From Rio de Janeiro to Aparecida
The road traveled by the Church in Latin-America.
The introduction of the Aparecida Document explicitly states that “The 5th General Conference of the Latin American and Caribbean Episcopate is a new step in the Church's journey, especially since the Second Ecumenical Vatican Council II. It provides continuity, and at the same time, sums up the way of fidelity, renewal and evangelization by the Latin American Church in the service of its peoples, which has been opportunely expressed in the previous General Conferences of the Episcopate (Rio, 1955; Medellín, 1968; Puebla, 1979; Santo Domingo, 1992). We recognize the activity of the Spirit in all this. We also bear in mind the Special Assembly of the Synod of Bishops for America (1997).” (n. 9).
This affirmation of the continuity of Aparecida with previous General Conferences of the Latin American Episcopate is an invitation to recall the process which has taken place and renew the commitment to evangelisation so our peoples may continue growing and maturing in faith in Christ Jesus and that they may have life in Him.
Before going back over – even if briefly - this journey of our Church, it seems to me important to recall the entire stage prior to Rio de Janeiro.
As the document recognizes in the brief history of the Church it offers, “The Gospel arrived in our lands amidst a dramatic and unequal encounter between peoples and cultures. The “seeds of the Word”1 which were already there in the indigenous cultures made it easier for our indigenous brothers and sisters to find vital responses in the Gospel to their deepest aspirations: “Christ was the Saviour they were silently yearning for”2. The appearance of Our Lady of Guadalupe was a decisive event for the proclamation and recognition of her Son, a pedagogy and sign of inculturation of the faith, the manifestation and renewal of the missionary impetus for spreading the Gospel3.” (n. 4).
The love of the missionaries for the indigenous people led them to defend them against the 'conquistadores', to fight for their dignity, learn their languages, recover their culture and in the by-going gave rise to a certain acculturation. This pastoral choice was shown through many and varied strategies such as financial concessions, popular hospitals, art, colleges, as well as doctrine.
The reaction of the indigenous peoples shifted from mistrust and resistance to enthusiasm and massive conversion, which assured the rapid Christianization of the continent, but it also allowed for the persistence of their own beliefs.
The final result is a kind of Indian Christianity as Toribio de Benavente called it, which expresses what we could call acolonial Church, or mestizo (mixed race) Christianity or a popular Catholicism, terms which without meaning quite the same thing at least have an affinity.
What, then, was the path taken by the Church in Latin America to grow in its identity?
1.A local Church: from Rio de Janeiro to Puebla
Indian Christianity, typical of the Church of the Hispano-portuguese colony in America, did not collapse with the decline of Spain and Portugal beginning from the 17th century4; nor when the Church was brought to its knees in the 18th Century, controlled by the State and challenged by the Enlightenment; nor, at the dawning of the 19th Century, with the disintegration of the Spanish Empire, the wars of independence and the birth of today's republics.
Indian Christianity died in the 20th century, when the political constitutions of the new republics put an end to the symbiotic relationship between Church and State5. It was the dominant classes who fought for the destruction of a regime which would make them obsolete. Thus a new version appeared of the leyenda negra, directed this time not against Spain but against the Catholic Church, presenting Protestantism as an example to follow for its expansive spirit, its entrepreneurial and progressive nature6.
Deprived of political support, devalued in the eyes of the dominant class, and dispossessed of its goods and institutions, the Church had to confront enormous challenges: liberalism, Protestantism, neocolonialism, secularism, positivism and industrialization, followed by the emergence of a Latin American entrepreneurial class and attempts at socialism.
In broad terms this is the context in which the Latin American Church as Local Church would emerge. This is the light in which we can rightly judge the dimension and scope of the creation of CELAM in Rio de Janeiro and the Assemblies at Medellín, Puebla and Santo Domingo.
1.1Precedents: Provincial Councils
Only towards 1955, when the Latin American Episcopal Conference set itself up as an Assembly, with a view to the Eucharistic Congress in Rio de Janeiro, did the Church begin to bea local Church, a Church that sought to confront and resolve the problems of its people and collaborate in improving the continent, instead of its internal organizational problems as it had done up until this moment.
It is certain that over the period of Christianity it had had, as part of its ecclesiastical organisation, provincial councils and diocesan synods. Some of these diocesan assemblies, such as the 3rd Council of Limense (1583) and the 3rd Mexican Council (1585) were aimed at applying the council of Trent (1537-1563), and as a consequence organizing and setting up the Church in America.
A notable feature of these American councils was their concern with finding solutions to the indigenous problem. In this sense, “the Mexican Juntas” or the 18 Constituciones de Loaiza had a value similar to the Jerusalem synod for the universal Church. There they discussed whether or not the Indian could be baptized, that is, whether or not he was really a human being; and whether he could be an 'integral' part of the Church. The bishops fully defended the thesis that the Indian, remaining as such, with his language and with customs not contrary to Christianity, could be Christian. There was never a thought given to Hispanization before Christianization. This then is the history of the primitive Church of America”7.
Later, in 1899, in Rome, the Latin American Plenary council took place8, and we can consider it as the second precedent in this process of setting up a true local Church. It was called by Leo XIII, who “took account of the very different situation which pastoral ministry was facing compared with the Councils of the 16th Century and brought its decrees up to date. The Council made decisions, in the form of canons, regarding superstition, paganism, religious ignorance, socialism, Masonry, and provided practical norms on ecclesiastical discipline and liturgy”9.
Despite its limitations, this first episcopal encounter at continental level had a significant value within the unifying process, since it allowed a meeting of episcopal representatives from various geographical areas of Latin America. This interrupted the splintering of the Churches into small units and allowed pastoral agents from these Churches to get to know one another, compare criteria and exchange experiences.
1.2Rio de Janeiro and the setting up of CELAM
However, it was the meeting in Brazil, with Bishops like Dom Helder Cámara taking part, which was the catalyst for a process of decentralization and autonomy on the part of the Latin American Church as Local Church.
Although the argument centered on the Eucharist, three problems emerged which became, over the years that followed, the concern of the Episcopal Conferences:
the communist threat, in a bipolar world engaged in a powerful struggle to create geopolitical enclaves in the continent, and marked by the arrival in Latin America of missionaries who had been expelled from China;
the systematic invasion by sects, which could be seen as the religious arm of the North American secular power, aimed at weakening the Catholic Church and the disintegration of the already fragile Latin American unity;
the lack of priestly vocations, which has its origin in the model of Church planted in the colony as a European or creole Church and not an indigenous one.10.
The major value of this Assembly was an awareness of the pastoral context of Latin America itself: its social and ecclesial reality. Influencing it indirectly was specialized Catholic Action which had been drawing together the most active amongst the laity through its various branches: the JAC (rural workers, farmers), the JOC (workers), the JUC (university students), and had introduced a new method in apostolic work, via See-Judge-Act. Equally valid was a shift from ministry to the masses, which had always distinguished the Latin American Church, to a ministry of elite groups, which gave new value to the power of the group. This perspective also implied a shift in the purpose of pastoral activity, which was going in the direction not so much of creating or reinforcing ecclesial structures as transforming social reality with the leaven of the Gospel, fully inserting Christians into the world.
Faced with this new ecclesial panorama, the vote of the Latin American Epsicopate was unanimous in asking the Holy See to create a Latin American Episcopal Council (CELAM), which would be given three distinct objectives: studying the issues which were proper to the Latin American Church, coordinating the pastoral activities of the various Latin American countries and preparing for new meetings of CELAM. Pius XII approved this request on 2 November 1955.
