THE PREDAWN OF LIBERATION THEOLOGY (CONTINUED)

Pope Paul VI built upon the foundation laid by his predecessors, as his encyclical Populorum Progressio (1967) indicates.  He notes how trips to Latin America and Africa in the 1960's gave him a firsthand look at the plight of the poor and points out why he had established a pontifical commission "to further the progress of poor peoples, to encourage social justice among nations, to offer less developed nations the means whereby they can further their own progress (Populorum Progressio, Gremillion, the Gospel, p. 88)." 

In this encyclical the Pope writes of "the scandal of glaring inequalities" in both possession and power, and points out how the Vatican Council insisted on the imperative of expropriating landed estates that were poorly utilized and brought harm to the people (Ibid., p. 390).

He denounces those who make a profit the key motive for economic progress and deplores the fact that "a type of capitalism has been the source of excessive suffering, injustices, and fratricidal conflicts (Ibid., p. 395). 

The Pope recognizes the urgency of the situation: "We must make haste, too many people are suffering, and the distance is growing that separates progress of some and the stagnation,  not to say the regression of others (Ibid., p. 396).

He goes on to say: There are certainly situations where injustice cries to heaven.  When whole populations destitute of necessities live in a state of dependence barring them from all initiative and responsibility, all opportunity to advance culturally and share in social and political life, recourse to violence, as a means to right these wrongs to human dignity, is a grave temptation (Ibid.).

Paul VI insists that "the superfluous wealth of rich countries should be placed at the service of poor nations"; otherwise their continued greed will bring down the wrath of the poor (Ibid., p. 402).  

In short, the world, exclaims the Pontiff, is sick-sick of luxury and waste in the midst of poverty, and sick of horrendous economic and social inequalities.  It is imperative for lay persons to take the initiative in making necessary changes in the customs, laws, and structures of their communities.  He ends by declaring: All of you who have heard the appeal of suffering people, all of you who are working to answer their cries, you are the apostles of a development which is good and genuine, which is not wealth that is self-centered and sought for its own sake, but rather an economy which is put at the service of humankind; the bread which is daily distributed to all, as a source of siblinghood and a sign of Providence...Yes, we ask you, all of you, to hear our cry of anguish in the name of the Lord (Ibid., p. 413).

From the publication of Rerum Novarum in 1891 to the late 1960's, Catholic social teaching in the form of papal encyclicals and conciliar documents had undergone a steady transformation.  There was increasing concern shown for the poor, suffering, and oppressed; for the rights of workers; for the responsibilities that the wealthy nations have for the impoverished; for the defects of capitalism based exclusively on the profit motive; for the role of both church and state in liberating the oppressed. And in what area of the world needed to hear this social message more than in Latin America, where political power makes the small number of rich even richer, and the vast number of poor even poorer (Ferm, op. cit. p. 9)?

A major cause of poverty and oppression in Latin America has been and remains the economic policies of the United States government and of multinational corporations-policies that buttress repressive governments.  As one observer puts it:  The basic difference between American imperialism and today and American imperialism a century ago is that it is more violent, more far-reaching, and more carefully planned today (In Irving  Louis Horowitz, et.al, eds., Latin American Radicalism: A Documentary Report on Left and Right Nationalist Movements.  New York: Random House, 1969, p. 194)

To be Continued.

 

THE PREDAWN OF LIBERATION THEOLOGY 

We continue with our focus on the historical origins of Liberation Theology.  As I mentioned at the beginning of these essays, theology (God-talk) does not take place in a vacuum.  Liberation Theology, like all other theological movements and schools of thought did not emerge out of nowhere.  Like all other theologies, it had its historical beginnings and contextual emphasis.  

While focusing on the details of the origins of a particular theology might seem somewhat cumbersome and tedious, it is a necessary component of research on that theology.  In order for us to understand theological thought, we must ask ourselves "How did it all begin?" 

I will say about Liberation Theology the same thing that I say about all other theologies.  It is not "heaven-sent," and neither is it inerrant or infallible.  Liberation Theology, like all other theologies, is culturally and historically-conditioned.  Like all other theologies, it has its own set of assumptions, biases, and presuppositions.  Every theologian of liberation brings her/his prior assumptions and mindsets to the table.  Liberation Theology is by no stretch of the imagination, something that takes place "Tabula rasa (in a blank slate)."  

