Vatican never condemned liberation theology, Gustavo Gutierrez insists [CC]

[Catholic_Press]

The Peruvian priest who is widely regarded as the founder of liberation theology said that he is pleased with a “change in atmosphere” at the Vatican since the election of Pope Francis, …

More…

 

[Tsuwano]

Nothing to debate. He’s right. Aspects of Liberation Theology were critiqued, but as a whole, it was never condemned.

 

[Tigg]

Well here is the instruction for those who wish to muddle through it and it has little good to say about Marxism and it was even considered a threat to the church as spoken of by St. JP II who warned the church in Latin America to get out of politics!

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19840806_theology-liberation_en.html

It really is too bad that for all the talk of helping the poor, we give them nothing to help their souls. Seems a betrayal to me and this very thing was harshly condemned by Pope Leo. Of course, in today’s world following a secular trend, material equality is given more significance, and the warnings of Pope Benedict that the theology itself contained certain deceitful principles will go unheard in this age of encroaching socialism.

 

[Tsuwano]

Well here is the instruction for those who wish to muddle through it and it has little good to say about Marxism and it was even considered a threat to the church as spoken of by St. JP II who warned the church in Latin America to get out of politics!

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19840806_theology-liberation_en.html

It really is too bad that for all the talk of helping the poor, we give them nothing to help their souls. Seems a betrayal to me and this very thing was harshly condemned by Pope Leo. Of course, in today’s world following a secular trend, material equality is given more significance, and the warnings of Pope Benedict that the theology itself contained certain deceitful principles will go unheard in this age of encroaching socialism.

It is nonsense to say that a concern for the physical well being of another person necessarily detracts from a concern for their spiritual welfare. The Church has always been concerned for both when we talk about the poor. To tell the truth, those who are rich should be more concerned for their spiritual welfare than those who are poor, especially if the rich show no concern for the poor. It is also nonsense to say that a concern for the poor is Marxism. Liberation Theology, as explained by Guitierrez, was not about Marxism, but about salvation. It separates itself from Marxism by making Christ the center of its vision for the poor. It would be nice if Capitalists in developed countries also made Christ the center of their enterprises. Perhaps then, we wouldn’t be talking about the attraction a false ideology like Marxism has for those who are desperately poor.

 

[Good_Tidings]

It is nonsense to say that a concern for the physical well being of another person necessarily detracts from a concern for their spiritual welfare. The Church has always been concerned for both when we talk about the poor. To tell the truth, those who are rich should be more concerned for their spiritual welfare than those who are poor, especially if the rich show no concern for the poor. It is also nonsense to say that a concern for the poor is Marxism. Liberation Theology, as explained by Guitierrez, was not about Marxism, but about salvation. It separates itself from Marxism by making Christ the center of its vision for the poor. It would be nice if Capitalists in developed countries also made Christ the center of their enterprises. Perhaps then, we wouldn’t be talking about the attraction a false ideology like Marxism has for those who are desperately poor.

Here, here! Thank you for this post.

 

[Tigg]

It is nonsense to say that a concern for the physical well being of another person necessarily detracts from a concern for their spiritual welfare. The Church has always been concerned for both when we talk about the poor. To tell the truth, those who are rich should be more concerned for their spiritual welfare than those who are poor, especially if the rich show no concern for the poor. It is also nonsense to say that a concern for the poor is Marxism. Liberation Theology, as explained by Guitierrez, was not about Marxism, but about salvation. It separates itself from Marxism by making Christ the center of its vision for the poor. It would be nice if Capitalists in developed countries also made Christ the center of their enterprises. Perhaps then, we wouldn’t be talking about the attraction a false ideology like Marxism has for those who are desperately poor.

You have distorted my words and please do not make the claim that the rich do not care for the poor - it is pure propaganda and the ones advocating for socialism would do well to search their own hearts and their possible envy and hatred of the wealthy when they throw around terms like “the filthy rich.” Did you read the link I posted in which the Vatican document warns of the Marxist priniciples contained within the very concepts of LT? I think I’ll go with the popes and the Church on this one and be warned of the iniquitous elements that have been contributed by a few radical priests and their Medellin Conference. Unfortunately the poor have (and are) being exploited to help achieve a political system, (a huge contributing factor in illegal immigration, btw) although it has been suggested that LT is more intellectual than revolutionary today. I, for one, will never get rid of the picture in my mind of Christ hanging on the cross with a guerilla soldier superimposed upon His dead body. (Research the People’s Church in Latin America.)