The birth of CELAM ran into difficulties in Roman circles, who saw the initiative as a separatist movement within the Church that could endanger ecclesial unity and adherence to the Pope. These fears were not put aside until Vatican II fostered an ecclesiology of communion, unity in plurality, and a certain decentralization. We are talking of a fertile and fruitful period, a new ecclesial springtime which fostered biblical, liturgical, pastoral renewal, in which the Latin American Church was recovering its continental conscience. This was the subsoil in which Medellín and Puebla sprouted.
1.3Vatican Council II
The ecclesial event par excellence of recent times, regarded rightly as a new Pentecost, was Vatican Council II. For the Latin American bishops meant a school of formation, dependent on the presence of great theologians (Rahner, Ratzinger, Shillebeeckx, Daniélou, De Lubac, Liégè, etc.) The conciliar experience and theological study contributed strongly to the formation of a common mindset and a common opening up to the new problems arising in the Church, those coming from outside, from the modern world, and those from inside, from the renewal movements.
In Vatican II, the bishops learned that they had to be reconciled with the world, recognize the autonomy of temporal realities, be in empathy (solidarity) with mankind and his history, enter into dialogue with culture, choose freedoms and rights of individuals and peoples, define the identity and mission of the Church better, make it a servant of mankind and incarnate it in the world.
In Vatican II, the Church accepts the criticisms and challenges of the Reformation and the Enlightenment and responds to the first by recovering the invisible and secular aspects of the Church, which brings it to the point of describing itself as ‘mystery’ and as ‘People of God’; and to the second, by again taking up the theme of social involvement and introducing itself into the field of culture, which leads to it describing itself as “sacrament of salvation”11.
1.4Medellín and liberating commitment
The Second General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate, which was held in Medellín (1968), sought to be an application of Vatican II to Latin America and the response to the tough reality of the continent, which in those years was experiencing an extraordinary social turmoil12.
The novelty of this Second Conference was the Church's self-interrogation faced with the social situation of extreme poverty in which the greater number of its peoples lived (DJ 1) and their desire for freedom. Analysis, the first element of the method taken up from then on, following on from Gaudium et Spes, revealed besides that the causes of impoverishment and violence were the situation of economic dependence and the institutionalization of violence itself.
With regard to these challenges, the Church in Medellín adopted a prophetic attitude: it denounced the structures of sin, urged radical changes, and committed itself to struggle for justice and freedom. At this moment it stood out for its solidarity with the poor, and as a consequence, a breaking away of the Church from unjust powers13.
This clear stance by the Church introduced strong ecclesial and political tensions into the pastoral process. Within, groups were set up along the lines of basic ecclesial communities, priests for the Third World and liberation theology14; as a reaction, conservative and fundamentalist groups surfaced, and finally the masses, faithful to their popular religious sense, unconnected with social problems15.
The States responded to social commitment and the liberation movements with repression, via military regimes and the Doctrine of National Security which gave rise to a fury of persecution, defamation, imprisonment, torture, violation of human rights, disappearances and assassinations of union leaders, farmers, workers, catechists, religious, priests and bishops, amongst whom the greatest repercussions came from the public views of Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo Romero (1980) and the six Jesuits from the University of Central America.
1.5Puebla and the option for the poor
Called by Paul VI, the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate was confirmed by John Paul I after the death of Paul VI, and then afterwards again by John Paul II, when his predecessor died. It finally took place from 27 January to 13 February1979, in Puebla.
In continuity with Medellín, Puebla sought, on the one hand, to confront the new challenges which had arisen ever these ten years, and on the other, to apply the Apostolic exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (1975) to the Latin American circumstance. To achieve this double objective, Puebla introduced a great novelty by presenting a historical vision of evangelisation in Latin America16 which served as a preamble to the pastoral outlook on the social situation of the continent, in which it substantially owned the Medellín diagnosis, with the aggravating circumstances that had worsened the situation17, and to which it sought to respond via a liberating evangelisation18 which took as its historic goal the creating of a society free from all social, political, economic, cultural enslavements which were dominating the continent.
