source

ASPECTS OF BOFF’S LIBERATION THEOLOGY

Like Niebuhr, liberation theologians such as Boff do not believe that the church should necessarily be the prominent conduit for justice in society, though it of course has the highest obligation to contribute and set an example. There exists a certain ecclesiological skepticism in both systems of thought. Though the church has preached Christ as liberator, but in Boff’s estimation, the church has not generally been supportive of liberating movements for those on the periphery. Additionally, Niebuhr and Boff together stress that every theology is socially situated.[xxii]

Whereas European and colonial theologies often look to the past to retrieve their instruction, this history, constituted by the subjugation of the poor, is rejected from the liberationist point of view. It is instead the future that becomes the energizing force for liberation theology – a future that breaks with the sinful structures of oppression. And if a utopia is being envisioned, it is not to be understood as a synonym for illusion or flight from the present.[xxiii] Instead it is born from hope and serves as a model for perfecting reality and protects against stagnation. Somewhat counter-intuitively, speaking of utopia is thought to keep the social process open and prevent ideologically absolutization. For Boff, it inspires ever-increasing transformation.[xxiv]

In Latin America, immense portions of the population have been marginalized. Systemic evils transcend individual ones and have far greater consequences. It is not just that collective groups must be analyzed and regulated differently from individuals, as Niebuhr suggests, but that they must be analyzed regulated first and more urgently. This is the precise situation that Boff believes the gospel is addressing – namely, that of unjust forms of government and economy. Hence one finds in liberation theology the central motif of Jesus’s teachings about the kingdom of God – not as some unrealizable, distant end, but as a growing, immanent condition that manifests itself in accordance with our cooperation with God to loose the chains of injustice here and now. Boff understands this kingdom as a global, institutional and political revolution, though he is careful not to reduce it to any one dimension, be it economic, cultural, or political.[xxv]

Thus, all christology is united with ethics. Boff cites several passages of Scripture: “He who says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way which he walked” (1 John 2:6); “It is not those who say to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ who will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the person who does the will of my Father in heaven” (Matt. 7:21-23).[xxvi] For Boff, the historical Jesus takes precedence over the creedal Christ (though the latter is by no means excluded or eradicated): “According to the parable concerning anonymous Christians in Matt. 25:31-46, the eternal Judge will not ask people about the canons of dogma, nor whether they made any explicit reference to the mystery of Christ while they lived. He will ask if we have done anything to help those in need. Here all is decided.”[xxvii] The appeal for change in the prophetic tradition and the language of exodus from bondage are other key sources of biblical authority for liberation theology. Not to participate in this process of emancipation is to directly reject Christ and disobey God.

Poverty is concretely characterized by malnutrition; a high infant mortality rate; endemic diseases; low income; unemployment; lack of social security; lack of health care, hospitals, schools, and housing facilities. As such, it is regarded by Boff as fundamentally inhumane, offensive, and inimical to the will of God. The roots of these problems are not first and foremost identified in individuals but in the ruling class of society, its method and establishment of governance, and a “First World” culture of consumption. The issue is not one of aid but of justice. Consequently, the faith of the Western world in progress, science and technology is called into question. This elitist vision assumes that benefits will trickle down fro the top layers to those at the bottom.[xxviii] The chasm between this group and this dominated peoples is the major obstacle to development from Boff’s point of view. The material problem is such that some nations are dependent on others.[xxix] As a result, a shift in power is in order – one in which more is desired than just revision or reform. This outlook is further supported by the observation that Jesus himself challenged the existing powers and authorities of repression in his day, which in part led to his death: “The cross demonstrates the conflict-ridden nature of every process of liberation undertaken when the structure of injustice has gained the upper hand.”[xxx] At the same time, Boff also acknowledges Jesus’s resistance to the temptation of political messianism.[xxxi] In sum, the way of Jesus is a journey of eschatological hope that goes by way of, but is not limited to political hopes.