Regarding the poor today, are you reading the many and recent accounts of how Catholics in Latin America are turning away from the Church in droves and going to the Pentecostal/Evangelical churches? Where is the catechesis for them and how are they to attain salvation without the guidance and encouragement to remain in the grace of the sacraments.

 

[graciew]

It ’ s here. Alive and well and struggling .
4% of Latin American were raised without a religious affiliation.
Ok . We ll have to beat our evangelical friends in this wrestling. Now given where our " wrestling " takes place , the.context , I.do appreciate it is still a religious one.
Come.and see.( you would love it btw if you haven t visited )
We need encouragement. This is planet earth too.And I am really saying it lovingly. I hear your struggles too.

 

[zz912]

I’ll avoid the near occasion of sin and stay away from Liberation Theology altogether. I prefer the Catholic faith without any Marxism, thank you.

 

[graciew]

I’ll avoid the near occasion of sin and stay iaway from Liberation Theology altogether. I prefer the Catholic faith without any Marxism, thank you.

That is the only Catholic faith I know.The one I inherited from great grandparents and further.
I lived times of mess and I.do remember the image Tigg speaks about.
And the wording that Marxism subtly used to make a mess.
Past is gone.
Catholic is catholic.
Personally , I can perfectly well try to stay away from what I do.not know .Those were diffi ult times and I was a teen at school.

 

[Tsuwano]

You have distorted my words and please do not make the claim that the rich do not care for the poor - it is pure propaganda and the ones advocating for socialism would do well to search their own hearts and their possible envy and hatred of the wealthy when they throw around terms like “the filthy rich.” Did you read the link I posted in which the Vatican document warns of the Marxist priniciples contained within the very concepts of LT? I think I’ll go with the popes and the Church on this one and be warned of the iniquitous elements that have been contributed by a few radical priests and their Medellin Conference. Unfortunately the poor have (and are) being exploited to help achieve a political system, (a huge contributing factor in illegal immigration, btw) although it has been suggested that LT is more intellectual than revolutionary today. I, for one, will never get rid of the picture in my mind of Christ hanging on the cross with a guerilla soldier superimposed upon His dead body. (Research the People’s Church in Latin America.)

Regarding the poor today, are you reading the many and recent accounts of how Catholics in Latin America are turning away from the Church in droves and going to the Pentecostal/Evangelical churches? Where is the catechesis for them and how are they to attain salvation without the guidance and encouragement to remain in the grace of the sacraments.

I do not claim that “the rich” do not care for the poor, though I’m fairly sure that some do not. What I said was that the rich should be more concerned for their own spiritual welfare, especially if they don’t care for the poor. This doesn’t come from me, but from that fellow who said it is more difficult for a camel to enter through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the gates of heaven. Maybe that’s just propaganda, too. I’m glad you are choosing to go with the Popes and the Church concerning the vision it has of Liberation Theology. As the article we are referencing has stated, Liberation Theology has never been condemned by any Pope or by the Church. There are aspects of Liberation Theology which have been critiqued, and rightly so. Are you aware of any theology which isn’t critiqued? You are correct when you say that the poor continue to be exploited for political reasons, which, to my mind, makes the central point of Liberation Theology, namely, that God accompanies the poor in their suffering, more pertinent than ever.

 

[ishii]

It is nonsense to say that a concern for the physical well being of another person necessarily detracts from a concern for their spiritual welfare. The Church has always been concerned for both when we talk about the poor. To tell the truth, those who are rich should be more concerned for their spiritual welfare than those who are poor, especially if the rich show no concern for the poor. It is also nonsense to say that a concern for the poor is Marxism. Liberation Theology, as explained by Guitierrez, was not about Marxism, but about salvation. It separates itself from Marxism by making Christ the center of its vision for the poor. It would be nice if Capitalists in developed countries also made Christ the center of their enterprises. Perhaps then, we wouldn’t be talking about the attraction a false ideology like Marxism has for those who are desperately poor.

