Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
Conscientization, Conversion,
on Base Communities
in Latin
and
Convergence: and
Emerging
America
Charles E. Self*
59
Reflections Pentecostalism
.
Trends in Liberation A new historical
reality
has
emerged pluralism.
Movements within and challenging
centuries of hierarchical theological
reflection.
centered
I. Introduction:
An Hour of
Opportunity:
Theology
and Pentecostalism
within Latin America:
religious
without the Catholic church are
catalyzed:
1970’s as a blend of Marxist
authority, religious practice,
and
Within the Catholic church small
community-
groups
have mushroomed
ecclesial communities
represent
a
grass-roots
renewal and social activism.
Lay leaders, group
Bible
study, tical efforts towards
community improvement
tion characterize this renewal of
integrative
these vibrant
expressions
an entire
theological
Liberation
Theology.
This movement
social
analysis
and
praxis-centered cal hermeneutics.2 It is now a mature, self-critical movement deep
historical and intercultural roots.3 Gustavo Gutierrez, upon nearly
two decades of tumultuous
development,
eral
important challenges facing
the movement4:
–
Its internationalism challenges theologians in each concrete historical-
cultural setting to discover both the uniqueness of theological reflec-
tion and praxis for a particular area and ways to strengthen ties with
brothers and sisters around the world.5
oppressed
since Vatican II. These basic
movement of
spiritual
and
prac-
and societal transforma-
Christian faith.1 From
movement has been
began
in the
early
bibli-
with
reflecting
emphasized
sev-
Bethany College
*Charles E. Self is Associate Professor of Biblical and
Theological
Studies at
in Santa
Cruz, CA
1989), esp.
.
See
Sergio Torres and John Eagleson, The Challenge of Basic Christian Com- munities :
Papers for the International Ecumenical Congress,on 20-March Theology, February
2, 1980, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 107-118.
2Gustavo Gutierrez’ A Theology of Liberation
Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1972, is the first book-length study detailing this synthesis.
3This is reflected in several studies, most notably Arthur F. McGovern, Libera- tion Theology and its Critics: Toward an Assessment (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books,
ix-xi.
4Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation: Fifteenth Anniversary Edition (with a new Introduction) (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1988) xix-xiiv.
“Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation (1988), xix.
1
60
· Economic
oppression
is not the
only
liberation which must be vigorously pursued. Racism, sexism, and nationalism must also be discerned, exposed, repented of and displaced.
· Political action must never be
separated
from the
wellspring
of biblical and mystical spirituality. Several liberationists have begun to emphasize
the primacy of God’s initiative in spiritually transforming individuals and communities.
Other voices
evaluating
base communities and liberation
theology are
equally
critical but less
optimistic
than Gutierrez. Alistair
Kee,
a British
religious scholar,
laments that the liberationists were
(and are) not Marxist
enough
in their
analyses
and calls to action.6 Elsa
Tamez, a feminist
theologian
from Costa Rica
eloquently argues
that the church will never know full liberation until women are received as equal partners
in God’s work for the world.7 She sees the base com- munities as a sign of
hope
where the
relational, unifying vision
of fem- inism can exercise a
transforming
influence. Arthur McGovern, in a major study assessing
the Liberation
Theology movement, agrees
with Frei Betto that “social reflection cannot substitute for the
experience
of God that the
poor
desire.”8
Scholars more critical of Liberation
Theology
have
recently
chal- lenged
some of its rhetoric and
theological
innovation. Paul
Sigmund has
emerged
as an
important
critic of the movements’ Marxist orienta- tion.9 He
challenges
liberationists to
recognize
that an “ecclesio- genesis”1?
had
begun prior
to
any
official
theological
trend. Issues such as personal
property,
human
rights,
and the
willingness
of libera- tion
theologians
to be addressed
prophetically
must be confronted. Rubenstein and Roth’s recent
studyll provides
a conservative, North American
critique
of base communities as places in which indoctrina- tion can too
easily displace on-going
Christian conversion.
Hans
Kiing,
a German
theologian
of international
repute (and
offi- . cially
banned from
teaching
Catholic
dogma
with the church’s
blessing
.
