Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kpete

(71,991 posts)
Thu Dec 12, 2013, 05:17 PM Dec 2013

Noam Chomsky: U.S. used to have people killed for practicing what Pope Francis preaches

“There is a reason why Christians were persecuted the first three centuries,” Chomsky said. “The Gospels are radical – it’s a radical text – that’s a basically radical pacifism with its preferential option for the poor.”

He said liberation theology’s practitioners were systematically martyred over more than 20 years by U.S.-backed forces to prevent Latin American nations from installing socialist governments to benefit their own people, rather than American interests.

“The U.S. went to war (and) fought a bitter, brutal, violent war against the church,” Chomsky said. “If we had a free press that’s the way they’d present it.”

He said the U.S. supported the “overthrow of governments and institution of neo-Nazi-style dictatorships” as part of a war that finally ended in 1989 with the murder of six Jesuits and two women at the University of Central America by Salvadoran troops.

MORE:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/12/12/noam-chomsky-u-s-used-to-have-people-killed-for-practicing-what-pope-francis-preaches/

36 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Noam Chomsky: U.S. used to have people killed for practicing what Pope Francis preaches (Original Post) kpete Dec 2013 OP
As usual, Chomsky is right. nt DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2013 #1
Recommend! KoKo Dec 2013 #2
But, they did it to protect us from terrorists..or, was it communists?...well, somebody. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2013 #3
The best way to protect the populace is for a handful of people to get filthy rich. valerief Dec 2013 #5
Totally great quote from Camus vlakitti Dec 2013 #6
Thank you for that. n/t jtuck004 Dec 2013 #11
Unseen aliens from outer space will be the next boogeyman. n/t ChisolmTrailDem Dec 2013 #25
k&r for the truth. n/t Laelth Dec 2013 #4
I agree with the premise, but not the conclusion Major Nikon Dec 2013 #7
Chomsky is just perpetuating a myth that needs to go away. AlbertCat Dec 2013 #9
I beg to disagree. Persecution of Chirstians was widespread in the Empire prior to Jackpine Radical Dec 2013 #27
The problem is the only evidence for it comes from... Major Nikon Dec 2013 #28
If only it were that simple. westerebus Dec 2013 #31
Actually destroying the temple was not in the play book Major Nikon Dec 2013 #32
Titus. Second temple. 70 AD westerebus Dec 2013 #33
First Jewish–Roman War Major Nikon Dec 2013 #36
Kicked and recommended a whole bunch.....nt Enthusiast Dec 2013 #8
Liberal activists were murdered by the tens of thousands. Coyotl Dec 2013 #10
I'm sure there were a few priests who risked life and limb to promote social justice Major Nikon Dec 2013 #12
Of course, the Jesuits and nuns in El Salvador gave their lives in defense of the people. Coyotl Dec 2013 #13
People seem to forget that when social justice conflicts with the almighty dollar.... Major Nikon Dec 2013 #17
Have you ever heard of liberation theology? Comrade Grumpy Dec 2013 #14
Yes Major Nikon Dec 2013 #16
I wish I could disagree with Chomsky here, but I don't nt geek tragedy Dec 2013 #15
Much of what the Pope has said is fairly close to Liberation Theology. Eleanors38 Dec 2013 #21
All of what he said? Bradical79 Dec 2013 #22
the part quoted in the OP nt geek tragedy Dec 2013 #23
+1 uponit7771 Dec 2013 #18
“If we had a free press that’s the way they’d present it.” upi402 Dec 2013 #19
e.g. Oscar Romero, archbishop of El Salvador 0rganism Dec 2013 #20
"Haga patria, mate un cura" MisterP Dec 2013 #29
More about this on Fox News. Not. JEFF9K Dec 2013 #24
knr Douglas Carpenter Dec 2013 #26
As others have stated this Pope, IMO........ socialist_n_TN Dec 2013 #30
100% correct malaise Dec 2013 #34
k&r nt bananas Dec 2013 #35
 

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)
3. But, they did it to protect us from terrorists..or, was it communists?...well, somebody.
Thu Dec 12, 2013, 05:27 PM
Dec 2013
"The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.”
-
Albert Camus (1913-1960)

valerief

(53,235 posts)
5. The best way to protect the populace is for a handful of people to get filthy rich.
Thu Dec 12, 2013, 06:02 PM
Dec 2013

I'm too stupid to understand how that works, but it seems to be most often employed strategy by the PTB.

Major Nikon

(36,827 posts)
7. I agree with the premise, but not the conclusion
Thu Dec 12, 2013, 06:11 PM
Dec 2013

The idea that early Christians were persecuted for simply being Christians has no historical basis and is simply a construct of the Catholic Church intended to illicit sympathy. The Romans were actually quite tolerant of alternate religions (at least before Christianity became the official one). They did routinely kill people wholesale for political reasons. It's the same with Latin America. Saint Ronnie propped up murderous despots in Latin America for political reasons, not religious ones. Irreligious people were murdered for the same reasons. Chomsky is just perpetuating a myth that needs to go away.

http://www.salon.com/2013/02/24/the_myth_of_persecution_early_christians_werent_persecuted/

 

AlbertCat

(17,505 posts)
9. Chomsky is just perpetuating a myth that needs to go away.
Thu Dec 12, 2013, 06:20 PM
Dec 2013

Thank you for saying this better than I would have.

Chomsky is an interesting guy... but hardly a guru. He's wrong and his prejudices show all the time.... but not every time, or I'd say even most times. But they are clearly there.

Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)
27. I beg to disagree. Persecution of Chirstians was widespread in the Empire prior to
Fri Dec 13, 2013, 04:47 PM
Dec 2013

the so-called "Edict of Milan." The issue is more complex than I want to go into here, but see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Milan

Major Nikon

(36,827 posts)
28. The problem is the only evidence for it comes from...
Fri Dec 13, 2013, 05:03 PM
Dec 2013

the church itself.

There's very little evidence from Roman sources which kept records on just about everything or anywhere else. Short, isolated incidents, yes. Widespread and ongoing, no.

There's also plenty of evidence that the Romans were very tolerant of other religions which is the far simpler answer. The Roman empire absorbed a lot of different people with a lot of different religions and they did so very effectively. They couldn't have done this had they also been trying to convert everyone to a different religion. It was only after the Roman empire stopped growing and adopted Christianity as the official religion when they started widespread persecution based on religion. Certainly the church has a different story to tell for obvious self-serving reasons, but very little of it can be verified by independent sources.

westerebus

(2,976 posts)
31. If only it were that simple.
Sat Dec 14, 2013, 01:55 PM
Dec 2013

Romans were not in the habit of tolerating anything that they viewed as a possible threat to the administration of their empire. Sacking a city was common by Roman armies. Destroying the local Temple was in the play book as was taking slaves. Nailing criminals and dissidents, religious or political, to the nearest pole was common.

Romans allowed established religions to practice provided they kept within the bounds that Rome established. It fell on the discretion of the local Roman governor to administer his province with guidance from which ever Caesar was ruling Rome at the time.

Anyone preaching the return of their Kingdom from Rome would have found himself nailed to pole..

Early Christians were considered members of a cult. Non-Roman cults were persecuted under Roman law. When that very same cult came to power, they used the law to their advantage.

Then there was the great split of the Holy Roman Church into Roman and Greek. What came out of that was the Roman Catholic Church and the Greek Orthodox Church.

All roads lead to Rome.




Major Nikon

(36,827 posts)
32. Actually destroying the temple was not in the play book
Sat Dec 14, 2013, 03:39 PM
Dec 2013

They did build cities from the ground up on a grid system in typical Roman fashion and the evidence for this can be seen to this day. So if a temple or any other building was in the way of construction it was razed, but this has nothing to do with the building's function. The Romans also crushed political dissent with a very heavy hand, so if that dissent originated from a religious source they were not beyond crucifying religious leaders the same as anyone else who spoke out against them. As long as religion didn't get in their way, the Romans left it alone. So one must discern between actual religious persecution and that which was done for political reasons. Evidence of religious tolerance isn't that hard to find. Tiberius was critical of Pontius Pilate for desecrating Jewish temples and there are other excellent examples throughout the next few centuries. Stirring up the local religion without a very good reason was considered bad form because it often led to riots and riots were very bad for business and tax collection.

