Poellet, Michael N.

English

Wilfrid Laurier University

ConsensusVolume 19Issue 2 Liberation Theology Article 111-1-1993Liberation TheologyMichael N. PoelletFollow this and additional works at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensusThis Foreword is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by anauthorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.Recommended CitationPoellet, Michael N. (1993) "Liberation Theology," Consensus: Vol. 19 : Iss. 2 , Article 1.Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol19/iss2/1FOREWORDIn the political, social and economic upheavals of the lastthree decades a number of political or liberationist theologieshave emerged calling upon Christians to act and reflecting atheological turn toward the wide spectrum of history’s socialcrises and oppressions as their main, if not exclusive, area ofconcern. These new “theologies of liberation” stress their iden-tity with a particular oppressed community, call for emancipa-tory (“revolutionary”) action or praxis, and engage in theo-logical reflection that arises out of this situation. Many ofthese Christians have come to recognize that the term “liber-ation” best describes what God is doing in their midst. How-ever, the scope of “liberation” comprises a threefold dimen-sion. Liberation entails a release from the oppressive aspectsof the economic, social and political processes which put thepoor and marginalized in a powerless situation with respect tothe oppressor-groups. Furthermore, liberation is seen histori-cally as human beings assume conscious responsibility for theirown destiny, and in pursuit of this freedom of destiny, bringabout desired qualitative social changes. Finally, liberation isgrounded theologically in Christ who liberates from sin whichis the root of all injustice on all levels of existence.But is this understanding of liberation compatible with andappropriate to the Lutheran understanding of justification byfaith? Certainly for Lutherans in Europe and North Americathe political incongruities between their understanding of theaction of God in history and those of Latin America, Africa,Asia and elsewhere are very obvious. Gustavo Gutierrez cap-tures this well when he remarks, “Evangelization will be reallyliberating when the poor themselves are the bearers of thegospel message. Then, to preach the gospel will be a rock ofscandal, it will be a gospel ‘unpresentable in society.’ It will be8 Consensusexpressed in an unrefined manner, it will smell bad.”l Yet, how-ever pungent the odour, this does not render liberation sense-less to justification, nor should it render justification scentlessto liberation. The contributors to this issue, from their varioussituations and perspectives, have used their theological olfac-tory senses to sniff out the interface between liberation andjustification.Most theological reflection for liberation methodologies be-gins with an assessment of one’s situation and experiencerather than with theological theory, dogma, or concepts. Sotoo this issue. “I often think that if God had spared me thispilgrimage, I would have been a better adherent to the churchthat Luther accidentally founded, because it was far away frommy comprehension, and therefore it did not disturb my person-hood”, writes Musimbi R. A. Kanyoro. This African Lutheranwoman pastor is the Executive Secretary for Women in Churchand Society at the Lutheran World Federation and it is fromthis perspective that she tells of the struggle for liberation fornot only herself, but for many women throughout the world,who, because they have been justified, journey together in theirpilgrimage of liberation. The journey literally becomes a marchas Evangelical Lutheran Church In Canada missionary to ElSalvador, Brian Rude, reflects on the return of exiles to theirhomeland and the procession which celebrates the anniversaryof Reverend Medardo Gomez’s ordination as Bishop of the Sal-vadoran Lutheran Church. Pastor Rude becomes a missionaryof the Salvadoran people to us as these processions becomeliving images of Exodus and Resurrection, God’s walk withus. Justification and liberation are seen in God’s ministry, andthus in people’s ministries, of accompaniment.From these situations of experiencing liberation and justifi-cation in action a liberation methodology now shifts to a differ-ent mode of engagement— reflection. For our reflection on jus-tification and liberation we have asked two Lutheran system-atic theologians to be our interlocutors. Gottfried Brakemeieris seminary professor in Porto Alegre, Brazil, and currentlyPresident of the Lutheran World Federation, his evangelicalreflection upon liberation centers on the question, “What isthe gospel message for Latin America?” Associate Professor ofSystematic Theology at Waterloo Lutheran Seminary, RobertForeword 9A. Kelly, addresses his question specifically to North AmericanLutherans, “If we have left our ideology or worldview intact,do we really believe that we are justified by faith alone withoutworks of law?”Dare we say it? Do we as Lutherans in Canada need tocome to grips with the situation wherein our understandingand practice of justification is in need of liberation?Our final essay returns us to being situation specific andpraxis oriented. Robert Regnier, Associate Professor andGraduate Chairperson of the Department of Educational Foun-dations, School of Education, the University of Saskatchewan,notes that, “In constructing pedagogies of critical literacy forethical refiection committed to the preservation, health, andsafety of humankind, schools are not neutral political arenasbut rather centres of ideological contestation.” Professor Reg-nier’s case study is a careful analysis of the way in which thenuclear industry and the provincial government present ura-nium mining, nuclear theology, and nuclear weapons in theSaskatchewan public school curriculum. Within this ideologi-cal hegemony there arises the call for a liberation ethic.Liberation and Justification? Indeed! They both are consti-tutive of a theology of the cross. Miguel D’Escoto, Maryknollpriest and former government minister with the Sandinista gov-ernment in Nicaragua writes:In this process I came to the conviction that the cross is not justsome type of suffering or other, as we so often think. If I havean ingrown toenail, I have a cross. Anything we don’t like we calla cross. If we’re suffering the consequences of our own careless-ness and faults we say that it’s “our cross,” and that we “have toaccept our cross.” But that’s not the cross. The cross is the in-evitable consequence of accepting the will of the Father. It’s theinevitable consequence of preaching the fatherhood [sic] of God anda communion of brothers and sisters among all human beings, anddenouncing everything that keeps this communion from becomingreality. When you do this—and therefore want to identify withthose who hunger and thirst for justice, identify with the exploitedand marginalized—you invite reprisals. When you identify withthose' who suffer, you take the risk of reprisiils. This is the cross.10 Consensus... I came to see that the cross was the greatest act of love Andif it’s the greatest act of love, then it’s the greatest act of life—it’sthe act where life is most manifest.^Michael N. Poellet, Guest EditorLutheran Theological SeminarySaskatoon, SaskatchewanNotes1 Gustavo Gutierrez, “Freedom and Liberation”, in Ronald H. Stone(ed.). Liberation and Change (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1977) 93.2 Miguel D’Escoto in Teofilo Cabestrero (ed.). Ministers of God, Minis-ters of the People: Testimonies of Faith from Nicaragua (Maryknoll,New York: Orbis Books, 1983) 109-110.

