Home > Uncategorized > An Observation on Liberation Theology and Judgment

An Observation on Liberation Theology and Judgment

Liberation theologians in general and Jon Sobrino in particular do not hesitate to use harsh condemnation when they see forces which oppose the rights and welfare of the poor and vulnerable. These people and structures are part of the “anti-Kingdom,” opposing the God of life by supporting idols of death (capitalism, national security, etc.). Sobrino’s writings always have a prophetic ring: the civilization of wealth is killing the poor and we must fight to uncover the truth and oppose this injustice with everything we can. Yet, it is important to note how Sobrino’s conceives of his project. He distinguishes between personal, social, historical, and transcendent salvation. In the book No Salvation outside the Poor, he says (and I think this is consistent with the majority of his writings), “here we will concentrate on the historical-social salvation of a gravely ill society” (57). This passage is key to understanding why his use of “salvation” in the rest of the text is indeed partial but not reductionistic.

What I want to point out here is the the way in which prophetic judgment on those who oppress the poor (and thus crucify Christ) functions. Just as much as salvation, judgment seems to remain on the historical-social level. We have many prophetic warnings about how the rich and powerful are actively opposing the will of God and God’s Kingdom. There is a striving for liberation that demands such condemnation. Nevertheless, it is striking how modern this move is in how it limits such warnings. This is clear when we read Bartolomé de Las Casas. In Las Casas we have anticipations of many impulses within liberation theology from someone deeply rooted in the biblical text and genuinely open to the suffering of the oppressed. Yet his warning go much further. One passage will suffice: interpreting Matthew 25 by recalling a question from Augustine he says, “If someone is damned to hellfire by Christ saying to him or her, ‘I was naked and you did not clothe me,’ to what hellfire will they be damned to whom He says, ‘I was clothed and you stripped me” (quoted in Gutiérrez, Las Casas 64). This passage is typical of Las Casas’ prophetic critique of the Spaniards and the socio-economic order they created. No wonder they didn’t like him! Here we have an intimate connection between the social-historical and the personal-transcendent, which brings out there seriousness of the social-historical all the more. I do not know where the line is between scare tactics and proclaiming the truth of what is really going on, but I find something utterly biblical, compelling, and unsettling in Las Casas’ words. The prophetic denunciation of people and and nations which oppress the poor goes all the way down – in oppressing the poor we reject God. As with most of us today I am no fan of fire-and-brimstone preaching (I’ll take Balthasar’s talk of universal hope any day), but if were going to have it I’ll take Las Casas.

Categories: Uncategorized Tags: , ,
  1. robbbeck
    January 28, 2011 at 12:40 pm


    This is really interesting – love this line of thinking: “Here we have an intimate connection between the social-historical and the personal-transcendent, which brings out their seriousness of the social-historical all the more.”

    Do you mean to say that Las Casas’ prophetic denunciations ‘work’ because he lived in an age where people, for the most part at least, believed in an afterlife?

    Overall, I have the same feeling when reading Chrysostom’s on Wealth and Poverty. So much of what he says about socio-economic justice works because of the sense of an afterlife, transcendence, intermediary spirits, heaven/hell, etc. Like you intimate, I’m not really interested in bringing back hell fire & brimstone preachers. But I also have to recognize that a bit of the prophetic critique is lost on us enlightened peoples (and of course this is much more profound than just petty fear mongering).

    Thanks for sharing.

  2. Todd Walatka
    January 28, 2011 at 1:20 pm

    Yes, what I like in Las Casas is the strong sense of urgency, ultimacy, and seriousness, and this flows from the fact that so much is at stake. It is clear that his focus on the “next life” does not in any way take away from life here and now. Indeed, in refusing to give life here and now one refuses Christ and life in the next. This is Sobrino’s socio-politically inflected Kingdom and anti-Kingdom but carried to a traditional conclusion of where these two kingdoms lead. Ambivalence remains for me but there is something compelling as well.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: