body-and-soul until at the last, even in death, its mortification continues until extinguished completely by that soul's wont-and-will.

This then is fullest meaning of the word death. Within this meaning is the idea of destruction, annihilation, and cessation of life altogether. It is the opposite to the word life which bears the idea of blessing, continuity, community, redemption, and shalom. And it goes with God's forbearance (or allowance) at our insistence to die completely apart from His love and fellowship against the full weight of His persistence (or insistence) for the redemptive life of His creation.

Tenants of Annihilationism

So then, what does the concept of annihilation communicate then?

• It allows the fullest freedom of the human will to have its final say of abandonment from God, self, others, and creation (up-wards, in-wards, out-wards, eco-wards).

• It allows sin its final affects of separation (or death) in all these four areas.

• It allows divine justice to justly condemn sin will permitting divine love to give everything away to save the sinner from death's destruction and abandonment.

• It sees hell's final estate as one of extinguishment where divine wrath upon sin, and divine anguish for the sinner (by God and by loved ones for the sinner), finds completion and end.

• It grants a period to the end of the divine sentence of creation. A conclusion to the eternal play of salvation.

• It fulfills the testimony of Scripture re sin, death, life, and salvation. That sin will have its judgment. And that salvation will be completed even if by sin's annihilation. That is, even in death will God's word be attested as true, and sinful man be allowed to fully die in all the many senses of that word.

• And, it grants an eschatological completeness to divine creation and recreation. That in no realm of heaven will sin reign or be found. Even in hell itself, which will be put to a final death and destruction.

To me, the view of annihilation seems the most consistent with divine love, mercy, grace, and forgiveness, human freedom, and divine sovereignty. If I didn't follow this conclusion than I would have to move to a universalist, or purgatorial, position of death, which is inconsistent with the biblical demand for sin's judgment, payment, and need for redemption IN THIS LIFE.... Although I will grant to universalism its emphasis upon living a redeemed life NOW and not later, to the public at large, they would not be so attentive to this Christian idea and warning of "redeeming the time," preferring instead to mouth the mantra of Invictus:

Out of the night that covers me, 

Black as the pit from pole to pole, 

I thank whatever gods may be 

For my unconquerable soul.

In the fell clutch of circumstance 

I have not winced nor cried aloud. 

Under the bludgeonings of chance 

My head is bloody, but unbowed.

Beyond this place of wrath and tears 

Looms but the Horror of the shade, 

And yet the menace of the years 

Finds and shall find me unafraid.

It matters not how strait the gate, 

How charged with punishments the scroll, 

I am the master of my fate, 

I am the captain of my soul.

- William Ernest Henley

For myself, and apparently within the testimony of Scripture itself, God is saying that it is now - in this life - that we have the time to throw off sin and evil. To become reconciled to our Redeemer-Creator. To be reconciled with mankind and creation. Not later. Not in the next life (or death) to come. But now. Scripture is very clear in this warning to do all that one can to be ready for God and for death. That it is important how we live our life to come by how we live our life now. And to truly fear not living this life salvifically without the divine redemptive help and agency of our Savior God who is very Life Himself in all His councils and very being.

To be confident that in all things - even in death itself - that God will reconcile all things to Himself, even if to allow death - in the fullest sense of its meaning - to descend upon the shades of resolute souls too proud in their sins and hate. Misappropriating, misinterpreting, or unwisely misunderstanding, the steady guidance of God in the affairs of this life. Still, for all three Christian positions here mentioned, we do each rest upon the forgiving mercy and all gracious judgment of our loving God and Savior.

Conclusion

So then, to sum up the position of conditional immortality or annihilationalism:

• The life we have now is the life we have for God or for sin, for life or for death.

• That the time we have in this life is enough for God to effect His will and for us to respond regardless of our human circumstances (cf. synchronicity).

• That it is unnecessary to slip into death for further redemption to take place (contra universalism).

• That it forces the real issue of time for this life now, and not sometime later, after death (contra purgatory). 

Interestingly, this timeful position of annihilation is in parallel thought with the ECT position regarding the importance of the human act before God in this life now - for good or for ill. To not put that act off until later because what we do now matters before God, man, and creation itself. A thorough universalist will say the same thing though the worry here for that position is that life's extenuating circumstances may not allow God enough time for His redemption to occur. That it may have to be after death for God's redemption to occur. 

