Finally, a third area of critique: the question of freedom, which is, after all, the telos of liberation; and yet is in many ways the Achilles’ heel of Liberation Theology. It lies at the heart of the Vatican cri- tiques of Liberation Theology in 1984 and 1986, which regarded the liberationist vision as reductionist in its reliance on Marxist ideol- ogy. The second of the two Instructions from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1986) attempted a description of Christian freedom allegedly more in line with orthodox Christian tradition. Stanley Hauerwas casts a cold eye over the concept of ‘freedom’ in Gustavo Guti´errez, while the Belgian theologian, Jos´e Comblin in Called to Freedom (1997) regrets the earlier tendency of veteran liberation theologians like himself to devote too much attention to the process of liberation, rather than the actuality and ambiguities of freedom and liberty. For Comblin, Liberation Theology must aim for a theologically articulated project, focussed on the freedom of the person in community. Such a priority would enable Liberation Theology to recover the sense of a defining and unifying vision or blueprint for its socio-analytical mediation, a vital ingredient missing since 1989.