LATIN AMERICAN LIBERATION THEOLOGY 

Liberation Theology is a world-wide movement which engages the oppressed and suffering people of the world.  As has been mentioned before, it is not merely another school of thought which will have its day and then gone by, but rather, a movement which emerges from and seeks to address the situation of people, who are suffering in different parts of the world.  

This essay is the beginning of several focusing on that part of the world known as "Latin America." We might ask "Why do we need to focus on Latin America?"  My response to that is that we focus on that region of the world because it happens to be a region where people are living in dire straights, and where they have been the victims of much cruelty, dehumanization, and suffering. 

Writing in 1971, Enrique Dussel stated that Latin America had not yet produced any leading theologian (Enrique Dussel, A History of the Church in Latin America. Grand Rapids:Eerdmans, 1981, p. 112).

This situation has changed rapidly.  Since the 1970's and 1980's, Latin American theologians have written an abundance of books and articles that have led to the conclusion that their authors are at the forefront of of the making of contemporary theology (Ferm, op. cit., p. 16).

Most observers consider Gustavo Gutierrez of Peru to be the preeminent Latin American theologian. His book "A Theology of Liberation" published in Spanish in 1971, and then translated into English in 1973 has been hailed as the "Magna Carta" of Liberation Theology (A Theology of Liberation. Maryknoll, Orbis Books, 1973).

Gutierrez was born in 1928 in Lima, Peru. He studied for a time at the San Marcos University Medical School in Lima, where he took a particular interest in psychiatry.  Later he felt called to the priesthood.  His pursuit of theological studies took him to Louvain, Lyons, and Rome.  He returned to Peru to accept a position at the Catholic University in Lima. Ordained a priest in 1959, he moved to Rimac, a slum of Lima. He taught in the Department of Theology and Social Sciences at the Catholic Pontifical University in Lima and also served as the director of the Bartolome de Las Casas Center in the heart of Rica( Ferm, op. cit., p. 16).

Of Amerindian ancestry, Gutierrez had experienced the pangs of discrimination in his early years-an experience that prompted him to become a political activist in his undergraduate years.  His encounter with daily suffering in Rimac strengthened his resolve to focus on his priestly concerns on the plight of the oppressed. This commitment was also reinforced by his discovery of the writings of the early Spanish liberator, Bartolome de las Casas (Ibid. pp. 16-17). 

During the 1960's, Gutierrez became increasingly disenchanted with his formal theological training.  In Europe, theology had been presented primarily as an intellectual discipline, more attuned to the life of the mind than to the actual living conditions of the poor. As a priest of and to the poor, he came to see that theology-indeed the Christian faith itself -made no sense unless it came to grips with the oppression and violence endured by those who whom he was called to serve.  During the decade of the 1960's, Gutierrez encountered other priests who felt as he did-that the theology that they had been taught was irrelevant to the poor with whom they lived.  One such priest was Camilo Torres, Gutierrez's fellow student at Louvain, who became radicalized in his ministry to the poor, and was eventually murdered for his "subversive" activities (Ibid.). 

According to Gutierrez, Liberation Theology as a self-conscious movement, was born in 1968, the year that he had gathered with like-minded priests in Lima and later at the episcopal conference in Medellin, serving as the principal author of the document on peace.  He also attended the follow-up conferences in Switzerland in 1969, and Colombia in 1970 (Ibid.).

It was during this time that Gutierrez wrote A Theology of Liberation.  The book was, in essence, a reflection on what he had learned firsthand from his daily encounters with his people during the preceding decade (Ibid.).

The book is Gutierrez's answer to the question, "What is the proper role of theology and of the theologian in the attempt to faithful to both the Christian gospel and to the poor in Latin America? Historically, Gutierrez notes, theology serves a variety of purposes. One model has emphasized wisdom and understanding.  According to this model, the primary task of theology is to understand the nature of reality, and further, to provide a reasoned interpretation of the divine revelation entrusted to the Church. Thus, theology serves both to strengthen the faith of the believers and to make Christianity intellectually convincing to the non-believers. Another important theological model has stressed spiritual enlightenment and sought to bring the believer into a close relationship with Christ (Ibid.) 

