This last week, we witnessed some workers in the fast-food business protesting against the wages that they are being paid and demanding that the minimum wage be raised to $15 an hour. As with other issues, this situation generated conflicts surrounding this demand. Some, for a variety of reasons, are totally in favor of this proposal. Others, also for a variety of reasons, are totally against it. Others, yet, are willing to compromise, and negotiate and even settle for something in between.
In our capitalistic American society (Slavetown, U.S.A), the following theoretical criteria is used to pay wages and benefits. You will notice that I am emphasizing that this is the criteria in theory.
1. Education
2. Experience
3. Benefit to the Employer, especially in the private employment sector.
In reality, the criteria which is used for wages and upward mobility is the following:
1. Profitability
2. Cronyism and Favoritism- ("It's not what you know, but who you know.")
3. Consequences ("What if?)
4. Education (with qualification, subordinate to 1 and 2)
5. Experience (also with qualification, subordinate to 1, 2, 3, and 4)
This writer (yours truly) would like to propose another paradigm for paying wages. This paradigm entails ethical and moral considerations. In other words, it is not based on how much profit the employer can make, or how much the employer stands to lose if the minimum wage is raised to $15 an hour. It is based on the question of what does justice require?
1. Living wage- Are the wages paid enough to enable employees to obtain decent and affordable housing? Are they enough to enable the employees to adequately support their families? Are they enough to enable the employees to obtain adequate nutrition for themselves and their families? Are they enough to pay college/university or vocational study expenses for themselves and their families, especially at private institutions? Do the wage structures include adequate health and retirement benefits? Do the employer's policies leave room for equal opportunity of upward mobility for every single employee?
2. Community/Social benefits- Is the work performed by employees conducive to the well-being of the community and society?
3. Employer Benefit- Is the work performed by the employees beneficial to the employer? (With qualification, subject to 1 and 2)
4. Education (With qualification, subject to 1, 2, and 3)
5. Experience (With qualification, subject to 1, 2, 3, and 4)
On the basis of my proposed model, I speak in favor of raising the wage to $15 an hour. The model is not based on how much the employer stands to gain or lose, and neither does it leave room for cronyism and favoritism. Some may say that I am being too "idealistic." This may or may not be the case, but I strongly believe that ethical and moral issues override the consequential issues of "what if?" I invite you the reader to comment and give your views concerning this vital matter.
Grace and peace,
Dr. Juan A. Ayala-Carmona
Saturday, April 18, 2015
Thursday, April 16, 2015
Liberation Theology-The Assumptions
Like with any other written document, whether it be the Bible, or the sacred text of any another faith community, or literature in any field, we encounter assumptions and presuppositions on the part of the writers. Liberation Theology is no exception to the rule. Like theologians of other currents of thought, Liberation theologians work with their own set of assumptions and presuppositions. We cannot have a fair evaluation of Liberation Theology or any other theology for that matter, unless we first identify what those working assumptions and presuppositions are.
What do Liberation theologians assume when constructing and developing their theology? It is a known fact that no one does theology in a vacuum. That is totally impossible. This should come as a surprise to no one, when we consider, among other things, that no such thing as pure "objectivity" exists. We are all biased. We are all culturally conditioned, and subsequently, everything we read or write will reflect that cultural conditioning. The authors of Liberation Theology write out of their cultural matrix and particular social location like all other theologians do.
I would caution against reading Liberation Theology with our own set of presuppositions. When we bring our own baggage of assumptions, there is a tendency to evaluate what we read in the light of those presuppositions. Our assumptions color the way we interpret what we read. In this essay, I will attempt to identify the assumptions that lead Liberation theologians to their conclusions.
Gustavo Gutierrez, the person who coined the term, "Theology of Liberation," works on the assumption that there is a struggle taking place between different social groups in Latin America. On the one hand, there are the oppressive groups, and on the other, the oppressed classes. Gutierrez's social analysis leads him to conclude that there is a class struggle taking place that divides society into different classes of people.
Gutierrez says that "Liberation expresses the aspirations of oppressed peoples and social classes, emphasizing the conflictual aspect of the economic, social, and political process which puts them at odds with wealthy nations and oppressive classes (Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1973, p. 36).
Hugo Assmann elaborates on the assumption expressed by Gutierrez by speaking of a "starting point" in Liberation Theology. That starting point, says Assmann, is "our objective situation as oppressed and dependent peoples, which is forcing itself more and more strongly on the consciousness of broad sections of Christian society in Latin America." In summarizing the development of Liberation Theology in Latin America, he points out that regardless of the course which Liberation Theology should take in the future, that its analytical content or central semantic axis should not be forgotten. Assmann says that "Any discussion of liberation must always go back to its essence: denouncing domination (Hugo Assmann, Practical Theology of Liberation. London: Search Press, 1975, p. 43-57)."
Ester and Mortimer Arias are pretty clear as to where they stand when they point out the depth of dehumanization that exists in Latin America. They refer to the situation in Latin America as "a situation of captivity." They share their reflections on the following words: "The last decade has been hard on our people south of the Rio Grande, in political frustrations, economic exploitation, social oppression, and military and police repression. We have been living in captivity in our own land. As in biblical times, a new theology has been born from our exile and out of our captivity-the theology of liberation. We have been rediscovering the God of the Exodus, the liberating God. Out of the depths of oppression and repression, we may have something to share with Christians of the North, something which the Lord has been saying to us throughout this dreadful experience ( Ester and Mortimer Arias, The Cry of My People. New York: Friendship Press, 1980, p. ix)."
