P
planter654
Guest
Whites don’t?
God Bless
- Status
God Bless
P
planter654
Guest
planter654:
You say the Hebrews were in slaved in Africa? What? Hebrew were white people in slaved by black people? I disagree–That I am sorry makes no sense at all that statement.
God Bless
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
Vern you cite A document then refuse to read the first paragraph of it wherein Ratzinger says straight that he is speaking of only one form of LT. The fact is, it has NOT been banned, nor have its proponents. Most of them are in quite good stead with the church. You simply mimic the usual ultra right rhetoric. It is being taught in every reputable Catholic University, it is being taught at seminaries, It being written of by dozens upon dozens of Catholics all without a complaint. You should not read it. But you cannot get away with saying its somehow evil. To do so suggests that the Vatican has not been properly advised by you yet, but then your only source seems to be one document.
You are correct that Rev. Wright is a proponent of black LT. I do not agree with the man on some points assuredly, but on others, he has spoken truthfully to be sure. He is certainly no worse than the likes of Falwell, Hagee, and a host of other hate-mongering right wingers.
I do enjoy watching you guys scream about something that the Vatican allows. It just shows how out of step you really are, and consequently how you pick and choose what tenets of the Church you choose to accept or reject.
You are correct that Rev. Wright is a proponent of black LT. I do not agree with the man on some points assuredly, but on others, he has spoken truthfully to be sure. He is certainly no worse than the likes of Falwell, Hagee, and a host of other hate-mongering right wingers.
I do enjoy watching you guys scream about something that the Vatican allows. It just shows how out of step you really are, and consequently how you pick and choose what tenets of the Church you choose to accept or reject.
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
Why do you continue to pretend to quote something with no citation? That is a form of plagerism you know. Cite your sources or stop arguing that nobody is refuting you. Your opinion pretty much counts for nothing, sources do.
K
katgee
Guest
I find the past posts very informative and well stated.
I worked in the missions in a diocese in eastern Africa composed of European Latins. It was there that I first learned of liberation theology. I organized and implemented a literacy program for the poor with the help of local African teachers. I eventually met and dined with the Marxist Frelimo.
There was a growing and vocal hostility towards the colonialists in the country that implied that the Lord was against the rich as well. The Luta, ‘the struggle’, was used more than the Lord when we would congregate with the natives. There were inserts of such language in homilies. The communications in the church workers became polarized, we for the poor vs they for the rich.
Pope Paul VI sent a papal nuncio. I was invited to the women’s religious session. The nuncio asked what the problem was there in this diocese…lack of prayer, misunderstandings, rich vs poor. I was egged on to speak by some sisters. But I shared that the problem I perceived was Christology, that defining the problem was rather a question, ‘Who is Christ???’ This new theology was creating conflicts ‘of Christ among us’ where we were now divided and arguing, not agreeing, and worst of all, mistrust among the church workers.
When the country became independent of colonial rule, instead of the newspaper referring to this, the headlines stated on the day of their independence in large, very emboldened letters, ‘America is the Enemy of the World’. And in the world wide struggle that continues, this is what people are hearing all over the world.
So for my experience in liberation theology, I saw it stressing work, women going to work, struggling, blaming, dividing, more work and work…and less and less Christ, that brought an impoverization of the Redeemer and Savior of one’s soul…for it was the work of human hands that brought one’s salvation.
For about 7 years, that experience remained with me and it really damaged my soul. What cured me was the wounds of the Holy Father when he was shot in Rome, and my immediate drop to my knees, praying the rosary for 15 minutes, and now then restored in the true freedom of Christ.
I worked in the missions in a diocese in eastern Africa composed of European Latins. It was there that I first learned of liberation theology. I organized and implemented a literacy program for the poor with the help of local African teachers. I eventually met and dined with the Marxist Frelimo.
There was a growing and vocal hostility towards the colonialists in the country that implied that the Lord was against the rich as well. The Luta, ‘the struggle’, was used more than the Lord when we would congregate with the natives. There were inserts of such language in homilies. The communications in the church workers became polarized, we for the poor vs they for the rich.
Pope Paul VI sent a papal nuncio. I was invited to the women’s religious session. The nuncio asked what the problem was there in this diocese…lack of prayer, misunderstandings, rich vs poor. I was egged on to speak by some sisters. But I shared that the problem I perceived was Christology, that defining the problem was rather a question, ‘Who is Christ???’ This new theology was creating conflicts ‘of Christ among us’ where we were now divided and arguing, not agreeing, and worst of all, mistrust among the church workers.
When the country became independent of colonial rule, instead of the newspaper referring to this, the headlines stated on the day of their independence in large, very emboldened letters, ‘America is the Enemy of the World’. And in the world wide struggle that continues, this is what people are hearing all over the world.
So for my experience in liberation theology, I saw it stressing work, women going to work, struggling, blaming, dividing, more work and work…and less and less Christ, that brought an impoverization of the Redeemer and Savior of one’s soul…for it was the work of human hands that brought one’s salvation.
