Vatican readmits leftist thinking

THE Vatican has begun a historic move to rehabilitate the leftist Catholic movement known as “liberation theology” as the Pope refocuses the church on the poor.

L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican’s official newspaper, devoted its centre spread to defending the virtues of liberation theology, which had been anathema since the Cold War.

“With a Latin American Pope, liberation theology could not remain for long in the shadows to which it has been relegated for some years, at least in Europe,” wrote Ugo Sartorio, a priest and editor of a Catholic magazine.

Father Sartorio even argued in his piece yesterday that, while serving as archbishop of Buenos Aires, the Pope had been an exponent of the Argentine version of liberation theology.

For decades, liberation theologians in Latin America, deeply critical of the church hierarchy’s ties to military dictatorships, were denounced as Marxist by the vehemently anti-communist Polish pope, John Paul II.

He was succeeded by his conservative doctrinal enforcer, the German cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who was nicknamed “God’s rottweiler”.

Under its first Latin American pope, however, the Vatican is recognising the strengths of the movement that gave priority to the poor. Francis has eschewed the pomp of the papacy — refusing to wear red papal slippers and insisting on living in the Vatican guesthouse rather than the luxurious papal apartment overlooking St Peter’s Square.

The first pope to take the name of St Francis of Assisi has proclaimed that he wants “a poor church for the poor”. This outreach comes as the Catholic Church is confronting sex and money scandals and suffering a loss of many faithful to evangelical churches.

Francis is understood to be writing a new encyclical on poverty, to be titled Beati Pauperes, or Blessed are the Poor.

A new biography, by Paul Vallely, reports that the Pope has secretly been taking advice from the left-wing Brazilian theorist Leonardo Boff, a leading proponent of liberation theology.

Francis has also unblocked moves to canonise Oscar Romero, the archbishop of San Salvador who was shot dead at the altar after condemning violence by the military in El Salvador. He is considered a hero by liberation theologians.

Francis has just appointed the Papal Nuncio in Venezuela, Pietro Parolin, as his new Secretary of State, the Vatican’s equivalent of prime minister.

In an interview with the pro-government Venezuelan newspaper Ultimas Noticias, before he was named, Archbishop Parolin gave a careful endorsement of liberation theology. “On liberation theology, and I say this with all my heart . . . things are much clearer now,” he said.

“The church has a preferential option for the poor . . . But it’s also always clarified that it’s not an exclusive option, or one that excludes anyone. The church must not assume Marxist categories, or class struggle.”

The occasion of this week’s double-page spread in the official Vatican newspaper was the publication of an Italian translation of a 2004 book co-written by the father of liberation theology and a German theologian who is now the Vatican’s doctrinal chief.

Gerhard Ludwig Muller was appointed by Benedict XVI last year to his former post as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican’s chief ideologist. The German bishop and professor was not only close to the German pope, but also a lifelong friend of the Peruvian theologian Gustavo Gutierrez, who coined the term “liberation theology”.

The two will present their book, On the Side of the Poor, at a festival in Mantua, Italy.

“This new Pope is supporting a fresh look at the situation of the poor all over the world,” said Marco Politi, an author of books on the Vatican. “What is coming is this ‘people’s theology’, which seems very much about the poor and the rift between the poor and the rich.”

Yes, because Republicans can certainly win without Catholic votes

They're certainly not voting for conservative candidates!

