Agent of The Powerless

In class, I am part of the group that is in charge of learning about Oscar Romero and the Liberation Theology. So far, I have learnt that Oscar Romero was a guy who preached to large crowds about the Liberation Theology and about the role that the church should play in society. From what I understood, the Liberation Theology wanted for the Church, mainly it's holy men of power, to use their religious power to fight for the 'people'. It wanted for the church to fight the main power against oppression, their goal was to achieve justice, equality, and liberty. The liberation Theology was a popular movement with strong connections to the Marxist ideology, involving its own twist that asked for the Christian Church to support the movement by essentially become politically aware, then preaching to the public to also become more involved in political affairs by encouraging uprisings against all that was unfair.

From what I understood, this Liberation Theology movement was unsuccessful, but there were many people who felt passionate about it. While I agree in what this movement was trying to accomplish, I think the reason it was not successful was because while preaching to the public, talking to people about some of the issues that they wanted to change and improve could raise awareness, I’d say that the amount of people that would actually act upon their concerns on the issues being faced, was minimal.

The way that I see it, while it may be very close minded of me and what not, the reason for why the Liberation Theology was not successful in achieving its goals was because the execution of their plan relied far too much on religion itself along with its holy men of instead of basing some of it on the people themselves, as the bigger percent. I think that the Liberation Theology was either far too complex or too simple, and the people who supported it just found it hard to decide how to help it thrive and grow and be successful. I think its a poor example of how through out history religion has been used as an agent of the powerless because it relied on power.

Simon Says...,

The guideline for assuming a place of control: First of all, one must have and/ or claim a legitimate connection to god. Then followers who believe in god must be obtained. Out of these followers, devotees are formed and having devotees equals full support. With support, power is given to do almost anything with god's 'blessing'.

Most religious leaders believe that their religion is the max, is the best, and is incomparable to any other due to its greatness. Such religious leaders try to gain followers by convincing them of this: that there is no such thing better or more real than what they believe in. Once the convincing is done, I think it is the sense of community created that leads many to feel passionate about the beliefs presented. These feelings have shown time and time over again that it is quite possible and quite easy to acquire the feeling of wanting and needing to make an impact in order to become an important part of a religious movement were many are involved.

Religious leaders use this as a way to get people on their side. Once people get on their side, its all about extremity and conservatives. I think its they who at levels inspire people to want to join, because i think people are naturally attracting to things that show the possibility of success. Usually, the more people that support something, the more that others want to support it too. I think that it is all mostly about what is the mainstream. Through this idea of mainstream and following others, i think religion develops the ability to turn those very people ignorant.

Its Simon Says do this, and you do, because it is Simon, and if you don't, you lose.

Sneaky, Creepy, Freaky.

 Witchcraft and its relation as an agent of the powerful.

For a long span of time, and through out various different times in history, accusations of witchcraft have been flung over and over again. The targets of such accusations being mainly woman- yet another way in which societies have undermined women and placed them at a level below that of men. As you might know, it was specially during this time that women, most of them single and independent women that were looked down upon by society.. Of these women, I think it was mainly those of lower classes that had no real importance or way of defending themselves, that were accused. The possibility of maybe some single slightly successful women being accused and condemned by men of power that saw them as threats, is also quite possible because, who wants a woman, someone of a lesser sex and intelligence, to be successful and maybe take away the spotlight of a powerful male??

Although I wasn’t part of the group that was assigned to read the reading on witchcraft, from the activity we did in class of sharing ideas on the readings done, I was able to get an idea of the reading itself from the sharing my partner did, and from what I was able to hear from other group's conversations. I came to a point of general understanding on the subject and to the conclusion that the trials of witchcraftery were used as a form of demonstration of power. So if this was the case, who held the power? The judges, the ones with the ability to condemn and to accuse and to decide who was and who wasn’t under the influence of the demonic possessions of souls, under the control of the devil, and what not. They had their way one way or another, with no limiting to their decisions. I think that this is one of those things that can be seen time and time again among the characteristics considered in one way or another as a form of acquiring and maintaining power, the act of having the final and only word. From what I understood, witchcraft trials seemed to be almost inaccurate and unjust. From my knowledge on such trials, or lack thereof, I know that in some cases, if one agreed to repent their sins and confess to the world of their role in serving the devil, they would be let off the hook, otherwise, they would be executed by burning at the stake, hanging until dead, etc. But what is the point of this?  To be honest, I don't know. Maybe it’s just to show that these actions are possible and that proof is only existent in the head of the believer of such accusations. While in this post, I am not neglecting nor denying the existence of people of such magical powers; it was the case that in these trials, those killed were more often than not, innocent.

So what is the relation between witchcraft and power? Easy. Magic. You can’t prove something you cannot deny. You can’t accuse powerful men of lying without being told it is the devil inside you saying so. You cannot live without succumbing to the humiliation of having million ignorant people believe you a confessed witch, and few knowledables knowing you lied. The idea of wichcraftery is an idea brought upon by the religion and those powerful in the religion as a form of almost brainwashing the public with fear and hate and as a solution to confusing events or unsuspected success.