Liberation Theology

[Ellenita]

Interesting to see how the church was able to establish the links between liberation theology and marxism, and to recognise how attractive this would be to people who were (and it could be argued, still are to some extent) living in abject poverty and under repressive regimes. It's obvious that the church would be most wary of her priests following that route since it might be difficult to protect their theology from becoming too aligned to what is essentially a philosophy steeped in atheism. Plus of course the next step from that could be to say that there should be a 'flat structure' within the church when actually it is a hierarchy - dangerous stuff!

Of course the churches primary concern must to be the spiritual welfare of people, I understand that. However, the notion of social justice grows out from that too doesn't it? To be in the postion of power carries with it the weight of responsibility and I believe individuals will be held accountable if they abuse their position for personal gain, because that in itself is a sin. Is there evidence of the church, other than priests who subscribed to the concept of liberation theology, speaking out against the abuses carried out towards the people by those in power during that period of time in Latin America?

[BLAZEr]

Yes Ellenita, I think you are right on the money. The Church has spent much more time developing a doctrine of Social Justice than she has pointing out the dangers of Liberation Theology.

Starting in 1887 (give or take) Pope Leo XXIII wrote "Rerum Novarum" the first real social encyclical. It has been followed up with Quadragessimo Anno (whoever was pope 40 years after Leo), Popolurm Progresso (Pope Paul VI), and then Pope John Paul II wrote Laborem Exercens (on the dignity of work and the rights of workers) and Centissimus Annus (sp) which articulates the history of Social Justice in the Church for the last 100 years. Reading Rerum Novarum and Centissimus Annum will give you the best and broadest description of the Church's social teachings.

There are a few other encyclicals whose names I can't remember (and I don't have my books handy) that you can find at www.vatican.va They have a search feature and you can type "social teaching" to get the list.

[God Conquers]

The LAtin American countries are still in horrible shape, many worse than at the time of the popularity of Liberation Theology.

I'm still not sure whether Oscar Romero believed in Liberation Theology. He was certainly against priests carrying arms, but beyond that I'm not sure.

Wicked movie though.

[M.SIGGA]

The LAtin American countries are still in horrible shape, many worse than at the time of the popularity of Liberation Theology.

I'm still not sure whether Oscar Romero believed in Liberation Theology. He was certainly against priests carrying arms, but beyond that I'm not sure.

Wicked movie though.

I saw a documentary in high school about Oscar Romero, and if I remember correctly he was assasinated on the altar during mass. It was said that the main reason Archbishop Romero was not given much recognition by JPII was because he sympathized with priests who taught liberation theology and his preaching had an underlying tone of liberation theology too.

JPII is a pope who was directly threatened and affected by Nazi and Communist occupation in Poland; therefore ideologies that represent any aspect of National Socialism or Marxism will be condemned.

I believe Archbishop Romero was noble and saintly for speaking up against his unjust government instead of remaining silent like so many of his fellow clerics and peers. He didn't openly condone liberation theology, but the documentary said he didn't necessarily openly condemn it either. He should have been in line with the Pope, and treated his situation with total solidarity.

Liberation theology classifies Jesus soley as a Revolutionary, which he is, but it also forgets that he is also the Prince of Peace.

[God Conquers]

I think Liberation Theology is a tough subject. I know that to take your focus off of Christ is wrong, but it is also part of our lives as Christians to seek freedom through him in this world as well as in the next. Especially if our rights to worship Him are called into question.

Although the Prince of Peace, Jesus also said, "I come NOT to bring peace, but a sword." and the peace which he DOES bring is "not the kind that we think"... i'm totally paraphrasing but you get my point.

I think someone said that JPII couldn't support Liberation Theology because he doesn't support war is kind of off as well. No Catholic can reject war outright, because the Church holds the Just War Doctrine. So although he may have an aversion to armed conflict, he may support some military actions.

[p0lar_bear]

More documents to read:

Populorum Progressio

Sollicitudo Rei Socialis

[M.SIGGA]

Although the Prince of Peace, Jesus also said, "I come NOT to bring peace, but a sword." and the peace which he DOES bring is  "not the kind that we think"... i'm totally paraphrasing but you get my point.

Do you think it is just as dangerous to totally oppose fighting and war and soley regard Jesus as the Prince of Peace?

[God Conquers]

I think we have to be careful when describing Christ in this way. We can't be completely against war of any kind, because the Church is not. In Revelations, the Return of Jesus is heralded by the armies of heaven going into battle. We fight spiritual battle every day of our lives.

[Ellenita]

We can't be against war of any kind because the church is not

There has been also very obvious examples of 'just war' too - WW2 for example.

I would think that it was the apparent link to marxism that caused most concern - firstly because of the underlying atheism which might feasibly impact on the doctrine, but also because of the negative influence marxism would have had on JPII in his early life. As attractive as the philosophy might be to some, (and there are elements of it which are very attractive such as the concept of social justice), living under the reality of it as it was applied in the soviet bloc must have left a powerful impression in terms of how empty the philosophy is spiritually and how the system ultimately destroyed people's lives.

[BLAZEr]

It was said that the main reason Archbishop Romero was not given much recognition by JPII was because he sympathized with priests who taught liberation theology and his preaching had an underlying tone of liberation theology too.

When JP2 went to El Salvador, he prayed for 30 minutes at the Tomb of Oscar Romero. Archbishop Romero is much more heroic in "loving memory" than he ever was in real life. He is revered by the left because his support shifted from the "upper class" to the poor who were being killed by the army for organizing unions and opposing the dictatorship. He also fought very hard for his priests who were abducted, even though they were Marxists. He opposed Liberation Theology when its expression was marxist.

[M.SIGGA]

The film I saw said JPII lost his chance to connect with Latin America when he didn't make Archbishop Romero a martyr or protomarytr. It's good to know JPII really did recognize him. Thanks Blazer.