Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Liberation Theology and Marx - Coggle Diagram
Liberation Theology and Marx
The views of Karl Marx on economics and religion
Marx
claimed that the reason for economic inequality and poverty is the way the economy is structured
In capitalism, a few people own businesses and everyone else works for them, thereby creating different classes of people divided by wealth inequality
This also creates ‘alienation’, where workers feel disconnected from their work and a lack of value in their life
Fixing poverty will require challenging and changing capitalism
Marx
was against religion – called it the ‘opiate of the people’ – it is designed to keep people down
Religion tells the workers to accept their life of injustice and inequality, because then they will go to heaven when they die
Marx
thought religion stood in the way of the communist revolution
Guitierrez & Boff on the validity of being influenced by Marx’s economic views but not his anti-religious views
Liberation theology claims that the teachings of Jesus show that Christians have a duty to help the poor
They also think
Marx
was correct in his economic views about how to help the poor – about the causes of poverty
So, they conclude that Christians have a duty to challenge and change capitalism
This is what liberation theology is – Christian duty to help the poor PLUS
Marx’s
views on what helping the poor requires – challenging capitalism
Guitierrez and Boff
both claim to only be influenced by
Marx’s
economic views, not
Marx’s
anti-religious views
Evaluation
Ratzinger’s
critique of liberation theology
Look at all the people who died as a result of Marxism (it numbers in the 10s of millions at least)
Christians should not be influenced by atheist ideologies like Marxism
He says atheism and denial of human rights is at the core of marxism
Those who try to help the poor through marxist means end up betraying the poor they mean to help
The preferential option for the poor from a liberation theology perspective
The concept of the ‘preferential option for the poor’ is part of traditional Christian theology
It points out that Jesus gave more attention and care and help to those who needed it more – such as the poor, and concludes that Christians should also help the poor
Liberation theologians think helping the poor means challenging capitalism
Traditional theology puts orthodoxy (right beliefs) before orthopraxis (right action)
The correct theology must be figured out first and then from that we will figure out which are the morally right actions to do
Liberation theology challenges this – it claims we must first do the right action (orthopraxis) – which is, whatever action will help the poor. If that involves left-wing or even Marxist economic policy – then so be it. We can figure out orthodoxy later
Pope John Paul II's response
Pope John Paul II
said that it’s wrong to focus so much on economic liberation, like Liberation theology does
We also need to focus on spiritual liberation – he pointed to pornography and drugs and consumerism as examples of spiritual poverty
The Church needs to figure out orthodoxy first – just focusing on orthopraxis first can result in this imbalance of focusing too much on economic liberation and not enough on spiritual liberation
The church should just continue in its approach of helping the poor through charity. That is enough, that is all a Christian’s duty to the poor requires. Once properly understanding the Christian orthodoxy, the orthopraxis which results is merely charity
The biblical basis for liberation theology & its interpretation of preferential option for the poor
Jesus said things about wealth that seem to justify liberation theology and suggest he was a liberator of the poor
“It is harder for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven”
“If you want to be perfect, sell all that you have and give it to the poor”
Jesus seems to be against people being rich, and in favour of radically changing society to liberate the poor
Evaluation
Kloppenberg
disagrees
He points out that Jesus only ever spoke about the sin and salvation of individual people
Jesus’ teachings were never aimed at the structure of society or the economy itself
So, there’s no way to view Jesus’ teachings as challenging capitalism or anything like that
Jesus is only recommending that rich people give to charity. So, he’s not a liberator