Vurtual: 1) 'Who killed Jesus.': But here is the thing though, according to Christianity it was still the Romans who killed Jesus. Their belief is that the High Priesthood, under Caiphas, perceived Jesus to be a heretic with the inference ultimately being that they felt Jesus would be a threat to the established order and therfore a threat to their lofty positions. After bribing Judas Iscariot they located Jesus in the Garden of Gethesemane and had him arrested by the Temple paramilitary. After a trial in front of the Sanhedrin they condemned him to death and had him brought to Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governor and lobbied to have Jesus executed. Pontius Pilate was reluctant to condemn Jesus but Caiphas et al were insistent, "Let his blood be upon our heads and that of our children," and reluctantly Pilate complied. Crucified by Romans he died on "Calvary." There are a few very major problems, aside from the almost laughable interpolation, "Let his blood be upon our heads..." As I stated earlier, the Sanhedrin decreed death a single time in its last 70 years of existence which includes the period in which Jesus was said to be executed (26 to 36 CE/AD which was the time in which Pilate served in Judaea). The source for "once in 70 years" is manifold but the simplest source would be in the Talmud Bavli (Babylonian Talmud) in the Book of Sanhedrin, quote attributed to Rabbi Ezekiel Ben Azaireh. Contrary to the claims of Conspiracy Theorists Jesus isn't even mentioned in the Talmud, unless the Christian Gospels are complete fiction, because the times in which the name Jesus is mentioned ("Jesus" of course is merely the Greek translation of his name which, if he lived, would have been Yeshuan full name Yeshua Bar Yosef, or in less formal terms, Yeshua HaNotzri, Jesus the Nazarite- NOT Nazarene as Christians imagine but I do not want to run off in different tangents here), he is described entirely different than in any known Christian source- and certainly than in the Gospels. The point? If the Sanhedrin had condemned him to death there would be a record of it.
Christians needed a way in which to get their minds around the fact that Jesus was an Observant Jew while living their lives in direct contradiction to the so called "Old Testament." They invented 3 major rationales of which the primary one was that since the Jews condemned him to death and went so far as to convince Pilate by assuming any possible guilt from such an execution, there is no way to rationalise a belief that G-D would want Christians to abide by the laws contained within the Old Testament. The main reason though, why Christianity usually blames Jews is to rationalise Anti-Semitism. One may think that European Anti Semitism is theologically based but in fact we dealt with the same dynamic from Greek and Roman pagans as well as Muslims, so that it is a dynamic usually existing above and beyond a particular theology.
2) 'Liberation Theology.': Simply examine the Vatican's "Instruction on Christ, Freedom and Liberation" issued on May 22nd, 1986. In Chapter V, Article 17, the Vatican not only condones the use of violence it also condones insurrectionism and insurgency. Guess old John Paul II forgot about "Render unto Caesar" and leaving the temporal to man yadda yadda. To quote verbatim, "the Church's Magisterium admits as a last resort to put an end to an obvious and prolonged tyrrany which is gravely damaging the fundamental rights of individuals and the common good." The huge problem with this is that humans are subjective creatures. What you label "tyrrany" may be completely acceptable to me. The Vatican does not define its stance above and beyond eschewing collectivism. It was asinine in unbelievable ways.
3) 'Pundits like Chomsky and their views on Liberation Theology.': Chomsky is a clown. He also glorified the Khmer Rouge and lauded Pol Pot. Even after tonnes of evidence was coming out of Cambodia (then known as "Kampuchea") Chomsky refused to reverse himself. A man that sits eating biscuits in Sheikh Nasrallah's office in the Hezbollah Headquarters compound and discussing Israel's "terrorist activities" isn't going to rate too high when it comes to integrity. My favourite though? Here is a man who has spent the bulk of his adult life railing against the wealthy and their use of tax shelters (in the US). Then it turns out he has created the "Diane Chomsky Irrevocable Trust" with a blue chip legal firm dedicated to Tax Law (the firm is Palmer and Dodge in Boston). Hypocrites and people who self promote themselves into niche careers outside of their academic expertise are suspect from the door anyway. I am not going to ask an Orthopedist for an opinion about my fuel injection system right? Yet everybody listens to a Linguist expound on Political Science.
4) 'Philippines and Liberation Theology.': The country is a great example. The CPP/NPA (Communist Party of the Philippines and its military wing, the New People's Army), along with its above board NDFP (National Democratic Front of the Philippines) were built around Liberation Theology and its adherants. In fact, the biggest constiuency within the NDFP is the "Christians for National Liberation," an organisation rooted almost equally in the Church and the homegrown Protestant church "Church of Christ" (not to be confused with another homegrown Protestant church, Iglesia ni Kristo which translates as...Church of Christ). If you are really curious examine the evolution of the BCC (Basic Christian Community) into the BEC (Basic Ecclesial [sic] Community), and how it has served the CPP/NPA. Also, the Church of Christ's rural outreach and PIME (Pontificium Institutum Missionum Exterarum), a Catholic Order based in Italy. PIME priests are deeply enmeshed with the CPP/NPA. 2 of the 3 PIME priests killed on Mindanao died as a result of their CPP/NPA involvement. In one interesting case the priest was cannibalised but that has nothing to do with the issues you are asking about. The last PIME priest to die was 2011, Father Fausto "Pops" Tentorio, an Italian double tapped between the eyes in Arakan, in Mindanao's North Cotabato Province.
Elsewhere? Anywhere in Latin America, when you find an armed Marxist group it is deeply enmeshed with Liberation Theology. From the Zapatistas in Mexico's Oaxaca State to the ELN and FARC in Colombia to the Tupaceros in Uruguay.
5) 'The degeneracy of Vatican II.': If you ask a Catholic who feels that way they will talk about Latin and Gregorian Chant but neither was even mentioned. In Vatican II. It is the environment that led to these "reforms" that is the real problem. It is the same environment that led the Vatican to issue the Encyclical "Populorum Progressio" (Progess of Peoples but the official English title is "On the Development of Peoples") in 1968. The document outlined the Church's position that economic reform is essential to any discussion regarding societal change. This is the Vatican, with the world's richest bank, spitting on established Capitalism. Typical Liberal blathering, "I love blacks as long as they don't move onto my street." The "Not in my Backyard" mentality. Anyway, that is just an iota of my perspective on it.
6) 'Jean Bertrand Aristide was good.': At the moment he is under prosecutorial inquest in Port au Prince for his terrible abuse of homeless orphans and the residents of one particular slum want him in prison for life for the street gangs he controlled having lynched and decapitated any supporters of the Haitian opposition living there. If he ever was good he lost it by the time he took hold of the reins in Haiti.
Ill get to the rest a bit later...
) i'm sure some (maybe all) of those liberation theology priests had some views i would disagree with, but social justice i'd think should come first anyway (and the other stuff will follow)
![:\](https://bluelight.org/xf/BL_Images/Orig_Emoji/wrygrin.gif "wry grin :\")