Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: crf%basil@princeton.edu (Charles Ferenbaugh) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Liberation Theology (was Re: A Dialogue with Rome: part I) Message-ID: Date: 8 Dec 89 08:08:21 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Princeton University Lines: 47 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article ejalbert@phoenix.princeton.edu (Edmund Jason Albert) writes: > >... And you believe that liberation theology, which states that Christianity >is not just for the fortunate but for all, and is an appropriate vehicle >for social protest against injustice, is not valid? The people of We need to be very careful here: what exactly do you mean by Christianity? Look at what Jesus called the two greatest commandments: that we should love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength; and that we should love our neighbor as ourself. Now it's clear that anyone who doesn't practice justice among people is not following the second of these commands. This would include the Central American elite described above; I agree that even if these people call themselves Christians, it's dubious whether they really are. BUT it's not right then to say that the Communists are any better; though they seem to be obeying the second command, they are flagrantly ignoring the first. You see, there are two parts to being a Christian, summed up nicely in the commands above. One is that we should get our relationship with God straight, no longer living in rebellion against Him, but trusting in Him to change our sinful natures into new natures that are pleasing to Him. HAVING DONE THAT, the second part is to then let that new nature affect all our dealings with the people around us. Neither of these can stand without the other. Because we are fallen creatures, we can't do the second without the first; but if the second doesn't occur, we can be fairly sure that the first didn't happen either. (Compare Ephesians 2:8-9 with James 2:17.) Now, for what all this has to do with liberation theology. It is clear to me that liberation theology cannot be valid UNLESS it bends over backward to distinguish itself from all other 'revolutionary' philosophy, such as Marxism, by emphasizing the first great commandment as well as the second. The liberation theology which I have seen (which, I admit, isn't a whole lot) has failed to do this. - Charles Ferenbaugh [I got several comments making the same or related points. I have chosen this one as representative. By the way, it might be helpful to hear from someone who knows what liberation theology actually is. Comments have been made about Marxism, but I don't know how far liberation theology goes in that direction. Marxism as a way of looking at how power is distributed is one thing. Marxism-Leninism, i.e. Communism, is something else. --clh]