I am confused. I have read several times Cardinal Ratzinger's book against Liberation Theology. I have defended the Cardinal's views and the Church's stand against this damaging theology. Are they saying it is ok now? Or that it was 'misunderstood?' or that this false ideology got twisted up with real biblical teaching and service so therefore it is now ok because we have a Pope who serves the poor like Christ and understands what they were all trying to do and that it never caused any harm?? Seriously. I'm dumb-founded on this one. Maybe the article is bad. Would someone please read the whole article and explain it to me? I will NEVER be ok with Liberation Theology. http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/e...ologia-de-la-libertad-vaticano-vatican-25842/
I always though the nixing of Liberation Theology was part of the Church's teaching. I am afraid to look.
I think it's important to make some distinctions here: the Magisterium's position has never been a simplistic condemnation of everything connected with Liberation Theology, as the notion of a 'preferential option for the poor' is absolutely the stance of the Church. At the same time, the line has consistently been drawn very clearly in terms of ruling off-limits the positions of some liberation theologians regarding i) the reduction of the Gospel to a purely this-worldly, socio-political agenda (redefinition of the Kingdom of God) ii) the embrace of armed struggle iii) the alliance with Marxism. The Church's position towards liberation theology has largely been one of constructive critique; John Paul II was certainly no friend of Communism, to put it mildly, but he could nonetheless say in March 1986 that 'purified of elements that can water it down, liberation theology is not only orthodox, but necessary'. So Archbishop Müller's words don't in themselves represent a 180° shift. This having been said, reading the La Stampa piece, it's necessary to distinguish between Müller's statements and the spin put on them by the author of the article. For example, Gianni Valente says that That is Valente's evaluation, not necessarily Müller's position (I would have to read On the side of the poor in its entirety to be able to comment).
As for Pope Francis's balanced position on liberation theology, an interview reprinted in Sergio Rubin/Francesca Ambrogetti Pope Francis: Conversations with Jorge Bergoglio: The Authorised Biography (Hodder & Stoughton, 2013) makes things very clear:
Wow. I was wrong. Thank you Peter! (once again) I thought the Church condemned it. I went toe to toe with a priest when I lived in WA. My son was going on a 'mission trip' to Mexico. I paid my money and went to the meetings and they handed me paperwork and in two pages it had the 'glories of liberation theology'. I said, "Hold on here! You are not taking these people's money, and the parish's money to take our kids on a trip to show them how they can do stuff against the Church!" I brought Cardinal Ratzingers' book and everything. They 'assured and promised' me that that they were not going to be teaching that and the paperwork was old... All went well on the trip but It was difficult to explain.
I think Liberation Theology, like Social Justice, has good and bad effects within the same titles. Much the same as the word Love. God defined what love is, however since the 60's love to the Hippie generation and Hollywood means having sex and not sex in the context of married (man and woman) relations. Unfortunatley, we live now in an era where the Webster dictionary has changed its original definition to whatever modern man uses the term.
Thanks, Peter! Also, I think it's important to note that Pope Francis is being VERY charitable here. From what I've read, he suffered persecution from his own order, and was exiled to teaching high school science in some backwater place, for his strong stand against abuses in the name of liberation theology. (Pope John Paul II fished him out of exile and made him a bishop, or he might be there yet!)
