Liberation Theology and Marxism

[new_atheist]

Is liberation theology still in vogue despite the end of the Cold War? Why has it always been associated with Communism/Marxism especially in third world countries?

 

[marywarfield]

Is liberation theology still in vogue despite the end of the Cold War? Why has it always been associated with Communism/Marxism especially in third world countries?

Liberation theology in a much altered form enjoys some
popularity still in South America. Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI)
red lined so to speak most of its most objectionable
aspects I.e. systemic sin vs. individual responsibility for sin
among others.

It’s association with Marxism however remains as it
rejects any type of central authority anywhere.

 

[catholicscot]

Is liberation theology still in vogue despite the end of the Cold War? Why has it always been associated with Communism/Marxism especially in third world countries?

It was associated with Marxism because some of its proponents argued that the dialectical method of analysis proposed by Marx was a suitable tool to be used by Christians in analysing society and proposing remedies. The classic and authoritative Catholic response to this was by the then Cardinal Ratzinger Certain aspects of Liberation Theology

1. Impatience and a desire for results has led certain Christians, despairing of every other method, to turn to what they call “marxist analysis.”

1. Their reasoning is this: an intolerable and explosive situation requires ‘effective action’ which cannot be put off. Effective action presupposes a ‘scientific analysis’ of the structural causes of poverty. Marxism now provides us with the means to make such an analysis, they say. Then one simply has to apply the analysis to the third-world situation, especially in Latin America.

1. It is clear that scientific knowledge of the situation and of the possible strategies for the transformation of society is a presupposition for any plan capable of attaining the ends proposed. It is also a proof of the seriousness of the effort.

1. But the term “scientific” exerts an almost mythical fascination even though everything called “scientific” is not necessarily scientific at all. That is why the borrowing of a method of approach to reality should be preceded by a careful epistemological critique. This preliminary critical study is missing from more than one “theology of liberation.”

1. In the human and social sciences it is well to be aware above all of the plurality of methods and viewpoints, each of which reveals only one aspect of reality which is so complex that it defies simple and univocal explanation.

1. In the case of Marxism, in the particular sense given to it in this context, a preliminary critique is all the more necessary since the thought of Marx is such a global vision of reality that all data received form observation and analysis are brought together in a philosophical and ideological structure, which predetermines the significance and importance to be attached to them. The ideological principles come prior to the study of the social reality and are presupposed in it. Thus no separation of the parts of this epistemologically unique complex is possible. If one tries to take only one part, say, the analysis, one ends up having to accept the entire ideology. That is why it is not uncommon for the ideological aspects to be predominant among the things which the “theologians of liberation” borrow from Marxist authors.