But with the accompanying view of Christian synchronicity (as mentioned above), whatever life's unfairness or extenuating circumstances, God will redeem fairly and wisely. That the life  we have now is enough for God to effect his will - and for us to respond - regardless of (or in spite of) our personal situations. I think this gives a truer view of God's sovereignty and the importance of our human responsibility towards obedience to God's affective will.

But the least tenable position for me is the ECT position. It is the least gracious. The least complete in terms of eternal redemption. And the most eternally vindictive by God; by the redeemed who wish to pursue eternal judgment and not forgiveness; and, even by the sinner themselves who are held in eternal agony/torment without recourse to any kind of salvific ending. For an ending each resolute sinner must be allowed his or her's free willed soul.

R.E. Slater

June 4, 2014
update June 6, 2014

* * * * * * * * * * * *

continue to -

Rethinking Hell: Evangelical Conditionalism (Annihilationism), Part 1

Rethinking Hell: Evangelical Conditionalism (Annihilationism), Part 2

Rethinking Hell: Evangelical Conditionalism (Annihilationism), Part 3

Amazon Link

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Old and Current Views of Hell (1/2)

Old and Current Views of Hell (2/2)

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Book Blurb

Most evangelical Christians believe that those people who are not saved before they die will be punished in hell forever. But is this what the Bible truly teaches? Do Christians need to rethink their understanding of hell? In the late twentieth century, a growing number of evangelical theologians, biblical scholars, and philosophers began to reject the traditional doctrine of eternal conscious torment in hell in favor of a minority theological perspective called conditional immortality. This view contends that the unsaved are resurrected to face divine judgment, just as Christians have always believed, but due to the fact that immortality is only given to those who are in Christ, the unsaved do not exist forever in hell. Instead, they face the punishment of the "second death"-an end to their conscious existence. This volume brings together excerpts from a variety of well-respected evangelical thinkers, including John Stott, John Wenham, and E. Earl Ellis, as they articulate the biblical, theological, and philosophical arguments for conditionalism. These readings will give thoughtful Christians strong evidence that there are indeed compelling reasons for rethinking hell.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Rethinking Hell: Evangelical Conditionalism

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2014/06/04/rethinking-hell-evangelical-conditionalism/#disqus_thread

by Scot McKnight

June 4, 2014

Comments

The beat continues, the beat that persists in probing one question: Is ECT (eternal conscious torment) the most consistent view with the Bible and with theology? Or, the beat keeps asking, Is it possible that maybe conditionalism (annihilationism) is the most consistent? I have pushed this topic on this blog a number of times because the books are worthy of consideration and the issues continue to press against what many of us believe. I’m not convinced yet by the arguments of the conditionalists, but I am convinced conditionalism is a legitimate option for those who want their theology anchored in the Bible.

The most recent beat is by C.M. Date, G.G. Stump, and J.W. Anderson, Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism (Eugene: Cascade, 2014), with a potent foreword by the excellent scholar, John Stackhouse, Jr.. A couple clips from John’s foreword:

To this day, I have wondered why Christians prefer — as many seem to do — believing in eternal conscious torment (ECT). [This is a topic in itself, one worthy of someone to take up seriously -- with the tools of the social sciences in hand.]

Wouldn’t it be great to be able to believe that God did not keep the damned on a spit, rotating forever in the flames of eternal hellfire?

Wouldn’t it be a relief not to think of the saints getting on with with joyful business of the Age to Come without expending considerable energy trying not to think about their loved ones writing in everlasting agony?

Wouldn’t it be reassuring not to have to try to bend one’s mind and, worse, one’s heart into a shape that could somehow give glory to God for afflicting people forever, that could somehow call majestic what seems obviously monstrous? (xii).

But Stackhouse has enough Bible in his spine to know that “Wouldn’t it’s” will not be sufficient for theology. So he says,

Now, maybe, of course, the traditional view of ECT is right. If it is, if ECT is truly what the Bible teaches, then I’ll do my very best to believe it and teach it. I won’t like it, but that doesn’t matter: I love God and I trust him above my own reason and experience and more intuition. Despite whatever might be the theological sophistication I have acquired over the years, if the Bible says it, I’ll believe it, and that settles it (xiii).

