Leonardo Boff: Jesus Christ Liberator, a Critical Christology for Our Times

 Book Report

Jesus Christ Liberator: a Critical Christology for Our Times

Part 1: Who is Jesus and What would Jesus do

WWJD, which means what would Jesus do, is a folk slogan among Christians. The question concerns what would our savior, Jesus Christ reacts upon different circumstances, especially on daily issues, for instance, someone cut your line, rude to your family members and so on and so forth. To Christians, how does Jesus responds imply how we should behave. That means to say, if we believe Jesus is going to do X at Y, as a follower of Jesus, in most cases, it is decent to do X at Y. Leonardo Boff’s Jesus Christ Liberator, should be best understood as a theological text that concerns WWJD at our time or as he has said a Christology for our time.

As a reader who reads the textbook as a reflection on Liberation Theology, I have to suggest at the very beginning that I do not gain much knowledge about what Liberation Theology is from the book. It appears to me that Boff has not tried to set boundaries for his theology. Maybe, as Boff has suggested at the Epilogue, he does not believe there is a structure for Liberation Theology, Liberation Theology is more like a contextual message that every Christian should, no matter they are living in Latin America, United State of America or even Hong Kong, echo. It is because Jesus Christ “IS” a liberator, He came to liberate the oppressed, not physically but spiritually and mentally.

So if the textbook cannot be viewed as a guideline of Liberation Theology, what are the themes of the book?  Roughly speaking, as a Latin-American theologian, he believed he has to speak for his people, for his country, he wanted to articulate a bottom up theological point of view rather than the traditional top down theological point of view. As a result, he has to ask and put forward a notion on WWJD in Latin America. Nevertheless, before investigating and arguing how Jesus is going to response towards the social injustices, like most theologians since the 19^th Century, he has to answer the question, who is Jesus Christ and what do we know about Him?

To most Christians, we are familiar with the life Jesus Christ base on the scared text Holy Bible; however, among scholars, especially those being influenced by the methodologies of historical criticism and contemporary hermeneutics, it appears to them that Jesus Christ in the Bible might not be the Jesus Christ who has existed 2000 years ago. Put things otherwise, these scholars question the accuracy of the Bible writers, if Jesus Christ in the Bible is just a mythological being like Odin or Thor, it is not overwhelming to say that the entire belief of Christianity is in a shaky ground or, using Jesus’ own parable, Christianity is built on sand.

Boff takes the question two fold, on the one hand, evidence by chapter 1 and 2, he believed that we have to take the criticism seriously, as theologians, it is their duty to outline the problem, bridging the gap on what makes the Bible’s record on Jesus accurate; on the other hand, as he has discussed very detail from the chapter from 3 to chapter 10 that, in some cases the “details” of an event of the Bible can be replaced by a “theological message”. For instance, where was the birthplace of Jesus? In the Bible, there are at least two different records on the birthplace of Jesus Christ, base on contemporary methodologies on historical record, either one of them is correct and as a result in either case the Bible is fallible. To Boff, this kind of view has missed the most important features of the Bible; the Holy Bible, rather than being a historical text about different events that happened, is a theological work that records the message from the Divine. Put things other way, where exactly did Jesus born is not important, what is important is, first, Jesus Christ did exist (being born); second, there is a theological meaning of postulating Jesus born in certain place. As a result, to Boff, the Bible is a reliable piece of work; Jesus who existed is Jesus in the Bible.

In the following chapters, after elaborating how the Bible is a reliable text for contemporary readers, Boff marched to his agenda, paralleling Jesus Christ as a liberator for our world. From chapter 3 onwards, because Boff has already discussed the validity of the Bible, Boff has spent a great deal of time in postulating a liberate Jesus Christ from the Good News, from his teaching, to his death and most importantly his resurrection. At this point, I believe, as Dr. Kung has once mentioned in his class of Christian Ethics, in most cases scholars do enjoy selectively used materials that favor their conclusion, especially among Christian writers. Here, I am not saying Boff has exaggerated the liberate side of Jesus, what I have to suggest here is that: following Boff’s endeavor, I have to agree that Jesus should be best understood as a liberator. By citing different passages from the Bible, it is quite clear to the reader that through different times in Jesus’ life, Jesus did try His best to re-new the soul of us. The only reason that I do not spend time in explaining Boff’s work is because, Boff’s arguments are quite straight forward and his premises do lead to his conclusion, there is nothing much for me to discuss here. However, at this point, I have to propose that, it does not mean Boff’s work is boring or without inspiration. On the very contrary, he has discussed things in detail with the a spirit which make readers, even knowing very little on complicated theological issues capture the essence of the debate, for example, he has spent nearly 1 and a half chapters in reliving the conflict about the godliness of Jesus and the human side of Jesus, he has discussed from the traditional understanding on the topic to how all these theses traditional views demand further elaboration and how we should interpret that contemporarily. So to sum up the work of Boff, I am convinced that Jesus did have a liberate side, He was here to give Christian new commands and re-new the old commands, through His life, from His teachings, to His death and finally His resurrection. So in the rest of this book report, I will explain in detail how does this mean to me and to us, Christians who live in Hong Kong.    