Major Nikon

(36,827 posts)
36. First Jewish–Roman War
Sat Dec 14, 2013, 04:51 PM
Dec 2013
The First Jewish–Roman War (66–73 CE), sometimes called The Great Revolt (Hebrew: המרד הגדול‎, ha-Mered Ha-Gadol, Latin: Primum Iudæorum Romani Bellum), was the first of three major rebellions by the Jews of Judaea Province (Iudaea) against the Roman Empire. The second was the Kitos War in 115–117, and the third was Bar Kokhba's revolt of 132–135.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Jewish_Revolt

Major Nikon

(36,827 posts)
12. I'm sure there were a few priests who risked life and limb to promote social justice
Thu Dec 12, 2013, 07:02 PM
Dec 2013

However, I don't remember the pope John Paul II ever calling Saint Ronnie a murderous shitbag, which is exactly what he was. The Christian church has done far more to stifle social justice than they ever have promoting it.

To his credit, pope John Paul II came from Poland and promoted the idea of solidarity and worker's rights, but the claim that the church was in any way instrumental in bringing about change in Latin America is very far afield from reality and minimizes the secular contribution to those goals and the people who suffered for it. Chomsky seems to forget that the Catholic church excommunicated Castro along with all other socialists and communists at the time and maintains their anti-socialism stance to this day.

 

Coyotl

(15,262 posts)
13. Of course, the Jesuits and nuns in El Salvador gave their lives in defense of the people.
Thu Dec 12, 2013, 07:07 PM
Dec 2013

Meanwhile, it was the Pope who divided the world into two Catholic halves, Spain's half and Portugal's half, while the worst genocide in human history ensued as the conquest of the Americas transpired. For over five centuries now, the genocide has continued and no one seems able to stop it.

Major Nikon

(36,827 posts)
17. People seem to forget that when social justice conflicts with the almighty dollar....
Thu Dec 12, 2013, 08:14 PM
Dec 2013

The Catholic church has no conflict. The church was propping up murderous despots in Latin America the same as Saint Ronnie was.

 

Comrade Grumpy

(13,184 posts)
14. Have you ever heard of liberation theology?
Thu Dec 12, 2013, 07:12 PM
Dec 2013

The Vatican was not on board with it, but it was very influential in Latin America:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_theology

Liberation theology[1] is a political movement in Roman Catholic theology which interprets the teachings of Jesus Christ in relation to a liberation from unjust economic, political, or social conditions. It has been described as "an interpretation of Christian faith through the poor's suffering, their struggle and hope, and a critique of society and the Catholic faith and Christianity through the eyes of the poor".[2] Detractors have called it Christianized Marxism.[3]

Although liberation theology has grown into an international and inter-denominational movement, it began as a movement within the Catholic Church in Latin America in the 1950s–1960s. Liberation theology arose principally as a moral reaction to the poverty caused by social injustice in that region. The term was coined in 1971 by the Peruvian priest Gustavo Gutiérrez, who wrote one of the movement's most famous books, A Theology of Liberation. Other noted exponents are Leonardo Boff of Brazil, Jon Sobrino of Spain, Óscar Romero of El Salvador, and Juan Luis Segundo of Uruguay.[4][5]

The influence of liberation theology diminished after proponents were accused of using "Marxist concepts" leading to admonishment by the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in 1984 and 1986. The Vatican criticized certain strains of liberation theology for focusing on institutionalized or systemic sin, apparently to the exclusion of individual offenders and offences; and for identifying Catholic Church hierarchy in South America as members of the same privileged class that had long been oppressing indigenous populations since the arrival of Pizarro onward.[6]

Liberation theology could be interpreted as an attempt to return to the gospel of the early church where Christianity is politically and culturally decentralized.[7]

Liberation theology proposes to fight poverty by addressing its alleged source: sin. In so doing, it explores the relationship between Christian theology — especially Roman Catholic theology — and political activism, especially in relation to social justice, poverty, and human rights. The principal methodological innovation is seeing theology from the perspective of the poor and the oppressed. For example Jon Sobrino, S.J., argues that the poor are a privileged channel of God's grace.

Some liberation theologians base their social action upon the Bible scriptures describing the mission of Jesus Christ, as bringing a sword (social unrest), e.g. Isaiah 61:1, Matthew 10:34, Luke 22:35–38 — and not as bringing peace (social order)[better source needed]. This Biblical interpretation is a call to action against poverty, and the sin engendering it, to effect Jesus Christ's mission of justice in this world.

