369 - Will it Liberate? Questions about Liberation Theology

Will it Liberate? Questions about Liberation Theology

By Michael Novak

New York, Paulist, 1986. 311 Pp. $14.95.

Michael Novak, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, shares with liberation theologians, he says, a spirituality and a preferential option for the poor. In his view, the key difference between

371 - Will it Liberate? Questions about Liberation Theology

them concerns their views of the economy. Capitalist development has been liberating in the United States, he insists. Will the economic program of these theologians bring liberation to Latin America?

His answer is no. And in eleven chapters, he seeks to describe Latin American liberation theology, to clarify its position on socialism, and to criticize this choice. Here, there is only space to point out what are, ill my judgment, five fundamental inadequacies in Novak's version of the dialogue with Latin American liberation theologians.

First, I can see no evidence that the author and the Latin Americans share a preferential option for the poor and a corresponding spirituality. Readers would never know from this book that liberation theologians have devoted most of their attention to the complex theological issues involved in the option for the poor, its grounding in the Bible, and its implications for the church. Nor do we learn that at the heart of this option is a commitment to listening to the voices of the poor in reading the signs of the times and solidarity with them in the perilous pilgrimage toward the future promised by God. There is little theology, in this sense, in this book. And its starting point is not in the experiences of suffering and repression, and of evangelical hope of the poor. On the contrary, it appears to be the experience of the affluent in the U.S.

Second, the picture presented here of the liberation theologians' views on capitalism and socialism and on the relation of their theology to Marxism is blurry and incomplete, because their writings on these issues, especially those available in English, on which Novak depends are scattered and mostly quite dated. In other words, while he raises some important questions concerning alternative forms of development and social order, these have not generally been their preoccupations. Rather, their fundamental concerns have focused on the nature of God, of God's presence among the poor, and of the church's mission in this divided and conflictual world. Focused reflection on political-economic alternatives has been a dangerous pursuit for which few have had the opportunity or space.

Third, Novak presents a caricature of critical Latin American analyses of capitalism. Poverty and oppression are not marks against capitalism, because these nations are conveniently defined as not "capitalist." Questions about the role of the United States government and corporations in promoting policies contributing to poverty and terror in Latin America are simply ignored. This is not analysis; it is pure ideology, obscuring the extraordinarily broad range of voices in Latin America and around the world, including Popes Paul VI and John Paul H, who have called attention to the structural sins of this system and for fundamental transformation of it.

Fourth, Novak's apologetics for capitalism in the United States similarly betray his claim to base judgments on the actual track record by ignoring difficult facts. Readers would never know about the history of racism and its still powerful expressions in ghetto poverty. Nor about rural poverty. Nor about the poverty that traps the elderly, and single

372 - Will it Liberate? Questions about Liberation Theology

mothers and children. Nor about plant shutdowns and broken communities. Nor about the militarism that so infects American political and economic life, and threatens to destroy life as we know it.

Fifth, Novak's rejection of socialism depends on ignoring the enormous variety in socialist experiments around the world, as well as oil outlandish assertions, never defended, that, for example, the Inca empire was socialist, which explains its weakness before the invading Spaniards, and that socialism is "unnatural." In this framework, there are no "rational" alternatives.

Finally, the tone of this book is one of respectful, scholarly dialogue about complicated issues. But it must also be noted that the forces Novak identifies with and supports, such as large corporations and the United States government in its policies in Latin America, are militantly committed to snuffing out dialogue over political and economic alternatives, to silencing the critics of capitalist development, to reducing alternatives to the single option of the "free market" and its frequent servant, the military government, which relies on policies of terror, disappearances, torture, and murder to maintain "peace and order."

Given the extraordinary power of the groups supporting "democratic capitalism," there is no danger of not hearing their voices in these debates over our God and our future. For the sake of fidelity to the spirit of truth and justice, the urgent priority must be to include the voices speaking of the pain and hope of the poor and oppressed in Latin America, and at home, too, in ways this book hardly suggests.

LEE CORMIE

St. Michael's College
Toronto, Ontario