Gustavo Gutierrez

This is the credo and seminal text of the movement which was later characterized as liberation theology. The book burst upon the scene in the early seventies, and was swiftly acknowledged as a pioneering and prophetic approach to theology which famously made an option for the poor, placing the exploited, the alienated, and the economically wretched at the centre of a programme where "the oppressed and maimed and blind and lame" were prioritized at the expense of those who either maintained the status quo or who abused the structures of power for their own ends. This powerful, compassionate and radical book attracted criticism for daring to mix politics and religion in so explicit a manner, but was also welcomed by those who had the capacity to see that its agenda was nothing more nor less than to give "good news to the poor", and redeem God's people from bondage.

History, Politics, and Salvation

A Theology of Liberation

nhu ⋆𐙚₊˚⊹

The case of Chile is particularly interesting. The electoral victory of a socialist government poses a decisive and potentially very fruitful challenge to Chilean Christians. The first reactions are already being felt, but it is well to remember that they come out of a long tradition of participation by various groups in the struggle for liberation of the oppressed sectors. A group of priests attached to the university parish in Santiago writes: "The capitalist system exhibits a number of elements which are antihuman ... Socialism, although it does not deliver humanity from injustices caused by personal attitudes or from the ambiguity inherent in all systems, does offer a fundamental equality of opportunity. Through a change in the relationships of production, it dignifies labor so that the worker, while humanizing nature, becomes more of a person. It offers a possibility for the even development of the country for the benefit of all, especially the most neglected. It asserts that the motivation of morality and social solidarity is of higher value than that of individual interest, and so forth."

Finally, the process of liberation requires the active participation of the oppressed; this certainly is one of the most important themes running through the writings of the Latin American Church. Based on the evidence of the usually frustrated aspirations of the popular classes to participate in decisions which affect all of society, the realization emerges that it is the poor who must be the protagonists of their own liberation. "It is primarily up to the poor nations and the poor of the other nations to effect their own betterment." Rejecting every kind of paternalism, the ONIS priests say, "We believe that social transformation is not simply a revolution for the people, but that the people themselves, especially farmers and working men, exploited and unjustly kept in the background, must take part in their own liberation.

The denunciation of injustice implies the rejection of the use of Christianity to legitimize the established order. It likewise implies, in fact, that the Church has entered into conflict with those who wield power. And finally it leads to acknowledging the need for the separation of Church and state because "this is of primary importance in liberating the Church from temporal ties and from the image projected by its bonds with the powerful. This separation will free the Church from compromising commitments and make it more able to speak out. It will show that in order to fulfill its mission, the Church relies more on the strength of the Lord than on the strength of Power. And the Church will be able to establish . . . the only earthly ties which it should have: communion with the disinherited of our country, with their concerns and struggles."

The whole climate of the gospel is a continual demand for the right of the poor to make themselves heard, to be considered preferentially by society, a demand to subordinate economic needs to those of the deprived. Was not Christ's first preaching to "proclaim the liberation of the oppressed?

Thus there is a great challenge to the faith of Christians in these countries. In contradistinction to a pessimistic approach to this world which is so frequent in traditional Christian groups and which encourages escapism, there is proposed in these other countries an optimistic vision which seeks to reconcile faith and the world and to facilitate commitment. But this optimism must be based on facts. Otherwise, this posture can be deceitful and treacherous and can even lead to a justification of the present order of things. In the underdeveloped countries one starts with a rejection of the existing situation, considered as fundamentally unjust and dehumanizing. Although this is a negative vision, it is nevertheless the only one which allows us to go to the root of the problems and to create without compromises a new social order, based on justice and fellowship. This rejection does not produce an escapist attitude, but rather a will to revolution.

We have to break with our mental categories, with the way we relate to others, with our way of identifying with the Lord, with our cultural milieu, with our social class, in other words, with all that can stand in the way of a real, profound solidarity with those who suffer, in the first place, from misery and injustice. 

There is a real love only when there is free giving—without conditions or coercion. Only gratuitous love goes to our very roots and elicits true love.

The hope which overcomes death must be rooted in the heart of historical praxis; if this hope does not take shape in the present to lead it forward, it will be only an evasion, a futuristic illusion. One must be extremely careful not to replace a Christianity of the Beyond with a Christianity of the Future; if the former tended to forget the world, the latter runs the risk of neglecting a miserable and unjust present and the struggle for liberation.

Crespy can therefore state: "If we attempt to conclude our investigation we see clearly that the trial of Jesus was a political trial and that he was condemned for being a Zealot, although the accusation was not solidly established?"94 From the moment he started preaching, Jesus' fate was sealed: "I have spoken openly to all the world (John 18:20), he tells the High Priest. For this reason John's Gospel presents the story of Jesus as a case "brought, or intended to be brought, against Jesus by the world, represented by the Jews. This action reached its public, judicial decision before Pontius Pilate, the representative of the Roman state and holder of political power."

And political dogmatism is as worthless as religious dogmatism; both represent a step backward towards ideology. But for utopia validly to fulfill this role, it must be verified in social praxis; it must become effective commitment, without intellectual purisms, without inordinate claims; it must be revised and concretized constantly.

A Theology of Liberation quotes

Join the club