6Alistair Kee, Marx and the Failure of Liberation Theology (London: SCM Press, 1990), 211-219 and 260ff.
7Elsa Tamez,
ed., Through Her Eyes: Women’s Theology in Latin America (Maryknoll,
NY: Orbis Books, 1989). See 47-48; 112-173; 151ff.
8Frei Betto, cited by McGovern, Liberation Theology and Its Critics, 86. See also Betto’s
impassioned article, “God Bursts Forth in the Experience of Life” found in Pablo Richard, et. al, The Idols of Death and the God of Life (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1983), 159-163.
9See Paul E. Sigmund, Liberation Theology at the Crossroads (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 168-196.
lOS? his critique of Leomardo Boff’s book Ecclesiogenesis in Sigmund, Libera- tion Theology at the Crossroads, 83-84.
1 1 Richard L. Rubenstein and John K. Roth eds., The Politics
The
of Latin American Liberation
Theology (Washington,
D.C.:
Washington Institute for Values in Public Policy, 1988), esp. 130-133; 158-171.
2
61
since
1980),
reminds his Latin American
colleagues
that the “church from below” can take
many
forms. Each
geographical region
of Catholic
Christianity
must confront its own
unique
set of
cultural,
his- torical,
and social concerns.l2
Political events across the
globe
have heartened liberationists even though they
fall far short of the
emancipation
envisioned
by praxis- centered
theologians.
One
great challenge facing revolutionary
Chris- tians is how to
accept
such
penultimate gains
without
losing
revo- lutionary
fervor. 13
Basic Christian communities and the
theological
reflection
arising from them are a
dynamic reality-the
most consistent
things
about them are
change, diversity,
and
mobility.14
To borrow a biblical image,
base
community Christianity
can be
compared
to the Taber- nacle of the Wilderness, the Israelite desert shrine where Yahweh was worshipped
as the
newly
liberated nation moved toward the
promised land. The materials were fine but functional. The entire Tabernacle could be
easily
moved from
place
to
place.
Most
importantly,
the Tabernacle was in the midst of this exodus
congregation.
God’s presence, though
not
ultimately
confined to
any earthly locale,
was close to the heart of the entire nation. This wilderness
experience
must be contrasted with the Solomonic
Temple,
a
building which,
while given
divine
permission,
reflected more
upon
the
emerging despotism of
monarchy
than
upon
the
worship
of a liberated
people.
The
apostle John would later describe the Incarnation of the Word in Jesus as a “tabernacling” (John 1:14).
The first
post-Pentecost martyr
would be killed because of his criticism of the
hierarchy’s
obsession with Temple
ritual rather than obedience to a God who calls
by grace (Acts 7:1-53).
A similar kind of
dynamic
movement can be seen in the
rapidly growing
Pentecostal movement. Estimates
vary,
but Pentecostals
may comprise
as much as 10% of the Latin American
populace
as a whole.15 When the
percentage
of
practicing
Catholics
(including
base .
l2Hans
Kiing, Reforming the Church Today: Keeping Hope Alive (New York: Crossroad, 1990), 1-11; 34, 47-61, 103.
13See Gustavo Gutierrez, The Truch Shall Make You Free (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1984). Pablo Richard and Hugo Assmann
are less sanguine about such compromises.
l4See W. E. Hewitt, “Myths and Realities of Liberation Theology: The Case of Basic Christian Communities in Brazil” cited by Rubenstein and Roth, The Politics of
Latin American Liberation
Theology, 135-137. See also Tamez, Through
Her Eyes,
151 and McGovern, Liberation Theology and Its Critics, 69-89; 202ff.
this estimate is given by several scholars. See David Martin, “Speaking in Latin Tongues” in National Review, Sept. 29, 1989, p. 30. Richard Rodriguez esti- mates over 50 million are Protestants (most of whom are Pentecostal). See his article “Latin Americans Convert from Catholicism to a More Private Protestant Belief’ in The Los Angeles Times (Aug. 13, 1989), V:1, 6.
,
3
62
community participants)
is considered, the adherents of each move- ment contain almost
equal membership figures. 16 (Though
it should be noted that notions of
“practicing”
Christians
vary greatly!)
