9 thoughts on ““Liberation” Theology”

  1. There was a time when the Catholic Church turned rather shamelessly toward populism, and many thought this was the route to expanding on its already substantial gains in Africa and South America.

    It’s understandable, in a sense. Who wants to be the guardians of a dying tradition? Who wants to go down with the ship, loyal to an ideology being increasingly rejected by the masses?

    I think the turning point was actually John Paul II. The man had a gift for making conservatism appealing to young people. He could come tell them to be abstinent and they’d adore him for it. (God knows whether they actually did it or not.) In any event, he showed the rest of the Church that it was possible to be conservative and not lose popularity. That’s probably the only reason Ratzinger was elected, honestly, and even then, they were cautious in that he’s not a young man, so they haven’t made a two-generation mistake no matter what.

    I don’t know when we’ll see the likes of Karol Wojtyla again. He was a really extraordinary leader, even down to his last days, when he demonstrated how to die like a man and a Christian.

  2. Collapsed?

    It’s not just a Catholic phenomenon. For instance, it was adapted and blended with a black power theme by the “theologian” James Cone. That variant is known as black liberation theology. It offers a lovely combination of Marxism and racialism (Jesus is black; whites are the devil; reconciliation between blacks and whites is only possible via the submission of whites to blacks).

    Has it achieved a wide following?

    I don’t think so. But then someone who sat for twenty years as a parishoner in a black liberation theology church is currently President of the United States.

  3. Martin, something I’ve observed more than once is that some of the most pernicious ideologies have already begun to fall apart just when their adherents achieve their greatest power.

    The test is whether the grip on power also fails. The odds that a BLT supporter will be POTUS after 20 Jan 2017 (or, Dog willing, 2013) are vanishing small.

  4. Anybody here familiar with Francis Fukuyama’s thoughts on low- and high-cooperation societies? The LC culture can be summed up thus: trust no one outside your clan. The class warfare of liberation theology and unabashed Marxism codify this ethic, defining the clan as “class.” It is not a coincidence that these isms are almost solely the province of LC cultures.

    People are not going to leave liberation theology or Marxism as long as they live in the LC mindset. They’re not going to stumble into HC thinking on their own, any more than the woman who jumps from one dysfunctional relationship to another will figure out on her own how to find the right guy. They will nto accept a HC ethic they’ve never experienced. How do you direct a LC society to evolve into a HC society?

  5. McGehee: “[S]something I’ve observed more than once is that some of the most pernicious ideologies have already begun to fall apart just when their adherents achieve their greatest power.

    The test is whether the grip on power also fails. The odds that a BLT supporter will be POTUS after 20 Jan 2017 (or, Dog willing, 2013) are vanishing small.”

    Never underestimate the power of destructive judgement coupled with unhinged power to lay in as much ruin in a year as the relatively sane ditherings of old-fashioned governors could achieve in a half-century.

    An Alinskyite Marxist is proving that he can pluck the eyes that are market signals out of one-sixth of the economy faster than you can say “I’ve observed.”

    He did not listen to his mentor the preacher in vain. And feels no need to listen to the American people at all.

  6. They will nto accept a HC ethic they’ve never experienced.

    This is true. You have to wait for them to die off.

    How do you direct a LC society to evolve into a HC society?

    According to Strauss & Howe, it’s the crisis war, or the “regeneracy event.” Existential wars (as opposed to “wars of choice”) where the very existence of the society is threatened make the generation which fights it (for us, the latest example would be the generation which fought WWII, “the greatest generation”) *not* adopt -isms in favor of the society as a whole. Once the war is won, they take it upon themselves to rebuild the destroyed society and remain HC for the rest of their lives. Their children, however, growing-up in relative paradise (baby boomers) are the ones who pick-up -isms again and the cycle continues.

  7. I am glad that finally the New theology of liberation is alive. Ii is not the old liberation theology, but a new one base on a democratic system. It is a new structures of government in South America. It is not the extreme radical left ,which no one wants anymore, but a balance left with a new approach to the 21st century. I thing all the old systems are changing even the US.(But not the Catholic Church, which is death RIP). Viva Padre Lugo!

  8. I am glad that finally the New theology of liberation is alive. Ii is not the old liberation theology, but a new one base on a democratic system. It is a new structures of government in South America. It is not the extreme radical left ,which no one wants anymore, but a balance left with a new approach to the 21st century. I thing all the old systems are changing even the US.(But not the Catholic Church, which is death RIP). Viva Padre Lugo!

    Whatever. I just have two questions: 1) Does it respect the rule of law? I’m not speaking of laws applied one way for the wealthy and powerful and another for the rest, but laws that apply fairly and equally to all, and 2) Is it still ok for me to work hard, get paid well, and not have to care about people who repeatedly and stupidly cause massive problems for themselves?

Comments are closed.