The book collects singular pieces and can be an exceptional textbook for anyone who wants to study this topic seriously. The essays are by Peter Grice, Glenn Peoples, Edward Fudge, Stephen Travis, John RW Stott, Clark Pinnock, John Wenham, BFC Atkinson, EE Ellis, RG Bowles, HE Guillebaud, AC Thiselton, PE Hughes, H Constable, CD Marshall, NG Wright, RG Swinburne, Kim G. Papaioannou, LeRoy E. Fromm, the Evangelical Alliance, Roger Olson and Ben Witherington III.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

What is evangelical conditionalism?

Conditionalism refers to the biblical doctrine of conditional immortality, which holds that God alone possesses immortality innately and therefore any other being who is immortal (imperishable, deathless) is so extrinsically, that is, as the result of a positive act of God. No other being, human or otherwise, whether by creation or resurrection, possesses immortality innately but only as God’s specific gift.

Anytime the New Testament mentions immortality in connection with human beings, there are three contrasts which bear out as true: (1) that immortality is ascribed only to the redeemed and never to the damned, (2) that it is a gift of God in the heavenly body and never the natural body, and (3) that it is always in reference to the whole person and never a disembodied soul or spirit.

Conditionalists believe that since the damned are not immortal and never will be, they will actually perish in hell (annihilation). This is the punishment referred to in the Bible as destruction, by which one will perish in the lake of fire, the second death. Some Christians suppose that everyone innately has an immortal soul, redeemed and damned alike, which God will not or cannot destroy. But Jesus implied otherwise, saying that we should fear God because he "can destroy both soul and body in hell" (gehenna).

Immortality is a gift bestowed by God upon his children. To receive this crown, a person must belong to Christ. Such is the condition of this conditional immortality. And this conditionalist view is evangelical insofar as it is understood and articulated within a framework of evangelical Christian orthodoxy.

So this view, then—evangelical conditionalism—is what we explore and commend at Rethinking Hell, whereby we examine how those who do not belong to Christ will be resurrected to face both judgment and the punishment of their destruction in the lake of fire, "the second death."

What is annihilationism?

On the one hand, conditionalism emphasizes what awaits the redeemed, namely, eternal life and immortality. (See What is evangelical conditionalism?) On the other hand, annihilationism is about what awaits the damned, namely, the eternal punishment of destruction in hell. Such is their perishing, the permanent end to the conscious existence of the whole person.

There is some debate among evangelical conditionalists regarding finer eschatological details. For instance, some believe there is a consciously experienced intermediate state between physical death and judgment day, and others believe the intermediate state is not consciously experienced.

All evangelical annihilationists believe that the damned (those who do not belong to Christ) are raised bodily from their graves at an appointed day of judgment and are then finally punished?they perish with finality, suffering the eternal punishment of destruction in hell.

Why is it controversial?

Conditionalism can be controversial for a variety of reasons. For one thing, it has been affirmed historically by a minority of Christians, while the majority of the church has believed and taught the traditional view of hell since at best the time of Augustine. Furthermore, until the recent rise of conditionalism among evangelicals, it was popular to dismiss the final annihilation of the damned as a doctrine believed and taught only by pseudo-Christian cults (e.g., Jehovah's Witnesses, Christadelphians, etc.) and Christian denominations which some consider questionable (Seventh-Day Adventists, etc.).

It can also be controversial because there have been some outspoken evangelical proponents of conditionalism who have given the impression to critics that this view was arrived at on more sentimental grounds, as if they had interpreted scripture through a fallen sense of justice and a humanist view of love. Other proponents of conditionalism have represented arguably questionable views such as open theism and anthropological physicalism (or some other variation of monism, mortalism, or soul sleep), or denied substantive evangelical doctrines like the inerrancy of scripture.

For these reasons and perhaps others, conditionalism is a controversial view. But the climate is changing and an increasing number of evangelical lay people and professionals are becoming convinced of this view. And there are critics who suggest that it may be affirmed by a majority of evangelical scholars. But conditionalists come from a variety of backgrounds and theological positions; one can find conditionalists on virtually every side of virtually every theological debate within evangelicalism.

Continue to website to read additional topics on:

• Reasons
• Misconceptions
• Scriptures
• Proponents

http://rethinkinghell.com/explore/

Maya Angelou. Poet, Activist, Storyteller.

Maya Angelou's Inaugural Poem (1993)

President Bill Clinton Inauguration

On the Pulse of Morning
by Maya Angelou

A Rock, A River, A Tree
Hosts to species long since departed,
Marked the mastodon.
The dinosaur, who left dry tokens
Of their sojourn here
On our planet floor,
Any broad alarm of their hastening doom
Is lost in the gloom of dust and ages.

But today, the Rock cries out to us, clearly, forcefully,
Come, you may stand upon my
Back and face your distant destiny,
But seek no haven in my shadow.

I will give you no more hiding place down here.

You, created only a little lower than
The angels, have crouched too long in
The bruising darkness,
Have lain too long
Face down in ignorance.

Your mouths spilling words
Armed for slaughter.

The Rock cries out today, you may stand on me,
But do not hide your face.

Across the wall of the world,
A River sings a beautiful song,
Come rest here by my side.

Each of you a bordered country,
Delicate and strangely made proud,
Yet thrusting perpetually under siege.

Your armed struggles for profit
Have left collars of waste upon
My shore, currents of debris upon my breast.

Yet, today I call you to my riverside,
If you will study war no more. Come,

Clad in peace and I will sing the songs
The Creator gave to me when I and the
Tree and the stone were one.

Before cynicism was a bloody sear across your
Brow and when you yet knew you still
Knew nothing.

The River sings and sings on.

There is a true yearning to respond to
The singing River and the wise Rock.

So say the Asian, the Hispanic, the Jew
The African and Native American, the Sioux,
The Catholic, the Muslim, the French, the Greek
The Irish, the Rabbi, the Priest, the Sheikh,
The Gay, the Straight, the Preacher,
The privileged, the homeless, the Teacher.
They hear. They all hear
The speaking of the Tree.

Today, the first and last of every Tree
Speaks to humankind. Come to me, here beside the River.

Plant yourself beside me, here beside the River.

Each of you, descendant of some passed
On traveller, has been paid for.

You, who gave me my first name, you
Pawnee, Apache and Seneca, you
Cherokee Nation, who rested with me, then
Forced on bloody feet, left me to the employment of
Other seekers- desperate for gain,
Starving for gold.

You, the Turk, the Swede, the German, the Scot...
You the Ashanti, the Yoruba, the Kru, bought
Sold, stolen, arriving on a nightmare
Praying for a dream.

Here, root yourselves beside me.

I am the Tree planted by the River,
Which will not be moved.

I, the Rock, I the River, I the Tree
I am yours- your Passages have been paid.

Lift up your faces, you have a piercing need
For this bright morning dawning for you.

History, despite its wrenching pain,
Cannot be unlived, and if faced
With courage, need not be lived again.

Lift up your eyes upon
The day breaking for you.

Give birth again
To the dream.

Women, children, men,
Take it into the palms of your hands.

Mold it into the shape of your most
Private need. Sculpt it into
The image of your most public self.
Lift up your hearts
Each new hour holds new chances
For new beginnings.

Do not be wedded forever
To fear, yoked eternally
To brutishness.

The horizon leans forward,
Offering you space to place new steps of change.
Here, on the pulse of this fine day
You may have the courage
To look up and out upon me, the
Rock, the River, the Tree, your country.

No less to Midas than the mendicant.

No less to you now than the mastodon then.

Here on the pulse of this new day
You may have the grace to look up and out
And into your sister's eyes, into
Your brother's face, your country
And say simply
Very simply
With hope
Good morning.

* * * * * * * * * *

Maya Angelou, Poet, Activist and
Singular Storyteller, Dies At 86
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/05/28/147369802/maya-angelou-poet-activist-and-singular-storyteller-dies-at-86

by Lynn Neary

May 28, 2014

Listen to the Story

Poet, performer and political activist Maya Angelou has died after a long illness at her home in Winston-Salem, N.C. She was 86. Born in St. Louis in 1928, Angelou grew up in a segregated society that she worked to change during the civil rights era. Angelou, who refused to speak for much of her childhood, revealed the scars of her past in I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, the first of a series of memoirs.