Jose Miguez Bonino also makes allusion to this starting point in theological reflection. He states that the articulation of the obedience of Christians and the account of their faith "rest on an analysis and interpretation of the Latin American situation for which the transition from developmentalism to liberation is crucial." Bonino makes a direct link between action and reflection. He says: "Their action and their reflection are of such a nature that they make no sense outside of such an analysis. If it is wrong, they are proved wrong. An engaged faith and obedience cannot stand outside or above the world in which they are engaged. This is the reason why, in the effort to enter into this theology, we are forced to dwell on the understanding and analysis of the world in which it finds its locus (Jose Miguez Bonino, Doing Theology in a Revolutionary Situation. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975, p, 21)."
Leonardo Boff takes this same point further by saying that Liberation Theology was born as an answer to the challenges of oppressed society. He believes that Latin America provides the context in which "action-reflection" can take place. He says that Latin America is today, a theologically privileged place for action and for reflection challenging problems faced there. He refers to Latin America as a continent of colonial Christianity. He adds that Liberation Theology was born of an experimental praxis ( Leonardo Boff, "Capitalism vs. Socialism: Crux Theologica," in Frontiers of Theology in Latin America, ed. Rosino Gibellini. Maryknoll" Orbis Books, 1979, p. 13)."
We have seen that while each Liberation theologian mentioned in this essay approaches the issue from a different angle, each one is working with the assumptions that:
1. Society in Latin America is divided along the line of social classes.
2. That division in turn results in the economic marginalization of the majority by a small minority who control the resources, and which in turn creates a situation of dependence and oppression.
3. That the economic, political, and social conditions constitute the most appropriate forum for biblical interpretation and theological reflection.
You, the reader are invited to comment on the assumptions and presuppositions with which Liberation theologians work. Please tell us what you think as we continue on this journey of evaluating Liberation Theology.
Grace and peace,
Dr. Juan A. Ayala-Carmona
What do Liberation theologians assume when constructing and developing their theology? It is a known fact that no one does theology in a vacuum. That is totally impossible. This should come as a surprise to no one, when we consider, among other things, that no such thing as pure "objectivity" exists. We are all biased. We are all culturally conditioned, and subsequently, everything we read or write will reflect that cultural conditioning. The authors of Liberation Theology write out of their cultural matrix and particular social location like all other theologians do.
I would caution against reading Liberation Theology with our own set of presuppositions. When we bring our own baggage of assumptions, there is a tendency to evaluate what we read in the light of those presuppositions. Our assumptions color the way we interpret what we read. In this essay, I will attempt to identify the assumptions that lead Liberation theologians to their conclusions.
Gustavo Gutierrez, the person who coined the term, "Theology of Liberation," works on the assumption that there is a struggle taking place between different social groups in Latin America. On the one hand, there are the oppressive groups, and on the other, the oppressed classes. Gutierrez's social analysis leads him to conclude that there is a class struggle taking place that divides society into different classes of people.
Gutierrez says that "Liberation expresses the aspirations of oppressed peoples and social classes, emphasizing the conflictual aspect of the economic, social, and political process which puts them at odds with wealthy nations and oppressive classes (Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1973, p. 36).
Hugo Assmann elaborates on the assumption expressed by Gutierrez by speaking of a "starting point" in Liberation Theology. That starting point, says Assmann, is "our objective situation as oppressed and dependent peoples, which is forcing itself more and more strongly on the consciousness of broad sections of Christian society in Latin America." In summarizing the development of Liberation Theology in Latin America, he points out that regardless of the course which Liberation Theology should take in the future, that its analytical content or central semantic axis should not be forgotten. Assmann says that "Any discussion of liberation must always go back to its essence: denouncing domination (Hugo Assmann, Practical Theology of Liberation. London: Search Press, 1975, p. 43-57)."
Ester and Mortimer Arias are pretty clear as to where they stand when they point out the depth of dehumanization that exists in Latin America. They refer to the situation in Latin America as "a situation of captivity." They share their reflections on the following words: "The last decade has been hard on our people south of the Rio Grande, in political frustrations, economic exploitation, social oppression, and military and police repression. We have been living in captivity in our own land. As in biblical times, a new theology has been born from our exile and out of our captivity-the theology of liberation. We have been rediscovering the God of the Exodus, the liberating God. Out of the depths of oppression and repression, we may have something to share with Christians of the North, something which the Lord has been saying to us throughout this dreadful experience ( Ester and Mortimer Arias, The Cry of My People. New York: Friendship Press, 1980, p. ix)."
Jose Miguez Bonino also makes allusion to this starting point in theological reflection. He states that the articulation of the obedience of Christians and the account of their faith "rest on an analysis and interpretation of the Latin American situation for which the transition from developmentalism to liberation is crucial." Bonino makes a direct link between action and reflection. He says: "Their action and their reflection are of such a nature that they make no sense outside of such an analysis. If it is wrong, they are proved wrong. An engaged faith and obedience cannot stand outside or above the world in which they are engaged. This is the reason why, in the effort to enter into this theology, we are forced to dwell on the understanding and analysis of the world in which it finds its locus (Jose Miguez Bonino, Doing Theology in a Revolutionary Situation. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975, p, 21)."
Leonardo Boff takes this same point further by saying that Liberation Theology was born as an answer to the challenges of oppressed society. He believes that Latin America provides the context in which "action-reflection" can take place. He says that Latin America is today, a theologically privileged place for action and for reflection challenging problems faced there. He refers to Latin America as a continent of colonial Christianity. He adds that Liberation Theology was born of an experimental praxis ( Leonardo Boff, "Capitalism vs. Socialism: Crux Theologica," in Frontiers of Theology in Latin America, ed. Rosino Gibellini. Maryknoll" Orbis Books, 1979, p. 13)."