Liberation Theology

Scholars Commons

Consensus
Volume 19
Issue 2 Liberation Theology Article 1
11-1-1993
Liberation Theology
Michael N. Poellet
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus
This Foreword is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by an
authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.
Recommended Citation
Poellet, Michael N. (1993) "Liberation Theology," Consensus: Vol. 19 : Iss. 2 , Article 1.
Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol19/iss2/1
FOREWORD
In the political, social and economic upheavals of the last
three decades a number of political or liberationist theologies
have emerged calling upon Christians to act and reflecting a
theological turn toward the wide spectrum of history’s social
crises and oppressions as their main, if not exclusive, area of
concern. These new “theologies of liberation” stress their iden-
tity with a particular oppressed community, call for emancipa-
tory (“revolutionary”) action or praxis, and engage in theo-
logical reflection that arises out of this situation. Many of
these Christians have come to recognize that the term “liber-
ation” best describes what God is doing in their midst. How-
ever, the scope of “liberation” comprises a threefold dimen-
sion. Liberation entails a release from the oppressive aspects
of the economic, social and political processes which put the
poor and marginalized in a powerless situation with respect to
the oppressor-groups. Furthermore, liberation is seen histori-
cally as human beings assume conscious responsibility for their
own destiny, and in pursuit of this freedom of destiny, bring
about desired qualitative social changes. Finally, liberation is
grounded theologically in Christ who liberates from sin which
is the root of all injustice on all levels of existence.
But is this understanding of liberation compatible with and
appropriate to the Lutheran understanding of justification by
faith? Certainly for Lutherans in Europe and North America
the political incongruities between their understanding of the
action of God in history and those of Latin America, Africa,
Asia and elsewhere are very obvious. Gustavo Gutierrez cap-
tures this well when he remarks, “Evangelization will be really
liberating when the poor themselves are the bearers of the
gospel message. Then, to preach the gospel will be a rock of
scandal, it will be a gospel ‘unpresentable in society.’ It will be
8 Consensus
expressed in an unrefined manner, it will smell bad.”l Yet, how-
ever pungent the odour, this does not render liberation sense-
less to justification, nor should it render justification scentless
to liberation. The contributors to this issue, from their various
situations and perspectives, have used their theological olfac-
tory senses to sniff out the interface between liberation and
justification.
Most theological reflection for liberation methodologies be-
gins with an assessment of one’s situation and experience
rather than with theological theory, dogma, or concepts. So
too this issue. “I often think that if God had spared me this
pilgrimage, I would have been a better adherent to the church
that Luther accidentally founded, because it was far away from
my comprehension, and therefore it did not disturb my person-
hood”, writes Musimbi R. A. Kanyoro. This African Lutheran
woman pastor is the Executive Secretary for Women in Church
and Society at the Lutheran World Federation and it is from
this perspective that she tells of the struggle for liberation for
not only herself, but for many women throughout the world,
who, because they have been justified, journey together in their
pilgrimage of liberation. The journey literally becomes a march
as Evangelical Lutheran Church In Canada missionary to El
Salvador, Brian Rude, reflects on the return of exiles to their
homeland and the procession which celebrates the anniversary
of Reverend Medardo Gomez’s ordination as Bishop of the Sal-
vadoran Lutheran Church. Pastor Rude becomes a missionary
