As I’ve come to appreciate the Lord’s Table more over the past few years (as I’ve been decolonizing my own theology), I’ve been reflecting on how the Lord’s Table is different from the Colonizer’s Table.
Here’s where I’ve arrived:
The Lord’s Table makes room for everyone. All are welcome. And yes, *all* are actually welcome to the Lord’s Table.
The Colonizer’s Table only has room for some. It’s survival of the fittest (read: richest and most powerful).
The Lord’s Table has a preferential option for marginalized people groups. There’s special room for all marginalized people groups.
The Colonizer’s Table only has room for some marginalized people groups. The message to marginalized communities is clear: “Sucks to be you. Sorry, figure it out amongst yourselves.”
The Lord’s Table is made up of people united and motivated by love. Their bond is strong.
The Colonizer’s Table is made up of people united by fear. It’s a fickle alliance because it’s only a matter of time before they start to fear each other and make enemies out of one another.
The Lord’s Table is humongous and comprised of people who wouldn’t normally want to be seated next to each other.
The Colonizer’s Table is homogeneous and constantly striving towards more homogeneity.
The Lord’s Table is fiercely ecumenical.
The Colonizer’s Table is fiercely factional.
There’s room for everyone’s stories and liberation at the Lord’s Table.
There’s only room for a few folks’ stories and liberation at the Colonizer’s Table. “Liberation for me but not for thee” is the mantra here.
Because of our colonized theological frameworks, many western churches and denominations act like the Colonizer’s Table under the guise of the Lord’s Table.
This is why we decolonize our theology and embrace the Table of Jesus of Nazareth - a brown, middle eastern, colonized refugee heretic from the wrong part of the country.
What differences do you see (or have experienced) between the Lord’s Table and the Colonizer’s Table?