Just Exactly What is Liberation Theology?

                                                    Just Exactly is Liberation Theology?

                                                    Dr. Juan A. Carmona

                                                    Visiting Professor of Theology

                                                    Tainan Theological College and Seminary


There are many people who have heard the term "Liberation Theology." They react to the term in different ways.  Some will completely ignore it because they have no interest whatsoever in theological issues.  To them, theology is a hobby for those who have such interests, or at the very least, something which has no relevance to life, at least not their life.

Then there are those who judge Liberation Theology on the basis of hearsay.  Their view of Liberation Theology is based on what they have heard said by other people who have no direct familiarity with the subject. Their view, in essence, is based on second-hand information.  In some cases, they will base their view of Liberation Theology on what they have read, not in the field itself, but rather on writings of those, who again, have no direct knowledge of or engagement with Liberation Theology.

Then there are others who will react viscerally to the rumor that Liberation Theology is a "Marxist infiltration of the Church, and of classical Christian theology."  Because Liberation Theology makes use of critical and social analysis, they figure that it must be Marxist-based, or at the very least, Marxist inspired.

The purpose of this essay is to debunk these myths and to put Liberation Theology into proper perspective. The essays are written on the basis of the writer's familiarity with the basic texts of Liberation Theology, and also his experience as a lecturer at various schools of theology, as well as his presently serving as Visiting Professor of Theology at the Tainan Theological College and Seminary in Tainan City, Taiwan.

In a very general sense, Liberation Theology begins with the doctrines of Creation, the Fall, and Redemption. Liberation Theology takes seriously the divine initiative in all of these events.  It affirms God as the Creator of all things, and the Liberator of humankind from the consequences of the Fall, i.e. slavery to sin, both individual and systemic.

In that same vein, Liberation Theology focuses on God's acts of liberation from the physical slavery of the Hebrew people in Egypt.  Yahweh God speaks to Moses and says to him "I have heard the cry of my people."  God identifies with the affliction, misery, and suffering of the Hebrews.  God conveys to Moses that he is being called to initiate the process of dismantling the structures of slavery, and leading the people out of what at one time was the house of abundance, and then became the house of bondage.

The failure to acknowledge and recognize the biblical roots of Liberation Theology will result in a gross misunderstanding of what it is, and cause many to demonize it, and even distort not only its contents but its thrust. In addition, if one fails to recognize the biblical roots of Liberation Theology, then the tendency will be to either think of it as one school of theological thought among others, and also to equate it with secular ideologies and movements such as Marxism and political and social revolution.  It will also result in placing Liberation Theology within the framework of extreme humanism, which tends to "write off" divine initiative and overemphasize human achievement.

The task of defining Liberation Theology is a difficult and complex one.  There is no one "theology of liberation."  One will find diversity of thinking and methodology in Liberation Theology.  It is not one particular way of thinking.  There is as much diversity in Liberation Theology as there is in classical Christian theology.  Nevertheless, there is an underlying unity in Liberation Theology's trend of thinking.

As previously pointed out, Liberation Theology is not monolithic by any stretch of the imagination. There are differences as to motifs and prisms through which Liberation theologians engage in social analysis.  The one thing that most, if not all Liberation Theologians have in common, is that they believe that oppression and suffering are the starting points for biblical interpretation and theological reflection.  While historically speaking, the Scriptures and the traditions have been seen as sources which shed light on the human political and social situation, Liberation Theology does just the opposite, i.e. departs from the reality of the human condition in order to derive an understanding of the biblical message and of the traditions.  While that approach brings the risk of eisegeis (reading into biblical text), it also brings the advantage and the excitement of making the text and the tradition come alive.  It allows for there to be interaction between the the text and the traditions on the one hand, and on the other hand, the current situation.

Subsequent essays will focus on the historical development of Liberation Theology in Latin America, and the major assumptions and presuppositions on the part of Liberation Theologians.

This essay is submitted in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen

Dr. Juan A. Carmona

For Further Reading:

Hugo Assmann, Practical Theology of Liberation. London: Search Press, 1975

Ester and Mortimer Arias, The Cry of My People.  New York: Friendship Press, 1980

Leonardo Boff, Teologia desde el Cautiverio.  Bogota: Indo-American Press Service, 1975

Jose Miguez Bonino, Doing Theology in a Revolutionary Situation. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975

Juan Luis Segundo, "Capitalism Versus Socialism: Crux Theologica," in Frontiers of Theology in Latin America, ed. Rosino Gibellini. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1979.

A Message to the Church in the U.S.A.