From 1930 to 1960, the Catholic Church experienced a theological and liturgical revival concentrated especially in the religious orders and seminaries.  This ferment surfaced in the general conference of the Latin American episcopacy (CELAM I), which convened in Rio de Janiero in 1955 with Pope Pius XII in attendance.  This conference addressed many issues, not the least of which was the modern role of the church in missions and in the social order.  Liberation theology was presaged in Cardinal Adeodato Piazza's reference to Jesus's first sermon to define the proper mission of the church: "The spirit of the Lord has been given to me, for He has anointed me.  He has sent to bring the good news to the poor (Ferm, op. cit. p 6)." 

Two major events of the 1960's shook the Catholic Church in Latin America to its foundations. Vatican II and the Medellin conference (CELAM II) of 1968.  It is important that we consider both events in some detail and note their impact on Latin America, for these two events, more than any others, gave official impetus to the emergence of Liberation Theology (Ibid., p. 7).

Both proponents and critics of Liberation Theology stress the importance of Vatican II and its convener, Pope John XXIII.  Gustavo Gutierrez of Peru, the leading exponent of Latin American Liberation Theology, has said that the Medellin conference would not have been possible without Vatican II and Pope John XXIII (National Catholic Reporter, Dec. 17, 1982, pp. 10-11).

In addition, C. Peter Wagner, no friend of Liberation Theology has stated: "When historians evaluate this period a century from now, it may well turn out that Pope John XXXIII will have been judged to have had more influence on the Latin American continent than any other person in the twentieth century.  Roman Catholicism will never be the same as a result of the council he called and the attitude he infused (Latin American Theology: Radical or Evangelical? Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970, p. 17)."

Pope John XXIII convened the council in 1982.  It met for two months at a time for the next four years.  After the death of John XXIII in 1963, Pope Paul VI continued where his predecessor had left off.  Vatical II represents the positive response of the Catholic Church to the challenges of the modern world.  Possibly the spirit of openness to all "separated brethren" epitomized by Pope John himself had a greater impact than even the documents themselves (Ferm, op. cit., p. 7).  

Nevertheless, one should not underestimate the significance of the Vatican II documents. Of major importance is the Gaudium et Spes (1965), which emphasizes the special responsibility Christians have toward "those who are poor or in any way afflicted (Gaudium et Spes, in Joseph Gremillion, ed., The Gospel of Peace and Justice. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1976, p. 243).

This document underlies the increasing gap between the haves and the have-nots, as well as the universal mandate to "count social necessities among the primary duties of modern humankind (Ibid., p. 267)."

It denies that the church is bound to any single social, economic, or political system and maintains that what is most important is the wider distribution of economic power.  Gaudium et Spes recognizes the importance of organized labor and even of the right to strike for just demands, as part of the effort to press for a fairer distribution of goods.  It affirms that the church itself, although independent of the political sector, has the right-even the duty-to pass moral judgments on political matters (Ferm, op. cit., p.7).

One finds the same spirit of willingness to confront the new demands of a changing world in the papal encyclicals issued the 1960's.  Pope John XXIII's Mater Magistra ( 1961) which builds upon the landmark social encyclicals Rerum Novarum (1891) and Quadragesimo Anno (1931), illusstrates this point well. In Quadragesimo Anno, Pius XI had advanced two basic principles: "practical morality," must govern economic affairs, and the interests of an individual or a society must be subordinate to the common good. He explicitly rejected unregulated competition and the subjugation of any society to the interests of its wealthiest members (Ibid., p. 8).

Pope John XXIII went a step further. He agreed with Pius XI that it was wrong for the powerful members of a society to determine the wage scale and he declared unjust any society in which the "human dignity of workers is compromised, or their sense of responsibility is weakened, or their freedom of action is removed (Mater et Maistra, in Gremillion, The Gospel, p. 161).

TO BE CONTINUED 

 THEOLOGY FROM A THIRD WORLD PERSPECTIVE 

DR. JUAN A. CARMONA 

It has been assumed by many of us who have been exposed to Western theology (Euro-American) that it is the "norm," and the primary validator of what constitutes or does not constitute sound theology.  It is my intention in this next series of essays to deconstruct that position.

Theology (God-talk) emerges out of the geographical context and existential realities that humanity lives in.  One could argue that theology is a "heaven-sent" enterprise.  When people treat theology in that matter, it then renders theology as a God-given legacy.  It is treated as "the faith once delivered to the saints," i.e. divinely-rendered, therefore, inerrant, infallible, and not to be questioned or tampered with.