Gutierrez does not wish to do away with either of these models but rather to transcend them. He suggests a vision of theology from Augustine's The City of God, and Augustine's attempt to relate the Christian faith to the everyday lives of the Christians in his turbulent time (Ibid.).  

In a later book which he writes, i.e. We Drink from our Own Wells, Gutierrez stresses the point that liberation is an all-embracing process that "leaves no dimension of human life untouched." He says that "an encounter with the Lord is the necessary point of departure for a life according to the Spirit (Ibid.).  

As one continues to engage with Gutierrez and his writings, one discovers that he believes that oppression and suffering are the starting points  for biblical interpretation and theological reflection. These conditions and situations become the prism  through which Scripture and the traditions of the Church are understood in the life of the community. 

Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona 

Past Visiting Professor of Theology

Tainan Theological College/Seminary 

Past Prison Chaplain

New York State Department of Correctional Services ne  

 The heart of the Medellin documents can be summarized in two of its passages:

By its own vocation Latin America will undertake its liberation at the cost of whatever sacrifice (The Church in the Present Day Transformation of Latin America in the Light of the Council: Second Conference of Latin American Bishops. Washington, DC, National Conference of Catholic Bishops, 3rd. 3d., 1979, p23).

The Lord's distinct commandment to "evangelize the poor" ought to bring us to a distribution of resources and  apostolic personnel that effectively gives preference to the poorest and neediest sectors (Ibid., p. 175).

Medellin is the cradle of Liberation Theology.  It is a clear and unambiguous assertion that the church should exercise a "preferential option for the poor"-an ideal that has become the hallmark of Liberation Theology.  However, the documents do not represent a unanimous point of view.  Both proponents and opponents of Liberation Theology can find passages to bolster their own positions.  And the documents are far more impressive in analyzing conditions than in proposing solutions.  But what Medellin did accomplish, in the words of Phillip Berryman, was "to give a green light to creative minorities all over the continent whose participation in the liberation struggle has led to a radicalization of the themes present in Medellin ("Latin American Liberation Theology" in Sergio Torres and John Eagleson, eds, Theology in the Americas.  Maryknoll, Orbis Books, 1976, p. 26).

Although Vatican II and Medellin were important catalysts, they did not produce Liberation Theology.  Liberation Theology emerged from the lives of the poor and oppressed in Latin America, and, in particular, from the small basic Christian communities (CEBs-comunidades eclesiales de base) of the dispossessed-creative minorities seeking to relate their Christian convictions to their everyday lives.  These small communities, mostly in rural areas and on the outer edges of the cities, are formed by simple Christians who gather together to worship God and live out their responsibility to make Christ real in their lives (Ferm, op. cit. p. 12).

The CEBs are trying to live in a demanding way and under the extremely difficult conditions of their environment, the good news which they have accepted; celebrating it jubilantly in worship and and proclaiming it courageously to those who have not yet heard it----When the oppressed poor accept the gospel as good news of liberation, and actually strive to become liberated from the oppression that is being suffered, they are, ipso facto, battling against the sin of the oppressor, inviting the latter to conversion...The great revelation of the gospel of Jesus Christ and the radical innovation of the good news that He brings in His preferential love for the poor and sinners (Basic Ecclesial Communities: The Evangelization of the Poor. Maryknoll: Orbis, 1982, pp.64, 67-68).

CEBs have mushroomed all over Latin America.  By the end of the 1970's, approximately eighty thousand such communities existed in Brazil alone.  The CEBs are the very stuff out of which Liberation Theology grows, for they are the "poor in action" of which Liberation Theology is but a reflection.  Many of these communities use educational methods developed by Paulo Freire. He introduced "conscientization," a process by which persons  are made aware of how important it is to integrate their religious faith with their day-to-day political and social lives (Ferm, op. cit. p. 12).

