In the thread below about black liberation theology, Nate W writes:
A lot of liberation theology in general has a tendency (good or bad) to pick a side in a conflict and hyperbolize the conflict; so God favors the poor, favors women, favors blacks, against the rich, against men, and against whites, respectively. It's really important to keep in mind that the language, however inflammatory, is most often aimed at the mutual liberation of BOTH the oppressed AND the oppressor. It's usually not about destroying the enemy, and its not about that in the case of Cone, either.
I've been reading Frederica Mathewes-Green's book "First Fruits of Prayer: A 40-day Journey Through the Canon of St. Andrew," which is just terrific for Lent. IN last night's reading, Frederica pointed out how radical is the humility to which Christ calls us. She points out that in the Gospels, Jesus showed mercy to tax collectors and Roman centurions who showed faith and humility. The Romans were the oppressors, as we know, and the tax collectors were quislings who helped them. And yet, Christ embraced them, even as they oppressed his own people -- but only when they showed humility. Frederica asks her readers to imagine what it would be like had Hitler won the Second World War, and Jesus was among us today, telling us that a German officer among us, or a collaborator, was showing more true faith and righteousness than the rest of us?
It is a sobering question.
There is a real spiritual danger in hating the oppressor, and in yielding to the emotional rush that believing in one's own righteousness, or the righteousness of your class, as against The Other. Not one of us are immune to that temptation. This, I think, is one of the problems with "liberation theology" as it has been described: it makes one think that "liberation" comes when we free ourselves from others; in fact, more than anything else we need to be freed from ourselves.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
And other people might want very much to be liberated, in order to AVOID being dragged out of their house at midnight etc. etc., a policing style that seems to know no left or right, no east or west, no north or south.
But given the heavily Marxist orientation of "liberation theology", and the support of Marxist guerillas in Central and South America by "liberation theologians", and given the blood soaked history of Marxist revolutionary groups over the last 100+ years, your objection seems to be a bit disingenuous.
Sorry, AD, but I will insist on rejecting your logic.
1) The US, unless and until it becomes a fascist state, will not be subjected to the expected wholesale ills of Marxism. I would respectfully point out, too, that the retail mugging of law-abiding citizens by officially sanctioned terrorists (i.e. lynchings in the Old South) continues to this day. It's usually happening in skin-color ghettos, and the perpetrators and victims usually have the same skin color.
2) I've been called paranoid on many occasions, so you'll have to have your grain of salt handy, but I think it much more likely that you will see me and my fellow pagans dragged out in the middle of the night before you will see blacks doing that to whites, meaning that a theocracy is much more likely the form fascism will take in the US, should such a thing ever happen.
In any event, I'd much rather focus on the actual fascism practiced by the thought police, commonly called political correctness. See my response re: 21st century catch-22.
Wow, that was very careless of me: my first point above is an insult to the many sincere and honest police officers out there, overworked and underpaid, who are trying to bring those ghetto criminals to justice.
My very poorly phrased point is simply to point out that the violence continues, and society doesn't much care to try to do much about it.
"My favorite liberation theology text is the Magnificat (Luke 1:46-55)."
Which quotes or paraphrases such psalms as 33: 3-5; 34: 9; 137: 6; 70: 19; 125: 2-3; 110: 9; 97: 1 and 3; 117: 16; 32: 10 and 11; 112: 7; and 131: 11, as well as the Song of Hannah (1 Samuel 2:1-10.)
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.