No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Extract
‘This book is a critical introduction to political theology, not an enthusiastic initiation into it’ (p 37). Such was the intention of Alfredo Fierro in making his own sizeable contribution to the subject. Drawing together a great variety of sources he tries to sketch the development of ‘political theology’, and suggests some directions for the future. This not without a sense of his own relative position: from the outset he states that ‘this book was written in Madrid, Spain, and finished in the summer of 1974 (xii). (The Militant Gospel, SCM Press 1977 xv + pp. 453 £4.50).
The book divides into three parts, Situation, Programme and Theory, eight chapters in all. In the first part, changes in the climate of thinking are described which have brought political theology into being; the second goes through the formulation of the new theology; while the third reflects on the significance of it and challenges the presuppositions of several authors.
First, though, some general comments about method. The term ‘political theology’ is used rather too frequently—I’ve already used it twice—and moreover as if one was always clear what is meant by it. Then, related to this, is Fierro’s tendency to put together several ideas about a concept without contrasting them very accurately or stating a clear view of his own. Often this makes no difference, and one appreciates the breadth of reference; but there are times when some distinctions have to be made (notably the discussion of ideology, pp 243-7), and a failure to do so is unhelpful.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 1979 Provincial Council of the English Province of the Order of Preachers
References
1 This Utopian tendency has been a fault of his in previous writings, as he admits later (p. 273).
2 Incidentally, once this role of the historian is realised, the term ‘materialist reading’ becomes somewhat less mysterious. It designates the straightforward exercise of using source‐material which reflects a different bias from the present‐day reader, and trying despite that to make sense of the facts it purports to record.
3 ‘Babylon’ is used to denounce British (white) capitalist society in general and often the police in particular, and its use as a part of the struggle corresponds to what Fierro is recommending. I would strongly suggest that here is a theology of liberation emerging exactly where on all Marxist theories it ought to emerge, but where (white) Marxist theologians have never troubled to look.
4 To avoid any misunderstanding: I have nothing necessarily against the maternal principle, and do not intend this as a sexist jibe! I'm mote concerned with the lack of political examples that ring true, which I regard as characteristic of the book as a whole.
5 Certainly at last year's Communist University of London the concept of ‘relative autonomy’ was being elaborated on by all and sundry; but it wasn't clear whether it allowed for ideology actually influencing the material base. (This uncertainty doubtless due to my inexperience of Marxist thinking: but also maybe to the state of the CP).
6 I think the degree of voluntarism that Fierro is prepared to allow is of some interest. It is apparent here from ‘conditioned’ (not ‘determined’ ‐ and significantly this difference was noted in the ideology discussion on p. 244) and ‘outlook’ (not position) that choice is allowed in somewhere. It is part of the fairly open brand of Marxism adopted, and it would have been interesting to see how he would treat a more determinist variety; but since Fierro is not going to try to harmonize Christianity and Marxism I don't think this damages the discourse.
7 This admittedly smacks of ‘making the theology fit the crime’, a standard charg against left‐wing Christians. But at least there is not here the claim to be (re)discovering original Christianity, which is what makes such an exercise hypocritical. An if it is any consolation, your opponents are open to exactly the same accusation.
8 I would point out particularly the passage on sects (pp. 135‐8), in which Fierro recommends the positioning of ‘the Christian community' midway between the responsibility of Church’ and the dissenting power of ‘sect’. It fits well with the general theme of the book, and a reviewer more interested in ecclesiology might have seen it as a central passage.
9 It is this observation that makes it seem quite relevant that the book comes out of Spain, and was written prior to 1974. And I think the same goes for the rather archaic view of much of Catholicism Fierro often seems to have: although he has read widely, you would expect the home country's practices to leave their mark.