Glenn Beck is WRONG on Liberation Theology!
A Brief Response to Glenn Beck on "Liberation Theology"
—By William Anderson, editor of
Journey through Christian Theology
After reviewing Glenn Beck’s program and notes regarding "Liberation theology," a simple response would be: "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." In Mr. Beck's case this is apparent on two fronts: (1) his understanding of the Judaeo–Christian scriptures and (2) his appreciation for, and understanding of, "Liberation theology," both in terms of its history and its development.
In his piece: "Liberation Theology and Social Justice," Beck suggests we start with James Cone—one of the founding fathers of liberation theology—and is a program which seeks to liberate those who are oppressed from unjust political, economic or social conditions.
In fact, speaking historically, liberation theology, per se, is specific to Latin American theology as espoused by Gustavo Gutierrez, a Peruvian Roman Catholic priest, arising as a reaction to the suffering, pain, and political oppression of so many human beings in Latin America. It is a theology of and for the poor together with a total freedom of the oppressed. Liberation theology does not deny or oppose the "personal" salvation of which Mr. Beck speaks, but addresses the personal and social well-being of the masses as well.
While this theology is perceived to be radical by those especially interested in focusing on personal salvation alone, it argues that the church, its theologians, leaders and its people must deal with their concept of God as it relates to human suffering and oppression of any type and in any form. To put it simply: the problem of human suffering, whether it be in Latin America, the United States of America, or anywhere else, is the "problem of God." The theological issues of our time come to focus as a history of suffering, oppression, and liberation. If Christianity, if the Christian faith has any meaning or validity at all, it must be a faith that frees us, i.e. that liberates—the form of which is shaped by the historical context in which the faith is proclaimed. Hence, in North America, particularly in the United States, liberation theology takes shape and form in the "Black Theology" of James Cone, in the "Feminist" theologies of Mary Daly and others for example.
Beck wishes to bifurcate theology with theology/religion having relevance only in the personal, spiritual lives of human beings. Not only is this bifurcation inadequate, it is a truncation of the gospel itself, as the great theologian of the social gospel, Walter Rauschenbusch argued in his A Theology for the Social Gospel. It is challenged, perhaps mildly, but challenged nevertheless in the papal encyclical, Populorum Progressio, where it states, speaking of "building a world where every man [sic], no matter what his [sic] race, religion or nationality, can live a fully human life, from servitude imposed on him [sic] by other men [sic] or natural forces over which he has not sufficient control."
In my view, Jesus of Nazareth, the one we claim as the Christ, is without question, a "liberation theologian!" Clearly this is seen in his summary of the law when queried by his adversaries. Jesus provided us with the principles with which to challenge all authority which is out of sync with the principle of God's love of all and the extension of that love to and for all. Liberation theology is based on a political interpretation of the gospel of Jesus of Nazareth, but liberation theologians see the term political in a comprehensive sense that includes "all" dimensions of life, i.e, God's love is for the "world" as John puts it in his famous passage in chapter three. Christian theology is not simply about saving individuals and it cannot be so limited; it is about saving the world—the tangled and sinful complex of human relations that in large measure preclude the possibilities of "becoming" truly and fully human.
Thus, Glenn Beck is simply mis–informed; he is simply "wrong!"
—By William Anderson, editor of
Journey through Christian Theology
After reviewing Glenn Beck’s program and notes regarding "Liberation theology," a simple response would be: "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." In Mr. Beck's case this is apparent on two fronts: (1) his understanding of the Judaeo–Christian scriptures and (2) his appreciation for, and understanding of, "Liberation theology," both in terms of its history and its development.
In his piece: "Liberation Theology and Social Justice," Beck suggests we start with James Cone—one of the founding fathers of liberation theology—and is a program which seeks to liberate those who are oppressed from unjust political, economic or social conditions.
In fact, speaking historically, liberation theology, per se, is specific to Latin American theology as espoused by Gustavo Gutierrez, a Peruvian Roman Catholic priest, arising as a reaction to the suffering, pain, and political oppression of so many human beings in Latin America. It is a theology of and for the poor together with a total freedom of the oppressed. Liberation theology does not deny or oppose the "personal" salvation of which Mr. Beck speaks, but addresses the personal and social well-being of the masses as well.
While this theology is perceived to be radical by those especially interested in focusing on personal salvation alone, it argues that the church, its theologians, leaders and its people must deal with their concept of God as it relates to human suffering and oppression of any type and in any form. To put it simply: the problem of human suffering, whether it be in Latin America, the United States of America, or anywhere else, is the "problem of God." The theological issues of our time come to focus as a history of suffering, oppression, and liberation. If Christianity, if the Christian faith has any meaning or validity at all, it must be a faith that frees us, i.e. that liberates—the form of which is shaped by the historical context in which the faith is proclaimed. Hence, in North America, particularly in the United States, liberation theology takes shape and form in the "Black Theology" of James Cone, in the "Feminist" theologies of Mary Daly and others for example.
Beck wishes to bifurcate theology with theology/religion having relevance only in the personal, spiritual lives of human beings. Not only is this bifurcation inadequate, it is a truncation of the gospel itself, as the great theologian of the social gospel, Walter Rauschenbusch argued in his A Theology for the Social Gospel. It is challenged, perhaps mildly, but challenged nevertheless in the papal encyclical, Populorum Progressio, where it states, speaking of "building a world where every man [sic], no matter what his [sic] race, religion or nationality, can live a fully human life, from servitude imposed on him [sic] by other men [sic] or natural forces over which he has not sufficient control."
In my view, Jesus of Nazareth, the one we claim as the Christ, is without question, a "liberation theologian!" Clearly this is seen in his summary of the law when queried by his adversaries. Jesus provided us with the principles with which to challenge all authority which is out of sync with the principle of God's love of all and the extension of that love to and for all. Liberation theology is based on a political interpretation of the gospel of Jesus of Nazareth, but liberation theologians see the term political in a comprehensive sense that includes "all" dimensions of life, i.e, God's love is for the "world" as John puts it in his famous passage in chapter three. Christian theology is not simply about saving individuals and it cannot be so limited; it is about saving the world—the tangled and sinful complex of human relations that in large measure preclude the possibilities of "becoming" truly and fully human.
Thus, Glenn Beck is simply mis–informed; he is simply "wrong!"
Comment
© 2012 Created by Fortress Forum.
Powered by 
.
You need to be a member of Fortress Forum to add comments!
Join Fortress Forum