In this series of essays, I will deal with the theology which emerges out of the existential reality and experiences of people living in the so-called "Third World," i.e. those continents of the world which have been considered underdeveloped and dependent on Euro-America.  

Because Third World Theology emerges from and deals with God-talk in an environment of colonialism and economic bondage, it is referred to as "Liberation Theology."  The question is, "liberation from what?'  Classical theology has tended to render the doctrine of liberation as something that is other-worldly.  In other words, it deals with God's liberating and salvific acts as something that will take place in the after-life and not something which is historical, i.e. taking place in our time.  Liberation Theology, in turn, focuses on God's liberating and salvific acts as something which takes place in the present, and which includes liberation from economic, political, and social bondage.  Euro-American theology has tended to view liberation or salvation as something which is "spiritual," and not something physical or present.  

NOTE:

If we include Liberal (not LiberationTheology) and Theology of Hope in this discourse, we can say that Euro-American theology at some points does deal with God's liberating and salvific acts in the present historical moment.  In some respects, they may, indeed, serve as a precursor to Liberation Theology.  

In order to have a better understanding of what Liberation Theology actually is, we must examine it in historical perspective.  We must ask how did it begin, who were the key players, and what does Liberation Theology seek to address? 

I will give a brief historical sketch of the origins of Liberation Theology and then talk briefly about its emphasis.  This will aid the reader to have a better understanding of what Liberation Theology is or isn't. 

For more than four centuries, the Catholic Church played a dominant role in Latin American history, playing a dominant role in that history, proclaiming a gospel of salvation transmitted through Spanish and Portuguese earthen vessels. The violent history of Latin American colonization, in which the Catholic Church figured prominently, is of central importance for for anyone attempting to grasp Third World theological reflections on liberation (Deane William Ferm, Third World Liberation Theologies: An Introductory Survey.  Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1986, p. 3).

Europe began its conquest of what is now called Latin America with Christopher Columbus's invasion of the West Indies in 1492.  Two years later, Pope Alexander VI negotiated the Treaty of Tordesillas, which divided the New World between Spain and Portugal, and set the stage for "patronage"-royal control over the church in the mission lands the two European nations would colonize.  Church and state worked hand in hand in the settlement of Latin America.  Spain and Portugal imposed their own feudal structures on the newly acquired territory.  The native Amerindians became Christians, usually under duress, but they never really rejected their own indigenous cultures and religions (Ibid.).

The sixteenth century saw the rapid expansion of Christian missions in Spain and Portugal conquered more and more Latin American soil.  When the Aztecs of Mexico, the Incas of Peru, and their counterparts in other areas were subdued, Dominicans and Franciscans followed closely behind.  Most of these early missionaries viewed the indigenes as ignorant children desperately in need of Christian instruction.  They preferred to make converts by peaceful means, but would resort to force if necessary.  The clerical conquerors were as ambitious as the military, one as violent as the other in their methods of conversion or control (Ibid., pp. 3-4).

From the moment Columbus set foot in the New World, cross and sword had been indistinguishable. Priests and conquistadors divided the plunder in people and land-it was a toss-up as to who was the greedier.  And long before Latin America's military regimes installed their torture chambers, the Inquisition was at work with whip and rock.  By the time of the wars of independence at the beginning of the nineteenth century, the Church was the largest landowner in Latin America.  It was also the most conservative political force on the continent  ( Penny Lernoux, Cry of the People (New York: Penguin, 1982, p. 10). 

Other scholars dispute this view. Renato Poblete claims that "in Latin America, the actual transition from paganism to Christianity was accompanied with a minimum of struggle."  He also adds: 

In all respects, this was a golden age for the Latin American church and its splendor, now dimmed, can still be glimpsed in the magnificent cathedrals of Mexico, Quito, and Lima (" The Church in Latin America: A Historical Survey," in Henry A. Landsberger, ed., The Church and Social Change in Latin America. University of Notre Dame Press, 1970, pp. 40,43).

The Spanish and Portuguese conquest of Latin America did not usher in a golden age in the treatment of the indigenous inhabitants, but it was not without its martyrs and prophets, whom the liberation theologians of today regard as their progenitors (Ferm, op. cit., p 5).