Pente- costalism is a unique version of Protestant
Christianity,
but it has come to
represent
an
indigenous
movement marked
by
intense
spiritual fervor, community solidarity,
and an antihierarchical
ecclesiology.17 For the
purpose
of
clarity,
“Pentecostal” will be used to denote the variety
of Christian movements
springing up
outside of Catholic influ- ences.
Evangelical
and mainline Protestantism can be considered
sepa- rate
movements,
but their numbers are minuscule in comparison with Pentecostalism; moreover,
the
evangelical
churches which are
growing tend to be characterized
by
a spirituality and communitarianism akin to the Pentecostal movement.
David Martin and David Stoll have
recently published major
works analyzing Pentecostal/Protestant phenomena
Neither scholar has a confessional commitment to this
movement;
in
fact,
both have
gone
on record as
generally suspicious
of
religious
claims and hostile to Protestantism’s historical record of imperialism.19
Martin delineates several
important
features which enable Pente- costalism to have wide
acceptance20:
Pentecostalism,
like its European pietistic and revivalistic predeces-
sors, is characterized by revivalism and voluntarism. At its core it is
distinct from the “reasonable” norms of cultural
expectations
and
hegemony.
Pentecostalism is not only antagonistic to established Catholicism, it is also a counterpoint to encroaching secularization. Pentecostal commu- nities create a “free social space” in which religious piety can be fused with aspirations for a better life.
Pentecostalism is even more diffuse than the base community move- ment. It is polycentric and has yet to develop an educated elite. Its
16Everett Wilson and other scholars estimate the number of practicing Catholics at 30 million (notes from a personal interview, May 13, 1991). See also a Chris- tianity Today
interview with David Martin, “The Hidden Fire” (May 14, 1990), 25.
17 See Martin, “The Hidden Fire.” In a soon to be published paper, Everett Wilson asserts that these are primary features of Pentecostalism.
lBSee David Martin, Tongues of Fire (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990) and David Stoll Is Latin America Turning Protestant?
(Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1990).
l9David Stoll’s book on the Wycliffe Bible Translators, Fishers
of Men or Founders
of Empire? (London: Zed Press/Cambridge, MA: Cultural Survival, is an 1982)
anthropological
and sociological critique of what he sees as an
movement. In the article
imperialistic
by Martin cited above, 33, David Martin chastizes North American
liberals for refusing to take Latin American Pentecostalism seriously as an indigenous phenomenon.
20see Martin, Tongues of Fire, 271-295.
4
63
leadership is truly charismatic, consisting of lay persons who have as
emerged evangelists and pastors of various movements.
Everett Wilson characterizes the Pentecostals as
part
of a
larger movement for
empowerment
which animates the lower strata of Latin American
society. Utilizing concepts
borrowed from
Eugene
Nida?l and further
developed by
field
observation,
Wilson
argues
that Pentecostals are marked
by anticlericalism, adaptability, appeal
to native
minorities,
and
dynamic community
creation.
Quoting
David Martin,
Wilson affirms that Pentecostalism is
truly
a faith
of the poor and is thus distinct from some liberation
theology
movements which are for
the
poor.22
Journalist Richard
Rodriguez explains
that the
necessity
of
personal conversion to Christ
(as opposed
to Catholic confirmation in which Christian
identity
is
assumed)
is
liberating
and
empowering.
It repudi- ates the fatalism of the
poor
which hierarchical
religion
and crucifix imagery
has reinforced.
Evangelical religion
is more “masculine” in that it affirms
initiative, self-improvement,
and new
ways
of
viewing authority.23
Other observers of Pentecostalism affirm these
points,
but also
emphasize
that Pentecostal
spirituality
eliminates self-destructive machismo and is therefore a humanizing force for Latin males as well
as a liberating influence for women.24
Before
charting
some of the
important
events in the
development
of both the base communities and
Pentecostalism,
a word about
European and North American
“imperialistic”
influences is
necessary.
Conser- vative critics of liberation
theology
have
attempted
to brand it as a Latinized version of
European
Marxist
political theology.25
It is true that
many leading
liberation
theologians
were trained under radical European thinkers,
and that
early (before 1980)
reflection often over- looked
problems
inherent in
any synthesis
of Marxist
analysis
and Christian
theology.
