A New Heresy Invading the Church: Child Liberation Theology
You've heard of Black Liberation Theology. Liberation theology can be traced back to Latin America in the early 60s. Latin America has always been a hotbed of oppressive working conditions for those who tried to make ends meet and Liberation Theology was invented as a supposed Christian response to this oppression. It should be noted that the rise of Liberation theology coincides with the Roman Catholic Second Vatican Council in the 60s.
It was this Liberation Theology that gave rise to various other liberation theologies around the world including Black Liberation Theology in America. Popularized by James Cone, Black Liberation Theology essentially teaches that the God of the oppressive White man is not the same God as the God of the oppressed Black man. In the view of Black Liberation Theology, God dwells with and identifies with the oppressed—Black people are the oppressed.
Similarly, over the years, we've seen this theology adapt itself and evolve into many different forms, but the underlying theme remains the same. From this has sprung women's or feminist liberation theologies, queer theologies—practically anyone who claims to be oppressed in society can have a liberation theology named after them. Additionally, these liberation theologies will incorporate the progressive social justice ideas of the Walter Rauschenbusch social gospel heresy of the 1800s.
The underlying theme is, essentially, that Christ did not come to die for the sins of His elect, rather he came to identify with the oppressed and liberate them from that oppression. The oppressor—which is defined in Marxist terms—is not fit for the Kingdom of the liberated oppressed.
Enter the newest heresy making inroads into the Church: Child Liberation Theology.
Child Liberation Theology is primarily advanced by a man named R.L. Stollar. Stollar, according to his website, defines Liberation Theology as finding "find[ing] Jesus on the underside of history: among those abused and cast aside by the powers-that-be."
He writes, "Black liberation theology declares God is Black. Mujerista theology says God is a Latina woman. Queer theology identifies God as queer. In similar fashion, child liberation theology makes clear: God is child, too! " As with the other liberation theologies, Stollar separates the oppressed from the oppressor and attaches the liberator figure, Jesus, to those said to be oppressed.
In the view of Child Liberation Theology, children are said to be oppressed by parents who hold "authoritarian control" over their children rather than allowing them the freedom to explore, learn, act, and feel however they choose. Stollar argues that children are oppressed because children are excluded from having too much power over their own lives:
In too many American churches and Christian families, children are excluded from too much. In an article for the theological journal Currents about child liberation theology, Dr. Craig L. Nessan notes that, “The distinctive perspective of children has been notably underrepresented.” They have little say over how they are raised, how they are loved, how they are taught, how they worship, and even how they relate to God. This reduces children to puppets, acting out a spirituality scripted and informed entirely by adult questions and concerns.
Empowering children to think freely and learn for themselves may sound good on the surface, but to the Christian who is competent in the Word of God, giving this kind of free rein to children always ends in proverbial disaster.
Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from him. —Proverbs 22:15
Let that sink in: the entire idea behind Child Liberation Theology is to remove the aspect of discipline from children. To allow them to choose express themselves according to their own judgment rather than teach them the objective difference between good and evil. To the liberation theologian, the only evil is oppression and the only good is liberation. This is the kind of thinking that one would expect from the secular Marxist world, but keep in mind, liberation theology is designed to masquerade as a form of Christian theology. Yet, it is not actually drawn from Christian, especially biblical, principles.
The logical conclusion—and this author would argue the designed purpose—of this ideology is to eliminate parental control over children and turn children over to the culture to be raised. Everyone is influenced by something; whether it be family, parents, and church or government and culture. If parents are not instilling the difference between right and wrong in their children and enforcing behavior in accordance with it, you can rest assured they're going to learn it from somewhere. And let's be real, this culture is overly sexualized, abusive, murderous, slanderous, and outright wicked. God hates the culture of the world; it's why He demands His people be separate from it.
Yet, to the child liberation theologian, parental control over children is "oppressive" and enforcement of parental ideals, especially spanking, is "child abuse." In fact, they regularly refer to spanking as "beating a child," just look at this Twitter exchange between Reformation Charlotte and R.L. Stollar and his followers.
It should be noted that the vast majority of Stollar's—who claims to be a Christian—are queers and atheists. It should be noted that his ideology is in line with those who openly and unabashedly rebel against God and His precepts. Yet, this is being passed off as a Christian theology.
Here's the bottom line: Child Liberation Theology, which is slowly beginning to make its way into mainstream churches around the world, is not a valid field of study, a valid theological concept, or in any way a Christian idea—it is a method of child grooming intended to lead children away from the foundational moral principles of God and Christ instilled in them by good Christian parents, and into the arms of the Pagan culture that teaches them that homosexuality, transgenderism, abortion, and every other form of sexual perversion is good and acceptable, and that their age is not a barrier to enter the realm of this lifestyle.
The putridity of what Mr. Stollar believes and proposes is an expression of the true nature of a man or woman of lawlessness; impudently arrogant, arrogantly profane, profanely perverted, and ultimately dead in sin and trespass.
Man is putting himself in Hell. A dark and fearsome place.