However, the Puebla document shows the the differences of position of the bishops, that marked as a consequence the diversity of viewpoints about the reality, theological perspectives and pastoral choices. While in Medellín there were 16 autonomous documents, in Puebla - “to avoid the relativization of some and the absolutization of others”19, they preferred to develop a unified document , which required that it be read as one.
It was, above all, in the double key to reading it where we see more this contra-position of strengths: at the external level, the ‘main idea’ of the document is evangelisation as communion and participation (DP 211-219), and at the inner level we see evangelisation as liberation20. The two interpretative keys are not, in themselves, opposed nor exclusive; but are really complementary. In this sense, Puebla enriched Medellín, by specifying the goal and what the process of liberation should aim at, through the term communion and participation, an understanding that would broadly outline the model of society to be achieved: a fully integrated society, where nobody is excluded and all are recognized as members with full right (communion), and a mutually responsible society, where nobody excludes himself and all are actively involved (participation). There is a trinitarian perspective underlying and giving a basis to this idea, and an escatological vision that gives it energy and confers a utopian character on it.
Gaudium et Spes and the encyclical Populorum Progressio were the ecclesial documents which served as a reference for Medellín, Lumen Gentium and the apostolic exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi were more relevant for Puebla. This can be easily explained by the themes: The Church in the current transformation of Latin America in the light of the Council, in Medellín, and Evangelization in the present and future of Latin America, in Puebla.
Some novelties of Puebla worth highlighting are its historical perspective, its discernment of the signs of the times21 its Mariology, Anthropology22, its Pneumatology23, and, especially, the re-evaluation of popular religiosity24 and the insertion of the theme of evangelization of culture25.
1.6Conclusion
The short but intense and fruitful history of Rio de Janeiro to Puebla has highlighted that a new Church was born in Latin America, the result of the discovery of economic, political, social and cultural dependence in which the greater number of men and women of this continent lived, in open contradiction to God's plan. The Church, which heard the cry of the poor and oppressed, has felt itself challenged and has turned to them to make them its preferential option and thus confirm its fidelity to the Lord Jesus and his Gospel.
The Latin American Church in solidarity with the poor, makes itself their servant, and has experienced social marginalization and martyrdom. It that has gained much in evangelical identity, in the eyes of society in the continent and the world, even if losing political relevance. it has acquired a face and has brought the richness of its Christian experience to the universal Church. It has learned to speak in order to lend its voice to those without one and to express, in a manner previously unknown, the truth of the Gospel. It believes in the utopia of the Kingdom and therefore in the transforming power of the Gospel. It is capable of injecting hope into a disenchanted world. In short, in Rio de Janeiro, the Church in Latin America began to be a true Local Church.
2.Towards an inculturated Church: Santo Domingo
A true inculturation of the Gospel requires the prior existence of a Local Church. In the case of Latin America, even if it gave a kind of inculturation of the Christian faith under the form of popular Catholicism at a time characterized by Indian Christianity, not having a true Local Church inculturation meant it was only basically expressed in the form of popular religiosity.
The Latin American Church already since Puebla but specifically in Santo Domingo, offered to insert itself into the cultures of the continent. Such was the challenge and commitment taken up by the Fourth general Conference of the Episcopate at Satnto Domingo (12 to 18 October 1992).
2.1Context
The determining element of Santo Domingo was the recalling of 500 years of evangelisation of America, which necessarily meant making a historical revision of the presence of the Church throughout these years. This implied having to face up to two thorny issues: that of the conquest of the indigenous people and that of the enslavement of Afro-americans. While the Documents of the Working Group had drawn up this ample history, in continuity with Puebla, the Final Document chose to avoid the polemic and preferred to recall the 500 years of first evangelization in the context of the celebration of faith in Jesus Christ as the Gospel of the Father, thus proclaiming the central theme: new evangelization 26.