The latter half of the sixteenth century saw the church consolidating its strengths as bishops and priests began to meet in provincial councils to coordinate their evangelization programs.  Fifteen such councils were held over the next two hundred years as church leaders developed catechetical instruction and rules of behavior for the converts-rule more often in keeping with Spanish customs and than native practices.  By the beginning of the seventeenth century, 120,000 Spaniards faced 12 million Amerindians scattered over 12 million square mile.  In some areas, Spanish cruelty continued unabated. Noel Erskine reports that native Jamaicans at the time of the arrival of Christopher Columbus totaled roughly 60 thousand.  A century later, the population had diminished to 1,500, only 74 of whom were pureblood natives (Noel Erskine, Decolonizing Theology: A Caribbean Perspective. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1981, p. 16).

In recent decades, an increasing and significant minority of members of the Catholic Church have shown growing concern for the staggering problems of the social order.  Catholic Action had its beginnings in Argentina in 1930, in Peru in 1935, and in Bolivia in 1938, spreading quickly to other countries.  Lay persons, prompted by the lack of priests, assumed positions of leadership and sought to apply Catholic teachings to social problems (Ferm, op. cit., p.6).

I will begin the next essay by talking about the predawn of Liberation Theology beginning in 1930.  This introduction has been given with the purpose of putting Liberation Theology in historical perspective so as to make Liberation Theology more understandable. 

In the Name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer. Amen.

Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona 

Past Professor of Theology 

Tainan Theological College/Seminary 

             

A SUMMARY OF CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY IN CONTEMPORARY PERSPECTIVE 

In this series of articles, we have examined the various doctrines of the Christian faith, not only in terms of their classic/historical formulations, but also in terms of how they are dealt with in the present time.  We now ask, how can Christian theology as a whole be summarized for our contemporary audience?  

In the early years of Christianity (first two or three centuries), the Church did not have to be  overly concerned with systematizing its theology.  It did have to contend with heretical infiltrations "here and there," but since the main issue was proclaiming the Lordship of Christ vs. the authority of the Emperor, on the one hand, and persecution on the other, there was very little, if any time, for the Church to focus on constructing a well thought-out or systematic theology.  

As Sallie McFague (Professor of Theology at the Divinity School of Vanderbilt University) would say, "If there can be said to be a single overriding task for theology at the present time, it is to recover a sense of the wholeness, the unity and the integrity of the Christian witness (Sallie McFague in "An Epilogue: The Christian Paradigm."  Christian Theology, An Introduction to Its Traditions and Tasks, op. cit., p. 377)."

The contemporary awareness of the relativity of all our constructions has freed the event from idolatrous human control while at the same time sharpening our wills and our intellects to interpret it more appropriately and more universally. In this sense, all theologians today embrace "the Protestant principle" that no human construct can embody the relationship of God with humanity.  We are then, on the brink of another "reformation," not the sort of reformation which would reduce Christianity to what modern consciousness will accept, or absorb Christianity into other religions, but one which would enable us to appreciate its truth as well as its relativity (Ibid., p. 378).

Contemporary theology emphasizes more openness to the future rather than on the absolutizing of the past. Traditional Christianity's peculiar and distinctive relationship to history-the fact that it is grounded in the story of a particular human being who lived almost two thousand years ago-has tended to absolutize the past, especially its early history, and to suppose that its reformation depends on a return to the purity of primitive Christianity. Patterns of ecclesiastical polity, models of God, relations with culture and politics, personal life styles for believers-all these issues and more frequently have  been seen within the framework of first-century Christianity.  The relativization of Scripture and tradition, as well as the critique of classical Christianity by the liberation theologies, have raised the question of Christianity's orientation to the past in a serious way.  Of equal importance, the future is now seen by many theologians to be more viable than the past as a source for transforming the present. The envisioning of an alternative future-creates a critical perspective from which the oppressive structures of the present can be changed. The transforming event of God's love is seen not in private or static terms, but in communal dynamic terms.  People become Christians not by personally accepting certain dogmas derived from the work of a bygone savior, but by living now in the presence of God's love to bring about universal transformation and fulfillment (Ibid. p. 388).

En fin, we now decide how we are going to deal with "the faith once delivered to the saints (or as someone else has said "the faith delivered by the saints")" and make it understandable to the "saints" who are now the recipients.  Do we proclaim a faith and its attendant dogmas in a frozen and stiff manner that is not understandable to our contemporaries, or do we construct a theology which was "once delivered to the saints," and intended to be understandable in all times and in all places?