Gustavo Gutiérrez gave the movement its name with his book A Theology of Liberation (1971). In this book, Gutierrez combined populist ideas with the social teachings of the Catholic Church. He was influenced by an existing socialist current in the Church which included organizations such as the Catholic Worker Movement and the French Christian youth worker organization, "Jeunesse Ouvrière Chrétienne". He was also influenced by Paul Gauthier's "The Poor, Jesus and the Church" (1965). Gutierrez's book is based on an understanding of history in which the human being is seen as assuming conscious responsibility for human destiny, and yet Christ the Savior liberates the human race from sin, which is the root of all disruption of friendship and of all injustice and oppression.[8]

Gutierrez also popularized the phrase "preferential option for the poor", which became a slogan of liberation theology and later appeared in addresses of the Pope.[9] Drawing from the biblical motif on the poor, Gutierrez asserts that God is revealed as having a preference for those people who are “insignificant,” “marginalized,” “unimportant,” “needy,” "despised” and “defenseless." Moreover, he makes clear that terminology of "the poor" in scripture has social and economic connotations that etymologically go back to the Greek word, ptōchos.[10] To be sure, as to not misinterpret Gutierrez’s definition of the term "preferential option," he stresses, “Preference implies the universality of God’s love, which excludes no one. It is only within the framework of this universality that we can understand the preference, that is, 'what comes first.'"[11]

Gutierrez emphasized practice (or, more technically, "praxis&quot over doctrine. Gutierrez clarified his position by advocating a circular relationship between orthodoxy and orthopraxis seeing the two as having a symbiotic relationship.[12] Gutierrez' reading of prophets condemning oppression and injustice against the poor (i.e. Jeremiah 22:13–17) informs his assertion that to know God (orthodoxy) is to do justice (orthopraxis).[13] Cardinal Ratzinger (who later became Pope Benedict XVI), however, criticized liberation theology for elevating orthopraxis to the level of orthodoxy.[14] Richard McBrien summarizes this concept as follows:
God is disclosed in the historical ‘’praxis’’ of liberation. It is the situation, and our passionate and reflective involvement in it, which mediates the Word of God. Today that Word is mediated through the cries of the poor and the oppressed.[15]

Another important hallmark for Gutierrez's brand of liberation theology is an interpretation of revelation as "history". For example
Gutierrez wrote:

History is the scene of the revelation God makes of the mystery of his person. His word reaches us in the measure of our involvement in the evolution of history.[16]

Gutierrez also considered the Church to be the "sacrament of history", an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace, thus pointing to the doctrine of universal salvation as the true means to eternal life, and assigning the Church itself to a somewhat temporal role, namely, liberation.

The struggle of women for social justice has given rise to its own liberation theology, frequently known as feminist theology in Europe and North America.[17] Black and other women of colour in the United States speak of womanist theology, while Mujerista theology denotes the liberation theology of Hispanic women.[17]

History[edit]

A major player in the formation of liberation theology was CELAM, the Latin American Episcopal Conference. Created in 1955 in Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), CELAM pushed the Second Vatican Council (1962–65) toward a more socially oriented stance.[18] However, CELAM never supported liberation theology as such, since liberation theology was frowned upon by the Vatican, with Pope Paul VI trying to slow the movement after the Second Vatican Council.[19]

After the Second Vatican Council, CELAM held two conferences which were important in determining the future of liberation theology: the first was held in Medellín, Colombia, in 1968, and the second in Puebla, Mexico, in January 1979.[18] The Medellín conference debated how to apply the teachings of Vatican II to Latin America, and its conclusions were strongly influenced by liberation theology.[6] The Catholic Church made the Medellín document an official document of the Church. Although liberation theology grew out of these officially recognized ideas, the Medellín document is not a liberation theology document. It did, however, lay the groundwork, and since then liberation theology has developed rapidly in the Latin American Catholic Church.[20]
Cardinal Alfonso López Trujillo was a central figure at the Medellín Conference, and was elected in 1972 as general secretary of CELAM. He represented a more orthodox position, becoming a favorite of Pope John Paul II and the "principal scourge of liberation theology."[21] Trujillo's faction became predominant in CELAM after the 1972 Sucre conference, and in the Roman Curia after the CELAM conference in Puebla, Mexico, in January 1979.