We have seen that while each Liberation theologian mentioned in this essay approaches the issue from a different angle, each one is working with the assumptions that:
1. Society in Latin America is divided along the line of social classes.
2. That division in turn results in the economic marginalization of the majority by a small minority who control the resources, and which in turn creates a situation of dependence and oppression.
3. That the economic, political, and social conditions constitute the most appropriate forum for biblical interpretation and theological reflection.
You, the reader are invited to comment on the assumptions and presuppositions with which Liberation theologians work. Please tell us what you think as we continue on this journey of evaluating Liberation Theology.
Grace and peace,
Dr. Juan A. Ayala-Carmona
Tuesday, April 14, 2015
Liberation Theology: Historical Origins and Definition
There is a phrase in Spanish that I used frequently when teaching courses on Church History. The phrase came in the form of a question, "Como fue que comenzo el bochinche (How did the gossip begin)?" In order to give a working definition to Liberation Theology (hereafter known as LT), I will give a historical background to its origin and development.
1. Antecedents
The historical roots of Liberation Theology are to be found in the prophetic tradition of evangelists and missionaries from the earliest colonial days in Latin America-churchmen who questioned the type of presence adopted by the Church and the way indigenous peoples, blacks, mestizos, and the poor rural and urban masses were treated. The names of Bartolome de las Casas, Antonio de Montesinos, and others can stand for a whole host of religious personalities who have graced every century of our short history. They are the source of the type of social and ecclesial understanding that is emerging today (Clodovis and Leonardo Boff, Introducing Liberation Theology. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 1987, p. 66).
A. Social and Political Development
The populist governments of the 1950's and 1960's- especially in Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico-inspired nationalistic consciousness and significant industrial development in the shape of import substitution. This benefited the middle classes and urban proletariat, but threw huge sectors of the peasantry into deeper rural marginalization or sprawling urban shantytowns. Development proceeded along the lines of dependent capitalism, subsidiary to that of the rich nations and excluding the great majorities of national populations. This process led to the creation of strong popular movements seeking profound changes in the socio-economic structure of their countries. These movements, in turn provoked the rise of military dictatorships, which sought to safeguard or promote the interests of capital, associated with a high level of "national security" achieved through political repression and police control of all public demonstrations (Boff and Boff, p.67).
In this context, the socialist revolution in Cuba stood out as an alternative leading to the dissolution of dependence which was considered to be the main course of underdevelopment. Pockets of armed uprising appeared in many countries, aimed at overthrowing the ruling powers, and installing socialist-inspired regimes. There was a great stirring for change among the popular sections of society, a truly revolutionary atmosphere (Boff and Boff, p.67).
B. Church Development
Starting in the 1960's, a great wind of renewal blew through the churches. They began to take their social mission seriously: lay persons committed themselves to work among the poor, charismatic bishops and priests encouraged the calls for progress and national modernization. Various church organizations promoted understanding of and improvements in the living conditions of the people: movements such as Young Christian Students, Young Christian Workers, Young Christian Agriculturists, the Movement for Basic Education, groups that set up educational radio programs, and the first base ecclesial communities (Boff and Boff,p 67).
The work of these-generally middle-class-Christians sustained by the European theology of earthly realities, such as humanism, social personalism, progressive evolutionism, etc., and reflections on the social dimension of dogma. The Second Vatican Council then gave the best theoretical justification to activities developed under the signs of a theology of progress, of authentic secularization and human advancement (Boff and Boff, p.68).
The end of the 1960's, with the crisis of populism, and the developmental model, brought the advent of a vigorous current of sociological thinking, which unmasked the true causes of underdevelopment. Development and underdevelopment are two sides of the same coin. All nations of the Western world were engaged in a vast process of development; however, it was interdependent and unequal, organized in such a way that the benefits flowed to the already developed countries of the "center" and the disadvantages were meted out to the historically backward and underdeveloped countries of the "periphery." The poverty of Third World countries was the price to be paid for the First World to be able to enjoy the fruits of overabundance (Boff and Boff, p. 68).
In church circles by now accustomed to following developments in society and studies of its problems, this interpretation acted as a leaven, yielding a new vitality and critical spirit in pastoral circles. The relationship of dependence of the periphery on the center had to be replaced by a process of breaking away and liberation. So the basis of a theology of development was undermined and the theoretical foundations for a theology of liberation were laid. Its material foundations were provided only when popular movements and Christian groups came together in the struggle for social and political liberation, with the ultimate aim of complete and integral liberation. This was when the objective conditions for an authentic liberation theology came about (Boff and Boff, p.68).
C. Theological Development
The first theological reflections that were to lead to Liberation Theology had their origins in a context of dialogue between a church and a society in ferment, between Christian faith and the longings for transformation and liberation arising from the people. The Second Vatican Council produced a theological atmosphere characterized by great freedom and creativity. This gave Latin American theologians the courage to think for themselves about pastoral problems facing their countries. This process could be seen at work, among both Catholic and Protestant thinkers with the group known as Church and Society in Latin America (Iglesia y Sociedad en America Latina) taking a prominent part. There were frequent meetings between Catholic theologians such as Gustavo Gutierrez, Segundo Galilea, Juan Luis Segundo, and Protestant theologians such as Emilio Castro, Rubem Alves, and Jose Miguez Bonino. These meetings were focused on intensified reflections on the relationship between faith and poverty, the Gospel and social justice, and the like. In Brazil, between 1959 and 1964, the Catholic left produced a series of basic texts on the need for a Christian ideal of history, linked to popular action, with a methodology that foreshadowed that of Liberation Theology. They urged personal engagement in the world, backed up by studies of social and liberal sciences, and illustrated by the universal principles of Christianity (Boff and Boff, p.69).
