“When I give food to the poor, they call me a Saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a Communist.” (Dom Hélder Câmara 1985).

Chapter links:
Marx’s critique of capitalism: alienation & exploitation
The political basis of liberation theology
The ethical basis of liberation theology
The religious and biblical basis of liberation theology
The biblical basis of Liberation theology
Whether Marx should be used by Christians
The economic validity of Marxism
Praxis
Marx’s critique of religion
Structural sin

Introduction

1960s Latin America experienced severe poverty, unequal ownership of land and wealth, and authoritarian rule. Liberation theology is a Christian movement which emerged in this context, calling for a more active approach to poverty. It claims Christians should work alongside the poor and oppressed to transform unjust social, economic and political structures as an essential expression of their faith.

Their fundamental premise is that scripture supports their view by presenting liberation from oppression as part of God’s saving work. They think Christians must challenge the causes of poverty, not simply relieve its symptoms and effects. This is captured in their principle of the preferential option for the poor. This means giving priority of attention to those most suffering poverty and exclusion and working alongside them to their full liberation.

Liberation theologians argue that mainstream Christian responses to poverty have often fallen short of these demands. They argue the whole relationship of theology to ethics needs rethinking, if duties to the poor are to be fulfilled.

Their argument is that theology too frequently becomes disconnected from real life. The solution is requiring that theological reflection develops from from lived faith and encountered injustice. Orthopraxis (right action) is prioritised over Orthodoxy (right belief). Christians begin with faithful action against injustice, and then reflect on it through Scripture to deepen their understanding and more appropriately guide further action. This aims to prevent overly-abstract theology from getting in the way of helping the poor. 

This approach leads to another controversy, which is that liberation theologians often embrace aspects of Marxism. They think that Marxist analysis offers useful tools for fulfilling the Christian duty to the poor as they see it. Refusing such help for ideological reasons, is considered exactly the sort of attitude that has prevented Christianity from sufficiently helping the poor in the past. But critics point to the failures of communist regimes and question whether Marxist methods can be separated from their atheistic and revolutionary assumptions.

The movement was contested within the Catholic Church. John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger affirmed the duty to oppose injustice, but warned that Marxist assumptions and the priority given to politics could distort Christian faith. They insisted that political liberation must remain accountable to Christian orthodoxy and preserve the spiritual meaning of salvation.

The main positions in this debate then tend to be:

• Marx: religion cannot achieve genuine liberation because its promise of salvation sustains illusions about how suffering can be overcome.
• Liberation theology: Christianity demands liberation of the oppressed, and selective insights from Marx can help Christians fulfil this duty.
• Traditional Catholic critics such as John Paul II and Ratzinger: Christianity demands liberation, but Marxist methods bring assumptions that threaten to distort Christian faith.

The debate concerns things like:

• The use of Marx: Can Christians draw on an atheistic thinker who opposed religion without adopting assumptions incompatible with their faith?
• The validity of Marx: How convincing is Marx’s critique of capitalism, and how useful are his ideas for overcoming poverty, exploitation and concentrated power?
• Religion and liberation: Does religious hope encourage people to accept oppression, as Marx argued, or can it sustain and inspire efforts to overcome it?
• Praxis and spirituality: Does prioritising action against injustice deepen Christian faith and spiritual liberation, or does it risk subordinating doctrine and spirituality to political aims?
• The biblical basis: Do biblical teachings on wealth primarily demand personal charity and moral reform, or also require structural change and political liberation?