The
maturing thought
of the
1980’s, however, can- not be
easily
dismissed as a subordination of
Christianity
to
Marxism, of heaven to
earth,
or of the transcendent to the immanent. Serious
21See
Eugene
Nida’s
pioneering
article “The
Indigenous
Churches in Latin America” in Practical Arethropology [now Missiology] 5 (May 1961):102.
22Everett A. Wilson, “Evangelicals In the Vanguard of Latin American Social Reconstruction?” This is an unpublished review of Martins and Stoll’s work for an
prepared
evangelical publication, 1991.
23R?guez,
“Latin Americans Convert from Catholicism,” 6.
24Rodriguez,
“Latin Americans Convert from Catholicism,” 6. See also David Stoll, “A Protestant Reformation in Latin America?” The Christian Century (Jan. 17, 1990) 47.
25See Ronald H. Nash, ed. Liberation
Theology (Grand Rapids: 1988 [first pub- lished, 1984]). This book contains some insightful critiques, but it is
liberation
drawing upon early thinking. Edward Norman’s
article “The Imperialism of Political Religion,”
121-138 is the most critical of the European connection.
5
64
differences to
“pseudo-ecclesiastic of
imperialism.”27
phenomena
enigma
capitalism.
(It
is
certainly
not the
revivalism as [and a]
voice
revivalism
Pentecostals are not con-
agencies.
In
fact, North to
places
like
Argentina
to learn
European
persist
between
European
and Latin American
approaches
liberation.26
It is
equally
unfair to castigate
evangelical-pentecostal
[which are] alienating
Evangelical
missions have sometimes had a rather nefarious
history
of accommodation to local and national
power
struc- tures.28 This fact is what makes
contemporary
such an
to liberal critics. Latin American
trolled or
manipulated by
North American
Americans are
making pilgrimages
about revival and
lay empowerment.29
A nuanced Marxist
analysis
of the current situation would character- ize these tensions as the
beginnings
of
change
in the structure of world
end of
it!)
Dramatic shifts in eco- nomics and
political power
in the
past
two decades have resulted in a decline of American
suzerainty
and a dramatic rise in Asian and
influences. For Latin
Americans,
moment is an
opportunity
to be rid of the
structures which avoid a new
oppression.
cal
process,
this
convergence
of authentic
awareness
among
varieties of Christian
peoples
is crucial in avoiding a new era of domination from without.
II. Conscientization:
Some
Developments
this
present
historic
Yankee
yoke
and create If God works in the histori-
spirituality
and
political
in Base Communities
The
literacy campaigns awakening
of the
impoverished “conscientization,”
from Vatican II to the Present The mid-1960’s witnessed the
convergence
and movements which
gave shape
to the base
community
of Freire in Brazil and elsewhere
of several
events, ideas,
movement.
began
an masses. This
awakening
he called
the
poor
with tools
the
(a term difficult to translate,
but best understood as consciousness-raising
or
awakening.) Equipping
for reflection and action was
revolutionary
and viewed
by
the
govern- ment elites as subversive. Freire was accused of
indoctrinating masses and
fomenting political
rebellion. He saw his task in a radically different
light,
as
part
of his service to God. To love others
enough
to
26See Kfng, Reforming the Church Today, 59ff. J. Moltmann has also written several articles critical of those who would make an unqualified connection between the European and Latin American experience.
2?So, Tamez, Through Her Eyes, 113.
28As a good example of this, see Virginia Garrard Burnett, “God and Revolution: Protestant Missions in Revolutionary Guatemala, 1944-1954 in The Americas, 46:2 (Oct. 1 989), 20%223 .