Growing up in St. Louis, Mo., and Stamps, Ark., she was Marguerite Johnson. It was her brother who first called her Maya, and the name stuck. Later she added the Angelou, a version of her first husband's name.

Angelou left a troubled childhood and the segregated world of Arkansas behind and began a career as a dancer and singer. She toured Europe in the1950s with a production of Porgy and Bess, studied dance with Martha Graham and performed with Alvin Ailey on television. In 1957 she recorded an album called "Calypso Lady."

"I was known as Miss Calypso, and when I'd forget the lyric, I would tell the audience, 'I seem to have forgotten the lyric. Now I will dance.' And I would move around a bit," she recalled with a laugh during a 2008 interview with NPR.

"She really believed that life was a banquet," says Patrik Henry Bass, an editor at Essence Magazine. When he read Angelou's memoir I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, he saw parallels in his own life in a small town in North Carolina. He says everyone in the African-American community looked up to her; she was a celebrity but she was one of them. He remembers seeing her on television and hearing her speak.

"When we think of her, we often think about her books, of course, and her poems," he says. "But in the African-American community, certainly, we heard so much of her work recited, so I think about her voice. You would hear that voice, and that voice would capture a humanity, and that voice would calm you in so many ways through some of the most significant challenges."

Film director John Singleton grew up in a very different part of the country. But he remembers the effect Angelou's poem "Still I Rise" had on him as a kid. It begins:

You may write me down in history

With your bitter, twisted lies,

You may trod me in the very dirt

But still, like dust, I'll rise.

"I come from South Central Los Angeles," he says. It's "a place where we learn to puff up our chests to make ourselves bigger than we are because we have so many forces knocking us down — including some of our own. And so that poem ... it pumps me up, you know. ... It makes me feel better about myself, or at least made me feel better about myself when I was young."

Singleton used Angelou's poems in his 1993 film Poetic Justice. Angelou also had a small part in the movie. Singleton says he thinks of Angelou as a griot — a traditional African storyteller.

"We all have that one or two people in our families that just can spin a yarn, that has a whole lot to say, and holds a lot of wisdom from walking through the world and experiencing different things," he says. "And that's the way I see Dr. Maya Angelou. She was a contemporary of Martin Luther King, a contemporary of Malcolm X and Oprah Winfrey. She transcends so many different generations of African-American culture that have affected all of us."

Joanne Braxton, a professor at the College of William and Mary, says Angelou's willingness to reveal the sexual abuse she suffered as a child in I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings was unprecedented at the time. The critical acclaim and popularity of the book opened doors for both African-American and female writers.

"Maya Angelou brought about a paradigm shift in American literature and culture," Braxton says, "so that the works, the gifts, the talents of women writers, including women writers of color, could be brought to the foreground and appreciated. She created an audience by her stunning example."

For Braxton, the world will never be quite the same without Angelou.

"I love her," she says. "She's beloved by many, including many, many people who have never met her in person, and who will never meet her in person — but she has extended herself that way, so that her touch extends beyond her physical embrace. That is truly a gift, and we are truly blessed to have known her through her presence and her work."

Angelou once said she believed that "life loves the liver of it," and she did live it, to the fullest.


More On Maya Angelou:

Author Interviews

At 80, Maya Angelou Reflects on a 'Glorious' Life

Author Interviews

In A New Memoir, Maya Angelou Recalls How A 'Lady' Became 'Mom'

PG-13: Risky Reads

When Parents Refused To Talk, Angelou Explained Sex — And Healing

Food

Maya Angelou's Cooking Advice: Ignore The Rules

Books
Maya Angelou On Wisdom, Pride And Independence

* * * * * * * * * *

Biography of Maya Angelou

http://www.poemhunter.com/maya-angelou/biography/

Maya Angelou (born Marguerite Ann Johnson on April 4, 1928) was an American author and poet who has been called "America's most visible black female autobiographer" by scholar Joanne M. Braxton. She is best known for her series of six autobiographical volumes, which focus on her childhood and early adult experiences. The first and most highly acclaimed, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings (1969), tells of her first seventeen years. It brought her international recognition, and was nominated for a National Book Award. She has been awarded over 30 honorary degrees and was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize for her 1971 volume of poetry, Just Give Me a Cool Drink of Water 'Fore I Diiie.

