The pseudonym "Philo Vaihinger" has been abandoned. All posts have been and are written by me, Joseph Auclair.

Thursday, September 12, 2013

Not so good news


Liberation Theology is pretty much nothing but a license for red revolution passed out by the Catholic clergy.

Its teachings differ from the traditional teachings of the church as to political economy not by being progressive – the traditional teachings are already that, to the permanent distress of America’s showily Catholic conservatives – but by being sympathetic to revolutionary socialism and, in particular, Marxist-Leninism, which the church otherwise and elsewhere vigorously condemns.

Fellow-traveling liberals, themselves to this day front-men for the reds of foreign lands, including retrospectively as in the cases of Allende vs. Pinochet or the Sandinistas vs. Reagan, don’t mind that, and even welcome it.

Like John Amato, who uses “progressive” the way the reds did throughout the 20th Century and still do, today, to cover over both differences among democratic and anti-revolutionary leftists and the differences between them all and the reds.

The definition of liberation theology Amato publishes is a mendacious and tendentious self-definition, a piece of pure propaganda, much as though the Catholic Church were to offer as a definition of “Catholic,” “a member of the one true Christian Church, within which alone salvation can be found.”

If the church drops celibacy it will lose many people to more attractive Protestant sects and subject itself to greater pressure for ordination of women.

Down that road is the extinction of Christianity.

I who write this am an atheist.

And a progressive, though not a liberal and in no degree a fellow-traveler.

What do you suppose JA thought of the film, JFK, loved by fellow-travelers, radicals, and reds but loathed by any who were none of those things?

(The same people really loved Reds.)

No comments:

Post a Comment