A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation

Analysis of A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation
Summary
The first part of the book by Gutierrez addresses the issue of what is meant by liberation (1). It begins with a discussion of theological reflection, and the assumption underlying this concept is that it arises spontaneously in the believer. Gutierrez then goes on to explain that the world has changed and is thus in need of a new perspective of theology. Social and cultural changes are used to rationalize the development and application of liberation theology (13). No discussion, however, is given of social and cultural changes throughout all human history or why these did not necessitate the need for liberation theology in the past. The book does show clearly the approach is rooted in Vatican II (6, 24, 31, 40, 65, 76, 79). It explains that the Church is now pivoting towards underdeveloped nations—like Latin America—which is where Gutierrez sees liberation theology being best applied.
The attitude of the author is that neo-colonialism has occurred and indigenous peoples have been marginalized and oppressed. Christians have been caught in the middle of changes and the Church, Gutierrez explains, is not in position to launch a new or fresh start (79). The issues that are to be addressed in these changing circumstances, according to the book, are those concerning the role of faith in the midst of alienation and injustice. The book, again, does not address the role of faith in centuries prior when alienation and injustice also occurred. What it suggests is that the situation is entirely new and that in Latin America an unprecedented situation has arisen.
What is new is that Gutierrez assumes that revolution against the oppressed and in favor of the oppressors is justified and that the Christian ought to see life in terms of the oppressed vs. the oppressors. In previous centuries when tyrants ruled, the belief was that Christ was king and that a Christian ought to be willing to die for his faith. In Gutierrez’s book, the implicit suggestion is that the kingship of Christ is not a going concern. What is a going concern is equality, liberty and fraternity—i.e., the ideals of the Revolution, and in Latin America society is divided on the issue of liberation (81).
Gutierrez posits that to know God is to do justice and that this point can be seen in Scripture (119). He then goes on to explain that faith and political action must be aligned (150). However, there is no discussion about what to do when those in politics do not have the faith at heart. Instead, what is implicitly suggested is that faith conform to political options. He asserts that faith and political action should dialogue with one another, as though faith had anything to learn from modern politics (151). He then suggests that a utopia of cultural revolution is at hand.
Gutierrez does acknowledge that the utopian communion envisioned implies the rooting out of sin—i.e., a liberation from sin, which he also identifies as the root of all social problems; however, there is no discussion of whether this utopian vision is realistic or not (152).
In the end of the book, Gutierrez clearly states that the Church has aligned Herself with the oppressors against the oppressed in Latin America and that this has to change (165). The book thus becomes a denunciation of the Church and, after a discussion of what it means to be in communion with God and the people, the author asserts that the Church is not in communion with the people because those in power do not promote equality and they are Christian; therefore, the Church is an oppressor in Latin America. That is what Gutierrez says needs to change.
Appraisal
As with much of modern theology, there is a great deal of talk about what theology is and little actual discussion of anything resembling actual theology. This is especially the case in Gutierrez’s Theology of Liberation, which is more a justification of jettisoning theology in the name of secular liberalism than anything else. Theology is dismissed as an evolutionary practice that began in the early centuries of the Church, morphed into scholasticism and rationalism in later centuries, and then became a reflection of praxis—in other words, it lost all semblance of theology. The approach is rooted in the revolutionary approach of Vatican II, which essentially updating Church teachings by aligning them with the values of the modern world. Considering that the modern world has devalued religion and Christ, it is not surprising that liberation theology and the book by Gutierrez should reflect the hollowing out of theology.
Gutierrez claims that the justification for liberation theology is based also in the rediscovery of the eschatological dimension in theology. The exercise is little more than an exercise in pedantic wordplay. By linking theology to praxis and praxis to an historical evolution of action, similar to other liberation-style teachers, like Freire, it is no wonder that the book overall should suffer from a lack of God-centeredness.
O’Hare argues that Gutierrez’s book is beneficial both because it highlights what is unique about liberation theology and because it locates liberation theology within the tradition of theology in the Church. This praise is little more than wishful thinking, as liberation theology is distinctly rooted not in Church tradition but rather in Marxism. The Church’s mission is viewed from the standpoint of social revolution rather than from the perspective of Heaven.
It is understandable why liberation theology should be attractive to some—they see injustice in the world and believe the Church, which is the Bride of Christ, should be the one addressing these injustices. However, the problem of sin, free will, redemption, and ultimate union with God are issues that too often end up being neglected as social justice becomes the focus of liberation theology. What is worse is that the social justice is too often viewed from a secular rather than from a Christian perspective. A Christian perspective should be full, holistic, and spiritual as well as corporal. Liberation theology tends more towards corporal injustices and the rights of man, neglecting outright the rights of God in the process.
As Rogers notes, Gutierrez’s book focuses more on the problems in Latin America than elsewhere in the world and that is because Gutierrez is advancing a revolutionary doctrine. Liberation theology in Latin America was focused on politics and social equality; economics, poverty, socialism—all of these issues were taken up in the field of liberation theology, totally displacing traditional discussions of sin and the sacraments. Liberation theology advanced the revolutionary aims of Vatican II and Gutierrez’s book certainly helped in this sense.
The main problem of the book is that it seeks to change the Church into something it is not—a source of revolution modeled on the spirit of the French Revolution, wherein liberty, equality and fraternity are the guiding lights. It associates any social order in which inequality prevails with oppression and thus advocates for Marxism and communism without explicitly ever acknowledging it—even though he does recognize it as a class struggle (172). Gutierrez lamely tries to argue this does not make his call one for Marxism.
Bibliography
Gutiérrez, Gustavo. A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation. Rev. ed.Marynoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1988.
O'Hare, Joseph A. "Book Review: A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics and Salvation." (1973): 489-491.
Rogers, Jack B. "Book Review: A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics and Salvation." (1976): 249-252.