Angelou was a member of the Harlem Writers Guild in the late 1950s, was active in the Civil Rights movement, and served as Northern Coordinator of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Since 1991, she has taught at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, North Carolina where she holds the first lifetime Reynolds Professorship of American Studies. Since the 1990s she has made around eighty appearances a year on the lecture circuit. In 1993, Angelou recited her poem "On the Pulse of Morning" at President Bill Clinton's inauguration, the first poet to make an inaugural recitation since Robert Frost at John F. Kennedy's inauguration in 1961. In 1995, she was recognized for having the longest-running record (two years) on The New York Times Paperback Nonfiction Bestseller List.

With the publication of I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, Angelou was heralded as a new kind of memoirist, one of the first African American women who was able to publicly discuss her personal life. She is highly respected as a spokesperson for Black people and women. Angelou's work is often characterized as autobiographical fiction. She has, however, made a deliberate attempt to challenge the common structure of the autobiography by critiquing, changing, and expanding the genre. Her books, centered on themes such as identity, family, and racism, are often used as set texts in schools and universities internationally. Some of her more controversial work has been challenged or banned in US schools and libraries.

This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia Maya Angelou; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA.

* * * * * * * * * *

More Links

* * * * * * * * * *

Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_angelou

Poetry Foundation - http://www.poetryfoundation.org/bio/maya-angelou

Poems - http://www.poetryfoundation.org/bio/maya-angelou#about

Poem Hunter Poetry Resources - http://www.poemhunter.com/maya-angelou/poems/

Angelou reciting her poem "On the Pulse of Morning",
at President Bill Clinton's inauguration, January 1993

* * * * * * * * * *

POEMS

* * * * * * * * * *

I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings

by Maya Angelou

The free bird leaps

on the back of the wind

and floats downstream

till the current ends

and dips his wings

in the orange sun rays

and dares to claim the sky.

But a bird that stalks

down his narrow cage

can seldom see through

his bars of rage

his wings are clipped and

his feet are tied

so he opens his throat to sing.

The caged bird sings

with fearful trill

of the things unknown

but longed for still

and his tune is heard

on the distant hill

for the caged bird

sings of freedom.

The free bird thinks of another breeze

and the trade winds soft through the sighing trees

and the fat worms waiting on a dawn-bright lawn

and he names the sky his own.

But a caged bird stands on the grave of dreams

his shadow shouts on a nightmare scream

his wings are clipped and his feet are tied

so he opens his throat to sing.

The caged bird sings

with a fearful trill

of things unknown

but longed for still

and his tune is heard

on the distant hill

for the caged bird

sings of freedom.

Alone

by Maya Angelou

Lying, thinking

Last night

How to find my soul a home

Where water is not thirsty

And bread loaf is not stone

I came up with one thing

And I don't believe I'm wrong

That nobody,

But nobody

Can make it out here alone.

Alone, all alone

Nobody, but nobody

Can make it out here alone.

There are some millionaires

With money they can't use

Their wives run round like banshees

Their children sing the blues

They've got expensive doctors

To cure their hearts of stone.

But nobody

No, nobody

Can make it out here alone.

Alone, all alone

Nobody, but nobody

Can make it out here alone.

Now if you listen closely

I'll tell you what I know

Storm clouds are gathering

The wind is gonna blow

The race of man is suffering

And I can hear the moan,

'Cause nobody,

But nobody

Can make it out here alone.

Alone, all alone

Nobody, but nobody

Can make it out here alone.

Awaking in New York

by Maya Angelou

Curtains forcing their will

against the wind,

children sleep,

exchanging dreams with

seraphim. The city

drags itself awake on

subway straps; and

I, an alarm, awake as a

rumor of war,

lie stretching into dawn,

unasked and unheeded.

A Brave and Startling Truth

We, this people, on a small and lonely planet

Traveling through casual space

Past aloof stars, across the way of indifferent suns

To a destination where all signs tell us

It is possible and imperative that we learn

A brave and startling truth.

And when we come to it

To the day of peacemaking

When we release our fingers

From fists of hostility

And allow the pure air to cool our palms.

