Saturday, February 27, 2010

Liberation Theology

4. The Basic Christian Community Movement


When Somoza was president of Nicaragua during the 1970’s, Ernesto Cardenal, a Nicaraguan priest, was a revolutionary poet, expressing his feelings of revolt against him. Cardenal got so involved in his opposition that he joined a revolutionary movement, the guerilla FSLN. Although he began as a pacifist, saying that arms should be used only in self-defense, in 1978 he changed to support armed insurrection. When Daniel Ortega came to power, Cardenal was appointed Minister of Cultural Affairs in the Sandinista regime. The Catholic Church censured him for his action as a Marxist.
In an effort to advance the Marxist Revolution, Cardenal formed study groups on the order of communist cells, in which he advanced the revolution by teaching liberation theology. He made his theology as he went. Leaders would later call this practice, “doing theology.” Cardenal called his groups “The Basic Christian Community,” and later, “The People’s Church.” This essay concerns the development of libration theology in these cells. In order to make the cell appear to be a Bible study, Cardenal read Bible stories about poor and oppressed people, such as Jesus’ reading Isaiah 53.

“The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom
for the prisoners and recover the sight of the blind,
to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor” (Luke 4:18, 19).

Cardenal asks, “What does this story mean to you?”
Someone responded, “It means that we are the poor, oppressed prisoners, the proletariat. We are poor because the bourgeois capitalists have exploited us. And comrade Jesus came to liberate us.”
“Very good,” says Cardenal, “if this is what you think this story means, if this is what it means to you, be assured that this is what it means.”
“Read us another story,” someone requests.
“Very well,” says the priest, and he begins to read again. “Jesus entered the temple area and drove out all who were buying and selling there” (Matt.21:12).
“I know what that means,” said an illiterate peasant “the money changers are the greedy capitalists and our Liberator is overthrowing them because they are exploiting us.”
“You must remember the other Bible stories we have read,” says Cardenal, “how the Egyptians enslaved the Jews and how the Jews overcame by organizing, overthrew the Egyptians and delivered themselves [Notice the emphasis on self-liberation].”
The people exchange stories, traditions, superstitions and an occasional Bible incident.
“You are not the docile poor,” Cardenal told the people “you are the erupting poor. You are angry and it’s all right to be angry. God welcomes angry people into the church on their own terms. As God’s people you are expected to engage in creative disobedience (emphasis added).
“After a catechism drill from Juan Luis Secundo’s, A Theology for Artisans of a New Humanity, they were dismissed.”
Harvey Cox of Harvard Divinity School, attempting to justify Cardenal’s innovations said, “The Basic Christian Community is “the Christian response to the bourgeois revolution, the economic pattern of the capitalists and their ‘modern’ religious mentality.” This is an example of how the liberationists blamed the U.S. rather than the Soviets for the Latin American Revolution. Cox goes on to say that Jesus also ran into difficulty, “not principally over doctrine but rather because he clashed with property owners, defending the poor and landless.” “It was the rabble,” Cox said, “who formed the majority of Jesus’ movement. Jesus was executed as a threat to the Roman emporium, and Christianity was a political factor from its earliest days,” not over doctrine but with property owners as a political factor.” What Bible, pray tell, is Cox reading? This is a clear example of how these LT proponents make the Bible say whatever they want it to say in order to justify their apostate theology.
Regarding the “liberation” movement, Cox said, “This represents the most promising response Christianity has made so far to the change of the tradition from a modern to a post-modern world, the clearest sign of the continuing presence of Christ in History.” Cox and his progressive friends advanced “post-modern” rather than biblical Christianity.
These LT cells, called “The People’s Church,” spread all over the world. By 1984, we were told; there were 200,000 such groups in Latin America, with 80,000 in Brazil alone. And the Catechism drills were so effective that Cardenal taped them and printed them as a “Commentary on the New Testament.” These cell groups were effective, in that they supplied the revolution with both men and motive. And as you know, the Soviet Union came in with lots of money and supplies, while the missionaries from the U.S. marched in lockstep with them in the Marxists revolution, all the time blaming the United States as the oppressor, lobbying for all the money they could get from our government, and enlisting their churches in the name of Christ to aid in the support of the Socialist Revolution.
When the People’s Church services were over, it was time for the people to engage in the revolution against those who would establish democratic governments. These people truly believed what they had been taught and were glad to do as they were told. They joined their Marxist comrades and the missionaries from the U.S. and they all marched together to the drumbeat of the Soviet Union.
Cox continues, “Liberation Theology is a church theology…par excellence, emerging as it does from basic congregations vigorously engaged in mission…By this radical interpretation of the Bible and ‘worldly’ definition of the ‘base’, the Latin Americans are projecting a decidedly ‘post-bourgeois’ worldview that recognizes class conflict…as a principle mechanism for social change.” Marx had begun the class conflict…as a principle mechanism for social change.” And, I might add, he set the world into conflict to bring it about. Liberationists, having a theology based on Marx’s philosophy of history, and they are committed to the Marxist cause.
Speaking of the French Revolution, Edmund Burke said, “Something must be destroyed, or they seem to themselves to have existed for no purpose.”

