(2 of 2)
The Instruction asserts that the basis of liberation is the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ, which have "freed us from the most radical evil, namely sin and the power of death." Social sins result from personal sinfulness and are fundamentally spiritual. By failing to recognize this, and by making good and evil relative, revolutionary movements that deny God may promise liberation but frequently violate human rights and produce "new forms of slavery."
While championing social justice, the Instruction insists that "the political and economic running of society is not a direct part of (the church's) mission," and it warns the clergy against secular preoccupations: "It is not for the pastors of the Church to intervene directly in the political construction and organization of social life." The document states that this is instead the job of the laity, a teaching of the Second Vatican Council that John Paul has often emphasized.
The Instruction contends that it is "perfectly legitimate" for oppressed peoples to use "morally licit means" like labor unions to seek their rights. However, "systematic recourse to violence put forward as the necessary path to liberation has to be condemned as a destructive illusion and one that opens the way to new forms of servitude." Accordingly, Christianity's commitment to the poor cannot be "a partisan choice and a source of conflict." Such words are aimed at liberation theologians who have openly adopted the Marxist advocacy of class struggle.
Citing Pope Paul VI's 1967 encyclical Populorum Progressio, the document accepts armed struggle "as a last resort to put an end to an obvious and prolonged tyranny which is gravely damaging the fundamental rights of individuals and the common good." However, the Instruction teaches that reform or passive resistance are far preferable methods for change, both morally and practically. Christian activists, says Rome, must never countenance terrorism or hatred of enemies.
Father Gustavo Gutierrez of Peru, one of the founders of liberation theology, considers the new document a "relaunching" of the movement. "It closes a chapter; a new, more positive period is beginning." At the Vatican, a prelate knowledgeable about strategy on social issues is anxious: "The danger is that this document is so positive that some theologians will feel they've been right all along." For the "complete interpretation" of official thinking, he insists, both the negative earlier document and the newer one must be followed.