Jesus the Liberator. A Christianity for the Left?

[Karmadillo]

http://dlibrary.acu.edu.au/staffhome/gehall/XTOLOGY7.htm

<edit>

Jesus Christ and political reality

Political christologies also begin with reflection on human experience but, rather than focus on the 'transcendental longings' of human beings, they point to the dark realities of suffering and oppression that inscribe our earthly existence. The real world in which humans live, it is suggested, is a world marked by torture and death-camps, ecological crises and starving peoples, the experience of the holocaust and the threat of nuclear war, the exploitation of women and the near-extermination of entire cultures, gross misuse of political power and sheer capitalistic greed. These forces of negativity and corruption--the forces of evil--impoverish whole societies of human beings and threaten our very planet with extinction.

Consequently, political christologies have no difficulty in admitting that the world stands in need of 'salvation'. Their question is not whether human beings are in search of a saviour-figure but, given our evident need to be saved and liberated, how does Jesus Christ fulfill this role? How does the life and ministry, death and resurrection, of Jesus of Nazareth enable us to transform this situation of 'death' into a situation of 'life'? And there is a sense of urgency in their questioning.

The approach could be called 'christology through sociology' because it reads human experience in terms of the social, economic and political realities which shape human lives. < Two classic texts, both from a South American perspective, are: Leonardo Boff, Jesus Christ Liberator (Maryknoll NY: Orbis, 1978); Jon Sobrino, Christology at the Crossroads (Maryknoll NY: Orbis, 1978). > It specifically rejects the evolutionary optimism of a Teilhard de Chardin or Karl Rahner. It points to the 'political' realities of twentieth century life in which there has been more human suffering and death than in the entire history of the world. It develops its christology in the light of the three great twentieth century crises of Marxism, Auschwitz and the Third World. Following Marx, what is important is not theory but praxis (critical reflective action); following Jesus Christ, what is important is not a theology of Christ that 'explains' the world, but practical Christian discipleship which 'changes' the world and 'liberates' human beings.

<edit>

Just as 1968 was the year of peace marches and anti-war demonstrations in wealthy, capitalist 'northern nations' (notably Europe and North America--and also Australia), it was also a time of raised hopes and consciousness in the peoples of the poor, dependant 'nations of the south' (notably Latin America). 1968 was the year that Paulo Friere published his book Pedagogy of The Oppressed which provided a method for empowering the poor to take up their own struggles (he called this the 'conscientization of the poor') < Paulo Friere, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (New York: Continuum, 1970). > In the same year, the Catholic bishops of Latin America met in Medellin, Columbia, and produced a challenging document on the situation of poverty and injustice that was rife throughout the Continent. Specifically, the Medellin document recognised the intimate link between 'liberation' and 'redemption': they proclaimed that 'all liberation is an anticipation of the complete redemption brought by Christ'. The bishops also spoke of the priority or 'option for the poor' which marked Jesus' own earthly life and should therefore be central to Christian life and ministry.

Soon after Medellin, the Peruvian Jesuit, Gustavo Gutiérrez published his work entitled A Theology of Liberation. < Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation (Maryknoll NY: Orbis, 1973) >. Since that time, there have been hundreds or perhaps thousands of works on 'liberation theology'. These have sprung up not only in Latin America but also in Africa, Asia and among indigenous and other impoverished peoples throughout the world. Liberation christologies reflect on Jesus Christ from the perspective of the suffering of particular oppressed groups. They begin by listening to the voices, the struggles and the outcries of the 'disfigured children of God'. These voices provoke a sense of 'religious outrage': if God is a God of total goodness and love, and if Jesus has come to 'save' us and 'redeem' the world, then all people have the responsibility to change the situation of oppression into a situation of liberation. To refuse to challenge the unjust system is tantamount to being complicit with evil.

Liberation and other political christologies are highly conscious of the social and political nature of human existence. Redemption and sin, grace and guilt, salvation and evil are embedded in the very fabric of human society. It is not only individual people who are good and just or sinful and inhuman; social systems (whether capitalist, socialist, democratic or monarchical) are also inherently moral or immoral, just or unjust, life-giving or death-dealing. Typically, social systems will exhibit a mixture of goodness and evil. Nonetheless, any social system which promotes violence or walks on the heads of people's dignity needs to be called 'inherently evil'. In order to understand this evil or 'social sin', it is important to uncover the root causes through social analysis. Why in some countries, for example, do 5% of the people control 90% of the wealth? Is this an economic or class based evil? If so, marxist socio-economic analysis may help. Why are indigenous people (such as Australian aboriginal people) so often dehumanized and made voiceless? Is this due to racism? If so, it needs to be named, confronted and changed.

more...

[Perky]

1. The problem with Liberation theology

Is that it has wrongly been accused as historically favoring or at least associateing Marxist revolutionaries. This certainly was the case with Archbishop Romero and the Maryknolls in Salvaldor and certainly Guiterres as it's chief writing proponent. It did not however translate into any real power in Ortega's Nicaraugua. Nor did it gain wide spread appeal amont Church Hiererchy as Marxism and religion appear antithetical and because it tended to focus almost wholly of good works as opposed to evangelism

Much in the same way I might add that the Religious Right focuses on Conservativism as more important than evangelism.

Liberation Theology would never becomse a succesful movement in this country unless it had...at its core an evangelical appeal)

Still there is something to it. Liberation Theology centers on the great biblical theme of Landedness vs.Landlessness. If you want to a a quick study of the issues involved (I think it is core to middle class angston the one hand as well as asssociation with the Poor on the other). I would commend to you Walt Brueggerman's "A Land of Promise"

[Karmadillo]

2. Liberation Theology, I think, had the right idea in focusing on political

realities and local communities. As conditions in the US are not the same as in Latin America, it would take a somewhat different form here, most likely without the links to Marx and, as you suggest, a focus on the middle class as well as the poor (here and elsewhere, one can hope). It seems a good example of a way the Left can embrace religion and contest the Right's "ownership." Jesus the Liberator has real potential to trump Jesus the Tax Cutter.

Thanks for reference to Brueggerman. The amazon.com excerpt is very interesting.

[Perky]

3. Brugerman's point

which has enviromental undertones and quasi-liberal overtones is that the People of God must come to understand that they do not own the "land": God does.

He is Landlord we are but tenants..entrusted by God, instructed by the Law to be good stewards of that which He has provided.

Tha balance comes in living in the land, dependent upon God, not on ourselves.

This, in contemporary context signals, I believe, a distinction between Left and Right. The right suggest dominion and ruling while the left suggest stewardship and serving.