Definitions and Understandings of God/ Ultimate Reality Flashcards
Who founded Liberation Theology? Where, when and why was it established?
First properly applied by Peruvian Catholic priest – Gustavo Gutierrez
Liberation Theology was established in the late 1960s, early 70s in South America.
The majority of the population lived in abject poverty, while a select number of rich families lived under wealth. This unequal cultural divide created separation and inaccessibility of religion for the poor. Religion was exclusive to the rich
What was established and how was it challenged in the Second Vatican Council of the Catholic Church, 1965?
How is Liberation theology motivated by Karl Marx?
Second Vatican Council of the Catholic Church – 1965 – the theologians established religion was exclusive to the rich. They challenged this, explaining that Jesus sided with the oppressed parts of society. Based on the principle of agape (unconditional) love.
Christianised Marxism - Liberation theology – motivated by the philosophy of Karl Marx who recognized that religion was a hierarchical construct ‘the opium of the people’ that sedates their need for reform – Liberation theologians suggested that religion should unify and value equally.
What are the key ideas of Liberation Theology?
Liberation Theologians see God not as that of the strong and successful, but instead as the God of the failures: the oppressed, the mentally retarded and those who are not particularly intelligent – the victims of society.
Liberation Theology involves pulling people towards social and political liberation.
Liberating the wealthy from selfishness and sin, which Gustavo upheld as the root of evil.
Quotations associated with Liberation Theology,
what did it do for the poor?
What bible passage was it influenced by?
Gustavo created a “preferential option for the poor” (Gustavo Gutierrez)
“to set at liberty those who are oppressed” (Luke 4:18)
What are the three ways patriarchal God language causes harm to society listed by Nicola Slee?
- Using it exclusively, suppressing or denying feminine language for God
- Using it literally – the gap between symbol and reality closes
- Causing patriarchy – self inflation – men thinking their more important
What is the difference between omnipotent and almighty?
Omnipotent - Usually understood by philosophers of religion to suggest an ability to do anything.
Almighty - Suggests God has power over all things.
St. Thomas Aquinas’ view on the Omnipotent/ Almighty debate
Maintains that God can do anything absolutely. However what is ‘absolutely possible’ means anything that does not contain a contradiction ‘pseudo-tasks.’
God can do anything logically possible.
Rene Descartes’ view on the Omnipotent/ Almighty debate
Defends the omnipotence of God by saying that God created the laws of logic from nothing ‘ex nihilo’ and thus could do things that go against logic as we understand it.
God is so transcendent and different to humanity that we cannot set limits on what God can do.
Why is God as Almighty more a far less problematic definition?
Works within Ian Ramsey’s definition of models and qualifiers, ‘Mighty’ being the model and ‘All’ being the qualifier.
Why did Almighty and Omnipotent pose difficulties with the incarnation of God…Jesus?
Aquinas’ views?
Because God of the creator and the sustained cannot logically die, this means he cannot logically have a body because then he would be limited by flesh.
According to Christian Belief “And the word became flesh” (John 1.14)
Aquinas would have suggested that God did become a man and thus can take on a body: But God as God cannot be a man or have a body. The idea of 3 hypostasis (spiritual entities) from one Ouisia (essence) helps to clarify this difficulty.
Beliefs of Irenaeus, c130-c200/ AD 1c
Believed in the ‘Economic Trinity’, a Trinitarian concept that explored the way God acts in biblical history e.g. Jesus’s resurrection and also the experiences of the believers e.g. speaking in tongues on the day of Pentecost.
The family of redemption are an economy of salvation – the path/ method in which God had ordered the redemption of the human race, historically.
God/ Father = the Creator
Son = Redeemer
Holy Spirit = Freedom
“Economic is used from the Greek oikonomikos, which means relating to arrangement of activities.”
Beliefs of Tertullian, c160-c225 (Latin) 2c
Tertullian held the belief that one substantia, inner reality, inner being, spiritual essence and transcendent force can act in three different ways
3 different persona’s or (masks/ facades) = One true substantia (Substance) – immanent, transcendent, hyper dimensional, omnipresent
‘The three persons of the Trinity are distinct, yet not divided, different yet not separate or independent of each other’ suggests that three masks unify to create a oneness.
Tertullian accepted that the Holy Trinity gives Trinitarian language and provides a base for doctrine, but is not a full doctrine in and of itself. Too close to tritheism.
Beliefs of Origen 185-254ce (Greek) 2c
Believed in three hypostases (centres of activity), manifesting in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, which have a mutual ouisia (inner being/ all-inclusive spiritual essence)
In Hierarchical order Father, the Son as his exact image, and the Holy Spirit as the image of the Son. Close to modalism
Define Tritheism, why was it seen as heretical?
The idea of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as three separate Gods, equal + individual in their own right - was too far apart.
Define Modalism, why was it seen as heretical?
The idea that God acts through different roles - was too merged.
