A Theological Reflection on Joerg Rieger's Liberating the Future, part 2

Criticism

The arguments in Joerg Rieger’s Liberating the Future had a lot of appeal to me because I believe that an examination of ungodly business practices and exposing them as idolatry is a part of my call as a preacher and virtue ethicist.  Like the liberation theologians in this book, I believe that orthopraxis is just as important as orthodoxy.  M. Douglas Meeks puts it this way, “Put simply, dogmatics is the church’s way of making a judgment about the truth in the face of truth claims in the church and the world that contradict Jesus Christ.”[8] I also affirm, along with liberation theologians, that God is a God of the oppressed and who can be found with them in their struggles.  Unfortunately, the alternative solutions to the current international crisis that these economic theologians offered in this volume can only be applied to human beings whose primary concerns are financial matters.  The essayists advocate a narrow definition of what liberation means.  Oppression takes on many forms other than purely economic disparity.  Wicked social structures rely on a complex web of oppression in order to maintain their legitimacy and power over the defenseless.  For example, womanist theologians and ethicists work to expose racist, sexist, and classist tendencies in society in order to work for the common good of the entire African American community, (both male and female), as well as those struggling with poverty.  While it may be in my economic interest (as a male) to support “the glass ceiling” against the promotion of women in the workforce, I could still be motivated by a factor other than money: sexism.  My sexism could be derived from experiences that I have had with women in the past or even my religious convictions drawn from a selective reading of the Christian canon that women’s roles should be at home.  Economic theologians do not take these factors into consideration when they scrutinize oppression.

The problem with liberationist ethics is that there is solely a primary concern for the telos or aim of liberation with very little attention given to the character development of the people working for liberation.  One example would be John B. Cobb’s criticism of Christian history.  He argues, whether it is the Crusades, the Holocaust, or women’s rights, that in “case after case theology has guided the virtuous into evil doing.”[9] To blame Christian doctrine for a majority of the Church universal’s sin is a bit of a stretch; right doctrine and right practice are both important for both being and doing Christianity.  History is far more complex than just the labels of victors and victims.  Another example is Susan Brooks Thistlewaite explanation of liberation praxis.  “Praxis means that theological reflection starts in the political, social, and economic realities of people’s lives [.]”[10] The situation, in liberationist praxis, ultimately determines the actions.  The teleological and situational forms of morality prevalent in liberation ethics have more to do with judging the actions that we take rather than the persons that we become; our doing is prioritized over our becoming.  The ethical dilemma posed as a question for the liberationist will be, “What would the God of liberation have me to do in this situation?” as opposed to a virtue ethicist’s inquiry, “Who is the person that God would have me to become?”    In order for a person to be able to make a choice for liberation in a given situation, that person must first be a liberated person.  It’s like what Thomas Jefferson once said, “Circumstances must always yield to substance.”[11] The situation does not determine the free agent’s decision; the person making the decision determines the action. This requires that a person possess particular virtues necessary for consistent liberative ethical praxis.  Theological reflection through the life of the church in worship, Bible study, and a proper Christian education on the Christian traditions will help form character in the lives of followers of Christ to become emancipated persons who do emancipatory work on behalf of the marginalized.

Works Cited

“Thomas Jefferson on Politics and Government.” http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeff0200.htm

Rieger, Joerg. Liberating the Future: God, Mammon, and Theology. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998.

[2] Ibid, 11

[3] Ibid, 32

[4]Joerg Rieger. Liberating the Future: God, Mammon, and Theology. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998),23

[5]Joerg Rieger. Liberating the Future: God, Mammon, and Theology. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998), 45

[6] Ibid, 63

[7] Ibid, 79-80

[8] Ibid, 44

[9]Joerg Rieger. Liberating the Future: God, Mammon, and Theology. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998), 29

[10] Joerg Rieger. Liberating the Future: God, Mammon, and Theology. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998),16

[11] Thomas Jefferson on Politics and Government. http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeff0200.htm

RodtRDH

Formerly known as Rod of Alexandria, Rod the Rogue Demon Hunter Preacher of Hope | Black Scholar of Patristics | Writer for Nonviolent Politics. Destroyer of Trolls. It must be that angry puppy.

More Posts - Website