New Testament Commentaries
Many other liberationists besides Ernesto Cardenal have written commentaries on the New Testament. Rev. Theodore Snyder, the Methodist minister who went about lecturing on Theological Options wrote such a commentary on Romans. Phillip Potter, General Secretary of the World Council of Churches (1972-84), and his wife, Bärbel Wittenberg-Potter, an ordained minister in the German Lutheran Church, wrote a Liberationist commentary on Galatians, which she titled Freedom Is for Freeing. Such liberties have been taken with the Bible that our generation has almost forgotten what God actually said about anything. You wouldn’t believe how they have distorted Paul’s letters. If each individual, according to his subjective understanding and in his own particular context, is free to interpret the Bible for himself without regard for the rules of hermeneutics. I wonder why anyone would write a commentary to explain what Paul meant, if it is understood in advance that he means whatever each reader thinks he means. Each person’s subjective understanding is his teacher.

Pope John II Opposed Liberationists
The roots of LT in the Catholic Church go back to the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), and the Second Latin American Bishop’s Council held in Medellin, Columbia (1968). Since the 1980s, the church hierarchy, led by Pope John Paul II, has criticized LT and its advocates for supporting the Marxist class struggle and the violent revolution. The pope visited Latin America and insisted that the bishops and priests desist. Nothing is more clearly established than this facts; it was broadcast in the news.

Marxist radicals influenced the Catholic missionaries to work with them in the “liberation of the poor.” Catholic missionaries, in turn, persuaded Protestant missionaries to join the Movement. Instead of liberating sinners from sin, both Catholic and Protestant missionaries, and their churches, assisted the Marxist in “liberating” the poor from poverty and oppression. As always, when people leave the Word of God, they also leave the God of the Word.

Along with the bishop’s declaration and the establishment of The People’s Church, another monumental event happened—Gustavo Gutièrrez, a Peruvian priest wrote the “bible” on LT in 1971 and titled it, A Theology of Liberation. From the 60’s on, LT has not been only “the preferred option for the poor,” but the preferred theology for the progressive churches – both Catholic and Protestant.

As a matter of helpfulness at this point, I should mention that one of the most helpful books against LT is Liberation Theology, the Church’s Future Shock, Gerald Berghoef and Lester DrKoster, 1984.

Friday, February 19, 2010

3. Liberation Theology Spreads, Part 2

The United States

Although persons and places have changed in the last twenty years, progressive Marxism in the form of liberation theology is still with us in economics, politics and religion. We continue with part two, the spread of liberation theology in the United States.

The Clergy
Under the caption, “American Clergy and Totalitarian Regimes,” Human Events (Dec. 3, 1988) described the attitude of the U. S. clergy during the Latin American Revolution, supported by the Soviets.

For reasons that are difficult to comprehend, many American clergymen, when they move from their religious vocation and regimes to discussing world affairs, show a marked tendency to defend and apologize for totalitarian regimes.

