Liberation Theology

[joshuabgood]

Is it? Elsewhere you have cited authors who claim that only white people can be racist; that racism didn’t exist before America did; that racism was “invented” in 1609; that racism didn’t exist in places that were pre-contact with Europeans.

So do you want to walk all that back or not?

I feel this is a misrepresentation of my position in a myriad of ways. However, I'd suggest keeping this thread for liberation theology. I think I am willing to stand on my already written record regarding my thoughts on racism, how it exists in this society, etc.

[Ken]

The antebellum south, Marxism was not a concern, Ken. The North was not a Communist Marxist revolution either.

Marxism calls for the abolition of Christian religion. You seem to be upset that people like myself reject that.

You never fail to miss the point Josh. My argument wasn't that abolition and the Civil War were Marxist movements. Das Kapital wasn't even published until 1867,

My argument was that the abolitionists of the 19th century (and before) were essentially making the same theological argument as the Liberation Theology movement of the 1970s and 1980s.

And that those who opposed them on theological grounds were also essentially using the same theological arguments. The pro-slavery Southern and Confederate theologians in the antebellum south and the conservative Catholic theologians in the 1970s.

[HondurasKeiser]

The antebellum south, Marxism was not a concern, Ken. The North was not a Communist Marxist revolution either.

Marxism calls for the abolition of Christian religion. You seem to be upset that people like myself reject that.

You never fail to miss the point Josh. My argument wasn't that abolition and the Civil War were Marxist movements. Das Kapital wasn't even published until 1867,

My argument was that the abolitionists of the 19th century (and before) were essentially making the same theological argument as the Liberation Theology movement of the 1970s and 1980s.

And that those who opposed them on theological grounds were also essentially using the same theological arguments. The pro-slavery Southern and Confederate theologians in the antebellum south and the conservative Catholic theologians in the 1970s.

I'm curious about the sources for these proto-liberation theologian abolitionists. I'd love to compare their arguments to those of someone like Gutierrez.

[Ken]

The antebellum south, Marxism was not a concern, Ken. The North was not a Communist Marxist revolution either.

Marxism calls for the abolition of Christian religion. You seem to be upset that people like myself reject that.

You never fail to miss the point Josh. My argument wasn't that abolition and the Civil War were Marxist movements. Das Kapital wasn't even published until 1867,

My argument was that the abolitionists of the 19th century (and before) were essentially making the same theological argument as the Liberation Theology movement of the 1970s and 1980s.

And that those who opposed them on theological grounds were also essentially using the same theological arguments. The pro-slavery Southern and Confederate theologians in the antebellum south and the conservative Catholic theologians in the 1970s.

I'm curious about the sources for these proto-liberation theologian abolitionists. I'd love to compare their arguments to those of someone like Gutierrez.

There has been an enormous amount written about the religious roots of the 19th century abolition movement. Here is just one example:

http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/tse ... mabrel.htm

But I expect you can find hundreds of more academic and scholarly works on the topic. The parallels between the 19th Century abolition movement and the 20th Century liberation theology movement seem pretty obvious to me. And the arguments opposed to both movements also take a similar tone. But I don't know if anyone has ever directly compared them in any sort of scholarly or theological discussion. It would be a good topic for an upper level HS or college history assignment.

[Josh]

The 19th century abolitionist movement was not at all the same as 20th century Marxism.

Try again, Ken.

[Ken]

The 19th century abolitionist movement was not at all the same as 20th century Marxism.

Try again, Ken.

No one including me ever said that it was. Where do you come up with such nonsense Josh?

[Josh]

The 19th century abolitionist movement was not at all the same as 20th century Marxism.

Try again, Ken.

No one including me ever said that it was. Where do you come up with such nonsense Josh?

You were busy saying earlier that they were basically the same and people opposing them are the same (bad) people.

[ken_sylvania]

The 19th century abolitionist movement was not at all the same as 20th century Marxism.

Try again, Ken.

No one including me ever said that it was. Where do you come up with such nonsense Josh?

You were busy saying earlier that they were basically the same and people opposing them are the same (bad) people.

That is not what he said. It would really be nice Josh if you could spend about a week making true statements instead of accusing people of saying things they never said.

[Josh]

Ken:

In the antebellum south, Southern Baptist and other southern theologians made much the same arguments against abolition and argued that northern churches who advocated for abolition were theologically in error for essentially the same reasons that you cite above. And that was before Marxism.

Once again, we see anyone who opposed Marxism,
Communism, and socialism painted by Ken as evil people like the “antebellum south”.