The Latin American Church found itself faced with a delicate situation. During the preparation a certain convergence had been achieved on possible topics: culture and evangelisation, which became an “Instrumento preparatorio” titled A New Evangelization for a New Culture, which was very much criticized for taking a step back in relation to the path taken over recent decades. In particular it was feared that the accent on culture might be to the detriment of the more acute problem of the continent: poverty27.
Faced with the reaction and suggestions of the majority of episcopal conferences from the various Latin American countries, the Pope determined the topic : “New Evangelization, Human, Cultural and Christian Promotion”, accompanied by a slogan: “Jesus Christ yesterday, today and forever” (Heb 13:8). The topic contained the three elements which made up the coordinates of the entire theme for Santo Domingo, and in the slogan, the main idea. After two years of work at trying to read the theme from a Latin American viewpoint then came the Conference.
2.2Conference and Final Document
As work began, a certain unease emerged amongst those who considered that the Working Document had not taken into account the contributions of the episcopal conferences, and proposed a vision according to which the Church should engage in activity in Latin America that would respond to growing secularization and urbanization, reaffirming the role of the family, Catholic education and social communications media.28 The position which finally emerged was that of those who felt responsibility for continuing the line of Medellín and Puebla, and not to disappoint the expectations of the Christian people who were hoping for new pastoral options.
In some way, the differences in relation to Medellín and Puebla are clear. Firstly the approach changed for structuring the whole document and was modified for each one of the topics taken up. At the general level, the document presented was divided into three parts which developed the slogan: Jesus Christ Yesterday-Today-Forever; at a particular level the scheme see-judge-act remained, but the order was altered: insight-challenges-pastoral guidelines. The changes are not, of course, irrelevant.29
As positive and innovative elements in the Document we could mention:
1.The explicit declaration that they were seeking to remain in continuity with Medellín and Puebla. This means that the central theme of new evangelisation is to be seen in the light of Vatican II, Medellín and Puebla (SD 290-292).
2.An awareness of the urgency of evangelizing a people which had been culturally Christian, but which had not made of the Gospel its integrating element in life and one which frees it from all social enslavement. This means we are talking of an evangelisation which finds its criteria of evaluation in its commitment to human promotion and in its capacity for recovering fundamental human and Christian values (SD 24).
3.A broader view of the socio-economic reality leads to recognition, on the one hand, of the globalization of the economy and, on the other, of the exclusion of Third World countries by First World countries, accentuating differences between North and South. This means imposing greater integration on Latin American countries and seeking the humanization of economic systems30.
4.Polarization of all the social challenges into the one great challenge: the defense of life, opens up exceptionally interesting perspectives on defense of human rights, defense of the environment, defense of the earth, defense of the poor, the worker, the migrant, defense of the new economic and democratic order, and defense of continental integration. This can be one of the expressions of liberation today (SD 210-227).
5.The insistence on inculturation includes both the task of respecting cultures -indigenous, Afro, Mixed race, and incarnating itself in them to bring them the Good News, the urgency of evangelizing modern culture and the city, the habitat for the majority of the population, which means shifting from a rural style pastoral ministry to another adapted to the urban setting. (SD 252-262)31.
6.A broadening of the cultural and historical panorama which recognizes the indigenous people as a people, acts justly towards Afro-americans who have been systematically ignored, and integrates those from the Caribbean, as a reality in themselves. In these last two points lies the identity of the Latin American Church and its right and duty to be a Local Church (SD 243-251).
2.3Towards an inculturated evangelisation
Santo Domingo, considered by many as a step back compared to Puebla and Medellín, represents, at least up until now, the document which a greater distance and better appreciation has given to the topic of inculturation, which makes up the core, means and objective of new evangelization (SD 229), with which it aims to respond to the huge challenge which evangelisation is in different cultures of the continent and, in these, the evangelisation of modern culture and the city.