Part 2: What Should I do

As I have discussed since the very beginning, WWJD (today) is the main theme of the book, so if I am convinced that Jesus is somewhat a liberator for the oppressed, then as Christians, it is reasonable for us to ask, “What should we do if Jesus is a liberator?” I believe here, Boff, rather than restricting Liberation Theology with boundaries, he was opened to possibility. Put things otherwise, as Dr. Kung has suggested at the first lecture, Liberation Theology is a contextual theology, which all Christian share a content, a liberate Jesus, but different Christians in different continents do entitle to different fragments about how we should do.

As a Christian in Hong Kong who has been influenced by conventional Christology, it is my burden to ask, “Is it wrong for us to not think from a liberation angle?” At first, It might sound counter intuitive, if Jesus Christ’s followers do not walk the path once Jesus has walked. However, I cannot help but to ask, in helping the oppressed, do they need our help? Are they really being oppressed? Are they using our liberate minds for their well beings? All these questions demand an answer; however, since Boff has not given us a clear guideline on what Liberation Theology is, as a reader, I can just reflect to these questions by other possible means. (Boff did mention what people in wealthy countries in the end of the book; however, I take that as a rational conclusion, if Boff is right on A, B follows. Now I am asking granting A is contextually true, what should we do next, in Hong Kong, is it B or C?)

All these questions I have been asking are not practical but crucial towards how we should act, if Jesus has been a liberator. When we look back, it is without a doubt that Jesus’ life should be appropriately reviewed as a liberate Christ, He came to set the oppressed free. However, can we just parallel today’s Hong Kong with Jesus’ time? Here, I have taken the question in a more micro sense than Boff, to Boff, in a Globalized World, powerful and wealthy countries should be viewed as the elites in the day of Jesus; on the contrary, weak and poor countries have to be read as slaves or oppressed group in those days. I believe Boff is not wrong in viewing things that way, but the outlook is too brief, it has ignored many conflicts already inside a city, not to mention inside a country and among different countries. So here I would like to focus my time in discussing whether a liberate mind is appropriate in Hong Kong, but not whether liberate minds are decent from a theological perspective.

To say we have to liberate something or someone, it assumes something or someone is being deeply oppressed or deprived from one’s autonomy. Nonetheless, as a citizen of Hong Kong, I have to ask, do we really have those kinds of people in Hong Kong? Saying there are unfortunate, poor and troubled people in the society does not mean they are being oppressed or deprived, it is just a slippery slope to deviate less fortunate people as victims, in worst sense, it is just in itself paranoid. Put things otherwise, I believe, since Hong Kong is a very “blessed” society, we might not need a liberator, in fact what we need is a modified liberation theology, a theology of tolerance and sympathy.

It is not an easy task to convince Christians who already constituted the belief that some citizens in Hong Kong are deviated, labeled and have been treating unfairly. What I should add here is that, like how my Psychiatrist has once told me, we need a positive attitude to hardships, human has a tendency to treat oneself or someone as a victim; nevertheless, it is an unhealthy way to interpret our world. A healthy way to read adversaries  should be: be positive. Here I am not saying we should take every unfair treatment positively, quite the opposite, I am asking Christian to think negatively unless it is more reasonable to do so, helping those weaker and misfortunate group to regain their confidence, but not labeling them as deprived, else we might have just worst off the situation rather than helping at all.

Conclusion: An Apprication Theology

From Boff’s work, I am convinced that Jesus Christ has been a liberator and I believe under certain situation, for instance considering the validity of Globalization, there are many social issues that Christian should speak up and try to mediate. Nevertheless, I do not share the belief that Hong Kong is a place like Latin America in the 70’s last century or even contextually like the Latin American in the 70’s last century. It is true that there are unfortunates, weaker groups in Hong Kong; but I do not believe we should parallel these people with the slaves in Jesus’ time or citizens living in Boff’s context. Because, rather than thinking from such a critical angle, I believe a positive, appreciating angle is more appropriate in Hong Kong. If Jesus came to liberate the oppressed, I do not see why He would like people to deviate oneself as oppressed when they are not. I suppose Jesus would welcome people to be proud of taking different roles in the society who function differently. The point here is that, under certain context, we need a liberate side of Jesus, in a context like Hong Kong where there are very few cases of oppressed, appreciation of being different, tolerate the difference are far more important than liberation. As a result since Jesus has been a liberator and we are living in a world where there are far fewer oppressed, we should move a step further, appreciating the beautiful world we are living in. It is not a simple task, because most people do treat such an attitude as childish and naïve; but if we Christians do not know how to appreciate the great creation of God, then it is doubtful how we can do theology, at all.