At a meeting of Latin American theologians held in Petropolis (Rio de Janeiro) in March 1964, Gustavo Gutierrez described theology as "critical reflection on praxis." This line of thought was further developed at meetings in Havana, Bogota, and Cuernavaca in June and July 1965. Many other meetings were held as part of the preparatory for the Medellin conference of 1068; these acted as laboratories for a theology worked out on the basis of pastoral concerns and committed Christian action. Lectures given by Gustavo Gutierrez in Montreal in 1967 and at Chimbote in Peru on the poverty of the Third World and the challenge it posed to the development of a pastoral strategy of liberation were a further powerful impetus toward a theology of liberation. Its outlines were first put forward at the theological congress at Cartigny, Switzerland, in 1969: "Toward a Theology of Liberation" (Boff and Boff, 69).
The first Catholic congresses devoted to Liberation Theology were held in Bogota in March 1970 and July 1971. On the Protestant side, Church and Society organized something similar in Buenos Aires the same years (Boff and Boff, p.70).
Finally, in December 1971, Gustavo Gutierrez published his seminal work, Teologia de la Liberacion. In May, Hugo Assmann had conducted a symposium, "Oppression-Liberation: The Challenge to Christians," in Montevideo. Leonardo Boff had published a series of articles under the title "Jesus Cristo Libertador." The door was opened for the development of a theology from the periphery dealing with the concerns of this periphery, concerns that presented and still present an immense challenge to the evangelizing mission of the Church (Boff and Boff, p. 70).
2. Liberation Theology Defined
We might ask, "What is Liberation Theology?' I can best answer that question by stating that there is no one "Liberation Theology." By this I mean that LT is not a single school of thought. Rosino Gibellini says: "Liberation Theology is a richly variegated affair, in both its motifs and in the personalities involved (Rosino Gibellini, ed. Frontiers of Theology in Latin America. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1979, p.x). As I point out in my doctoral dissertation, one will find diversity of thinking and methodology in Liberation Theology ( Juan A. Carmona. The Liberation of Puerto Rico: A Theological Perspective. Rochester: Colgate Rochester Divinity School, 1982, p. 36). I would venture to say that there is as much diversity in LT as there is in European theology. I would qualify that by saying that in spite of the diversity which may exist in LT, there seems to be an underlying unity in this trend of thought (Carmona, p. 36).
Gustavo Gutierrez says: "The theology of liberation offers us not so much a new theme for reflection as a new way to do theology. Theology as critical reflection on historical praxis is a liberating theology, a theology of the liberating transformation of the history of humankind-gathered into ecclesia- which openly confesses Christ. This is a theology which does not stop reflecting on the world, but rather tries to be a part of the process through which the world is transformed. It is a theology which is open-in the protest against trampled human dignity, in the struggle against the plunder of the vast majority of people, in liberating love, and in the building of a new, just, and fraternal society-to the gift of the kingdom of God (Gustavo Gutierrez. A Theology of Liberation. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1973, p. x). Here, Gutierrez is making a direct link between theology as reflection and the historical process of transformation. Liberation Theology, according to Gutierrez, would be the application of the study about God to the world of concrete historical happenings. As a critical reflection, Liberation Theology leads to self-reflection and to a critique of both church and society (Carmona, p. 37).
Hugo Assmann states: Theology is an understanding of the faith and a re-reading of the Word as it is lived in the Christian community. More than anything, it has to do with the communication of faith and proclamation of the good news, which is that the Father loves all humans. To evangelize is to witness to that love; to say that it has been reviewed to us was made flesh in Christ ( Hugo Assmann, Practical Theology of Liberation. London: Search Press, 1975, p.5).
I would rephrase Assmann's statement by saying that LT is an understanding of the faith and a re-reading of the Word as it is lived in Latin America. Why do we see this type of theological reflection taking place in Latin America today? Assmann answers, This theological reflection is impelled by a desire to speak the Word of the Lord to all persons from the position of solidarity (Assmann, p.6). In Assmann's view, LT is an attempt to bring the Word of God to the world. This proclamation would be carried out from the standpoint of taking sides with the poor and oppressed of this world. Assmann is careful to point out that the type of Christian experience determines the from that theology takes at different moments in history. Nevertheless, as he describes it, theology is a "task for all times (Assmann, p.5)."
Ester and Mortimer Arias describe Liberation Theology as "the result of a new reading of the Scriptures in a particular historical situation. The experience of the Exodus became the key to a new perception of the Gospel ( Ester and Mortimer Arias, The Cry of My People, New York: Friendship Press, 1980, p. 127). Taking the Exodus story as a model for liberation, LT is a participation in that story. To the Ariases, LT is not a mere retelling of the past, but rather the incorporation of past events into present history (Carmona, p. 38).
Jose Miguez Bonino defines LT as "a question addressed to the Christian obedience of our brothers and sisters in Christ elsewhere-a question , though, that only they can answer (Jose Miguez Bonino, Doing Theology in a Revolutionary Situation, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975, p.xx)."
As we have seen, Liberation Theology is not confined or restricted to one definition . There are a variety of definitions, depending on the angle that each LT theologian is coming from, and the approach that each one uses to apply LT to reality.