Like Medellín and Puebla before it, Santo Domingo was:
1.An event which, tied to a geographical location, evoked the beginnings of evangelisation of the peoples of the Caribbean and Latin America, an event laden with ambiguity and, therefore, is susceptible to differing interpretations. It marked, that's for sure, the arrival of the Gospel in Amerindia.
2.A spirit that dealt with highlighting the jubilee, doing justice to those who 500 years ago were dispossessed of everything, a year of grace and liberation for the indigenous peoples, the Afro-americans, and also for out countries, weighed down by foreign debt and neo-liberalism.
3.A document which invited renewed evangelical activity, aimed at transforming a reality marked so tragically by personal and social sinfulness. Even if it is undeniable that secularism is a threat, it is inhuman poverty which continues to characterize the peoples of Latin America. This calls for an integral evangelization, one that intimately links evangelization, human promotion and inculturation.
3.Successes and limitations of an inculturated Church. By way of conclusion
The Latin American Church began the process of inculturation when it began to be a Local Church. From there comes:
ministry of varied and rich kinds such as ‘basic ecclesial communities’ (BECs), the ‘new image of the Parish’ (NIP), the ‘integral system of evangelisation’ (ISNE);
associations involved in promoting women or families, following on from Medellín, like AMSIF32;
a well-differentiated and well-structured youth ministry focused around integration, formation and the militancy of its members, always seeking unity between faith and life, ecclesial experience and political involvement;
a priestly movement clearly identified with its people;
a religious life inserted into a popular setting and more concerned with accompanying than teaching the people, sharing their life more than indoctrinating them, forming their conscience rather than solving their problems;
an indigenous ministry which shifted from being a social welfare or development perspective to a liberating presence;
a theological reflection of its own, which came out of the BECS re-reading of the Word of God within political involvement;
and an episcopate with a pastoral calling and prophetic eye for reading the ‘signs of the times’, especially at the level of CELAM, and in certain regions with more ecclesial experience.
The major limitations of this ecclesial experience in ways of inculturation, caused above all by the socio-analytical means used by liberation theology, was found in three areas:
the underestimation of the phenomenon of modernity and its secularizing impact on cities33,
the devaluing of popular religiosity as a privileged form of religious expression of the people34, y
the minimal importance given to the problem of culture, taken to its extreme in relativizing cultures in relation to the absolute of social classes (rich-poor), flattening out the [differences between] farmer, the worker, the native, the Afro, men and women.
It is not strange that the historical failure of Marxism, on the one hand, and the systematic advance of the sects on the other, have assumed a crisis of liberation theology, which now points along the lines of a theology of minorities, understood not quantitatively but qualitatively, such as oppressed minorities: amerindian theology, theology of woman, black theology, and, even if it seems a paradox, along the lines of a universal ecological theology35.
Santo Domingo officially ratified the road traveled since Medellín (SD 290.302) and rectified the errors which have been incurred, offering the first prophetic response to changes in history taking place across the world and which have direct repercussion on the continent. With humility, the Church recognizes that it does not have answers for the new problems that are arising currently, and is committed to seeking and redefining its very presence in society. In the light of this, we have a better understanding of the pastoral priorities marked out there (SD 287-302).
We can conclude by stating that there has been a work of inculturation, the result of the entire People of God, but that we must now take more account of popular religiosity, every time that it proves that, even if in need of purification, it has shown itself to be deeply rooted and consistent. Equally we must work on the basis of ethnic groups and cultural subgroups, like the middle class, urban culture, media and the world of science, technology and art, and that these cannot be confronted through the narrow interpretation of social reality nor resolved only from a strategic point of view. In a word, we have to discover the importance of culture in evangelisation.
Such was, undoubtedly, the major novelty of the Church at Santo Domingo. It did not renounce its preferential option for the poor, nor its commitment to be a church of liberation, however it broadened the horizon and changed the hermeneutic36.