For about 7 years, that experience remained with me and it really damaged my soul. What cured me was the wounds of the Holy Father when he was shot in Rome, and my immediate drop to my knees, praying the rosary for 15 minutes, and now then restored in the true freedom of Christ.
R
rpp
Guest
This is a (knowingly?) false statement. In Post 31 Vern provided a link to the source. In Post 32, you responded and even quoted the link.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
You haven’t been paying attention, have you?
Go back and read what Cardinal Ratzinger said – hint: He did not say, “Hey, it’s okay if your keep your fingers crossed.”
Are those men Catholics?
And I enjoy you attempting to defend the indefensible. Do you say “G** D*** America?”
I’ve shown Liberation Theology for what it is, and proven Black Liberation Theology is racist.
By it’s fruits, we know it.
R
rpp
Guest
How is quoting a Vatican document (which was also linked in that post) which addresses Liberation Theology creating a straw man? The actual quote you are so upset about are words from that document. They are not mine. And it is about LT.
I am bowing out of this thread. It has clearly degenerated.
Se you all in the forums.
C
Contarini
Guest
The document makes it clear that is is speaking of certain forms of Liberation Theology. I’m not upset about the document. I’m saying that the document is addressing certain directions in which LT can go. You have to take the trouble actually to read the LT theologians if you want to know which ones come under these condemnations and which ones don’t. Otherwise, just do what the Vatican statement does–affirm that LT theologians must avoid certain errors without saying anything about whether they have done so or not.
As far as I know (I could be wrong), the only Liberation Theologian who has actually been censured by the Vatican is Boff. I haven’t read Boff so I don’t know how he compares to Gutierrez.
Edwin
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
I’ve been pointing out this same thing for a week. It is simply being ignored. It is the document cited, and I simply pointed out that the opening paragraph belied the conclusion that LT is banned. As far as I know Boff is the only one censured as well. Sobrino has been called upon to answer for some of his writings but that is all, as far as I know. Gutierrez has faced no inquiries as far as I know either.
One can of course ignore the plain black and white evidence if that is one’s desire, but it of course does not change reality.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
So, to the question: “What is Black Liberation Theology?”
Black Liberation Theology is best explained by its foremost proponent – the Reverend Jerimiah Wright (“G** D*** America!”)
By its fruits, you may know it.
Black Liberation Theology is best explained by its foremost proponent – the Reverend Jerimiah Wright (“G** D*** America!”)
By its fruits, you may know it.
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
Actually we’ve been aluding to mostly Latin American Liberation Theology because they have done the seminal work in the overall field. Specifically as to Black Liberation Theology, Cone is the major proponent I believe in America. I have no idea whether there are Black LT’s in Africa for example. Cone has written quite extensively, and I’ve only read one of his books, for again a class I took in a Catholic college. There are any number of women who are also writing from a feminist LT. I would think more of Johnson, Schussler Fiorenza, Reuther and other theologians/biblical experts of that ilk if you are interested in that form. Schussler Fiorenza is at Harvard and has written quite a number of books, any google will show them to you. I reviewed her last book at
iowamusings.wordpress.com…look under book reviews.
iowamusings.wordpress.com…look under book reviews.
C
Contarini
Guest
James Cone, not Jeremiah Wright, is the most famous black liberation theologian in America.
And since countries do not have souls, I am not at all sure that calling down damnation on a country is a sin.
Edwin
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
No, James Cone is indeed a primary advocate – but the most visible and influential proponent of Black Liberation Theology is Jerimiah Wright.
Jesus cursed things that did not have souls – including a fig tree, remember?
Would Jesus say “G** D*** America?”
Would you say it? Would you follow a man who said that?
R
richarde
Guest
Yes, I think this theology is being misused (as Darwin has been misused). This LT completely misses the point of the exodus of the hebrew slaves from Egypt. However historically accurate it may be, the real lesson is the liberation from sin that God offers through his son, Jesus Christ, who is and always has been our redeemer.
Remember that it was the Blood of the Lamb that saved the Hebrews and finally caused Pharoah to release his grip on the slaves.
The African/Americans who are descendants of the slave culture should get this message loud and clear, more than anyone, but unfortunately, with oppressors such as Wright and Malcolm X, they keep getting dragged back into the distraction of victimization and lose the context of real salvation from a sinful life. This is very evident in our current culture.
Wright blames the white culture for building more prisons to house black people and purposely giving them drugs and disease. He completely ignores the free choice all americans have regardless of race. There are whites in the same prisons.
The black or white or latino LTs are missing a very fundamental point of salvation, liberation from sin. It only comes through our Savior, Jesus Christ.
“I am the way, and the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father except through Me.” There is only one way to salvation. Not several different theologys, only one way. The Blood of the Lamb.