When I think of Liberation Theology, I think of this quote from CS Lewis:

“*Whichever side he adopts, your main task will be the same. Let him begin by treating the Patriotism or the Pacifism as a part of his religion. Then let him, under the influence of the partisan spirit, come to regard it as the most important part. Then quietly and gradually nurse him into the stage at which religion becomes merely part of the “cause” and his [faith] is valued chiefly for the excellent arguments it can produce in favour of the British war effort or of Pacifism. Provided that meetings, pamphlets, policies, movements, causes, and crusades mean more to him than prayer and and sacraments and charity, he is ours–and the more “religious” on those terms the more securely ours. I could show you a pretty cageful down here *”

Substitute “patriotism” or pacifism for “economic/social justice for the poor” and you have Liberation Theology - Marxism with a Christian twist. Liberation Theology was all the rage at the Jesuit college I attended in the 80’s. It was all about “racism, classism and sexism.” That was the focus of progressive Jesuits who loved Liberation Theology. They used to invite Marxist Jesuits from Nicaragua to speak on campus. They were all about ideology and creating a heaven on earth - as all Marxists are.

Ishii

 

[ishii]

You have distorted my words and please do not make the claim that the rich do not care for the poor - it is pure propaganda and the ones advocating for socialism would do well to search their own hearts and their possible envy and hatred of the wealthy when they throw around terms like “the filthy rich.” Did you read the link I posted in which the Vatican document warns of the Marxist priniciples contained within the very concepts of LT? I think I’ll go with the popes and the Church on this one and be warned of the iniquitous elements that have been contributed by a few radical priests and their Medellin Conference. Unfortunately the poor have (and are) being exploited to help achieve a political system, (a huge contributing factor in illegal immigration, btw) although it has been suggested that LT is more intellectual than revolutionary today. I, for one, will never get rid of the picture in my mind of Christ hanging on the cross with a guerilla soldier superimposed upon His dead body. (Research the People’s Church in Latin America.)

Regarding the poor today, are you reading the many and recent accounts of how Catholics in Latin America are turning away from the Church in droves and going to the Pentecostal/Evangelical churches? Where is the catechesis for them and how are they to attain salvation without the guidance and encouragement to remain in the grace of the sacraments.

 

[ishii]

I do not claim that “the rich” do not care for the poor, though I’m fairly sure that some do not. What I said was that the rich should be more concerned for their own spiritual welfare, especially if they don’t care for the poor. This doesn’t come from me, but from that fellow who said it is more difficult for a camel to enter through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the gates of heaven. Maybe that’s just propaganda, too. I’m glad you are choosing to go with the Popes and the Church concerning the vision it has of Liberation Theology. As the article we are referencing has stated, Liberation Theology has never been condemned by any Pope or by the Church. There are aspects of Liberation Theology which have been critiqued, and rightly so. Are you aware of any theology which isn’t critiqued? You are correct when you say that the poor continue to be exploited for political reasons, which, to my mind, makes the central point of Liberation Theology, namely, that God accompanies the poor in their suffering, more pertinent than ever.

Everyone should care for there spiritual welfare - the rich, as well as those who supposedly advocate on behalf of the “poor”, but who are really preoccupied with political solutions to the point that they focus on that more than they focus on the sacraments, spirituality, individual charity, etc. There is lots of blame to go around.

Ishii

 

[Tsuwano]

Everyone should care for there spiritual welfare - the rich, as well as those who supposedly advocate on behalf of the “poor”, but who are really preoccupied with political solutions to the point that they focus on that more than they focus on the sacraments, spirituality, individual charity, etc. There is lots of blame to go around.

Ishii

Hey, Ishii! Haven’t spoken with you for a while. Hope you are well. You are correct that all should care for their spiritual welfare. No argument at all. As Guitierrez has stated, Liberation Theology isn’t about creating a political solution for the poor. It’s about helping the poor to know that they are loved by God and that the inequality which exists in society is often the result of sin. I know enough about studying theology in the 80’s to know that many who studied Liberation Theology saw aspects of it as a formula for political and social activism. Perhaps they even saw themselves as Marxists. I think this was a failure to understand the radical nature of Liberation Theology. It did not call for the violent overthrow of government or social institutions, but it did call for a recognition that violence was already a reality for the poor. It did say that conversion was necessary. It did advocate that the Church, like Christ, walk with the poor. I don’t think that is something to be ashamed of.