Meeting of the Interamerica Region
Lima, Peru. 24 – 26 October 2009
There were certainly countries where liberalism, at the end of the 19th Century, had already relegated the Church to the private sphere, having dispossessed it of its goods and having secularised education. This way the Church shifted from being a power allied with the State to a separate entity, and in some cases like in Mexico, to dissolution and ignorance.
It is nothing strange that the rejection of colonial Christianity, tarnished by exploitation and procrastination, gave place to the model of federal organisation of the emerging and powerful United States of North America included in its Constitution.
Cf. Actas y Decretos del Concilio Plenario de la América Latina celebrado en Roma el año del Señor de MDCCCXCIX, (Rome, 1906).
Cf. Newsweek, February 12, 1996, 14, which analysed the growing shift by Catholics to various sects and Protestant confessions as a reason for John Paul II's journey to Guatemala, besides offering statistics, quoted Harvey Cox: “In many ways, evangelical Protestantism is more indigenous than Catholicism. Many Catholic priests throughout Latin America come from places like Spain, Ireland, the United States and even Poland, whereas probably 99 percent of evangelical ministers in the region were born and bred there.”
The best conciliar response to the world crisis was Gaudium et Spes. Rightly, Card. G. Lercaro, in discussion of the famous Scheme XIII, affirmed “the importance that the item on culture (GS 22) has as the nucleus of the entire scheme, since it deals with a theme that pretty much sums up the relationship between Church and world” (Ch. Moeller, ‘Die Geschichte der Pastoralkonstitution’, en Das Zweite Vatikanische Konzil. [Friburg 1968] 263). Italics are mine.
“In that conference, a sense of Church was given local substance . That was where a Latin American face for the Church was painted, one whose fundamental feature consisted in seeing and judging the reality not from ecclesial perspectives, marked by internal history, but from the viewpoint of the signs of the times in that hemisphere. From Medellín would arise the effort to seek the incarnation of the Church in that world in a different way: a Church that would be a servant of man, a leaven of transformation of a social structure that was not Christian, a messenger of good news for the poor and the marginalised, a voice for those who were voiceless” (CNM, Misión 95).
“The Latin American reality, the historic moment Latin America is living through isa profoundly conflictive one. One of the great merits of Medellín is in its starting with this situation and expressing it in terms which are surprisingly clear and accessible for an ecclesiastical document... It is necessary to see the originality of this stance; it implies a different and very concrete manner of seeing how history comes about, or more precisely: understanding the Lord's presence in it, urging us to be the architects of this change. On the other hand, the proximity to those who see the future from a Marxist perspective, leads to revising and reactualising eschatalogical values” (G. Gutiérrez, Teología de la Liberación. Perspectiva [Salamanca 1990] 178).
Cf. J. Comblin, ‘Movimientos e ideologías en América Latina’, en Aa. Vv., Fe cristiana y cambio social en América Latina (Salamanca 1973) 126.
Cf. DP, Second Part Ch. II, sect. 4, which leads to the title Evangelization, Liberation and Promotion Humana, n. 485.
Cf. J. B. Libanio, ‘El documento final de Puebla: sus líneas generales’, en Equipo Seladoc, Puebla (Salamanca 1981) 114-123. Más en concreto, sobre la cristología, ver J. Sobrino, ‘Reflexiones sobre el documento de cristología de Puebla’, en Equipo Seladoc, Puebla (Salamanca 1981) 159-173; sobre eclesiología, R. Muñoz, ‘Eclesiología’, en Equipo Seladoc, Puebla (Salamanca 1981) 230-241.
Some bishops complained, in effect, that Medellín had been reduced to documents on poverty, justice and peace.
It is certain that the document speaks at or another time of integral liberation, meaning both the personal and inner aspectsand social and structural ones, however the text reveals the desire to overcome sociological concepts of liberation which reduce it to mere emancipation, cf: DP 480-482.