I invite you, the reader, to review this essay, and make comments of your own. Your contributions are important and valuable.
Grace and peace,
Dr. Juan A. Ayala-Carmona
1. Antecedents
The historical roots of Liberation Theology are to be found in the prophetic tradition of evangelists and missionaries from the earliest colonial days in Latin America-churchmen who questioned the type of presence adopted by the Church and the way indigenous peoples, blacks, mestizos, and the poor rural and urban masses were treated. The names of Bartolome de las Casas, Antonio de Montesinos, and others can stand for a whole host of religious personalities who have graced every century of our short history. They are the source of the type of social and ecclesial understanding that is emerging today (Clodovis and Leonardo Boff, Introducing Liberation Theology. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 1987, p. 66).
A. Social and Political Development
The populist governments of the 1950's and 1960's- especially in Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico-inspired nationalistic consciousness and significant industrial development in the shape of import substitution. This benefited the middle classes and urban proletariat, but threw huge sectors of the peasantry into deeper rural marginalization or sprawling urban shantytowns. Development proceeded along the lines of dependent capitalism, subsidiary to that of the rich nations and excluding the great majorities of national populations. This process led to the creation of strong popular movements seeking profound changes in the socio-economic structure of their countries. These movements, in turn provoked the rise of military dictatorships, which sought to safeguard or promote the interests of capital, associated with a high level of "national security" achieved through political repression and police control of all public demonstrations (Boff and Boff, p.67).
In this context, the socialist revolution in Cuba stood out as an alternative leading to the dissolution of dependence which was considered to be the main course of underdevelopment. Pockets of armed uprising appeared in many countries, aimed at overthrowing the ruling powers, and installing socialist-inspired regimes. There was a great stirring for change among the popular sections of society, a truly revolutionary atmosphere (Boff and Boff, p.67).
B. Church Development
Starting in the 1960's, a great wind of renewal blew through the churches. They began to take their social mission seriously: lay persons committed themselves to work among the poor, charismatic bishops and priests encouraged the calls for progress and national modernization. Various church organizations promoted understanding of and improvements in the living conditions of the people: movements such as Young Christian Students, Young Christian Workers, Young Christian Agriculturists, the Movement for Basic Education, groups that set up educational radio programs, and the first base ecclesial communities (Boff and Boff,p 67).
The work of these-generally middle-class-Christians sustained by the European theology of earthly realities, such as humanism, social personalism, progressive evolutionism, etc., and reflections on the social dimension of dogma. The Second Vatican Council then gave the best theoretical justification to activities developed under the signs of a theology of progress, of authentic secularization and human advancement (Boff and Boff, p.68).
The end of the 1960's, with the crisis of populism, and the developmental model, brought the advent of a vigorous current of sociological thinking, which unmasked the true causes of underdevelopment. Development and underdevelopment are two sides of the same coin. All nations of the Western world were engaged in a vast process of development; however, it was interdependent and unequal, organized in such a way that the benefits flowed to the already developed countries of the "center" and the disadvantages were meted out to the historically backward and underdeveloped countries of the "periphery." The poverty of Third World countries was the price to be paid for the First World to be able to enjoy the fruits of overabundance (Boff and Boff, p. 68).
In church circles by now accustomed to following developments in society and studies of its problems, this interpretation acted as a leaven, yielding a new vitality and critical spirit in pastoral circles. The relationship of dependence of the periphery on the center had to be replaced by a process of breaking away and liberation. So the basis of a theology of development was undermined and the theoretical foundations for a theology of liberation were laid. Its material foundations were provided only when popular movements and Christian groups came together in the struggle for social and political liberation, with the ultimate aim of complete and integral liberation. This was when the objective conditions for an authentic liberation theology came about (Boff and Boff, p.68).
C. Theological Development
The first theological reflections that were to lead to Liberation Theology had their origins in a context of dialogue between a church and a society in ferment, between Christian faith and the longings for transformation and liberation arising from the people. The Second Vatican Council produced a theological atmosphere characterized by great freedom and creativity. This gave Latin American theologians the courage to think for themselves about pastoral problems facing their countries. This process could be seen at work, among both Catholic and Protestant thinkers with the group known as Church and Society in Latin America (Iglesia y Sociedad en America Latina) taking a prominent part. There were frequent meetings between Catholic theologians such as Gustavo Gutierrez, Segundo Galilea, Juan Luis Segundo, and Protestant theologians such as Emilio Castro, Rubem Alves, and Jose Miguez Bonino. These meetings were focused on intensified reflections on the relationship between faith and poverty, the Gospel and social justice, and the like. In Brazil, between 1959 and 1964, the Catholic left produced a series of basic texts on the need for a Christian ideal of history, linked to popular action, with a methodology that foreshadowed that of Liberation Theology. They urged personal engagement in the world, backed up by studies of social and liberal sciences, and illustrated by the universal principles of Christianity (Boff and Boff, p.69).
At a meeting of Latin American theologians held in Petropolis (Rio de Janeiro) in March 1964, Gustavo Gutierrez described theology as "critical reflection on praxis." This line of thought was further developed at meetings in Havana, Bogota, and Cuernavaca in June and July 1965. Many other meetings were held as part of the preparatory for the Medellin conference of 1068; these acted as laboratories for a theology worked out on the basis of pastoral concerns and committed Christian action. Lectures given by Gustavo Gutierrez in Montreal in 1967 and at Chimbote in Peru on the poverty of the Third World and the challenge it posed to the development of a pastoral strategy of liberation were a further powerful impetus toward a theology of liberation. Its outlines were first put forward at the theological congress at Cartigny, Switzerland, in 1969: "Toward a Theology of Liberation" (Boff and Boff, 69).