The title of this essay is a very tricky one, almost leading the readers to believe that there is such an entity as "The American Church."  Perhaps, a better title would have been "A Message to the Churches in the U.S.A." I say this in view of the fact that obviously, Christianity in America, just like Christianity elsewhere, is not monolithic.  There are various churches and groups of churches (denominations), each claiming to be "the true Church of Christ," or at the very least, operating under the notion that a particular group is "the truest Church of Christ;" projecting the notion that this group has more of divine truth in its theology and way of doing mission in the world.

This writer (yours truly) believes that there are certain challenges for the Church in the U.S.A. that are not necessarily unique to its geographical location, but nonetheless, extremely relevant to its life and mission. In 2017, the Church in the U.S.A. is faced with challenges that it, indeed, has had all along throughout history, but that now more than ever, it has to come to serious grips with.

The first challenge that we as Christians have to deal with is that of identity.  What does it mean to be the Church of Jesus Christ in the U.S.A. in 2017 and for the rest of the 21st century?  Given the number of theological expressions that identify each church or denomination, and given the fact that we live and operate in an environment in which is not only culturally, but also religiously diverse, the Church has to come together as one to identify its identity.  The struggle for unity in the midst of diversity is an ongoing one.  Christians seem to agree that "Christ is Lord," but yet, go about expressing the concept of Christ's lordship in different ways, ranging from preaching a Gospel that is "heaven-bound" to proclaiming a message that emphasizes social activism in the present age as a sign of the Reign of God in Christ.

The second challenge is to determine how we can co-exist peacefully with people of non-Christian traditions. In the Middle Ages, the concept of the Lordship of Christ was conflated with the concept of the authority of the Church, resulting in Christendom vs. Christianity.  In Christendom, there was the notion that since Christ is Lord of all, that His Church had the right to lord it over and rule society. In 2017, and especially in the U.S.A., the Church would definitely face legitimate resistance on the part of both non-Christian faith groups ad well as on the part of agnostics and atheists.   If under the present Presidential administration of Donald Trump, governmental positions were awarded exclusively to people with "Christian values," there would definitely be a moral and righteous resistance on the part of these non-Christian groups.

The third challenge would be for the Church in the U.S.A. to reevaluate and rethink its concept of dealing with issues of social justice.  What positions can and should the Church in the U.S.A. take on issues such as immigration, race relations, national health care, our LGBT sisters and brothers, the path to citizenship, etc.?
Different churches speak with different voices to these issues.  It does not suffice to quote Scripture as a way of attempting to solve the myriad issues that affect us in society.  It would be more important, I believe, for the Church to seek to construct a biblical hermeneutic (principle of interpretation) that speaks clearly and unequivocally to the issues in front of us.

Finally, the Church has to ask, how best to resist those tendencies in society that clearly go against the biblical affirmation of human worth and also against the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This last challenge might be considered one among many the previously mentioned challenges.  In reality, it is the foundation for dealing with  the specifics clearly mentioned.

I end by saying that the days ahead are both challenging and critical.  The road is rough, but we cannot allow the load to lay us down.  There is a family that we are called to nurture and take care of, i.e. God's creation, which includes not only human beings, but also animals, birds, plants, and seeds and en fin, the environment in its totality.

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

Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Visiting Professor of Theology, Tainan Theological College and Seminary