Consider their attitude toward the Sandinista regime, which has embarked upon a campaign of religious persecution…yet, rather than denounce religious persecution, many of our own religious leaders and groups have defended the Sandinista government. The National Council of Churches issued a statement entitled, ‘No Religious Persecution in Nicaragua.’ “The statement declared, ‘Reports of repression of religion in Nicaragua are exaggerated and are part of a general trend in the U. S. to discredit the Nicaraguan government.’

At about the same time, 525 bishops representing the 70-million-strong Anglican Communion met in Great Britain and gave their blessing to terrorism and the use of violence for political ends. This gathering…included 127 bishops from the U. S.

Why, in the battle between freedom and tyranny, are churches so often on the wrong side? This is a question that should trouble the men and women in the pews of churches that have turned the gospel on its head in an effort to be ‘relevant,’ not to the word of God but to the trendy politics of the movement. ”

This is unthinkable, but I can affirm that it is true. While researching and writing my book on this subject, I received little help from fellow-ministers, simply because we were on different sides – so many of they had bought this church-clad Marxism while I had opposed it.

The Reformed Church
The headquarters of the Reformed Church is in Grand Rapids, Michigan. This is Allen Boesak’s church. (Remember Allen Boesak? He’s the pastor who wanted revolutionaries for members in his South African church, even if they were atheists). The Reformed Church was once known for its solid stand on the Word of God, but now it has accepted LT with its distorted interpretation of the Word.

Publishers
Orbis Books of Catholic Maryknoll Mission is the foremost publisher of LT books in the United States. Friends Press, the Quaker publisher, has completely gone over to LT and environmentalism. William B. Eeerdmans Publishing Co. of Grand Rapids, publisher of great Christian books for decades, has turned to publishing books on LT, feminism and ecology. Eeerdmans is the Protestant counterpart of Catholic Paulist Press. Sometimes they publish jointly, as in the case of Arthur Simon’s book, Bread for the World. (Simon is the founder and for years the executive–secretary of a lobby group in Washington that doesn’t give a loaf of bread to anyone but instead collects millions from churches, and lobbies congress to pass all sorts of social spending bills.) Many others are pushing liberation theology books also.

The Civil Rights Movement
The American Civil Rights Movement has been greatly influenced by Marxist socialism. Jesse Jackson has been one of the most influential leaders of this movement. A number of years ago a Peruvian terrorist, a Maoist revolutionary, along with his guerillas were devastating Peru. He, like the other drug dealers, hid out and couldn’t be captured. But one day they caught and imprisoned him. A petition was sent out for signatures, demanding his release. I saw a copy of the petition and was not surprised to see that Jessie Jackson, along with a number of university professors and other influential people had signed it. Jackson’s protests, marches, strikes and shake downs are highly motivated by the Marxist philosophy of “spreading the wealth around.” This is an Obama quote, but Marx and Jackson said it first.

The Feminist Movement
Women picked up the Marxist philosophy and the LT parlance, and their new-found faith spread like the latest fashion from Paris. Some became all heart and wanted to give the world to the poor, while others became aggressive and controlling, disrupting the tranquility of their churches. Their “new affection” had expelled their lovely, gentle manner and turned them into secular materialists. By the time the Soviet Union fell, socialism and liberation theology had become deep-rooted in society. The women were deceived and changed by this experience; some were disillusioned and joined the drift toward socialism, led by their church organizations and national leaders. Do you realize how rapidly and how far our nation and churches have drifted in this direction? Deception is the better part of Marxism.

Women’s Study Groups
In my research, I noticed some words that the liberationists have brought into vogue in Latin America and South Africa, which were showing up in our church literature—words such as praxis (practice or doing and seeing results, i.e., “doing theology”) and kairos (the opportune time). The former word suggested replacing biblical theology with practicable theology (as if biblical theology is not feasible) and the latter referred to a theology for the present political crisis. The women of the churches used these revolutionary words in their classes, not knowing where they had come from or exactly what they meant in their contexts. For a while their theology was a praxis theology and every moment was a kairos moment! But when the Soviet Union fell and Latin America and South Africa stopped using these words, which also disappeared from the women’s literature. This was only liberationist jargon. These are good words but they were exploited for Marxist use. The women of the churches went right along, keeping step with both the Marxists and the liberationists. Why are people so gullible and so prone to follow passing fad?