The first Catholic congresses devoted to Liberation Theology were held in Bogota in March 1970 and July 1971. On the Protestant side, Church and Society organized something similar in Buenos Aires the same years (Boff and Boff, p.70).
Finally, in December 1971, Gustavo Gutierrez published his seminal work, Teologia de la Liberacion. In May, Hugo Assmann had conducted a symposium, "Oppression-Liberation: The Challenge to Christians," in Montevideo. Leonardo Boff had published a series of articles under the title "Jesus Cristo Libertador." The door was opened for the development of a theology from the periphery dealing with the concerns of this periphery, concerns that presented and still present an immense challenge to the evangelizing mission of the Church (Boff and Boff, p. 70).
2. Liberation Theology Defined
We might ask, "What is Liberation Theology?' I can best answer that question by stating that there is no one "Liberation Theology." By this I mean that LT is not a single school of thought. Rosino Gibellini says: "Liberation Theology is a richly variegated affair, in both its motifs and in the personalities involved (Rosino Gibellini, ed. Frontiers of Theology in Latin America. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1979, p.x). As I point out in my doctoral dissertation, one will find diversity of thinking and methodology in Liberation Theology ( Juan A. Carmona. The Liberation of Puerto Rico: A Theological Perspective. Rochester: Colgate Rochester Divinity School, 1982, p. 36). I would venture to say that there is as much diversity in LT as there is in European theology. I would qualify that by saying that in spite of the diversity which may exist in LT, there seems to be an underlying unity in this trend of thought (Carmona, p. 36).
Gustavo Gutierrez says: "The theology of liberation offers us not so much a new theme for reflection as a new way to do theology. Theology as critical reflection on historical praxis is a liberating theology, a theology of the liberating transformation of the history of humankind-gathered into ecclesia- which openly confesses Christ. This is a theology which does not stop reflecting on the world, but rather tries to be a part of the process through which the world is transformed. It is a theology which is open-in the protest against trampled human dignity, in the struggle against the plunder of the vast majority of people, in liberating love, and in the building of a new, just, and fraternal society-to the gift of the kingdom of God (Gustavo Gutierrez. A Theology of Liberation. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1973, p. x). Here, Gutierrez is making a direct link between theology as reflection and the historical process of transformation. Liberation Theology, according to Gutierrez, would be the application of the study about God to the world of concrete historical happenings. As a critical reflection, Liberation Theology leads to self-reflection and to a critique of both church and society (Carmona, p. 37).
Hugo Assmann states: Theology is an understanding of the faith and a re-reading of the Word as it is lived in the Christian community. More than anything, it has to do with the communication of faith and proclamation of the good news, which is that the Father loves all humans. To evangelize is to witness to that love; to say that it has been reviewed to us was made flesh in Christ ( Hugo Assmann, Practical Theology of Liberation. London: Search Press, 1975, p.5).
I would rephrase Assmann's statement by saying that LT is an understanding of the faith and a re-reading of the Word as it is lived in Latin America. Why do we see this type of theological reflection taking place in Latin America today? Assmann answers, This theological reflection is impelled by a desire to speak the Word of the Lord to all persons from the position of solidarity (Assmann, p.6). In Assmann's view, LT is an attempt to bring the Word of God to the world. This proclamation would be carried out from the standpoint of taking sides with the poor and oppressed of this world. Assmann is careful to point out that the type of Christian experience determines the from that theology takes at different moments in history. Nevertheless, as he describes it, theology is a "task for all times (Assmann, p.5)."
Ester and Mortimer Arias describe Liberation Theology as "the result of a new reading of the Scriptures in a particular historical situation. The experience of the Exodus became the key to a new perception of the Gospel ( Ester and Mortimer Arias, The Cry of My People, New York: Friendship Press, 1980, p. 127). Taking the Exodus story as a model for liberation, LT is a participation in that story. To the Ariases, LT is not a mere retelling of the past, but rather the incorporation of past events into present history (Carmona, p. 38).
Jose Miguez Bonino defines LT as "a question addressed to the Christian obedience of our brothers and sisters in Christ elsewhere-a question , though, that only they can answer (Jose Miguez Bonino, Doing Theology in a Revolutionary Situation, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975, p.xx)."
As we have seen, Liberation Theology is not confined or restricted to one definition . There are a variety of definitions, depending on the angle that each LT theologian is coming from, and the approach that each one uses to apply LT to reality.
I invite you, the reader, to review this essay, and make comments of your own. Your contributions are important and valuable.
Grace and peace,
Dr. Juan A. Ayala-Carmona
Monday, April 13, 2015
Liberation Theology: An Intermediate Consideration
This will not be one of the five essays that I will be writing on Liberation Theology. However, the focus of it will have relevance for Liberation Theology. The issues that I will be raising apply to Liberation Theology as they do to all other streams of theological thought. I admit that the issues raised in this intermediate essay stem from the challenges of Liberation Theology. Nevertheless, these challenges carry over into all theologies, and for that matter, into all aspects of the theological enterprise. One cannot engage in theological discourse relative to the validity of any theological current without taking into consideration the following questions:
1. At what point in history did a particular theology come into existence?
2. Who were the key players in the development of that theology?
3. What was the impact of the cultural-social milieu on the contents of that theology and vice-versa?
4. What type of economic, political, and social structures does that particular theology legitimize and lend its support to?
