How Did St Paul Contribute To Evangelization

Embracing their missions, both go out to spread their faiths leading to greater evangelization and closer encounters with the God of Abraham. Despite the racial divide still in his heart, Malcolm X would later see in Islam what St. Paul saw in the Mystical Body of Christ: “the Oneness of Man under One God” (X, 207). This change would occur after his fallout with the leader of the Nation of Islam and his mentor, Elijah Muhammad, and his hajj to Mecca. Similarly, St. Paul, after his conversion and before taking on the great ministry that would define the rest of his life, “went away to Arabia, and returned once more to Damascus. Then three years later I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas, and stayed with him fifteen days.” Prior to his great evangelization, St. Paul journeyed to Arabia, then met with Cephas (St. Peter), whom Christ had ordained as the rock “upon [which] I will build my Church”--symbolizing in a very real way St. Paul’s unity with the original disciples of Christ and their apostolic mission. From this experience, St. Paul would be inspired to evangelize to most of the known world preaching and writing to multiple cities across the Roman Empire just as Malcolm X was energized to spread Islam and the Nation of Islam’s ideology of black
nationalism across America. Like Malcolm X and Elijah Muhammad, St. Paul would “oppose [Peter] to his face”: St. Paul believed it was a scandal to the Gentiles that St. Peter returned to observing the Mosaic dietary laws so as not to offend the Jewish converts and sought to correct St. Peter. Similarly, Malcolm X would approach Elijah Muhammad on the scandal of Mr. Muhammad’s affairs and paternity suits; however, unlike Sts. Peter and Paul, the two men would separate and Malcolm X would be shunned from the community. Malcolm X would later convert to the “true” Islam seeing this as Divine Providence from his merciful God and on a pilgrimage, known as hajj, to Mecca--the holiest site in the Islamic world. This pilgrimage would be a moment of great change leading to a second name change to Imam El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz. This is due to X’s internalized fight against white supremacy: after parting from the Nation of Islam, X continued to argue that Islam is a “religious and political system of liberation from white oppression” (Curtis, 3); however, after seeing the unity of races in prayer while in Mecca, X would come to realize that the will of the God of Abraham is not the suppression of one man under another but the union of humanity in Him. DeYoung compares Malcolm X after this experience (not the conversion in prison) to the “post-Damascus Road Paul” (DeYoung, 2). The greatest evidence for this is found in the comparison of the two men’s words on the dignity of man as a member of the human family: St. Paul: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Malcolm X, during an interview recounted in Haley’s epilogue of X’s autobiography: “I believe in recognizing every human being as a human being-neither white, black, brown, or red; and when you are dealing with humanity as a family there's no question of integration or intermarriage.” (X, 259).
DeYoung is fascinated that this “transformation and reconciliation occurred and operated completely outside of Christianity” (DeYoung, 3). DeYoung furthers this point quoting Howard Thurman, “‘The burden of being black and the burden of being white is so heavy that it is rare in our society to experience oneself as a human being.’ True reconciliation can lift this burden for all people regardless of race or culture.” (DeYoung, 5). This is found in the lives of St. Paul and Malcolm X; to reconcile the past hatred is not to further hatred but to be transformed by love and respect for the other as other and to do so is to recognize fully who we are as a human race both individually and as a community.
Both men would learn this profound theology in their own lives--both as oppressed people seeking liberation in their God. In the times of St. Paul, the Jewish people and many other races were viewed as inferior to the Romans--even as a Roman citizen, Paul may have experienced beatings. This oppression is referenced in the teachings of Christ, who called for his disciples in Matthew 5:38-42, specifically when he said “Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two.” This wasn’t submission to oppression, but a revolution of love: at that time, a Roman soldier could ask any native of an area controlled by the empire to carry his belongings one mile; by going two miles, the soldier could be punished--this was revolutionary. In a similar way, the call to turn the other cheek is a call to face racism and hatred in the face so that the other person must confront the disciple’s humanity. Malcolm X disagreed with such passive resistance calling for a revolution “by any means necessary” (X, 228). This would cause his opponents and the media to brand him as violent; however, his daughter, Attallah Shabazz, explains in the foreword of his autobiography:
“Malcolm X never advocated violence.
He was an advocate of cultural and social reconstruction until a balance of equality was shared, ‘by any means necessary.’ Generally, this phrase of his was misused, even by those who were his supporters. But the statement was intended to encourage a paralyzed constituent of American culture to consider the range of options to which they were entitled-the ‘means.’ ‘By any means necessary’ meant examine the obstacles, determine the vision, find the resolve, and explore the alternatives toward dissolving the obstacles. Anyone truly familiar with my father's ideology, autobiography, and speeches sincerely understands the significance of the now-famous phrase.” (X,
3) Malcolm X disagreed with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., not for King’s speeches against violent revolt, but against his misunderstood prejudice against white Christianity and his belief that it was a tool used by both white men and the black clergy to exploit the average African American and to repress the urge to be free just as “Uncle Tom’s” did during slavery. Unfortunately, this famous phrase has become a symbol of the “dichotomy” of the Civil Rights Movement presented by the media and modern education: Dr. King’s gospel of nonviolence and X’s bellicose battlecry; however this is far from the truth as noted by Shabazz. Malcolm X called all African Americans not to sit down and accept oppression, but to seek their rights ordained by Allah. It is true, at least while in union with the Nation of Islam, that X did not believe in equality with the “white devils,” but after Mecca he understood Allah’s call for unity in prayer. Unfortunately, Malcolm X would face the same fate as St. Paul before he could truly expound on his new views--death. Both would die, because of the hatred of the world around them; St. Paul would die a martyr in Rome, the center of the ancient world, and X would be assassinated in New York City, arguably the center of the modern world. In fulfilling the spiritual mission to spread the "true" faith, both Paul and Malcolm would develop a greater respect for human dignity and equality under the God of Abraham, though their missions would also lead to their deaths. In his rejection of Christianity, Malcolm X, himself, would take on the archetypal Christian conversion, as that of St. Paul the Apostle. Both men would have to come face-to-face with their internalized hatred reconciling their past lives with the mercy of God and, in His Providence, spread a message of unity in Him before dying at the hands of those who hated them. Although some would try to distance themselves from this idea and the Black Muslim who advocated for the violent overthrow of white oppression, we find a man seeking a closer encounter with his God and, in his contemplation of the Divine Being, recognizes the dignity of all persons and the necessity to set hatred aside. Today, too many people criticize Malcolm X for his prejudice and misunderstood words when in union with the Nation of Islam. This would be comparable to hating St. Paul for the actions of Saul of Tarsus. As a people, like X and St. Paul, we must set aside our hatred in order to fully embrace our humanity recognizing the Divine call for the “Oneness of Man under God.” (X, 207).