29There are several groups of American
and
evangelicals actually chartering flights
arranging tours of the revival in Argentina. Partners International, a support net- work based in San
Jose, CA sponsors many of these events. ,
6
65
empower
them reveals both the Cross and the
resurrection, munism and insurrection. Freire stated:
not com-
Conscientization could never be an imposition on others or a manipula- tion of them. I cannot impose my opinions on someone else; I can only invite others to share, to discuss. To impose on others
a real For is not
my
of not
would be contradiction.
way being loving only a free act, it is an act of freedom. And love that cannot produce more freedom is not love.30
Another
aspect
of the
development
of base
community Christianity were the various renewal movements within Catholicism that
emerged in the 1950’s. The
leading
movement was Catholic Action. While many
of these
groups
were middle-class and
unthreatening
to the hier- archy, they
did
promote lay participation
and small
group experi- ence.31 In
fact, many
base communities which were later radicalized
by liberation theology began
as
small, pietistic
Bible studies.
The Vatican II Council contributed to base
community development by giving
official sanction to lay Bible
study, prayer groups,
and com- munity
actions which
peacefully
and
lovingly sought justice.
Vatican II did not
“change”
the Latin American church. It served to
ratify emerging experiences
and
give
a broad rationale for the church’s mis- sion in the modern world. The admission that a
strictly
Roman Catholic
identity
was not essential for salvation hastened the
beginning of ecumenical
dialogues
with other Christian traditions and
religious faiths. This also
proved
to be a
catalyst
for internal reform and self- criticism. Liberation
theologians
who would later chafe under conser- vative
Papal leadership
often
pointed
back to the Council to defend their
right
to criticize facets of Catholic
ideology
and structure. The
military repression
in Brazil in 1964-1965
(as
well as increased militarism in other
nations)
was another
factor,
albeit an evil
one,
in galvanizing
the base communities. In times of fear and
suppression, people
found solace in shared
prayer
and
support.
The Medellin Conference in 1968 denotes the end of this initial era. It is
during
this conference that the
Bishops gave explicit support
for both base communities and a
theology
centered in
praxis
which prophetically
calls
oppressors
to account and affirms that God has a special
concern for the
poor.
The
years
1968 to 1984
might
be characterized as the radical
phase of base
community experience
and
theological
reflection. These were tumultuous
years politically, socially,
and
theologically. Revolutionary hopes
were raised
by
events in Chile and
Nicaragua
as radical Chris-
30p.
Freires, “Conscientizing as a Way of Liberating” cited in Alfred T. Hen- nelly,
S. J. ed, Liberation Theology: A Documentary History (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1990) 13.
3lSee McGovern, Liberation Theology and Its Critics, 4-5 and Hewitt, and Realities of Liberation
“Myths
Theology,” 140ff.
7
66
tians
joined
with others to
promote
an end to rightist repression. Base communities were
particularly important
in the mobilization of Nicaraguan
Christians behind the Sandanista revolution.32
During
this era scholars
began
to
analyze
base communities from within and without. One of the most
important
studies was
published by
Alvaro Barreiro.33 He
analyzed
the
composition
of certain commu- nities in the mid-1970’s. The
majority
of
groups
were rural
(53.5%) while the rest were divided between suburban
(10.9%)
and urban (16.8%) populations.
For Barreiro
(quoting
Jose
Comblin)
base com- munities were
places
in which
people
seek “to rediscover what is cen- tral to
Christianity
and
put
the church back into the life that is lived daily again.”34
The communities varied in their social
activism,
with politicization decreasing
as wealth increased. These communities were not
causing revolution,
for
“they
are
living
the
permanent
revolution of fidelity
in their
history.”35
This shared life of faith,
hope,
and love was a fragile,
radical, transforming history-in-the-making.
Carlos
Mesters, writing
about the same
time,
did a careful
study
of the use of the Bible in base communities.36 What
distinguishes
libera- tion
study
from other forms of pious endeavor is the
community
desire to
apply
the Bible to concrete life-situations. It isn’t
enough
to dis- cover the sitz-im-leben of the
past:
God’s word must be heard afresh in the midst of
daily oppression. “Community hearing”
is a conjuncture of text
(Bible), pre-text (real life)
and context
(community-in- formation). Only
when all facets are considered has one “heard” God’s s word in a
transforming way.
When the Bible is read in this
manner,
it is found to be
contemporaneous
with the
experience
of the
poor. Mesters
acknowledged
several
challenges
faced
by any
base com- munity
bible
study. Illiteracy
and
hyper-literal interpretation
abound without
proper teaching. Conversely,
the less educated also tend to rely
too much
upon
various
experts
and therefore become
prey
to fads and sectarianism. Mester is
suspicious
of Protestant
divisiveness, yet he holds out for common
praxis
as a
starting point
for Catholic- Evangelical
ecumenism.