The central problem is this: How can the oppressed, as divided, un-authentic-beings, participate in developing the pedagogy of their liberation?  The starting point for organizing  the program content of education or political action must be the present, existential, concrete situation, reflecting the aspirations of the people ( Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder, 1972, pp. 33, 85).

Another major development that fed the emergence of Liberation Theology was the Christians for Socialism movement, which had its beginnings in Chile in 1971.  At a meeting of eighty priests from throughout Latin America, the movement drafted a document that stated:

"As Christians we do not see any incompatibility between Christianity and socialism.  Quite the contrary is true...it is necessary to destroy the prejudice and and mistrust that exists between Christians and Marxists (John Eagleson, Christians and Socialism: Documentation of the Christians for Socialism Movement in Latin America.  Maryknoll: Orbis, 1975. p. 4.

This statement goes beyond the Medellin conference, which tried to steer a middle course between capitalism and socialism.  The theme surfaced at a convention of four hundred Latin American Christians held in Santiago, Chile, in 1972, where final document affirmed:

"The economic and social structures of our Latin American countries are grounded on oppression and injustice, which in turn is a result of our capitalist dependence on the great power centers...We commit ourselves to the task of fashioning socialism because it is our objective conclusion....that this is the only effective way to combat imperialism and to break away for our situation of dependence.  There is a growing awareness that revolutionary Christians must form a strategic alliance with Marxists within the liberation process on this continent.  Socialism presents itself as the only acceptable option for getting beyond a class-based society (Ibid., pp. 161, 163, 168, 169)." 

This "preference for the poor by way of socialism" met fierce resistance from the established political and religious structures. Governments considered this socialist credo a distinct threat to the capitalist forces that kept them in power.  And the official teachings of the church had yet to acknowledge any merit in any form of socialism.  That would occur less than a decade later in Pope John Paul II's 1981 encyclical Laborem Exercens. The Christians for Socialism movement in Latin America did not survive as an independent force, but the seeds sown by it continued to germinate.  Its importance lies in its harsh criticism of the evils and abuses of a capitalist system that favors a wealthy minority and provides but a few crumbs for the oppressed majority (Ferm, op. cit., p. 12). 

For liberation theologians, the voices of the poor are indeed, in Dom Helder Camara's words, "the voice of God."  These theologians are convinced that social reform will come Latin America in one way or another.  These theologians are convinced that social reform will come to Latin America in one way or the other. Their primary mission is to promote this inevitable social reforms in a Christian context (Ibid., p. 15).  

In summary, we ask ourselves what is the future of theology (God-talk) in Latin America?  Will theological discourse reflect the interests of the rich and powerful, or will it reflect the aspirations and yearnings of the oppressed and poor of the region?  Will theology in Latin America be used to legitimize maintaining oppressive and unjust ideologies and systems, or will theological discourse breed and generate a movement for social justice? 

In this writer's point of view, any theology which legitimizes and supports oppressive ideological structures is a theology which must be exorcised and reprimanded.  Authentic and genuine theology must be contextualized in the lives of oppressed people and stimulate a movement that leads society in the direction of social justice.  Authentic and genuine theology should promote and reflect the ingredients of the Gospel of liberation and redemption.  

The Struggle Continues 

Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona 

Past Visiting Professor of Theology 

Tainan Theological College/Seminary 

 A major cause of poverty and oppression in Latin America has been and remains the economic policies of the United States government and of multinational corporations-policies that buttress repressive governments.  As one observer puts it:

The basic difference between American imperialism today and American imperialism a century ago is that it is more violent, more far reaching, and more carefully planned today (Irving Horowitz et al, eds., Latin American Radicalism: A Documentary Report on Left and Nationalist Movements.  New York: Random House, 1969, p. 194).

Between 1950 and 1955, the United States invested $2 billion in Latin America, chiefly in raw materials and agriculture.  From this investment the United States made a profit of $3.5 billion, nearly half of which returned to the United States.  As is obvious, a nation that dominates the economy of another nation dominates its political sector as well.  For this reason, the U.S. government plan for so-called development in Latin America is a sure way to maintain economic, social, and political status quo.  Furthermore, in light of the insistence of protecting national security by military might, it becomes obvious why the U.S. government and multinational corporations will inevitably support political structures that favor their own self-interests above all else. (Ferm, op. cit. p. 9).

