As liberation theology spread across the globe in the seventh and eighth decades of the twentieth century, the need was felt for mutual learning and teaching among its proponents in various continents. The Ecumenical Association of Third World Theologians (EATWOT) was founded at Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania, in 1976 to facilitate such a dialogue. This article explores the ways in which the thought of Ignacio Ellacuría, S.J., (a Spanish philosopher and theologian who was murdered in El Salvador in 1989) and Asian liberation theology can enrich each other.

After situating Ellacuría, especially his activities as rector of the Jesuit University of Central America, in the context of political and military conflicts of El Salvador, the essay expounds Ellacuría's philosophy of realidad historica, his theology of the People of God as el pueblo crucificado, and his understanding of a Catholic university as a “social force,” and shows how these three ideas can enrich Asian liberation theology. The essay then presents Asian liberation theology in the socio-political and religious contexts of Asia and explains how it can enrich Ellacuría's thought and by extension Latin American liberation theology in three areas: theological method, through the use of non-Christian religious sources, especially popular religion; theology of liberation, by attending to the efforts of non-Christian activists for justice and peace; and a new way of being church, through a triple dialogue: dialogue with the Asian people, especially their poor; dialogue with Asian cultures; and dialogue with Asian religions.

This article analyzes the International Theological Commission's Memory and Reconciliation: The Church and the Faults of the Past (MR). The document offers methodological reflections about how to proceed in implementing Pope John Paul II's call for the church to ask for forgiveness for past offenses at the dawn of the third millennium of Christianity. MR thus seeks to clarify “the reasons, the conditions, and the exact form of the requests for forgiveness for the faults of the past.” The article raises some specific concerns regarding the three operative distinctions that MR proposes to be applied: between the holiness of the church emphatically differentiated from holiness (and sinfulness) in the church; between church and social context in making historical and theological judgments; and between magisterium and authority in the church (that allows MR to explain how behavior contrary to the Gospel by persons vested with authority in the church need not imply involvement of the magisterial charism).

This essay partly responds to John Connolly's recent article on the significance of Newman's view of theology for the contemporary Catholic university. I agree with Connolly's argument but believe it does not do justice to the rich theological and philosophical implications of Newman's thought on this topic. Theology in the university serves a vital role in the philosophical formation of the intellect because it aids the intellect's trajectory toward a kind of transcendence. This specific transcendence is connected to the dynamics of reasoning operative within the philosophical habit of mind. The transcendence that Newman holds as constitutive of and ordered by university teaching concerns viewing theology as liberal knowledge and as a type of contemplation. As a subject matter, theology assists in the mind's enlargement by helping to bring out the metaphysical and aesthetic dimensions in knowing.