It’s obvious what his rhetoric here is. If you oppose socialism, liberal theology, etc. you are a racist and a bad person. His schtick is tiresome. He makes comments like the above and then pretends that isn’t what he really means.

[HondurasKeiser]

You never fail to miss the point Josh. My argument wasn't that abolition and the Civil War were Marxist movements. Das Kapital wasn't even published until 1867,

My argument was that the abolitionists of the 19th century (and before) were essentially making the same theological argument as the Liberation Theology movement of the 1970s and 1980s.

And that those who opposed them on theological grounds were also essentially using the same theological arguments. The pro-slavery Southern and Confederate theologians in the antebellum south and the conservative Catholic theologians in the 1970s.

I'm curious about the sources for these proto-liberation theologian abolitionists. I'd love to compare their arguments to those of someone like Gutierrez.

There has been an enormous amount written about the religious roots of the 19th century abolition movement. Here is just one example:

http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/tse ... mabrel.htm

But I expect you can find hundreds of more academic and scholarly works on the topic. The parallels between the 19th Century abolition movement and the 20th Century liberation theology movement seem pretty obvious to me. And the arguments opposed to both movements also take a similar tone. But I don't know if anyone has ever directly compared them in any sort of scholarly or theological discussion. It would be a good topic for an upper level HS or college history assignment.

Thank you Ken, for the resource. On a personal note, though I recognize that our temperaments and theological leanings would have been at odds, I have nevertheless always admired the Abolitionists of the 19th Century. They were simply a fascinating lot. Incidentally, I had the good fortune this morning to listen to a back "Friday Feature" from Mars Hill Audio where host Ken Meyers interviews Prof. Mark Noll on this very subject: "American Biblicism & slavery".

That being said, I don't deny that revolutionaries of all epochs tend to strike a similar tone and indeed tend to have similar complaints (sometimes legitimate, sometimes less so). I do think there's a through-line from say the French Revolution, the proto-Progressive reforms of the Anglo-American world, the Nationalist movements in Central Europe, the Bolshevik Revolution, The Cultural Revolution of Mao, the 68'ers, and up to the present Woke revolution that various people on the right and left have identified as a kind of cultural paradigm shift. That doesn't mean they all believe the same things or even rest on the same assumptions; simply that, revolution, utopianism and a belief in the forward progress of history being what they are: these varied and sundry (and oft competing movements) nevertheless tend to have quite a few similarities in their look, tone and tactics.

With respect though to the Abolitionists of 19th Century America; though they may talk quite a bit about oppression and the manifest evils of the system that was slavery and even the economic system that depended upon slavery for its survival. I nowhere see them making the metaphysical claims that Marx builds his theory on or that the Liberation Theologians adopted as their analysis in the building of their theology. Namely that:
1. The class consciousness of oppressed peoples is a defining attribute of an individual.
2. The history of mankind is pushed forward by the oppressor/oppressed dialectic.
3. Truth is found in praxis not theory.
I may be entirely wrong. Perhaps someone like Garrison believed things like this but without the aid of a fully articulated philosophy that Marx soon would lay out. If so, then I might say that some of the Abolitionists were something like proto-Marxists. I'd encourage you to listen to the interview with Mark Noll - he did a spectacular job of unpacking the competing hermeneutics employed by both the pro-slavery Americans and their Abolitionist and Anti-Slavery countrymen. The Abolitionists especially, sound like proto-Progressives and early versions of Liberal Theologians much more than nascent Marxists.

Your post to me of course was not to tag the Abolitionists as Marxists before Marx. It was to say something far more banal - "Liberal Theologians aren't really Marxists because even the Abolitionists spoke that way". Leaving aside the charge of "Marxist" I would push back and say:

1. No, the Abolitionists did not speak of dialectics, class consciousness or praxis over theory which are solidly Marxian developments used to critically undermine traditional analysis.
2. The Liberation Theologians did in fact employ a Marxist analysis and they used explicitly Marxist language to build their theology.
3. That the two movements struck similar tones I think is a consequence of them both being social revolutionaries.
4. Early Liberation Theologians were very forthright in their use of Marx as an analytical tool. (read again Moltmann's quote)
5. Whether this makes someone like Gutierrez or Assmann or Moltmann a Marxist I guess is debatable. Their thinking though certainly has a Marxist quality to it though that I simply do not see in the writings of someone like Garrison or the Grimke sisters.
6. What's more the conclusions of people like Assmann and Gutierrez (namely, the necessity of violent revolution) are far more in line with those of Marxist revolutionaries than are those of many of the Abolitionists (John Brown notwithstanding).