A Resistance-Driven Theology

There are two phrases that are often heard.  One of them is "don't talk about either politics or religion. They are very sensitive topics."  The other one is, "Politics and religion don't mix."  This latter one is often time affirmed by Christians who say that "the Gospel has nothing to do with politics."  This writer, humbly and respectfully, begs to differ.  For starters, I would refer the reader to the book "The Politics of Jesus," by John Yoder.  They will discover by reading not only Yoder's book, but the Gospel accounts in the New Testament, that the Gospel is very political in both its contents and thrust.  The "politics" in the Gospel accounts speak about the "politics" of the reign of God in Christ.  In addition to the political theology that we find in the New Testament, there are several theology books that were written in the context of politics.  One of them was "The Cost of Discipleship" by Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a pastor in Hitler's Germany.  Pastor Bonhoeffer was involved in the resistance against Hitler, and eventually killed just before Hitler's government fell and surrendered to the Allies who had intervened to put a stop to the atrocities taking place in Germany and other places in Europe by Hitler's Third Reich.  Bonhoeffer's theology was not a theology detached from the every day world.  It was not a theology produced in the comfort of an air-conditioned office isolated from society.  It was neither a theology of accommodation, or a theology of complicity.  It was not a theology that sanctioned the status quo, either directly or by default.  It was a theology of confrontation and resistance. It was a theology of outright denunciation, making it a prophetic theology.  Now, let us move "fast forward" to the United States in 2017.  We are in the second month of the year, approximately three months after Donald Trump was "democratically (yeah right!)" elected as President of the United States.  Well, the so-called "democracy" of our nation is being quickly undermined by the revival of a Nazi-type leader and government.  Slowly but surely, this new Administration is doing it best to undermine and even take away basic human rights.  I will qualify everything that I am saying by noting that the U.S.A. is and has been a white-supremacist nation-state all along.  By that I do not mean that every Caucasian is a member of the Ku Klux Klan or similar white supremacist group.  Nor do I mean that every Caucasian favors hate crimes or oppression against non-Caucasians.  There are many, many integral and justice-loving Caucasians in our country, and I know many of them.  Many, in fact, our very close friends of mine.  Many have been friends, and almost like family to me since my childhood.  Many are committed to the struggle for justice on all levels, not only racial, but class and gender as well.  Many are sincerely driven by their faith as a mechanism of social justice.  I will even go as far as saying that there have been many instances where I would have more confidence in a Caucasian than I would with a fellow African-American or Latino/a person who is psychologically "colonized."  What I mean by a "white supremacist nation-state," is that ours is an economic, political, and social system where non-Caucasians as a group are subservient to the rule and government by Caucasians.  Non-Caucasians are, in effect, "second-class citizens," not by nature, but by default.  The system, due to colonization and imperialism, by Great Britain and other European countries is a white-dominated system in terms of economics and politics.  The new Presidential administration, led by Donald Trump, is simply solidifying what has been in place all along, i.e white supremacy. Prior to his ascendance to the office of POTUS, white supremacy was more subtle, and in fact, almost unrecognizable by many.  Now, what we are experiencing is the construction of an outright white-supremacist state.  Many people in the U.S.A of all ethnic groups and races do not realize this, and in fact, are being blindly swallowed up in the euphoric rhetoric that has swept up many uninformed and emotionally-driven citizens.  Facts about the reality of what we are facing are being published constantly, and yet people who supported Trump become defensive and "uptight" when confronted by these facts. Their attitude, when confronted by the facts, is that they are being "attacked" by "leftist-liberals (what an oxymoron)," "ungrateful" and "non-patriotic" persons who want to "undermine the foundations of our democracy."  What should be the role of religion and theology in the midst of this insanity and lunacy?  For starters, theology has to be prophetic.  In other words, theology has to carry out its God-given task of unmasking, identifying, and denouncing the demonic forces at work whose power is being unleashed against human life and dignity.  Secondly, theology can not be "neutral" relative to what we are facing.  "Neutrality" is another form of complicity.  Thirdly, religion and theology must be a driving force of consistent and constant resistance against the powers of evil.  What we need is a revival of Pastor Bonhoeffer's courage and intestinal fortitude, not only in verbally denouncing the evils of the government, but also resisting all attempts to impose brutality and dehumanization.  Theology, in order to be faithful to the Gospel and to the cause for justice, must be a resistance-driven theology.

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

Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Visiting Professor of Theology, Tainan Theological College and Seminary

Who let the Dogs Out? Who, Who?

We might ask "who let the cat out of the bag," or "who opened up this can of worms?"  While Euro-America was resting comfortably in its assumptions of universal cultural, intellectual, and moral superiority in the areas of religion and theology, there was a theology that was developing in Latin America and other parts of the so-called Third World.  It was also developing among African-American people in the U.S.A., and among women around the world.

It was a theology that did not emerge from armchair or ivory tower speculation, but rather from the everyday experiences and reality of socially oppressed groups.  It was a theology that was constructed and developed by what my colleague Dr. Luis Rivera-Pagan calls "people on the margins," i.e. people who are living "on the edge," relative to socio-economic and political conditions.  It was a theology that emerged from the voices of people who had been silenced and/or suppressed by those exercising colonial and imperialistic powers.  It is the theology which is known today as Liberation Theology, or as others might put it, "a theology of liberation."  We might ask just exactly what is it and who were the responsible parties for unbinding the shackles of the theological grip imposed by male chauvinistic Euro-American assumed cultural superiority?  In other words, the question would be, Who had the audacity and intestinal fortitude to challenge Euro-American colonial theology with a theology that came from the "underground?"  How did this all begin, or as we ask in Spanish "como fue que comenzo el bochinche (how did the gossip begin)?"

In a very strict way, Liberation Theology began when Yahweh God spoke to Moses and said to him "I have heard the cry of my people.  Their cry has come up to me.  I am descending to deliver them from their bondage and from their misery."  Liberation Theology developed when Yahweh God through the mediation of human leadership, delivered the Hebrews from institutional slavery of Egypt.

Centuries later, Liberation Theology took on shape and form in different parts of the world when people who were dehumanized and oppressed by reason of their class, culture, ethnicity, gender, nationality, race, and recently their sexual orientation said "Enough is enough, we ain't taking this (expletive) any more, and hell no to oppression."  People began to say "hell no!" to all forms of brutalization and dehumanization.