Frei Betto has
eloquently
narrated his own conversion to the
poor which came as he involved himself in base communities. In his
32Some critics viewed these
groups as indoctrination centers. See Dennis P. McCann, “Liberating Without
Being
Liberationist: The U. S. Catholic Pastoral Letter on the
Bishops
Economy” cited in Rubenstein and Roth, The Politics American Liberation of Latin
Theology, 274-274.
33plfred Barreiro, Basic Ecclesial Communities: The Evangelization of the Poor (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1982), esp. 1-42.
34Barreiro, Basic Ecclesial Communities, 37.
35Barriero, Basic Ecclesial Communities, 38.
36Carlos
Mester’s,
“The Use of the Bible in Christian Communities of the Common People” publ. in 1981 cited by Hennelly, Liberation
Theology: A Docu- 14-28.
mentary History,
8
67
poignant essay,
“God Bursts Forth in the
Experience
of Life,”37 Betto speaks
of his
discovery
of God
among
the
poor,
the
prisoners,
and the persecuted.
The base communities, he
argued, forged
a cultural revo- lution, for the scholars
have “had to reshuffle intellectual
patterns
… [and
learn to do
theology without]
…
analytical projections over/ beyond people.”38
Betto
rejects scholarly
notions of “popular
religion” as condescending, for God is not an invention of
theologians
who
keep rehashing
the same books. Those who assist the
poor
will themselves be
evangelized by people
who know how to
“pray
with their bodies” and have the
integrity
to change gradually.39
In addition to diverse and
enriching experiences
and reflections
upon faith,
the
years
1968-1984 saw several official
developments affecting the base
community
movement. The Puebla Conference of 1979 was viewed
by many
as a conservative reaction to Marxist
influences, however, the documents
of Puebla are
genuinely supportive
of such groups, declaring
them to be “the
hope
of the church.1140 Base com- munities are
approved
as “authentic” if
they
are
eucharistic,
have approved leadership, embody
democratic and fraternal
solidarity,
chal- lenge egoistic
and consumeristic
attitudes,
and demonstrate
‘preferen- tial love’ for the
poor.41
Such
parameters
fell short of the
“option
for the
poor”
and
quest
for
revolutionary praxis
advocated
by
the radicals. A 1981
survey
and
analysis
of base communities in Sao Paulo inter- preted by
W. E. Hewitt revealed
great diversity
in
practice
and struc- ture within Brazilian CEB’s
(Communidades
eclesialesleclesiais de base or ecclesial base
communities).
Hewitt
argued
that the
impact
of CEB’s was “subtle, indirect, and multifaceted” because
they
are so heterogeneous.42 They
were found
among
all classes and met
together for a wide
variety
of reasons.
Perhaps
the most
surprising
fact
emerg- ing
from this
study
was the lack of
politicization among
the
poorest classes.43 Hewitt demonstrated that the most militant
groups emerged when
leadership
was
adequate, consistent,
and
experienced.44
Hewitt
categorized
the
groups according
to their function. Six
major groups appeared, ranging
from
“Simple
Devotional” to “Classic
.
37Frei Betto, cited by P. Richard, The Idols of Death, 159-163.
‘
38Frei Betto, cited by P. Richard, The Idols of Death, 163.
39Frei Betto, cited by P. Richard, The Idols of Death, 163.
40Cited by Hennelly, Liberation Theology: A Documentary History, 249.
4lHennelly, Liberation Theology: A Documentary History, 251.
42Hewitt, “Myths and Realities of Liberation Theology,” 136.
43Hewitt, “Myths and Realities of Liberation Theology,” 145.
44Hewitt, “Myths and Realities of Liberation Theology,” 145-151, The of the
“poorest
poor” were rarely involved with CEB’s. See also John Burdick, “We Are All Equal:
Social Differentiating in a CEB in the Brazilian Urban Periphery” July 9, 1989 LASA meeting.
