Latin America and the Roots of Liberation Theology

Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
Latin America and Liberation Theology
Introduction
Liberation theology in Latin America began in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Liberation theology is arguably one of the major theological developments in the last century. It refers to a body of thoughts mainly written by theologians in Latin America that sought to provide a new role of religious experience among religious organizations and practitioners (Grover 1991, 186). The political and religious culture of Latin America, whose background is characterized by Portuguese and Spanish past, produced liberation theology. Liberation theology is a field that has attracted considerable attention in the recent past, and it is thus the subject of many scholarly works. According to Berryman (1987, 7), for one to understand Latin America, it is important that they learn about liberation theory. This paper seeks to examine the Latin American liberation theology. The paper begins by discussing the roots of the movement and goes on to document the key theologians associated with it, giving special attention to Gustavo Gutierrez. The paper also addresses the movement’s key features, criticisms, and opposition, as well as its decline.
Roots of the Liberation Theology
The failures of the post-WWII self-sustaining models of economic development constitute the roots of the liberation theology. It was predicted that Latin America would grow fairly if it followed the examples of Western Europe and USA (Grover 1991, 186). It was the belief of the intellectuals in Latin America that the models would eliminate existing social problems such as illiteracy, land tenure inequities, and poor housing. As a result of the failure, the intellectuals began criticizing the models and consequently searching for reasons of their failure. As informed by Grover (1991, 187), the intellectuals questioned the capitalist model and realized that there was a dependency between the economies of Latin American countries and industrialized nations. They realized that instead of the gap between industrialized nations and Latin economies declining, it was expanding. They also showed that the economic system of the world promoted a cycle of exports of raw materials and import of finished from industrialized nations. As such, they noticed that the economic model that was supported by industrial nations did not help solve the social problems of the region. This awareness coincided with a major problem in the Catholic Church.
With an inadequate number of priests, the Catholic Church could not combat secular and Protestant groups from making strides among members of the Catholic Church. When the Catholic Church increased the number of priests to solve the problem, a majority of them began working with the poor (Grover 1991, 187). They felt that there was a big gap between the church and the poor and they thus began a looking for a theology that would help them address the problems they were facing. As informed by Grover (1991, 187), the combination of the intellectual atmosphere at the time and educational backgrounds helped the young priests perceive the societal challenges and solutions from Marxist and leftist lenses. Therefore, it became apparent to them that there was a need to rethink the church’s mission as well as the meaning of faith.
The events described above significantly contributed to the evolution of theology. As a result, in 1968, all bishops in Latin America convened a meeting in Medellin, Colombia to do away with the Vatican spirit (Morales-Franceschini 2018, para. 3). As informed by Hoi (1986, 3), the meeting became the main inspiration for liberation theology. The author also informs that the central theme of the conference was under development as the region was characterized by income inequalities, illness, misery, hunger, infant mortality, among others. Therefore, it is evident that the problems experienced by the poor members of the Latin American society played a part in influencing the development of liberation theology. As informed by Singer (n.d., para. 2), the church sided with the upper classes throughout the 19th century, and the grievances of the poor were neglected to a great extent. Therefore, this neglect of the needs of the poor people was a key contributor to liberation theology. Combined with the educational background of the scholars, the climate was appropriate for the rise of theology that represented the perceptions of the poor.
Gustavo Gutierrez
Gustavo Gutierrez is the most popular liberation theologian, and there are even scholars who consider him “the father of liberation theology” (Brown 2013, 1). Born in Peru in 1928, Gustavo grew up to be a priest, a writer, and a theologian (Brown 2013, 22). His time at the university involved learning medicine and philosophy while also participating in political activity. He moved to Europe for graduate studies as he gained more theological credentials. It was during his time in Europe that he interacted with French Catholic scholars who sought to relate the faith to the issues of the 20th century. He returned to Peru in 1950 to teach in Catholic University in Lima. It was during this time that Gustavo realized that the wisdom gained in Europe did not reflect the reality in Latin America and therefore, he had a lot to unlearn (Brown 2013, 26-27). Therefore, he had to reread theology, his continent’s history, as well as the Bible, which changed his perception of the oppressed and the poor. Consequently, he had to refashion theological tools to be relevant to the situation.
In 1971, Gustavo published his book, A Theology of Liberation, and as noted by Grover (1991, 189), the book attacked the economic and political system that brought about dependency and oppression in Latin America. As described earlier, intellectuals in the continent had realized that the economic system was not solving the social challenges that faced the region. As such, it is deducible that the efforts of Gustavo were meant to address the challenges that Latin America faced at the time, which was originated from the political and the economic systems, but not addressed by the Catholic Church. According to Gustavo, the way developed nations respond to poverty in third world countries is not in touch with the real problem (Muskus 2015, 32). He advocated for the removal of the political and economic structures of capitalists as a way of eradicating poverty. According to him, these systems were responsible for the poverty and injustice in Latin America.
According to Muskus (2015, 32), the priority of Gustavo was socio-economical and political liberation in the spheres of the poor people in Latin America. Therefore, for him, there was a need for a social revolution that would change the lives of the oppressed people in the continent. The church was to play a key role in the revolution. There was also the aspect of justified violence that would lead to the achievement of liberation, and the church was to be at the center of this process. As such, the process of liberation, according to him, could take the form of violence. Gustavo also wrote another book; We Drink from Our Own Wells (1984) that called for more social awareness and involvement (Grover 1991, 189). Therefore, it is evident that Gustavo was a prominent player in the liberation movement.
Other Theologians
There exist other theologians that also made a profound contribution to liberation theology. One of them was Hugo Assmann, who according to Ferm (2004, 32), became persona non grata in many countries in Latin America due to his advocacy. The theologian was exiled from Uruguay, Chile, Brazil, and Bolivia; however, he found a place in the University of Costa Rica. The greatest strength of the theologian lay in his ability to synthesize important themes in of the liberation theology (Ferm 2004, 32). In his 1976 book, Theology for a Normal Church, Assmann explains how theology had progressed since the Medellin meeting described before in this paper. According to him, the progressivist theology supported by developed nations was not specific enough to be applied to the context of Latin America. Therefore, it is evident that he echoed the views of Gustavo, who, as described earlier, had to unlearn much wisdom gained in Europe as they did not reflect the reality in the continent. Assmann specifically criticized European political theology, particularly for its failure to join the poor in ...