Pope Francis distances himself from Liberation Theology

ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/Vatican.php?id=8447

"During a meeting on Monday with priests from the Diocese of Rome, Pope Francis reportedly suggested that he does not support the version of liberation theology represented by Peruvian priest Father Gustavo Gutierrez.

In a post for his Italian-language blog Settimo Cielo, Vatican analyst Sandro Magister said the Holy Father distanced himself from Archbishop Gerhard Muller – the current prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, who supports Fr. Gutierrez’s views – in a “brief but eloquent” observation made during a question-and-answer session with the priests."

Interesting.

The Pope said something like “that is what Muller thinks” at the audience.

Right. Here is the actual quote and it’s context from the articel I linked to:

“In the formulation of one of the five questions posed to the Pope, a priest asking about the centrality of the poor in pastoral ministry made a direct reference to liberation theology and Archbishop Gerhard Muller’s stance in support of this theology,” Magister recounted.

But “upon hearing the name of the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Pope Francis didn’t let the priest finish his question and said, ‘That is what Muller thinks, that is what he thinks’,” Magister explained."

I am not exactly sure of what to make of that.

I can only hope it is true. Need to get away from that abomination.

In new book Francis’ former teacher also says that Francis never supported marxist liberation theology:

catholicnewsagency.com/news/francis-teacher-says-pope-never-supported-marxist-theology/

“One of Pope Francis’ former teachers says in a new book that the Holy Father has never supported a Marxist-based liberation theology.”

The Argentine current, he said, “which never used Marxist categories or the Marxist analysis of society, but rather, without disregarding the social analysis, it privileges a more historical, cultural analysis.”

“My opinion is that the Argentinean line of Liberation Theology, that some call ‘Theology of the people,’ helps understand the pastoral work of Bergoglio as Bishop, just like many of his affirmations and teachings.”

So, what good (read: orthodox) books are there about this and related subjects?

This article hints at the opposite. It does say the pope is not fan of Marxism, but is warming to liberation theology.

“Now, with the election of Francis, the first pope from Latin America, liberation theology can no longer “remain in the shadows to which it has been relegated for some years, at least in Europe,” according to the Vatican’s semiofficial newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano.”
religionnews.com/2013/09/09/liberation-theology-finds-new-welcome-in-pope-francis-vatican/

This makes everything more complicated…

:confused:

Hasn’t the Magisterium already made itself clear on this? The Marxist version of LT is out. Or am I mistaken?

Yeah.


So then what does Muller believe? If he accepts liberation theology a la Marx, then why on earth is he head of the CDF??? If not, and his acceptance of “liberation theology” isn’t what we normally think of liberation theology as being, then why is the Pope quick to distance himself from this “Liberation theology” that is “Mueller’s opinion”?

I’m lost.

I think the key is the word “version”. For one thing, this word is indicative of the range of differences in liberation theology. I think this will continue to be confusing for the Church. Liberation theology though based on bad theology often (but not always) arrives at the same actions as Catholic social justice. It is important that we not only do the right things, but that we do them for the right reason. Pope Francis understands the proper theology for social justice.

Good explanation. Thank you.

Pope John Paul II made everything very clear. I don’t know if that is part of the magisterium or not though.

Maybe people are having different ideas on it now.
Interestingly, it was a form of liberation theology, that brought Obama’s mentor Reverend Wright together with Father Pfleger and even Louis Farrakhan, who subscribed to the Islam version of the same doctrine.

As I understood it, the critcisms of LT focused largely on the tendency for LT to establish scapegoats rather than personal repentance, prayer, sacraments and sanctification. Human suffering exists because of THOSE people (rich and powerful), not because we’re ALL sinners in need of a Savior.

Pretty big difference in philosophy, wouldn’t you say?

It’s certainly valid to call out the sins of the rich and powerful and call them to repentance. But not when done in a manner that implies a lack of need for similar repentance in us all.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.