5. Does that particular theology claim and pretend to be universally valid or does it recognize its own particular application and limitations?
I take the opportunity to challenge you, the reader, to ponder on these questions, and, if possible to get a "head start" by reading any literature in the field of Liberation Theology in preparation for the next four essays.
Grace and peace,
Dr. Juan A. Ayala-Carmona
1. At what point in history did a particular theology come into existence?
2. Who were the key players in the development of that theology?
3. What was the impact of the cultural-social milieu on the contents of that theology and vice-versa?
4. What type of economic, political, and social structures does that particular theology legitimize and lend its support to?
5. Does that particular theology claim and pretend to be universally valid or does it recognize its own particular application and limitations?
I take the opportunity to challenge you, the reader, to ponder on these questions, and, if possible to get a "head start" by reading any literature in the field of Liberation Theology in preparation for the next four essays.
Grace and peace,
Dr. Juan A. Ayala-Carmona
Saturday, April 11, 2015
Liberation Theoogy: An Overview
This will be the first in a series of five essays focusing on Liberation Theology. The term "Liberation Theology" has become familiar to many people for better or for worse. The unfortunate thing is that even many, if not most of the people who have heard the term, or even about the theology itself, have a negative view of it without knowing anything or very little about it. Many people base their views and opinions about Liberation Theology on what they have heard others say about it. In other words, their evaluations and opinions about Liberation Theology are based on rumors that they have heard either on the streets, in the market-place, or in the barber shop. People tend to opine without bothering to read the literature in the field. Their opinions and perspectives about Liberation Theology are based on second-hand information which is usually not accurate. This second-hand information usually seeks to demonize and discredit Liberation Theology. Among the reasons that are given to defame and discredit Liberation Theology are the following:
1. It is a theology which emerged within the confines of the Roman Catholic Church. Those who reject Liberation Theology on that basis tend to assume and belief that the entirety of Roman Catholic theology is apostate, false, and heretical. According to that point of view, since Roman Catholicism is a falsification of Christianity, any doctrinal declaration that comes out of the mouth of Catholics must be considered false from the onset. To that assumption, I would respond as follows:
Liberation Theology, in the strictest sense of the word, did not emerge out of Roman Catholicism. Liberation Theology began during the time that the Hebrew people were slaves in Egypt. Yahweh God spoke to Moses and said to him, " I have heard the cry, the agony, and the misery of my people, and I am descending to liberate them." The knowledge of God on the part of the Hebrew people would emerge out of God's liberating acts in history, both during the period of bondage in
Egypt, and subsequently during the Exile in Babylon. The theology of the Hebrew/Jewish people did not originate in the ivory towers of academic institutions, nor in the comfort of air-conditioned spaces. Their theology was not a system of mere philosophical speculation, nor "heady thinking," nor "mental gymnastics," nor what African American theologian James Cone would call "intellectual masturbation." The theology of the Hebrew/Jewish people was rooted in their historical condition of bondage and oppression and in God's intervention to liberate them from those conditions.
I would add that this writer does not subscribe to the belief that the entirety of Roman Catholic theology is false. There are aspects of Catholic theology that I do not agree with, just as there are aspects of Protestant/Evangelical theology that I am not perfectly comfortable with. However, to disagree with certain parts of a church's doctrines should not lead us to reject the entirety of their theological system. There is a combination of truth and error in every church. No one church can claim to have it "all together." No one church can claim or pretend to have a monopoly on divine truth.
I would add that though a Catholic priest (Father Gustavo Gutierrez) was the first to coin the term "Liberation Theology," and even though Liberation Theology as a modern way of thinking started in the Catholic Church, there are Protestant ministers and theologians who have adopted Liberation Theology as a paradigm for doing both ministry and theology. Names like Ester and Mortimer Arias, and Jose Miguez Bonino are Protestant leaders, amongst others, whose names will appear in these essays. This writer (yours truly) himself, wrote his doctoral dissertation on Liberation Theology in 1982 relative to the political status of Puerto Rico, and has also incorporated Liberation Theology in his recently completed book "The Puerto Rican Diaspora: A Model Theology." I have also written a series of articles on theology from a prison standpoint utilizing Liberation Theology as a means of analyzing the conditions of incarceration from a theological standpoint.
2. Liberation Theology does not conform to the standards of Euro-American theology. Any system of thought which does not conform to Euro-American thinking is inferior and invalid. After all, Euro-American thinking is universally valid, in all times and in all places. Euro-American thinking should be "normative" for all churches and theological institutions. Euro-American thinking should prevail in other areas of life as well, but especially to any discourse about God. To that arrogant, imperialistic, pompous-ass, presumptuous, and racist position, this Afro-Puerto Rican theologian says "Pure, absolute, and unadulterated bullshit." That attitude is reflective of the notion that anything that is white is superior. As will be discovered, Liberation Theology challenges the notion that Euro-American theology is superior to all others. It will soon become apparent, that Euro-American theology serves to legitimize the white-power structure on a global basis. Liberation Theology takes the Euro-American -centered scholarship out of its comfort zone.
3. Liberation Theology is "Marxist, revolutionary, and socialist in disguise." This notion rests on false assumptions. While some Liberation theologians make use of Marxist socialist analysis, the basic root of Liberation Theology is the Gospel of Jesus the Christ, which emphasizes equality and justice for all humankind.
