2 Answers
No, Liberation Theology was born after WWII out of a genuine concern to meet the real need for moral and ethical social reconstruction. After the horror of the war and all the inhumanity to man people of conscience were greatly concerned to find ways to help those whose lives were devastated and to try to put a system of self empowerment in place for the weak and exploited.
The obvious failure of the mainline Chuches to effect change in the time of crisis militated for a new methodology. One of the solutions, amoung many in contemporary theology, was the emergence of Liberation Theology. A hands on, take controll by whatever means necessary approach, to bring about real lasting change, even to the point of actual violent revolution.
Black Liberation Theology was a natural outgrowth of this spirit of frustration with the mainline churhes, particularly in America. As for the president's church, while some of the rhetoric is admittedly inflamitory comming from the pulpit, never the less one must understand the motivation of the movement as a whole. To effect real, lasting, equitable change for a segment of society that feels disinfranchised and abused. Certainly something must bedone about it. We are all open to constructive suggestions.
While I as a Christian do not endorse the methods employed by Liberation Theology groups, I am sympathetic to their cause. All Christians must be concerned for the welfare of their fellow man, it's not an option. I would suggest that before we get caught up in vile name calling, we need to consider our own shortcommings (myself included) in contributing to the solution rather than adding to the problems of hatred, division,and stereotyping in our nation.
May I suggest that we all consider prayerfully before we rush to judgement concerning the motives of those with whom we disagree or don't understand. It seems to me that a good place to start might be to tone down the inflamitory rhetoric and stereotyping on both sides. Just a thought...
12 years ago. Rating: 3 | |