S
Sailka
Guest
Calling Anything one disagrees with as “MARXIST” is Radical Right, and Untruthful. Typical Big Money Only RNC. Am Conservative, but honest Catholic. Character assasination is Not Proper, Or Catholic. Vivat Jesu, Not self
C
Contarini
Guest
Only because the right-wing media has set him up as such due to [edited] link with him. I have heard people talk about liberation theology for years, and had never heard of Wright (that I remember) until the [edited] business.
I prefer to refrain from speculation as to what Jesus would say, other than that He would say nothing incompatible with faith, hope, and charity. I can imagine circumstances in which calling down God’s judgment on a country might be fully compatible with faith, hope, and charity–indeed, that is essentially what Jesus did when He cursed the fig tree, so thanks for bringing that up!
No. Not under present circumstances, anyway.
I would not reject my pastor for saying it, if that’s what you’re asking. That would be an abominable act of schism and disobedience.
I would not belong to a church of the UCC in the first place (unless the other options in terms of Trinitarian churches were even poorer, which is hard to imagine). I have huge problems with the fact that Wright uses this prophetic language about America but clearly does not consider abortion to be one of the things crying out for divine judgment (as I understand it, he’s staunchly pro-choice, which is also my main problem with [edited]). I do not personally think that the language Wright used was warranted or appropriate. But I do not see it as a huge issue. We need pastors who are more, not less willing to denounce the evils of our society.
Edwin
P
Poppa150
Guest
I agree completely.
BLT attempts to wed Marxist ideas to an enlarged sense of
Afro-Centrism. It is unique in content but very similar in style to the philosophies preached by charlatan evangelists both white and black.
It hopes to convince its adherents of the unique and elevated nature of the Head Guy (or woman) and his/her special ability to make sense of their culture. It usually pits the Head Guy’s special vision “against” some oppressing other culture and to promote and sustain a sense of suspicion and victimhood.
Of course, this enfeebles the adherents rather than providing them clear routes to success both material and spititual.
MLK and many American politicans got the USA a long way toward fixing problems in our society. However, since then, a significant portion of the Afro-American populace has been led down a garden path by the Norman Cones, Jeremiah Wrights, etc.
They rail against “middle classism” while peddling symbolism such as special holidays, costumes, and false histories of the African continent. At the same time they deny, deny, deny that a 50% droput rate among black youth can be traced to single motherhood and the failures of black fathers.
Let’s face it, the American ideal of the middle class is all about financial security, family values, and belief in the ability of the individual to progress. It is also about a sunny disposition rather than a sour sense of deprivation and resentment—which the Cones and Wrights foster and feed upon.
S
Sailka
Guest
Brother Vern, you do not seem to understand lot of Basics. Our Lord did not give us “The Word”. Nowhere is the Bible mentioned in the Bible. Nor does God ever say he is giving us writings. Our Lord gave us THE CHURCH Matt 16:18-19. Secondly, theology is not changing and new ideas. Basic right, wrong has been known since we lived in caves, comunanlly sharing. Basic theology is very unchanging. Morality is unchanging, despite New WAve attempts to rationalize theft, drugs, self as most important. Thirdly, Your main focus is on your property and money, suggesting every Tax is forceful Marxist attempt to grab your wealth. Ever heard * From those to whom much is given, much is expected ? * Or Noblesse Oblige? Ever considered helping others, instead of yourself only? Know of Lord’s And Church teaching, in the Ten Commandments on, about Not worshipping false gods, like money, wealth, self? Is Church teaching, that obsessive focus on own money and property, wealth, is worshipping false god. So taught in RCIA. Fourthly, Government only uses “force” with violators of Law. Like not paying taxes, etc. Fifthly, why suggest that Helping the Poorest is marxist govt use of power. Sixthly, do not know that deefamation of character can be called worst personal or group abuse? Ethnic attack? Major Sin? Why call any group trying to help poor or disadvantaged as Marxist? Seventhly, not aware that The Church respects all groups, faiths, persons? Only teaches against Evil Acts, like selfishness. Eightly, brother Vern, not aware that attacks by name-calling, and guilt by association are severely condemned? Chargeable in Court, and Based on Natural Law. The Magesterium of the Church in two thousand years has gone over almost every problem extant. And has found the Best Answers. All best answers are in the Lord, the Magisterium, His Church, not ourselves. Ninethly, ever heard of Social Conscience? Tenthly, Aware that Pope John Paul II ther Great did Not ‘attack Marxism’, as Pope Benedict did not overtly Condemn Liberatiom Theology? Both condemned, in modest words, Any Excesses that damage groups, indviduals. It is the Excesses of Capitalism And Marxism, And Liberation Theology that were Carefully worded denounced, by Both Popes.
Eleventhly, brother in Christ Vern, Hope you have discovered The Church does not spin reality, or facts. Because, Vern our Lord told us Earthly Truth is in the Church. Read 1 timothy 3:15? The Word is that truth on earth is In His Church. Vivat Jesu**- Status