9
68
traditional and innovative
Reforming.”45
elements. Bible
study,
festivities, CEB’s. These traditonal activities
All of the
groups
combined
and charitable work characterized all
the CEB’s
were
complemented by
collective on the local level. The
idealogies
of
but
praxis
was at the
action and
political
mobilization
the
groups
varied
according
to its
leadership,
heart of all of them.46
The
years
from 1984 to the
present
have been marked
by conflict
and creativity concerning
and liberation
theology. During
1983- 1985 Leonardo Boff was
investigated
his radical views of church life and structure
Ecclesiogenesis:
The
Remaking
clergy.
and
disciplined by
the church for
found in his works of
the Church, and in his Church,
a non-hierarchical view of the
rather than ruled
by
the
Boff’s new
Charism, and Power.47 Boff
put
forth
church in which the
people
were
supported
This ideal was not the center of the
controversy.
exegesis
of the
gospels
and Acts led him to declare that Jesus did not
in
word)
create or ordain a church; the church constituted itself
Community
of the
Spirit.48
Boff further
antagonized
the ordination of women.49
(even
as a Resurrection
the
hierarchy by advocating Papal
statements on liberation
ing
that a “preferential
ing
theology
were issued in 1984
(in
repu-
yet hopeful.51
response
to Boff) and in 1986. The first was a very conservative diation of
Marxism;
the second was a more
positive
statement affirm-
option
for the
poor”
was
integral
to the church’s s mission.50 Gutierrez
publicly supported
the second statement, affirm-
that it was a basis for renewed
hope.
The
past
three
years
have witnessed a
spate
of books on liberation
and CEB’s which are self-critical A
greater depth
of
spirituality
in several authors’ work, while Marxist
is more nuanced and
qualified
to include facets of democratic-
and their CEB con-
but their
public impact among
intellectuals far exceeds their
popular
base. The most
generous figures suggest
that two to four million
people participate
in all forms of the CEB’s. This is
than the four to five million charismatic Catholics and far short of
theology
is evident analysis
capitalism
and socialism. Liberation stituencies are influential,
less
1982) esp.
theologians
45Hewitt, “Myths and Realities of Liberation Theology,” 144.
46Hewitt, “Myths and Realities of Liberation Theology,” 140-143.
4?Leomardo Boff, Church, Charism and Power
(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books,
chs. 4, 8 and Ecclesiogenesis: the Remaking of the church
NY:
(Maryknoll,
Orbis Books, 1983).
48This is McGovern’s
summary
of Boff’s radical
theology. See McGovern, Liberation
Theology and Its Critics, 215ff.
49McGovem, Liberation Theology and Its Critics, 216.
50See Sigmund, Liberation Theology at the Crossroads, 167-169.
51 Several liberationists have published biblical studies and critical reflections of the movement. See McGovern, Liberation Theology and Its Critics, 231 ff for further citations.
10
69
Everett Wilson concludes exaggerated
lectual
representatives.
the
twenty
to
thirty
million
evangelicos
that this movement,
in importance due to Orbis
vigorous revivalism,
who are
mostly pentecostal.)1,
while
significant,
is books and to its effective intel-
Revivalistic Movement
is characterized
by
generally
these
movements; however, merely
a
by-product
of American 1900-1950 Pentecostalism viewed as sectarian
by evangelical
III. Conversion:
Pentecostalism as an
Indigenous
The
history
of Latin American Pentecostalism
indigenous leadership,
and until
recently,
isola- tion from
public
view.53
Brazil,
Chile and Central America are the focal
points
of this
rapidly growing
movement.
with Methodist or Holiness
backgrounds,
Pentecostalism cannot be dismissed as
was a
relatively
movements
Early missionaries,
helped
establish
missionary
endeavor.54 Between
small movement. It was and liberal Protestants and dis-
dained
by
the Catholic
hierarchy.
Since World War II, all Pentecostal
have
grown rapidly. Apart
from Divine
providence,
what accounts for this acceleration which
began
in the 1960’s and continues unabated?