Since the early part of the 20th century, the oppressed people of the world have come forward to take their stance against oppression.  Blacks, indigenous people in all countries, Latinos/as, LGBT, the poor, the unemployed/underemployed, and peoples from "the margins" are taking bold and strong positions in denouncing and protesting against the trampling of human dignity in all its.

While historically speaking, Liberation Theology has Judaeo-Christian roots, people of other traditions, as well as people who have no formal religious affiliation whatsoever, have been involved in the struggle for emancipation.  Faith-based people committed to liberation are of the conviction that oppression and suffering are the starting points for scriptural interpretation and theological reflection.  Non-religious people involved in the struggle are motivated by their belief in the intrinsic dignity of human beings.

Who let the dogs out?  People of audacity, gall, and intestinal fortitude.

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

Dr. Juan A. Carmona

Visiting Professor of Theology, Tainan Theological College and Seminary

Spider Web Religion: Caught in It?

Spiders spin a certain material in order to catch their prey.  It's as if they know how to trap their intended victims.  Well, it appears that when it comes to religion, most of us are either caught, trapped, or both. Religion has an impact on all of our lives, whether that impact be negative or positive.  Why are we attracted to certain religious beliefs and systems?  There are a variety of reasons for that.  Why are we repelled and "turned off" by certain religious beliefs and systems?  There are a variety of reasons for that as well.

It is not the purpose of this blog to advocate for or against any particular faith group or system.  Nor is it to validate the reasons why we are attracted to or "turned off" altogether by religion.  The purpose of this essay is to encourage the reader to think analytically and critically about her/his affiliation with religion, or the lack thereof, and also why he/she is attracted or repelled.

Let me begin by saying that people are trapped in it one way or the other.  Even when we disassociate from "organized religion," we still deal with the "fallout" of that decision.

Some people are affiliated with the faith community and its Scriptures, because it has been inculcated in their minds since early on in life, that if they are "not in the religion," or if they "don't believe the text," that God is going to have them "roasting and toasting in hell forever and ever."  Their relationship with the faith group, and subsequently with God, therefore, is based on fear and terror of the hell-fire.

Other people are affiliated with a particular faith group because it provides certain financial and material benefits for them either now, or promised in the future.  It is the religion of "prosperity."  They are told that if they join a particular faith group, that God will prosper them with good finances and a host of other material and consumeristic goods.  It's the notion of "what's in it for me?" They enter into a commercial relationship with God.

Some people have a religious affiliation because they believe that if they leave the group, that they are being unfaithful to the traditions of the parents and of the cultural group.  Even if they don't believe the majority of things they hear or parrot every week in their gatherings, they remain in the group for fear of being ostracized by the family as well as the group itself.

Other people affiliate with a faith community because they are convinced that this particular community has a monopoly on God's truth, and that it subsequently constitutes "the right religion."  People who are in that community are convinced that outside of their ideology there is no "truth," because they have "the correct understanding of God's Word."  Any other group that believes different from them is categorized as "heretical," "deviant," "schismatic," or as the group that thinks itself to have the "right understanding" would call them "cold."

And then, we can add to reasons on the positive side as to why people affiliate, there are some who believe that "one religion is as good as another."  Some will say "It doesn't matter what you believe as long as you're sincere."  They believe that one religion will be just as much of a "life insurance" if you will, in the next life.

People who "drop out" of the faith group do so for a variety of reasons.  Some are sick and tired of all the political "bullshit" that goes on in the faith group, especially among those leaders or "wannabe" leaders who wish to weld all the power.  Others leave the faith because they believe it is controlling and enslaving.  Others want "nothing to do with religion," because they simply  no longer (if they ever did) adhere to the dogma of the group.  They believe that the ideology of the group is "out of touch" with reality or "irrelevant" to the times that we are living in.  Others reject religion outright because of all the atrocities that have been committed in the name of God.  And then, there are others who want nothing to do with religion because they believe that religion is just an opiate which distracts people from the present sufferings of life while promising them a much better life in the "sweet by and by."

Well, the list could go on, and on, and on.  We can mention the reasons why people affiliate with or disassociate themselves from religious communities.  As mentioned in the beginning, the purpose of this blog was not to advocate for one position or the other, but rather to get you (the reader) to think honestly and ask yourself  "Why am I associated with this group,?" or perhaps ask yourself "Why am I not associated with this or any other group?"  This has been an exercise in honesty, i.e. stimulating you to think seriously about your relationship with God and affiliation or non-affiliation with a faith group.  Have fun!

Dr. Juan A. Carmona