LifeSiteNews recently reported the unsurprising findings of a poll commissioned by The Washington Post and ABC stating that a majority of American Catholics are in favor of abortion in “all or most cases.”
-- from the thread Why you shouldn’t blame the clergy that a majority of Catholics support abortion
The disagreement over Notre Dame and Obama is essentially the same as the disagreement among clashing American Catholic camps over the issue of the moral and legal status of abortion itself. In fact, 61 percent of the “attend less often” Catholics believe that abortion rights should be protected in all or most cases, as opposed to 30 percent (still an interesting number) among the “attend weekly” Catholics.
— from the thread Those consistently complex “Catholic voters”
They may call themselves Catholics, and they may even go to Mass, but when it comes to life choices they are virtually indistinguishable from everyone else in America. They don’t live radical Christianity out in any real sort of way. Their lives look just like the lives of their worldly neighbors. They don’t give any more than the average joe. They seem just as likely to divorce their spouses, have only 2.5 children as their non Catholic neighbors and they seem just as materialistic as everyone else. They attend church if they feel like it, but if there’s a weekend football game or the call of the beach house they’re just as likely to respond to that demand. When it comes to voting, they’ll vote as they wish according to wherever they get their opinions from–TV, the newspaper, the mass media–just like their neighbors. The one source they won’t consider when informing their vote is their priests and bishops.
— from the thread Catholic Vote?
Are Catholics now so “successfully” assimilated into American political life that they are without political impact—that there really is no such thing as a “Catholic vote”? Unfortunately enough, Catholics are largely indistinguishable from non-Catholics and, despite a few pundits, no, there really is no “Catholic vote.” This obvious conclusion—clear enough from the fact that the vote for the winning candidates in the last national election was approximately the same for Catholics and non-Catholics—has serious current implications....
....Compare two lists: According to the USCCB, the five most Catholic states, in population, are: Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Connecticut. According to the American Life League, the states with the most pro-life legislation (i.e., inhibiting abortion in various ways) are: Oklahoma, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Arkansas and Texas. This is a shocker. In short, there is no Catholic political impact in support of life in those states reportedly having the most Catholics. As Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia put it, after the 2008 election, “[w]e need to stop overcounting our numbers, our influence, our institutions, and our resources, because they are not real.”
— from the thread The Mythical Catholic Vote: The Harmful Consequences of Political Assimilation
According to Pew Research statistics, 23.9% of Americans are Catholics....Out of this very influential voter block came a Catholic majority which twice voted for Barack Obama. Understandably, voting for a Presidential candidate isn't a simple proposition, as candidates on both sides offer strengths and weaknesses. Yet, the Catholic decision to endorse Obama as President ratified the American Catholic movement as freely, and willfully, moving toward apostasy. If this sounds harsh, and overtly right wing, please feel free to dissect the political implications, and tell me where the apostasy, and idolatry, doesn't exist....Never before has a President overtly attacked religious freedom as has been instituted, as of the first of this month, in the HHS mandate. Gay marriage, moreover, has reached historical precedents through a left-radical push, endorsed by an administration which is overtly against established religious authority. And contraception, in Plan B, has become more than a moral issue, as it has been inculcated into a larger political battering ram, tearing down Constitutional and moral-ethical American Tradition.
Recapping, a majority of American Catholics have endorsed abortion, religious persecution, gay 'marriage,' contraception, and government tyranny.
-- from the thread Bringing a spiritual indictment against American Catholicism [don ye the asbestos suits]

Now people complain about taxes and government control but spout utter garbage whenever the Catholic Church says Catholics should get back to what they were doing when Christian charity helped keep government in check. It's not just the Catholic Church, either, any church that would start to advocate the sort of network the YMCA/YWCA once was would be similarly attacked.

With the level of taxation and destruction of intact families that is impossible at this point.

The collapse is coming, and since the strong centralized government destroyed all the smaller institutions below it people are going to have nothing. No family, no charities, no freedom.

All of this because the Churches spent the last 100 years urging its flock to commit the sins of theft and envy.

While they may have materially helped the poor they destroyed the souls of the poor. Single motherhood, bastardy, and irresponsibility are subsidized while good behavior is punished.

The slick politicians that were willing to do the stealing were also the same ones who forced abortion and gay marriage on the culture..

When these Social Justice and Liberation Theology Christians meet there maker do you think "We only wanted to help the poor" is going to be sufficient excuse for the total destruction of society they are responsible for?

"All of this because the Churches spent the last 100 years urging its flock to commit the sins of theft and envy."

"Shrewd" money management advisers instructed millions of people on how to move their parents assets around so that as soon as they hit 65 their parents would be eligible for every possible benefit since, on paper, they were all but indigent. Was that "Churches" undermining society?

Millions of people who had no need for assistance made sure their kids got Pell grants so the kids would have more spending money while in college. Was that "Churches" undermining society?

Millions of people who complain about big government and high taxes spent the past fifty years supporting their "good democrat" every election because their "good democrat" brought home the pork to pay for local projects with Federal funds. Was that "Churches" undermining society?

That's just three examples out of dozens of similar examples of the real problem and they're all individual decisions not based on what "Churches" teach and not based on a Christian view of responsibility, family, and charity.

Blaming "Churches" is just another cop out to avoid looking in the mirror.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.