quasimodo:
what are the primary distinguishing features of liberation theology. it is a beast i have not gotten my arms around yet
There are two very contradictory views of freedom, or “liberty”: one kind is promoted by Christianity; the other by Satanism.
True Christian liberty is the freedom to do as we
ought; that is, it is the freedom to obey the will of God. This freedom is primarily a freedom that comes from within. It is the freedom to obey our reason, formed by the faith, rather than the sinful tendencies of our fallen human nature. There is a battle within man between the flesh and the spirit. As long as we are following the inclinations of the flesh, we are not free. We only attain true freedom when we have overcome our lower nature, and obey God. That is true Christian liberty.
The person who “obeys” the sinful and disordered tendencies of their lower nature is actually a slave to them, and therefore is not truly free. That is why our Lord said that “he who sins is the slave of sin”. We are only truly free when we have overcome our lower nature and are obeying God. That is Christian liberty, and only those who have attained to it will be saved: “not all who say Lord, Lord shall enter into the kingdom of God, but only those who do the will of My father”. Christian liberty is the freedom to do the will of God, without being entangled in the sinful tendencies of our disordered lower nature.
Whereas Christian liberty is the freedom (from the sinful tendencies of our lower nature) to follow God, Satanic “liberty” (which is actually slavery), is the “freedom” to do what one wants.
Christianity teaches “not my will, but thine be done”.
Satanic liberty teaches: “Do what thou will”.
Man is only truly free to obey God. Any so-called freedom that allows man to disobey God is not true freedom, but license.
So far we have seen true freedom, which is the freedom to do as one ought; and false freedom, which is the freedom to do as one pleases. There is a third kind of freedom, which is known as physical freedom. This is the freedom to act without any human restraint. This can be either good, or bad. If the physical restraint restrains one from acting sinfully it is good; if it oppresses someone from acting within the law, it is not.
Liberation theology falls under the category of physical freedom, in that it pretends to free the “oppressed”, from social conditions that oppress them. The poor are liberated from their poverty, etc. This “liberation” from “social injustices” is accomplished by way of a social movement.
Liberation theology is a deception; not because delivering the oppressed from that which oppresses them is bad in and of itself; but because it reduces the gospel and salvation to that level.
The following is one definition of liberation theology: * “A theological movement, popular in the Third World, which interprets salvation, particularly as seen in the Exodus, in political terms. Therefore, the tendency is to believe the church’s primary purpose is to assist in changing oppressive social, economic, and political structures”.*
In liberation theology personal sins are no longer considered. It is only “social sins” that matter. When you really examine the movement, you find that it parallels, and leads to, marxism.
Warning against the dangers of liberation theology, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote:
“Liberation theology is a phenomenon with an extraordinary number of layers [Containing] a whole spectrum from radically marxist positions… The biblical concept of the 'poor" provides a starting point for fusing the Bible’s view of history with marxist dialectic; it is interpreted by the idea of the proletariat in the marxist sense and thus justifies marxism as the legitimate hermeneutics for understanding the Bible”.
continue…**