When we come to it

When the curtain falls on the minstrel show of hate

And faces sooted with scorn are scrubbed clean

When battlefields and coliseum

No longer rake our unique and particular sons and daughters

Up with the bruised and bloody grass

To lie in identical plots in foreign soil.

When the rapacious storming of the churches

The screaming racket in the temples have ceased

When the pennants are waving gaily

When the banners of the world tremble

Stoutly in the good, clean breeze.

When we come to it

When we let the rifles fall from our shoulders

And children dress their dolls in flags of truce

When land mines of death have been removed

And the aged can walk into evenings of peace

When religious ritual is not perfumed

By the incense of burning flesh

And childhood dreams are not kicked awake

By nightmares of abuse.

When we come to it

Then we will confess that not the Pyramids

With their stones set in mysterious perfection

Nor the Gardens of Babylon

Hanging as eternal beauty

In our collective memory

Not the Grand Canyon

Kindled into delicious color

By Western sunsets.

Nor the Danube, flowing its blue soul into Europe

Not the sacred peak of Mount Fuji

Stretching to the Rising Sun

Neither Father Amazon nor Mother Mississippi who, without favor,

Nurture all creatures in the depths and on the shores

These are not the only wonders of the world.

When we come to it

We, this people, on this minuscule and kithless globe

Who reach daily for the bomb, the blade and the dagger

Yet who petition in the dark for tokens of peace

We, this people on this mote of matter

In whose mouths abide cankerous words

Which challenge our very existence

Yet out of those same mouths

Come songs of such exquisite sweetness

That the heart falters in its labor

And the body is quieted into awe.

We, this people, on this small and drifting planet

Whose hands can strike with such abandon

That in a twinkling, life is sapped from the living

Yet those same hands can touch with such healing, irresistible tenderness

That the haughty neck is happy to bow

And the proud back is glad to bend

Out of such chaos, of such contradiction

We learn that we are neither devils nor divines.

When we come to it

We, this people, on this wayward, floating body

Created on this earth, of this earth

Have the power to fashion for this earth

A climate where every man and every woman

Can live freely without sanctimonious piety

Without crippling fear.

When we come to it

We must confess that we are the possible

We are the miraculous, the true wonder of this world

That is when, and only when

We come to it.

A Plagued Journey

by Maya Angelou

There is no warning rattle at the door

nor heavy feet to stomp the foyer boards.

Safe in the dark prison, I know that

light slides over

the fingered work of a toothless

woman in Pakistan.

Happy prints of

an invisible time are illumined.

My mouth agape

rejects the solid air and

lungs hold. The invader takes

direction and

seeps through the plaster walls.

It is at my chamber, entering

the keyhole, pushing

through the padding of the door.

I cannot scream. A bone

of fear clogs my throat.

It is upon me. It is

sunrise, with Hope

its arrogant rider.

My mind, formerly quiescent

in its snug encasement, is strained

to look upon their rapturous visages,

to let them enter even into me.

I am forced

outside myself to

mount the light and ride joined with Hope.

Through all the bright hours

I cling to expectation, until

darkness comes to reclaim me

as its own. Hope fades, day is gone

into its irredeemable place

and I am thrown back into the familiar

bonds of disconsolation.

Gloom crawls around

lapping lasciviously

between my toes, at my ankles,

and it sucks the strands of my

hair. It forgives my heady

fling with Hope. I am

joined again into its

greedy arms.

* * * * * * * * * *

What Maya Angelou Did on the First Day of Class

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2014/06/02/what-maya-angelou-did-on-the-first-day-of-class/

by Scott McKnight

Jun 2, 2014

by Margaret Feinberg, who had Maya Angelou as a professor:

I wish I could to tell you that the first class I sat in on with Maya Angelou was filled with an unforgettable poetry reading and rich stories about her textured life, but for the next hour, each of the students circled the room introducing themselves, stating and spelling their names. In this class, I was no longer Margaret, I was Ms. Feinberg, and everyone else would recognize me as such.

At the end of hour, Ms. Angelou explained that what we were learning was very important. This formed the basis of our first test. Our first test. I should have been paying more attention. Sketching a seating chart, I recorded as many people’s names as I could from memory….