4. Liberation Theology goes against "what the Bible says." Any person who is acquainted and familiar with the literature of Liberation Theology will have to admit that this statement is naïve at best and totally dishonest at worst. Liberation Theology seeks to take "what the Bible says," and make it relevant to the situation of oppressed social groups and nations. When one reads any type of written documentation in Liberation Theology, one will discover, that Liberation Theology seeks to make an honest restatement and application of the Christian faith and message in today's world.
The essays to follow on Liberation Theology will focus on the following topics:
The Definition of Liberation Theology
The Assumptions of Liberation theologians
The Diversity in Liberation Theology
The Role of Scripture, History, and Praxis in Liberation Theology.
In the meantime, you, the reader, are invited and encouraged to do some research of your own on Liberation Theology. Avoid basing yourself on what other writers say about Liberation Theology, and read books and other written material by Liberation authors for yourself. In this manner, you view of Liberation Theology will be less biased.
I invite you to comment on this introductory essay, as well as on subsequent essays. Your contributions will be important to this discourse.
Grace and peace,
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Ayala-Carmona
1. It is a theology which emerged within the confines of the Roman Catholic Church. Those who reject Liberation Theology on that basis tend to assume and belief that the entirety of Roman Catholic theology is apostate, false, and heretical. According to that point of view, since Roman Catholicism is a falsification of Christianity, any doctrinal declaration that comes out of the mouth of Catholics must be considered false from the onset. To that assumption, I would respond as follows:
Liberation Theology, in the strictest sense of the word, did not emerge out of Roman Catholicism. Liberation Theology began during the time that the Hebrew people were slaves in Egypt. Yahweh God spoke to Moses and said to him, " I have heard the cry, the agony, and the misery of my people, and I am descending to liberate them." The knowledge of God on the part of the Hebrew people would emerge out of God's liberating acts in history, both during the period of bondage in
Egypt, and subsequently during the Exile in Babylon. The theology of the Hebrew/Jewish people did not originate in the ivory towers of academic institutions, nor in the comfort of air-conditioned spaces. Their theology was not a system of mere philosophical speculation, nor "heady thinking," nor "mental gymnastics," nor what African American theologian James Cone would call "intellectual masturbation." The theology of the Hebrew/Jewish people was rooted in their historical condition of bondage and oppression and in God's intervention to liberate them from those conditions.
I would add that this writer does not subscribe to the belief that the entirety of Roman Catholic theology is false. There are aspects of Catholic theology that I do not agree with, just as there are aspects of Protestant/Evangelical theology that I am not perfectly comfortable with. However, to disagree with certain parts of a church's doctrines should not lead us to reject the entirety of their theological system. There is a combination of truth and error in every church. No one church can claim to have it "all together." No one church can claim or pretend to have a monopoly on divine truth.
I would add that though a Catholic priest (Father Gustavo Gutierrez) was the first to coin the term "Liberation Theology," and even though Liberation Theology as a modern way of thinking started in the Catholic Church, there are Protestant ministers and theologians who have adopted Liberation Theology as a paradigm for doing both ministry and theology. Names like Ester and Mortimer Arias, and Jose Miguez Bonino are Protestant leaders, amongst others, whose names will appear in these essays. This writer (yours truly) himself, wrote his doctoral dissertation on Liberation Theology in 1982 relative to the political status of Puerto Rico, and has also incorporated Liberation Theology in his recently completed book "The Puerto Rican Diaspora: A Model Theology." I have also written a series of articles on theology from a prison standpoint utilizing Liberation Theology as a means of analyzing the conditions of incarceration from a theological standpoint.
2. Liberation Theology does not conform to the standards of Euro-American theology. Any system of thought which does not conform to Euro-American thinking is inferior and invalid. After all, Euro-American thinking is universally valid, in all times and in all places. Euro-American thinking should be "normative" for all churches and theological institutions. Euro-American thinking should prevail in other areas of life as well, but especially to any discourse about God. To that arrogant, imperialistic, pompous-ass, presumptuous, and racist position, this Afro-Puerto Rican theologian says "Pure, absolute, and unadulterated bullshit." That attitude is reflective of the notion that anything that is white is superior. As will be discovered, Liberation Theology challenges the notion that Euro-American theology is superior to all others. It will soon become apparent, that Euro-American theology serves to legitimize the white-power structure on a global basis. Liberation Theology takes the Euro-American -centered scholarship out of its comfort zone.
3. Liberation Theology is "Marxist, revolutionary, and socialist in disguise." This notion rests on false assumptions. While some Liberation theologians make use of Marxist socialist analysis, the basic root of Liberation Theology is the Gospel of Jesus the Christ, which emphasizes equality and justice for all humankind.
4. Liberation Theology goes against "what the Bible says." Any person who is acquainted and familiar with the literature of Liberation Theology will have to admit that this statement is naïve at best and totally dishonest at worst. Liberation Theology seeks to take "what the Bible says," and make it relevant to the situation of oppressed social groups and nations. When one reads any type of written documentation in Liberation Theology, one will discover, that Liberation Theology seeks to make an honest restatement and application of the Christian faith and message in today's world.
The essays to follow on Liberation Theology will focus on the following topics:
The Definition of Liberation Theology
The Assumptions of Liberation theologians
The Diversity in Liberation Theology
The Role of Scripture, History, and Praxis in Liberation Theology.
In the meantime, you, the reader, are invited and encouraged to do some research of your own on Liberation Theology. Avoid basing yourself on what other writers say about Liberation Theology, and read books and other written material by Liberation authors for yourself. In this manner, you view of Liberation Theology will be less biased.
I invite you to comment on this introductory essay, as well as on subsequent essays. Your contributions will be important to this discourse.
Grace and peace,
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Ayala-Carmona
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)