Peace and Ecology Movements
Peace and Ecology Movements, ranging from Greenpeace to the Mennonites and Quakers, have gone completely over to Marxist theory of liberation. Two words have became very popular in these movements—peace and justice. “Peace” meant the cessation of anti-communist resistance and allowing the Marxist to establish socialism, and “justice” meant the elimination of capitalism and the distribution of wealth to the poor. American Christians picked up these words and used them as if suddenly they understood them for the first time. They harped on peace and justice without understanding what these meant in their context, just as the women used praxis and kairos.

The list could go on and on. That which was once an “exciting new theology,” is now so entrenched and familiar that it has become the norm. But you must remember that it is still religious Marxism. As Lenin predicted, Marxist philosophy has been “dressed up in religious clothes and accepted by the church.”

________________________________

Response to Liberation Theology Introduction: “Lacy, this is a lot to take in, but what a challenge.... love Betts.” (This will no doubt be the case with others, but those who accept the challenge for the next few weeks will be the ones who understand what is happening in the dark world of postmodern theology, and will shine the light of Christ upon it; stay with me. LW)

Saturday, February 13, 2010

2. Liberation Theology Spreads, Part 1

• Emilio Castro, General Secretary of the World Council of Churches, after a meeting with Pope John II said, “God works through the Marxist Revolution in order to bring all men together.”
• Dr. E. Stanley Jones, missionary/author, said, “God reached out and put his hand on the Russian Communists to produce a just order and to show a reluctant church what it has missed ....”
• Dr. Otis Gatewood, minister/ missionary/college president said, “The communists themselves are in some ways advocates of Christianity… They are in many respects, practicing Christians… They deny God, yet they confess him, not only in action, but also in word.”
• Millions of others, including ministers, missionaries, professors and ordinary believers who would not go as far as these men went, have nevertheless accepted the same liberation theology, which is still religious Marxism. By the time the Soviet Union fell, these liberationists had this Marxist philosophy well established in their governments, universities and churches; and they went right on doing their Marxist thing, supposing that God is now working through them “to bring all men together.” If you have not followed the liberation theology movement, you will be shocked to learn how widespread and seductive it is. We see this every day on TV, and it is the major problem in our government. Socialism, whether secular or religious, destroys democracy.

Latin America

Liberation Theology began in Latin America, and in 1968 it was called, “The preferred option for the poor.” After that date, it dominated Latin America and from there spread around the world. This essay lists some of the people and organizations that worked in the Marxists cause and the result of their efforts.

The World Council of Churches

In 1972, the World Council of Churches (WCC) adopted a well-developed system of liberation theology. This Marxist inspired organization sent vast sums of money to North Vietnam, the communist backed South West Africa People’s Organization (SWAPO), and South African communist front organizations, such as the African National Congress (ANC). The WCC is responsible for the overthrow of a number of sovereign nations and aiding the communists in their occupation of them. They supported thousands of both Cuban and U.S.S.R. troops in Angola against the sovereign state of Namibia during its formation.
The WCC believes in the broadest kind of pluralism. As far back as 1968 the WCC pledged “full fellowship with those of all races, classes, ages, religions, and political convictions, “in the place where they live.” They never had any qualms about supporting the communists. “The place where they live,” is a clear description of contextual theology, which, like a chameleon, changes its color to suit its environment.
We should familiarize ourselves with the World Council of Churches, its origin, its source of funding and its activities. The National Federation for Social Action flowed into the Federal Council of Churches in 1908. Rev. Harry F. Ward, founder of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and a professor at Union Theological Seminary, who had been identified under oath as a communist party member, was the Federation’s most prominent leader. The Federal Council of Churches evolved into the WCC on August 22, 1948. Eugene Carson Blake, a United Presbyterian minister, was the founder of the WCC and Executive Secretary from 1966-1972.
Blake was a Lenin Peace Prize recipient because of his friendship with the communists. And he promoted liberation theology when it came along. By 1960, the staff director of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, Richard Arns, testified that the committee had found over one hundred persons in leadership capacity in the WCC who were either communists or had records of service to the communists. The WCC receives millions of dollars from churches and individuals who contributions to the National Council of Churches (NCC). Most of these people don’t know it, but much of their contribution to the NCC goes to the WCC for the support of Marxist socialism and revolutions, which create much of the poverty they are attempting to alleviate. These generous people are told that their money is going to the poor, but they are not told that the Marxists they are assisting often cause the poverty by their revolutions. In this way Marx has won the hearts and the support of many churches, whose politics and economics are Marxist socialism and whose religion is Marxist liberation theology.