 

[ishii]

Hey, Ishii! Haven’t spoken with you for a while. Hope you are well. You are correct that all should care for their spiritual welfare. No argument at all. As Guitierrez has stated, Liberation Theology isn’t about creating a political solution for the poor. It’s about helping the poor to know that they are loved by God and that the inequality which exists in society is often the result of sin. I know enough about studying theology in the 80’s to know that many who studied Liberation Theology saw aspects of it as a formula for political and social activism. Perhaps they even saw themselves as Marxists. I think this was a failure to understand the radical nature of Liberation Theology. It did not call for the violent overthrow of government or social institutions, but it did call for a recognition that violence was already a reality for the poor. It did say that conversion was necessary. It did advocate that the Church, like Christ, walk with the poor. I don’t think that is something to be ashamed of.

Likewise, Tsuwano.

(then) Cardinal Ratsinger once said of Liberation Theology that it “fused the bible’s view of history with Marxist dialectics.” Regardless of the claims of Guttierez, the proponents of Liberation Theology that I have observed in academia were all hard core leftists who seemed much more focused on political activism than on religion (religion seemed almost like an after thought). Is it any coincidence that Gutierrez is a left wing hero? At the very least, I think its true to say that Liberation Theology became co-opted by the left, and also true that the architect of this theology hasn’t really said much about that.

The historian Paul Johnson referred to the “twin evils” which poison Latin America: militarism and politics. I would add to that leftism. Johnson explains how Argentina was once poised to become an economic powerhouse and even join the ranks of the first world countries. Alas, Juan Peron took over and “gave a classic demonstration, in the name of socialism and nationalism, of how to wreck an economy.” Perhaps at some point we can have an honest discussion about the causes of poverty in the southern hemisphere without having to accept leftism as one of the solutions.

Ishii

 

[zz912]

Hey, Ishii! Haven’t spoken with you for a while. Hope you are well. You are correct that all should care for their spiritual welfare. No argument at all. As Guitierrez has stated, Liberation Theology isn’t about creating a political solution for the poor. It’s about helping the poor to know that they are loved by God and that the inequality which exists in society is often the result of sin. I know enough about studying theology in the 80’s to know that many who studied Liberation Theology saw aspects of it as a formula for political and social activism. Perhaps they even saw themselves as Marxists. I think this was a failure to understand the radical nature of Liberation Theology. It did not call for the violent overthrow of government or social institutions, but it did call for a recognition that violence was already a reality for the poor. It did say that conversion was necessary. It did advocate that the Church, like Christ, walk with the poor. I don’t think that is something to be ashamed of.

What’s sad is the destruction and misery caused by LT, that claims to help the poor. South America and Mexico were positioned to become economic powerhouses like the US at the turn of the 20th century. But Marxism imported from LT stunted them. Their economies crumbled and they became destitute. It has the opposite effect of what they claimed they were trying to do.

 

[Darryl1958]

Common sense condemns these Marxist derivatives as anything that would help the poor or lead to a better society.

Any society that has played with these Marxist solutions are bitterly divided.
Examples of how to deal with the problem of inequality abound in this world, from North America to Europe to Australia. Those are the examples that politically motivated priest need to turn to in order to bring about meaningful change to the lives of their poor.
It borders on insanity that giving the Gospel a Marxist flavor would in any way help out the poor in Latin American countries. Class warfare only concentrates power and wealth into the hands of even fewer oligarchs. The plight of the huddled masses remains the same, or even worse, as any economic opportunity that once existed is driven out to the same degree that the bourgoise is driven out.

 

[Darryl1958]

John Paul II, after living in a Poland enslaved and ruined by the Marxists in power for the greater part of his life, was incensed and disgusted to see the Latin Catholic Church glorifying the same kind of crud that he had been so instrumental in destroying in his own home country. He did everything that he could to curtail and stop that kind of nonsense.

 

[J_Peterson]

What are the Marxist elements of Liberation Theology?

 

[Darryl1958]

merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberation%20theology

liberation theology
noun
Definition of LIBERATION THEOLOGY

: a religious movement especially among Roman Catholic clergy in Latin America that combines political philosophy usually of a Marxist orientation with a theology of salvation as liberation from injustice
— liberation theologian noun