Liberation Theology Essay Example for Free

loss Theology Essay kindling Theology is a notion born out of the horrible colonial legacy of Latin America. Despite gaining evidence from their colonial masters, the Spanish, the new leaders be shitd like the former colonial masters. This is the legacy left behind the the colonizers.The maneuver of divide and conquer w present they favored the local elites and marginalized the majority who are shunted to the lower strata of society, thereby creating a caste system of sorts that saying an unequal distribution of wealth made even worse by American intervention finished Dollar Diplomacy and at the height of the Cerstwhile(a) War, supported right-wing dictatorships which they saw as the lesser evil as opposed to local communist movements in the name of containment. Whether wor office with Marxist guerrilla movements or acting independently, Liberation Theology in name began around the 1950s though it had been around much longer.This concept combined Christian teachings with Ma rxist doctrine. As the name suggests, it is meant to exculpate the poor, not simply spiritually but materially from their plight (Petrella vii). Liberation Theologists put forward the idea of Jesus Christ as a veritable liberator who came to free the masses from their plight since is stated in the Bible that Blessed are the lowly they shall inherit the land. (New American Bible, Matt. 55). It can be inferred here that there is more to Jesus in his role as the Savior or Messiah.Liberation Theologists encouraged many to read the Bible but at the same time read between the lines to see that Christ empowers or encourages beli ever sos to fight for sociable justice and take a shit preference to the poor for they are the ones who have less in life. In a expression, Christianity is empowering the masses since the elite-backed regimes will not. As a result, the Bible is therefore interpreted in a different way and clerics who subscribe to Liberation Theology end up siding with armed r ebel groups in a sooner awkward partnership that puts them in a very comprosing situation as far as their vocations are concerned.The rationale is that the governments, supported by the elites represent the hypocrites Christ rebuked in the Bible and His notion that the earth of heaven is at hand is seen in a Marxist context as the time to rise up and be truly free from poverty and oppression. However, Liberation Theology was not without its critics. The Catholic Church itself, led by the Pope (John Paul II), strongly ctiricized Liberation Theologists for hijacking Christian teachings to serve policy-making purposes, specially Marxism.They criticize its rather ironic collusion with Marxism which opposes any form of religion, calling it an opiate of society in giving false hopes or a fomite of deceit to keep the masses poor. The Church has not forgotten the sins of Marxism in persecuting religion and therefore regards it as evil and those who subscribe to Liberation Theology could be considered being on the wrong side of history, if not faith. The Bible again is used to disprove the notion of Liberation Theologists when Christ rebuked Peter by saying, grab out of my sight, SatanYou are not judging by Gods standards but by mans (Matt. 1623). Furthermore, Christ also said to Give to Caesar what is Caesars, but give to God what is Gods (Matt. 2221). It can be inferred here that the Church hierarchy does not approve of the supposed well-meaningness of clerics subscribing to this notion of Christ as a radical for the Church as always upheld that Christ came to save mankind from the wages of sin which is death, not to lead a revolt and become a king in a temporal sense (Petrella 121-122).It also did not help with the fact that socialist regimes began collapsing in Eastern Europe following the collapse of the Berlin seawall which symbolized the separation between democratic and non-democratic regimes, culminating with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the heart and soul of Marxism. With the lose of their chief sponsor, Marxist regimes, even those in Latin America, fell and on with it the loss of credibility of Liberation Theology.In addition, the Church itself has adapted liberationist notions that are pro-poor and even created councils and commissions that address the needs of the margnialized peoples of the world, further emasculating Liberation Theologists and taking away what ever power or influence they have in stirring up the masses (Petrella 2, 121-122). At this point, one would wonder where would Liberation Theology go from here. harmonise to Ivan Petrella, Liberation Theology must reinvest itself to ensure its continued relevance and not become an anachronism.He further stated that the present is the opportune time to begin, especially in this day and age of globalization. Much of the world is trying to be competitive to meet world-class standards but the flaw seen here is that this competitiveness would throw behind those who cannot keep up and will therefore be marginalized. However, he pointed out that the current approach they are taking to reinvent themselves are erroneous or improper and in his work, The Future of Liberation Theology, he showed the shortcomings of Liberation Theologists in their look for to reinvent itself. atomic number 53 attempt to reinvent itself is to reassert its union ideas but at the same time distancing itself from Marxism where it is often associated, especially the growing inequality caused by globalization makes it even more relevant than ever (Petrella 3). One of the mistakes in this approach is that Liberation Theologists seem to have difficulty spearating itself from its Marxist ties as it still continues to see things through the prism of Marxism in their pursuit of social justice.It still maintains its antagonistic stance towards capitalism, thereby becoming more of a hindrance on the ideal essence of Liberation Theology which truly views it from a Christian pers pective (Petrella 69). Furthermore, Liberation Theologists have not provided their own model society which is still tied to Marxist utopia a classless society. In their attempt to reassert their ideas, Liberation Theologists fail to come up with an approptiate response to the cooption of their ideas by democratic institutions and even by the Church.It further contributed to the cooption by eliminating the dichotomy created by the old school Liberation Theologists but unfortunately failed to capitalize on it as it was seized by its perceived enemies especially in the part where the distinction between tame and revolution becomes blurred and its enemies realize that the ideas of Liberation Theology are useful to their purposes without worrying about revolution which is anathema to them and emphasizing the reform component (Petrella 122-123).What is proposed is that Liberation Theologists should reorient their way of thinking where they should stop regarding the concept of liberation as a theme but a guiding principle and must be politically neutral. This way, it can be employed by any political ideology that has social justice in its agenda and is not strictly special(a) to Marxism or socialism for that matter (Petrella 4). Petrella also encourages an open-minded appraoch for Liberation Theologists in order to remain relevant.He argued that democracy and especially capitalism, is not one-dimensional as they usually regard it to be but rather multi-dimensional. Capitalism in the United States is different from that of Germany and Japan and should not be generalized or viewed in absolute terms. Another point Petrella raised that supports Liberation Theologys continued relevance is that it can still transform society though not in a sweeping manner but in a methodical manner by changing the laws of society rather than calling for defiance or revolution, let alone activism (124).It can be surmised that what Petrella is suggesting is that Liberation Theology do aw ay with revolution and even civil disobedience as the approach but rather work within the system. Liberation Theologists should find allies in mainstream politics whose ideology and platform are attuned to theirs and create an alliance with them. By doing this, they not only scored a moral victory but a political victory as well, something that has eluded them for decades of trying with revolutionary movements.Borrowing ideas from noted Liberation Theologist da Vinci Boff, Liberation Theology is all about mediation to know and understand oppression and societys ills, reorienting it in a Biblical context without trying to intertwine it with Marxism and through this purview come up with appropriate measures to address these problems short of fomenting unrest and revolution. In conclusion, by looking at Petrellas proposed solution, Liberation Theology stands a occur of living up to its true billing.But as he warned, it must really distance itself from Marxism, the first challenge an d really look at problems from Christian context free of any ideology. Rather, it political ideologies must be assimilated by it rather than the other way around and by doing do, become part of mainstream politics in the pursuit of real social justice as Christian teachings define it. Works Cited Petrella, Ivan. The Future of Liberation Theology. Hampsihre Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2004.