This writer/theologian (yours truly) sincerely believes that the Cosmic (Universal) Christ who transcends all creeds, doctrines, dogmas, and theological formulations, continues to speak to us in ways that we can not only understand, but be receptive to embracing Him.  The one who says "I am the way, the truth, and the life," makes Himself known to us in our present time through those human actions (charity, kindness, love, commitment to social justice, etc.) which reflect the reason why He came into the world. Process theologians would remind us that God is always evolving and luring us to also evolve.  The God of Scripture and of the Christian tradition has not frozen in the past, but is alive today through the person of the Cosmic Christ, and through the ongoing construction of a theology which is a continuous "faith seeking understanding.  To God be the glory!

In the Name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer. Amen. 

Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona 

Past Visiting Professor of Theology

Tainan Theological College/Seminary 

 

THE INTERACTION BETWEEN CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY AND OTHER RELIGIONS 

One of the many issues relative to the task of constructing a Christian theology, is that of inquiring what Christian theology has to do with the other religions of the world.  We ask if there are things in common that we have with people of other faith traditions or whether we believe that divine truth is enclosed  and incapsulated within the Christian faith, its Scriptures, and traditions.  Some Christians will say that we should seek to "build bridges," and other Christians will say that we should not even bother because the theology of other faith traditions is false and non-resonant with Christian theology.

To be a Christian seems to entail the judgment that being a Christian is superior to being anything else.  To display this superiority has often been seen as the task of Christian apologetics.  This has not necessarily meant a claim that Christians are morally or humanly superior to others, but it has normally meant the conviction that the God from who alone salvation can be received is known or present to Christians as nowhere else (John B. Cobb, Jr. in "The Religions."  Christian Theology: An Introduction to Its Traditions and Tasks. Peter C. Hodgson and Robert H. King, eds.  Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994, p. 353)

This, of course, raises  the question as to whether God has been revealed to people of other faith traditions and if so, if that revelation is somewhat "inferior" to the revelation that Christians have received.  It also raises the question as to whether Christian theology has a monopoly or domination of the entirety of divine truth.

Today this habit of thought is severely challenged by increasing awareness of the many impressive ways in which human beings are organizing their lives and seeking and finding truth, wholeness, or salvation.  To more and more Christians, approaching others with the assumption of the superiority of their own religion seems false to Christian love.  Is it not better to listen appreciatively to what others have learned and experienced than to assume that we already know better (Cobb, op. cit., p. 353)?

But this gives rise to problems too. Does it mean that we abandon the conviction that Jesus Christ is the savior or liberator of all?  Do we become relativistic, accepting private decisions of others as beyond criticism? Does this charitable tolerance extend to everyone-to racists for example? Or does our faith provide grounds to decide in advance what the limits of respect should be? If so, are we being truly open to those others whom we are called to love and who judge by other norms (Ibid)?  

Prior to World War I, the problem was often formulated as that of the finality or absoluteness of Christianity.  Can we appreciate the achievements of other  religious traditions and still evaluate them from the Christian point of view?  Has Christianity in principle already grasped the final truth, or must we recognize that Christianity is just one way of believing and living alongside others which have equal justification for their exclusive claims (Ibid.)?

This theologian believes and is convinced that since God is sovereign and that Christ is cosmic, that we cannot limit divine revelation and truth to one specific tradition.  We cannot place God in a box.  God is beyond our human ideological constructs.

Some may want to argue that since Christian theology is based on "divinely revealed truths," and other religions are "man made," that we have to pay no heed to the claims of other religions.  The notion here is that God has been revealed "for once and for all" through the Christ of Bethlehem and through the Scriptures and traditions which attest to Him.  My counter-argument is that God is the Lord of both creation and history, that therefore, God cannot be limited or restricted to a particular set of beliefs and practices.  To attempt to do would be another way of saying that God is the product of our imaginations and thoughts.  This then, would be that we are creating God in our image and likeness instead of God creating us in God's image and likeness.  

En fin, no religious tradition has a monopoly on divine truth.  Each tradition, including the Christian tradition, has a limited glimpse of what divine truth is.  We see dimly as through a mirror.

In the Name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer. Amen.

Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona 

Past Visiting Professor of Theology

Tainan Theological College/Seminary