South Africa

I must establish three facts: First, my chief concern is with liberation theology. Second, I oppose LT in favor of biblical theology and freedom. Third, my readers must understand that communism has deceived many Christians and enlisted them in the cause of universal socialism. This is first and foremost a study of the deceived and their deception. If this seems political, it is not my doing; I am only pointing out that both Marxism and liberation theology are economic/ political philosophies.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu, former General Secretary of South African Council of Churches, confirmed his solidarity with the Soviets by saying, “I am a revolutionary. If Russia were to come to South Africa today, then most of the blacks would welcome them as saviors.” He also said, “I find capitalism quite horrendous and unacceptable, I am a socialist.” And in anger he said, “To hell with the West!”
Tensions ran high in South Africa in those days; both black and white people said many things they would not have said under better circumstances. South Africa was having the same struggle as Latin America during this period—a conflict between the forces of socialism and democracy. And just as liberationists and Marxists worked together in Latin America, they also worked together in South Africa.
Harvey Cox of Harvard University Divinity School was a close friend of Bishop Tutu. Harvard welcomed Tutu, and in 1989 elected him to their board of directors.

Alan Boesak, a Reformed pastor, had a “come-as-you-are” church. He invited as members, “All who fight for justice,” with no other requirement. He said, “Jews, atheists, or nothing at all,” could be members, since all he wanted were revolutionaries. While visiting the U.S. during the summer of 1989, he called on the President—I presume to solicit funds—while at the same time condemning the U.S. for its “moral hypocrisy.” Boesak was later excommunicated from the Reformed Church for immorality.

Nelson Mandela was not imprisoned for his religion but for his violence as a Marxist revolutionary. In prison he changed his behavior but not his faith in the communist cause. His administration as president was a time of healing and reconciliation, but it was also the time during which the African National Congress (ANC), who had put him in power and elected Thabo Mbeki, an overt Marxist who had been exiled as a communist, to be his successor. Mandela supported Mbeke.

Winnie Mandela was a militant Marxist, who, in her typical rage, said, “Together, hand in hand with our boxes of matches, we will liberate this country.” She had reference to lynching by “necklacing," i. e., tying an opponent’s hands behind him, tying a gasoline-soaked tire around his body (“necklacing”), and igniting it. A victim burns to death this way, while others laugh and dance and stones him as he writhe in anguish in the flames. This was a mob-imposed penalty for supporting their apartheid government. (Type “Necklacing South Africa” and “Necklacing Haiti” in Google searches and see pictures, even videos, of lynching by necklacing. But I warn you, it is a horrible sight.

