Given that it is an underpinning text of texts that have heavily informed my own beliefs I can't believe it has taken me this long to read through this book, but there you have it. I've now corrected that oversight. As the author is coming from a position of relative Catholic orthodoxy (relative being key here since the ideas are quite radical)
(
Read more... )
I don't read the passage about theology and action the same way you do - I don't think he's saying theology should precede action. If anything the language of "accompany" and "linked to" suggests (an ideal?) that they develop side by side. But, yes, it is clear from the book that liberation theology is already a thing and that the purpose of the book is not to "create" it but to systematize the arguments for it.
I'm not really familiar with secular theology beyond Bishop Spong, who I find interesting but is not the approach I resonate with most. I think there's something to be said for your argument that secular theology basically leads to a non-religious/non-theological culture but I think Spong would probably respond with something like: If so, so what? In his view there is no other option that has full integrity so if that's the inevitable result, so be it. I think Gutierrez's arguments are of a slightly different vein and actually does a pretty good job of arguing faith isn't secondary or marginal - that action without faith or that marginalizes faith is in danger of going off the tracks and, at worst, is outright dangerous. I can't speak to whether his arguments have veracity beyond saying that for me personally liberation theology one of the few things that has kept me within the fold of organized religion. And, yes, there is a certain irony in an agnostic Christian saying secular theology is a problem because it undermines faith, and probably also a certain irony in agnostic Christians debating the finer points of theology. :D
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment