Abstract
Abstract This comment demonstrates the changes of attitude among liberation theologians toward human rights language, from avoidance, through critical confrontation, to appropriation. The reluctance appears as a natural consequence of the idea of partiality and preferentiality held by liberationists, which has always been critical of any claim of universality such as human right. The comment also argues that the latest phase of appropriation is made possible after liberationists employ the ecclesial idea of the ‘preferential option for the poor.’ However, the acceptance of human rights language can only be possible if we see the poor as concrete universal and understand the idea of the ‘preferential option for the poor’ as a middle axiom.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