Thabo Mbeke, South Africa’s communist president following Mandela, appointed many of his Marxist comrades from the ANC to important positions in the South African government. Apartheid was eventually defeated, but Communism remained strong. And South Africa, which was once a strong Christian nation, is now in disarray as the murder capital of Africa.
I became deeply involved in a study of this, going back before Nelson Mandela was released from prison. I received periodic mailings of newspapers from South Africa, read books, magazines, and viewed videos my friends sent me. It was at this time also that I began to see how L T, which had begun in Latin America and had spread to South Africa and the U.S., had changed the churches into political action groups. Faithful Christians still preached the blood of redemption and salvation, but many missionaries condoned the revolution and violence, or at least looked the other way, as it was being perpetrated. Their mission was not to redeem souls from sin but to redeem the people from poverty and oppression. The missionaries and the Marxists worked together in this effort, while their liberal churches in the U. S. supported them.
These churches flooded these congregations with deceptive information. I know this to be true because I received much of the material that was sent out from my Mission Offices when I was affiliated with a liberal church. Liberationists hold the same philosophy as the Marxist, while at the same time placing the people in bondage to a false theology “Promising them freedom while they themselves are slaves of corruption” (2 Peter 2:19). Concluded in part two

Saturday, February 6, 2010

Liberation Theology

1. Introduction

Christian Definitions
1. “Liberation expresses the aspirations of oppressed people and classes, emphasizing the economic, social, and political process which puts them at odds with wealthy nations and oppressive classes.” –
David W. Belsiger, Family Protection Scoreboard, Liberation Theology Edition
2. “Liberation Theology is a movement…that seeks radical change along Marxist lines in politics and economics.” -- Ronald Nash, Christian author
3. Liberation theology is a combination of Marxism and Christianity, with the emphases upon the former. It does not liberation from sin but attempts to liberate from poverty and oppression. LW

Liberationists Own Definitions
1. “Liberation theology is an excellent new theology which reinterprets, in the light of the revolution, (Marxist Revolution) all terms of traditional theology: God, Christ, the priesthood, marriage, labor, everything. (Ernesto Cardenal, Nicaraguan priest and Minister of Cultural Affairs in the Sandinista Regime)
2. “Liberation Theology is an attempt to blend Marxism with Christianity by substituting political liberation for liberation from sin. When political and social transformation have occurred, the Kingdom of God will be established on earth…The mission of the church these days…is, above everything else, to preach communism. Communism, according to Marx, is a society in which there is no selfishness and injustice. It is the same as what Christians understand as the Kingdom of God.”(Ernesto Cardenal, a Marxist priest)
3. “Liberation theology is a strategic alliance with Marxism in the process of liberating the continent.” (Christians for Socialism, a Liberation Theology Publication)
4. “Liberation theology is revolutionary socialism…militant Christianity.” (Dorothy Soelle, A leading European Marxist and former professor at Union Theological Seminary)

Notes:
1. Socialism should have no part in a democratic government, nor should liberation theology have a part in Christian theology.
2. Liberation Theology is an umbrella, under which a great number of separate liberation movements shelter, such as feminist theology, black theology and contextual theology.
3. You may learn more about this “religious Marxism” and how it has affected Barak Obama and his friends, particularly Pastor Jeremiah Wright, by typing “Obama and Liberation Theology” or “Obama politics and religion” in a Google search. Type “James Cone” in a Google search for the founder of Black Power and Black Theology, the titles of two books written by Cone in 1959-60. Pastor Wright claims Cone as his mentor. Cone claims to have developed his theology by combining the teachings of Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr.

Is Liberation Theology dated?