“We have here once again what frequently took place in the Church's history: that an historical circumstance opened the eyesfor describing the surprising demands of the Gospel, God's calls to action; and that in turn certain pages of the Gospel have led us to perceive the inhuman situation wherein many people talk of misery, lack of freedom or hope. The Gospel was proclaimed in this world, from this world and for this world. And this is why the social screen on which it is projected reverberates with its particular understanding” G. González de Cardedal, ‘Significación’, en O. González de Cardedal – J. Ruiz de la Peña (eds.), Puebla. El hecho histórico y su significación (Salamanca 1981) 336. (Italics mine).
Cf. X. Pikaza, ‘La pneumatología de los documentos de Pueblo’, en O. González de Cardedal – J. Ruiz de la Peña (eds.), Puebla. El hecho histórico y su significación teológica. (Salamanca 1981) 305-324.
Cf. J. Allende Luco, ‘Religiosidad popular en Puebla’, en Equipo Seladoc, Puebla (Salamanca 1981) 473-504.
Cf. A. Tornos, El catolicismo latinoamericano. The Santo Domingo Conference (Madrid 1993) 19-24. We are dealing with a good presentation of the preparation for the Conference, beginning from the elaboration of the documents which preceded it.
“We do not need to hide, at the end, its interest in disqualifying liberation theology, to affirm the theology of reconciliation and social teaching of the Church, as well as its lack of trust in basic ecclesial communities and its preference for less popularised groups and movements in a more than intra-ecclesial perspective”. (G. I. Rodríguez, ‘Un accord tendu autour du ‘service de la vie’. La IVe. Conférence des évéques latino-americains à Saint-Domingue’, Lumen Vitae 1 [1993] 106).
Cf. Amerindia (group of Latin American theologians), 'Criterios para leer el Documento de Santo Domingo?,Adista, (13 March 1993) 11-13.
SD 157.162.178-181.194-209, in which it notes, on the one hand, the birth of a new international order, expressed under the idea of interdependence which, over and above mere economic interests, alludes to the values of solidarity and fellowship, and, on the other hand, the isolation and breaking up of our countries and the lack of communion amongst local Churches, from which comes the urgency of encouraging the forces which will foster Latin American integration, enliven justice and participation within nations,and stimulate intra-ecclesial cooperation.
On the topic of Christian culture, see Tornos, Catolicismo 60-61, where he makes important observations on theories of culture which need to be kept in mind for a better understanding of the text.
'Asociación Mexicana para la Superación Integral de la Familia', which drew its inspiration from Medellín opted to cooperate in the transformation of society through marginalised women and families, on the basis of a liberating education and evangelisation.
One saw the phenomenon of modernity from the perspective of liberal freedoms, without recongising that the Marxism itself - the herald of social freedoms - was the result of modernity and not an alternative to it.
In effect, from a Marxist perspective popular religiosity was perceived as a false awareness imposed on the proletariat by the dominant class, which resulted in it being an obstacle to freedom. Cf. F. Vanderhoff, ‘Die Volksreligions im sozialen und ôkumenischen Kontext Lateinamerikas’, en K. Rahner – Ch. Modeln – G. Opfert (eds.), Volksreligiion-Religion der Volkes (Stuttgart 1979) 50. From a subaltern perspective however, popular religiosity became a code which helped to understand what had helped a people to survive when in a state of oppression (R. J. Schreiter, Constructing Local Theologies. [New York 1985] 131-139, in which he analyzes the interpretations of popular religion).
Faced with the environmental crisis, the collapse of socialism, and the globalisation of the economy, L. Boff has continued his reflection on the new paths of Liberation Theology in his bookEcología, grito de la tierra, grito de los pobres. (Madrid, 1996).
Cf. L. Boff, ‘Evangelizar partiendo de las culturas oprimidas’, en P. Suess, Culturas y Evangelización (Quito 1992) 91-137.