Why did we just spend the last three weeks getting to know each other’s names?

She pressed it further:

Why did I just spend nearly 20% of our very valuable class time together making sure you knew each other’s names?

The room stewed in a kind of deafening, molasses-thick stillness that only the presence of Maya Angelou could command. She explained:

Because your name is a sign of your dignity.

When you recognize someone’s name, you recognize them not just as human but as a person. One of the greatest ways you bestow human dignity on someone is by calling them by name.

For the remaining weeks of class, we read a wide range of African American literature—including works by Maya Angelou. We listened in reverent awe as she read and recited poems that shook the soul. We laughed when she shared colorful stories from her childhood, personal adventures, and movies. We held back tears when she told of her painful past. We dug deep to create a final project that answered the granddaddy of all questions:

Why does the caged bird sing?

* * * * * * * * * *

Glurge: [Did] Maya Angelou wrote an inspirational religious poem entitled "I Am a Christian"?

False Attribution: "I Am a Christian"

Actual Author: Carol Wimmer, 1988

http://www.snopes.com/glurge/christian.asp

Last updated: 28 May 2014

FALSE

Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2006]

When I say I am a Christian

falsely attributed to Maya Angelou

When I say ... "I am a Christian"

I'm not shouting "I'm clean livin'."

I'm whispering "I was lost,

Now I'm found and forgiven."

When I say ... "I am a Christian"

I don't speak of this with pride.

I'm confessing that I stumble

and need Christ to be my guide.

When I say ... "I am a Christian"

I'm not trying to be strong.

I'm professing that I'm weak

And need His strength to carry on.

When I say ... "I am a Christian"

I'm not bragging of success.

I'm admitting I have failed

And need God to clean my mess.

When I say ... "I am a Christian"

I'm not claiming to be perfect,

My flaws are far too visible

But, God believes I am worth it.

When I say ... "I am a Christian"

I still feel the sting of pain.

I have my share of heartaches

So I call upon His name.

When I say ... "I am a Christian"

I'm not holier than thou,

I'm just a simple sinner

Who received God's good grace, somehow

Origins

Dr. Maya Angelou, who passed away in May 2014, became one of those figures (à la Mark Twain or Abraham Lincoln) who ended up withmore of other people's words attributed to her than words of her own. (As we note in another article dealing with an apocryphal poem erroneously attributed to her, many Internet-circulated bits of verse lacking authorship identification eventually become credited to Dr. Angelou, especially light-hearted inspirational pieces and/or poems written from an African-American point of view.) In this case, we not only know that Maya Angelou did not write I Am a Christian (she disclaimed it on her web site), we know exactly who did write it.

"When I Say, 'I Am a Christian'" (the correct, full title) was penned in 1988 by Carol Wimmer, was first published in the Assemblies of God periodical Hi-Call Gospel Magazine, and has subsequently been anthologized in several books (including Chicken Soup for the Christian Family Soul.) Unfortunately, over the years the work has been reprinted on the Internet with either missing or incorrect attributions (most often being ascribed to "author unknown" or the aforementioned Maya Angelou), and with verses that have been rearranged or altered by others.

The original version of
the poem read as follows:

When I say, "I am a Christian," I'm not shouting, "I've been saved!"

I'm whispering, "I get lost! That's why I chose this way"

When I say, "I am a Christian," I don't speak with human pride

I'm confessing that I stumble — needing God to be my guide

When I say, "I am a Christian," I'm not trying to be strong

I'm professing that I'm weak and pray for strength to carry on

When I say, "I am a Christian," I'm not bragging of success

I'm admitting that I've failed and cannot ever pay the debt

When I say, "I am a Christian," I don't think I know it all

I submit to my confusion asking humbly to be taught

When I say, "I am a Christian," I'm not claiming to be perfect

My flaws are far too visible but God believes I'm worth it

When I say, "I am a Christian," I still feel the sting of pain

I have my share of heartache which is why I seek His name

When I say, "I am a Christian," I do not wish to judge

I have no authority — I only know I'm loved

Additional information

History of the Poem

(carolwimmer.com)

Read more at http://www.snopes.com/glurge/christian.asp#msaRJ3lSj0Cv8Lkm.99