Someone is sure to ask, “Why would anyone be interested in liberation theology now? That was the going theology 25 years ago but you don’t hear much about it any more.” Yes, it was a popular theology of the past but do you know why there is less said about it now? There are several reasons. (1) During the Communist Revolution in Latin American, the cry for liberation was in the air. The revolutionaries were promising freedom, but when it came it proved to be even greater bondage; it was Marxist Liberation Theology (LT in most instances hereafter). The people flocked to it as it infiltrated the governments, schools and churches. And when it came to be the dominant theology, opposition waned and it was not talked about as much as before. (2) As LT was being established in the struggling nations, missionaries accepted it and brought it home to their churches, seminaries and divinity schools, which also accepted it and got all excited about it. They teach it now as progressive theology without even mentioning it by name. (3) LT was inspired by and grew up with Marxism, and is supposed to have died out with the fall of the Soviet Union. (4) A generation later, many who have been taught LT have seldom heard it called by name; they just came to believe it because it was being taught in these institutions. (5) While Marxism was changing society, religious Marxism, LT, was changing the church. But most Christians have not yet come to understand its Marxist origin and nature. (6) Lenin taught that deception and stealth are characteristics of Marxism – the end justifies the means.
Liberation theology didn’t die; nor did it fade away, it became the established belief system of thousands of churches and millions of Christians instead. No dead subject will ever be so widely disseminated after its demise. If you happen to see Will Rogers anywhere, tell him there are now three things that will always be with us: death, taxes and liberation theology. No, LT is not dated. My concluding essay on this theme will make it abundantly clear that this mindset is both the philosophy and theology of our time, but I need to give you one example of this fact at the outset. You will readily recall how Obama’s Pastor Wright invoked God’s name as he cursed America. Do you understand how he got this way? He has been a long-time adherent to the radical black liberation theology of James Cone, its founder, which affects people this way. Intolerance, anger and rage have always been a part of the Marx /Lenin heritage. After twenty years in Pastor Wright’s church, you can also see where president Obama got his socialist philosophy that he brought into the government with him. Liberation theology is not dated; it is alive and well, and a present part of our government and society.

Liberation Theology, the “Preferred Option.”

Bishops in Latin America wove popular modernism and Marx’s dialectic materialism into a LT umbrella, under which a variety of liberation movements shelter. Marxist socialism had been around for years, and churches had drawn on it, but it had never been turned into a theology until the Latin American bishops declared it to be such. Catholics had been studying in Europe and accepting Marxist views, while priests at home were infiltrating the governments and leading the people into the Marxist camp. The Second General Council of Bishops convened at a seminary in Medellin, Colombia in 1968 and declared LT to be the “preferred option for the poor.” This is significant for two reasons: It was the first public declaration that LT is the preferred theology and it was declared to be the option for the poor not by the poor.
In addition to the bishops’ declaration there were other factors at work. The Soviets were supporting the Revolution, revolutionaries were violently opposing democracy, liberal priests had joined the Revolution and were spreading rebellion among the poor, the Student Christian Movement became strongly committed to the cause, the World Council of Churches—which had adopted LT in Bangkok in 1972—gave their support to the Revolution, many LT books were being published, cells that served for the training of Marxist revolutionaries suddenly incorporated LT into their programs because they realized its power, missionaries became propagandists, supported by their churches in the United States, the Marxist regimes violently opposed the citizens who were trying to establish democratic governments, the Gospel became a message of revolution and liberation rather than salvation, causing many to lose sight of their mission of evangelization and to become Marxist sympathizers and liberators, and the Church and Society of Latin America becoming a leading force in the liberation movement.

“The Liberationist starts with a Marxist commitment and draws from the Bible whatever suits his allegiance to Marxism.”(Rev. James Colbert, Christian Anti-Communism Crusade Newsletter, 3-1-89.

“For Karl Marx, socialism would be the socioeconomic system that arises after the proletarian revolution, in which the means of production are owned collectively. This society would then progress into communism.” Arthur Schlesinger Jr. Can’t you see how our progressive president and congress are leading us according to this Marxist plan?

A serious challenge

One cannot understand the present unless he has knowledge of past events, which have led up to the present. It seems incredible that so many people have no concern about how we got to where we are, what we’re doing here or where we are going. These essays on Liberation Theology will give you valuable information on these maters. Some may be displeased that they are longer and more difficult than my usual essays, but I can’t imagine anyone not wanting to know about the theology that has invaded, not only our churches but our society, our families and our lives. I spent years researching and writing my book, and a lot of time drawing these essays from it. Please don’t be like the lazy schoolboy who never studied his History lessons. His teacher kept reminding, even threatening him, because he was so lazy. One day she said plainly, “I’ve had enough of your stalling, tell me why you are unwilling to study history.” The boy replied, “I’m willing to let bygones be bygones.”