The Holy See only condemns types of liberation theology that are based on Marxism. Here are the forgotten passages of the document that contributed to Ratzinger being nicknamed “panzerkardinal.”
On the occasion of German bishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller’s nomination as the new Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, his ties with Gustavo Gutierrez, one of the fathers of the Theology of Liberation are recalled.
There is a widespread belief that John Paul II and the then cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (formerly the Holy Office), condemned this field of theology without appeal, supposedly making the relationship between a bishop and a liberation theologian (never condemned or sanctioned by Rome) “suspicious”.
In actual fact, the Instruction Libertatis nuntius, which was published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on 6 August 1984 warned against the risks and deviations of Theology of Liberation which looked at reality through a Marxist lens.
In actual fact, the Instruction Libertatis nuntius, which was published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on 6 August 1984 warned against the risks and deviations of Theology of Liberation which looked at reality through a Marxist lens.
These were the years when the “Continent of Hope” was home to dictatorships and the Church sided with the Marxist-inspired liberation movements, although Wojtyla’s visit to Puebla in 1979 for the meeting of CELAM bishops had signalled a turning point.
These were the Reagan years, when the United States was fighting the “evil empire”, the Soviet Union and a key battle was being fought in Latin America.
But the Congregation was not targeting the entire Theology of Liberation, which was conceived in Latin America in the years following the Council. Neither was it condemning the “preferential option for the poor.”
It was simply against the Marxist interpretation adopted by some theologians.
Indeed, the document mentioned the “temptation to reduce the Gospel of salvation to an earthly Gospel.”
It spoke of the risk of “forgetting and postponing evangelisation to Tomorrow.”
It contested “ideological theories” that were used as a basis for interpreting social reality through a certain kind of theology which presented the war between classes as an “objective and necessary law” and made people believe that “by entering its process, the oppressed create the truth and people act “scientifically”.
Therefore, the conception of truth goes hand in hand with the affirmation of the need for violence.” The Eucharist becomes a “celebration of a struggling people.” “The Kingdom of God and its becoming such is often identified with the human liberation movement.”
It is precisely when Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger - who had come to the Holy See’s doctrinal dicastery two years prior to this - published the Libertatis nuntio document that he began to be seen as an “enemy” of more open theologians; the “gravedigger” of those hopes which the Council had helped grow in poor Countries.
The Catholic Church under Wojtyla sent out a sign which was made to look like an expression of support for the anti-communist regimes governing Latin America’s various states.
And yet, reading through that first document on Liberation Theology, fully, one discovers passages which attest to the contrary. “This - warning the Congregation wrote in the document’s introduction - should in no way be interpreted as a disavowal of all those who want to respond generously and with an authentic evangelical spirit to the "preferential option for the poor."
“It (this Instruction that is, Ed.) should not at all serve as an excuse for those who maintain the attitude of neutrality and indifference in the face of the tragic and pressing problems of human misery and injustice. It is, on the contrary, dictated by the certitude that the serious ideological deviations which it points out tends inevitably to betray the cause of the poor.”
“More than ever, the Church intends to condemn abuses, injustices, and attacks against freedom, wherever they occur and whoever commits them. She intends to struggle, by her own means, for the defence and advancement of the rights of mankind, especially of the poor.”
“Furthermore, the Instruction states that “the scandal of the shocking inequality between the rich and poor… is no longer tolerated.”
The warning against the serious deviations of some "theologies of liberation" must not be taken as some kind of approval, even indirect, of those who keep the poor in misery, who profit from that misery, who notice it while doing nothing about it, or who remain indifferent to it. The Church, guided by the Gospel of mercy and by the love for mankind, hears the cry for justice and intends to respond to it with all her might.”
Finally, the document also refers to the role of bishops, in a passage which is particularly significant for representatives of the Catholic hierarchy who are considered too “soft” if not “organic” with power.
“The defenders of orthodoxy are sometimes accused of passivity, indulgence, or culpable complicity regarding the intolerable situations of injustice and the political regimes which prolong them. Spiritual conversion, the intensity of the love of God and neighbour, zeal for justice and peace, the Gospel meaning of the poor and of poverty, are required of everyone, and especially of pastors and those in positions of responsibility. The concern for the purity of the faith demands giving the answer of effective witness in the service of one's neighbour, the poor and the oppressed in particular, in an integral theological fashion.”