It is not surprising...that since 1960, the amount of violence has dramatically increased on the one hand by the military governments supported by the Pentagon, and the national police (with their methods of torture often taught by the United States experts in counterinsurgency), and on the other hand by the rural and urban guerrillas. With the death of John Kennedy and the failure of the Alliance for Progress program, the United States began to support all the forces in Latin America that called themselves "anti-Communists," a euphemism for counterrevolution, that is, those governments that directed their efforts against the popular revolutions through neo-colonial militarism ( A History of the Church in Latin America, op. cit., p. 51)

With this portrait in mind, one can understand why more and more Latin Americans mistrust "foreign aid" programs and "alliances for progress," wonder whether the only way to break the spiral of violence supported by entrenched political and economic structures is literally to break the structures themselves.  After all, as John F. Kennedy used to warn us, those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable (Ferm, op. cit. p. 10).  

For a long time, Latin America had been ripe for massive social revolution.  When the social teachings of Vatican II and the social encyclicals of Pope John XXIII and Paul VI began to trickle down into Latin America, a small but growing number of bishops, priests, and lay persons found confirmation of what they themselves had come to see as the role of the church in building a new social order.  After all, six hundred bishops from Latin America had attended the opening proceedings of Vatican II in 1962, and they and their advisers could not help but be deeply committed to the social documents that they and their Latin American episcopacy, the implications of Vatican II and the papal encyclicals-in particular, the more recent Populorum Progressio were throughly discussed (Ibid.).

In 1967, bishops from Latin America, Africa, and Asia issued "A Letter  to the Peoples of the Third World," which maintained that revolution can be an appropriate means to overcome justice, and stated that the rich were inciters of violence.  More and more bishops, priests, and lay persons had come to realize that in order to remedy the desperate poverty and injustices of the masses, Latin American nations had to eliminate political and economic domination and create their own destiny in the community of nations.  Thus, beginning in the 1960's, a new era began for the church in Latin America, an era marked by a growing concern for the poor, resistance to the privileged few, distrust of the established order, and protest against the prevailing structures of the social order.  It was in this atmosphere that Latin American Liberation Theology was born (Ibid.). 

The second major event in the 1960's for the Catholic Church in Latin America was called the General Conference of the Latin American episcopacy (CELAM II) held in 1968 in Medellin Colombia.  Enrique Dussel considers CELAM II the "Vatican II of Latin America" (A History, op. cit., p. 147).

Gustavo Gutierrez points to the year 1968 as the birthday of Latin American Liberation Theology (National Catholic Reporter, Dec. 11, 1982, p. 11).

What the Medellin conference did above all else was to focus attention on the Latin American situation, particularly the pervasive human injustice and oppression.  What does God have to say and what ought the church as God's agent do about all this suffering (Ferm, op. cit., p. 11).

The theme of the conference was "The Church in the Present-Day-Transformation of Latin America in the Light of the Council (The Church in the Present-Day Transformation of Latin America in the Light of the Council:  Second General Conference of Latin American Bishops. Washington, D.C ., National Conference of Catholic Bishops, 3rd. ed., 1979). 

Sixteen documents were produced, ranging in subject matter from justice, peace, education, and youth, to liturgy, lay movements, the mass media, and the poverty of the church.  In reading the documents, it becomes apparent that the majority  of the 145 cardinals, bishops, and priests who attended this conference had been deeply and positively influenced by Vatican II-many of them had been present at it-as well as by Pope Paul VI's encyclical Popululorum Progressio of 1967, which had directly addressed the Latin American situation (Ferm, op. cit. p 11.).

To be continued.

Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona 

                              THE PREDAWN OF LIBERATION THEOLOGY (CONTINUED)

Pope Paul VI built upon the foundation laid by his predecessors, as his encyclical Populorum Progressio (1967) indicates.  He notes how trips to Latin America and Africa in the 1960's gave him a firsthand look at the plight of the poor and points out why he had established a pontifical commission "to further the progress of poor peoples, to encourage social justice among nations, to offer less developed nations the means whereby they can further their own progress (Populorum Progressio, Gremillion, the Gospel, p. 88)." 

In this encyclical the Pope writes of "the scandal of glaring inequalities" in both possession and power, and points out how the Vatican Council insisted on the imperative of expropriating landed estates that were poorly utilized and brought harm to the people (Ibid., p. 390).

He denounces those who make a profit the key motive for economic progress and deplores the fact that "a type of capitalism has been the source of excessive suffering, injustices, and fratricidal conflicts (Ibid., p. 395). 

The Pope recognizes the urgency of the situation: "We must make haste, too many people are suffering, and the distance is growing that separates progress of some and the stagnation,  not to say the regression of others (Ibid., p. 396).

He goes on to say: There are certainly situations where injustice cries to heaven.  When whole populations destitute of necessities live in a state of dependence barring them from all initiative and responsibility, all opportunity to advance culturally and share in social and political life, recourse to violence, as a means to right these wrongs to human dignity, is a grave temptation (Ibid.).

Paul VI insists that "the superfluous wealth of rich countries should be placed at the service of poor nations"; otherwise their continued greed will bring down the wrath of the poor (Ibid., p. 402).  

In short, the world, exclaims the Pontiff, is sick-sick of luxury and waste in the midst of poverty, and sick of horrendous economic and social inequalities.  It is imperative for lay persons to take the initiative in making necessary changes in the customs, laws, and structures of their communities.  He ends by declaring: All of you who have heard the appeal of suffering people, all of you who are working to answer their cries, you are the apostles of a development which is good and genuine, which is not wealth that is self-centered and sought for its own sake, but rather an economy which is put at the service of humankind; the bread which is daily distributed to all, as a source of siblinghood and a sign of Providence...Yes, we ask you, all of you, to hear our cry of anguish in the name of the Lord (Ibid., p. 413).

From the publication of Rerum Novarum in 1891 to the late 1960's, Catholic social teaching in the form of papal encyclicals and conciliar documents had undergone a steady transformation.  There was increasing concern shown for the poor, suffering, and oppressed; for the rights of workers; for the responsibilities that the wealthy nations have for the impoverished; for the defects of capitalism based exclusively on the profit motive; for the role of both church and state in liberating the oppressed. And in what area of the world needed to hear this social message more than in Latin America, where political power makes the small number of rich even richer, and the vast number of poor even poorer (Ferm, op. cit. p. 9)?

A major cause of poverty and oppression in Latin America has been and remains the economic policies of the United States government and of multinational corporations-policies that buttress repressive governments.  As one observer puts it:  The basic difference between American imperialism and today and American imperialism a century ago is that it is more violent, more far-reaching, and more carefully planned today (In Irving  Louis Horowitz, et.al, eds., Latin American Radicalism: A Documentary Report on Left and Right Nationalist Movements.  New York: Random House, 1969, p. 194)

To be Continued.

 

THE PREDAWN OF LIBERATION THEOLOGY 

We continue with our focus on the historical origins of Liberation Theology.  As I mentioned at the beginning of these essays, theology (God-talk) does not take place in a vacuum.  Liberation Theology, like all other theological movements and schools of thought did not emerge out of nowhere.  Like all other theologies, it had its historical beginnings and contextual emphasis.  

While focusing on the details of the origins of a particular theology might seem somewhat cumbersome and tedious, it is a necessary component of research on that theology.  In order for us to understand theological thought, we must ask ourselves "How did it all begin?" 

I will say about Liberation Theology the same thing that I say about all other theologies.  It is not "heaven-sent," and neither is it inerrant or infallible.  Liberation Theology, like all other theologies, is culturally and historically-conditioned.  Like all other theologies, it has its own set of assumptions, biases, and presuppositions.  Every theologian of liberation brings her/his prior assumptions and mindsets to the table.  Liberation Theology is by no stretch of the imagination, something that takes place "Tabula rasa (in a blank slate)."  