of the Salvadoran people to us as these processions become
living images of Exodus and Resurrection, God’s walk with
us. Justification and liberation are seen in God’s ministry, and
thus in people’s ministries, of accompaniment.
From these situations of experiencing liberation and justifi-
cation in action a liberation methodology now shifts to a differ-
ent mode of engagement— reflection. For our reflection on jus-
tification and liberation we have asked two Lutheran system-
atic theologians to be our interlocutors. Gottfried Brakemeier
is seminary professor in Porto Alegre, Brazil, and currently
President of the Lutheran World Federation, his evangelical
reflection upon liberation centers on the question, “What is
the gospel message for Latin America?” Associate Professor of
Systematic Theology at Waterloo Lutheran Seminary, Robert
Foreword 9
A. Kelly, addresses his question specifically to North American
Lutherans, “If we have left our ideology or worldview intact,
do we really believe that we are justified by faith alone without
works of law?”
Dare we say it? Do we as Lutherans in Canada need to
come to grips with the situation wherein our understanding
and practice of justification is in need of liberation?
Our final essay returns us to being situation specific and
praxis oriented. Robert Regnier, Associate Professor and
Graduate Chairperson of the Department of Educational Foun-
dations, School of Education, the University of Saskatchewan,
notes that, “In constructing pedagogies of critical literacy for
ethical refiection committed to the preservation, health, and
safety of humankind, schools are not neutral political arenas
but rather centres of ideological contestation.” Professor Reg-
nier’s case study is a careful analysis of the way in which the
nuclear industry and the provincial government present ura-
nium mining, nuclear theology, and nuclear weapons in the
Saskatchewan public school curriculum. Within this ideologi-
cal hegemony there arises the call for a liberation ethic.
Liberation and Justification? Indeed! They both are consti-
tutive of a theology of the cross. Miguel D’Escoto, Maryknoll
priest and former government minister with the Sandinista gov-
ernment in Nicaragua writes:
In this process I came to the conviction that the cross is not just
some type of suffering or other, as we so often think. If I have
an ingrown toenail, I have a cross. Anything we don’t like we call
a cross. If we’re suffering the consequences of our own careless-
ness and faults we say that it’s “our cross,” and that we “have to
accept our cross.” But that’s not the cross. The cross is the in-
evitable consequence of accepting the will of the Father. It’s the
inevitable consequence of preaching the fatherhood [sic] of God and
a communion of brothers and sisters among all human beings, and
denouncing everything that keeps this communion from becoming
reality. When you do this—and therefore want to identify with
those who hunger and thirst for justice, identify with the exploited
and marginalized
—
you invite reprisals. When you identify with
those' who suffer, you take the risk of reprisiils. This is the cross.
10 Consensus
... I came to see that the cross was the greatest act of love And
if it’s the greatest act of love, then it’s the greatest act of life—it’s
the act where life is most manifest.^
Michael N. Poellet, Guest Editor
Lutheran Theological Seminary
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Notes
1 Gustavo Gutierrez, “Freedom and Liberation”, in Ronald H. Stone
(ed.). Liberation and Change (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1977) 93.
2 Miguel D’Escoto in Teofilo Cabestrero (ed.). Ministers of God, Minis-
ters of the People: Testimonies of Faith from Nicaragua (Maryknoll,
New York: Orbis Books, 1983) 109-110.


https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1787&amp;context=consensus

Liberation Theology

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Wilfrid Laurier University

Scholars Commons