Despite the orthodox bishops' predominance in CELAM, a more radical form of liberation theology remained much supported in South America. Thus, the 1979 Puebla Conference was an opportunity for orthodox bishops to reassert control of the radical elements; but they failed. At the Puebla Conference, the orthodox reorientation was met by strong opposition from the liberal part of the clergy, which supported the concept of a "preferential option for the poor". This concept had been approved at the Medellín conference by Bishop Ricard Durand, president of the Commission about Poverty.

Pope John Paul II gave the opening speech at the Puebla Conference. The general tone of his remarks was conciliatory. He criticized radical liberation theology, saying, "this conception of Christ, as a political figure, a revolutionary, as the subversive of Nazareth, does not tally with the Church's catechisms"; however, he did speak of "the ever increasing wealth of the rich at the expense of the ever increasing poverty of the poor", and affirmed that the principle of private property "must lead to a more just and equitable distribution of goods...and, if the common good demands it, there is no need to hesitate at expropriation, itself, done in the right way"; on balance, the Pope offered neither praise nor condemnation.

Some liberation theologians, however, including Gutierrez, had been barred from attending the Puebla Conference. Working from a seminary and with aid from sympathetic, liberal bishops, they partially obstructed other clergy's efforts to ensure that the Puebla Conference documents satisfied conservative concerns. Within four hours of the Pope's speech, Gutiérrez and the other priests wrote a twenty-page refutation, which was circulated at the conference, and has been claimed to have influenced the final outcome of the conference. According to a socio-political study of liberation theology in Latin America, twenty-five per cent of the final Puebla documents were written by theologians who were not invited to the conference.[22] Cardinal Trujillo said that this affirmation is "an incredible exaggeration" (Ben Zabel 2002:139).

Practice

One of the most radical aspects of liberation theology was the social organization, or re-organization, of church practice through the model of Christian base communities (CBCs). Liberation theology strove to be a bottom-up movement in practice, with Biblical interpretation and liturgical practice designed by lay practitioners themselves, rather than by the orthodox Church hierarchy. In this context, sacred text interpretation is understood as "praxis". Liberation theology seeks to interpret the actions of the Catholic Church and the teachings of Jesus Christ from the perspective of the poor and disadvantaged. In Latin America, liberation theologians
specifically target the severe disparities between rich and poor in the existing social and economic orders within the nations' political and corporate structures. It is a strong critique of the various economic and social structures, such as an oppressive government, dependence upon First World countries and the traditional hierarchical Church, that allow some to be extremely rich while others are unable to even have safe drinking water.[20]

The journalist and writer Penny Lernoux described this aspect of liberation theology in her numerous and committed writings intended to explain the movement's ideas in North America. Base communities were small gatherings, usually outside of churches, in which the Bible could be discussed, and Mass could be said. They were especially active in rural parts of Latin America where parish priests were not always available, as they placed a high value on lay participation. In May 2007, it was estimated that 80,000 base communities were operating in Brazil alone.[23] Contemporaneously Fanmi Lavalas in Haiti, the Landless Workers' Movement in Brazil, and Abahlali baseMjondolo in South Africa are three organizations that make use of liberation theology.[24]

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
21. Much of what the Pope has said is fairly close to Liberation Theology.
Thu Dec 12, 2013, 11:18 PM
Dec 2013

And Catholic clerics were sometimes attacked and killed by the military & paramilitary forces of Central American dictatorships. Pope Paul was quite hostile toward these church leaders . I did not expect these views from this pope, esp. after the atrocities of the Argentine government..

upi402

(16,854 posts)
19. “If we had a free press that’s the way they’d present it.”
Thu Dec 12, 2013, 09:50 PM
Dec 2013


The propaganda media is the prime cause of the loss of our democracy.

It's why chickens vote for Colonel Sanders.



Chomsky is the oracle of truth IMHO.

socialist_n_TN

(11,481 posts)
30. As others have stated this Pope, IMO........
Sat Dec 14, 2013, 11:28 AM
Dec 2013

is touting a version of Liberation Theology. Of course like all Liberation Theology it doesn't go far enough. There's too much emphasis on individual actors and not enough on systemic factors in ALL Liberation Theology. And LT has never been in vogue with the power structure of the RC Church consequently it's never found a world-wide resonance among all Catholics.

But yes it's true that the US used to have people (priests and nuns) killed for practicing what Pope Francis preaches. I don't think that anyone could deny that.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Noam Chomsky: U.S. used t...