From 1930 to 1960, the Catholic Church experienced a theological and liturgical revival concentrated especially in the religious orders and seminaries.  This ferment surfaced in the general conference of the Latin American episcopacy (CELAM I), which convened in Rio de Janiero in 1955 with Pope Pius XII in attendance.  This conference addressed many issues, not the least of which was the modern role of the church in missions and in the social order.  Liberation theology was presaged in Cardinal Adeodato Piazza's reference to Jesus's first sermon to define the proper mission of the church: "The spirit of the Lord has been given to me, for He has anointed me.  He has sent to bring the good news to the poor (Ferm, op. cit. p 6)." 

Two major events of the 1960's shook the Catholic Church in Latin America to its foundations. Vatican II and the Medellin conference (CELAM II) of 1968.  It is important that we consider both events in some detail and note their impact on Latin America, for these two events, more than any others, gave official impetus to the emergence of Liberation Theology (Ibid., p. 7).

Both proponents and critics of Liberation Theology stress the importance of Vatican II and its convener, Pope John XXIII.  Gustavo Gutierrez of Peru, the leading exponent of Latin American Liberation Theology, has said that the Medellin conference would not have been possible without Vatican II and Pope John XXIII (National Catholic Reporter, Dec. 17, 1982, pp. 10-11).

In addition, C. Peter Wagner, no friend of Liberation Theology has stated: "When historians evaluate this period a century from now, it may well turn out that Pope John XXXIII will have been judged to have had more influence on the Latin American continent than any other person in the twentieth century.  Roman Catholicism will never be the same as a result of the council he called and the attitude he infused (Latin American Theology: Radical or Evangelical? Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970, p. 17)."

Pope John XXIII convened the council in 1982.  It met for two months at a time for the next four years.  After the death of John XXIII in 1963, Pope Paul VI continued where his predecessor had left off.  Vatical II represents the positive response of the Catholic Church to the challenges of the modern world.  Possibly the spirit of openness to all "separated brethren" epitomized by Pope John himself had a greater impact than even the documents themselves (Ferm, op. cit., p. 7).  

Nevertheless, one should not underestimate the significance of the Vatican II documents. Of major importance is the Gaudium et Spes (1965), which emphasizes the special responsibility Christians have toward "those who are poor or in any way afflicted (Gaudium et Spes, in Joseph Gremillion, ed., The Gospel of Peace and Justice. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1976, p. 243).

This document underlies the increasing gap between the haves and the have-nots, as well as the universal mandate to "count social necessities among the primary duties of modern humankind (Ibid., p. 267)."

It denies that the church is bound to any single social, economic, or political system and maintains that what is most important is the wider distribution of economic power.  Gaudium et Spes recognizes the importance of organized labor and even of the right to strike for just demands, as part of the effort to press for a fairer distribution of goods.  It affirms that the church itself, although independent of the political sector, has the right-even the duty-to pass moral judgments on political matters (Ferm, op. cit., p.7).

One finds the same spirit of willingness to confront the new demands of a changing world in the papal encyclicals issued the 1960's.  Pope John XXIII's Mater Magistra ( 1961) which builds upon the landmark social encyclicals Rerum Novarum (1891) and Quadragesimo Anno (1931), illusstrates this point well. In Quadragesimo Anno, Pius XI had advanced two basic principles: "practical morality," must govern economic affairs, and the interests of an individual or a society must be subordinate to the common good. He explicitly rejected unregulated competition and the subjugation of any society to the interests of its wealthiest members (Ibid., p. 8).

Pope John XXIII went a step further. He agreed with Pius XI that it was wrong for the powerful members of a society to determine the wage scale and he declared unjust any society in which the "human dignity of workers is compromised, or their sense of responsibility is weakened, or their freedom of action is removed (Mater et Maistra, in Gremillion, The Gospel, p. 161).

TO BE CONTINUED