Speaking
of El Salvador, Everett Wilson states
strength
[T]he growth of pentecostalism
in El Savador demonstrates that its
lies in popular, diffused institutional authority, creating internal cohesion and
stability
while permitting the
flexibility necessary
for
social change.55
accomodating
Pentecostalism
native
languages
and
customs), poor by offering spiritual power fervor touches
ologist
Christian Lalive
d’Epinay only authentically
which is bestowed
has
galvanized persecuted
Indians
(even encouraging
disenfranchised
peasants,
and urban
and
personal dignity.
Its
spiritual
a deep chord
among indigenous
minorities. Swiss soci-
has
argued
that Pentecostalism is the
South American Protestantism.56
by membership
someone hermano or hermana affirms
identity.57
upon
Dignity
is
granted sincere converts.
Calling equality
and
community
52Everett Wilson, personal interview, May 13, 1991. ..
History
53See Everett
Wilson, “Identity, Community, and Status: The Legacy of the Central American Pentecostal Pioneers” in Joel A. Carpenter and Wilbert R. Earthen
Shenk,
Vessels: American Evangelicals and Foreign Missions. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989), 133-134.
54Wilson, “Identity, Community, and Status,” 148-151.
55Everett Wilson, “Sanguine Saints: Pentecostalism in El Salvador” in Church
52:2 (June 1983), 198.
56Cited
by Everett Wilson, quoting Lalive d’Epinay’s, Haven of the Masses (London: Lutterworth Press, 1969), 124.
57Everett Wilson, “The Central American Evangelicals: From Protest to tism” in International Review
Pragma-
of Mission, LXXVII No. 305 (Jan. 1988), 99-100.
11
70
Pentecostalism is viewed
by
some
analysts
as a mass movement for “peoples
in
transition,” who
protest
the
existing
class structure
by creating
their own
self-empowering
communities.58 The
displacement of urbanization and the
desperate poverty
of overwhelming numbers of people
have created a vacuum which Pentecostalism can fill.
David Sto1159 has detailed several characteristics of this
spiritually powerful yet underpoliticized
movement:
Pentecostalism
proudly distinguishes
its spirituality and life from both Catholicism and mainline Protestantism. Its community rateness makes it
very sepa-
appealing.
Male and female roles are being transformed. Women continue to work harder and be appreciated
less, but men who would
and church are
normally ignore family discovering
a new
sensitivity
and strength
in servanthood.
Because their social consciousness is undeveloped, Pentecostal social
action is more of a “good government lobby” at present. This could
change quickly
if they awaken from apathy and question authority.
The events of the 1960’s
spurred
the
development
of CEB’s within Protestantism. Alienated individuals found
reconciling relationships. Displaced
workers discovered comraderie and mutual
support.
As political repression increased,
so did the
spiritual desperation-an angst
ameliorated
by
conversion and the
gift
of the
Holy Spirit.
Pentecostalism does not
simply
offer an
escape
from harshness through mysticism
or
ecstasy.
It is a
dynamic
movement which believes that each individual believer is a
representative
of Christ to the world. There is no “tension” between
evangelism
and social action. Pentecostals, fortified
by daily prayer, community support,
and a spiri- tual commission to
evangelize,
see themselves as
“personal
instru- ments of God’s intervention in the world.”60
Such
rapid growth
worries the Catholic
hierarchy,
befuddles evan- gelical sympathizers,
and confuses liberation
theologians.
The Pente- costals have
yet
to discover their
potential
for
political
influence. In this sense
they
need conscientization. Their
spirituality
unites them with millions of charismatic Catholics.
Among
Protestant
groups, they are the
only
ones
growing significantly.
This “outsider” status is one of the
key ingredients
in
any
ecumenical
dialogue
with the
radical, Catholic CEB
community (which
has heretofore been
hostile,
and the object
of Pentecostal
hostility).
58So David Stoll, “A Protestant Reformation in Latin America?” 47-48. See also David Martin “The Hidden Fire,” an interview in Christianity Today (May 14, 1990), 23-26.
59Stoll, “A Protestant Reformation in Latin America?,” 47.
60See a wonderful article by Lidia Susana Vaccaro de Petrella, “The Tension Between Evangelism and Social Action in the Pentecostal Movement” in The Inter- national Review of Mission 85 (1985), 37.
12
71
IV.
Convergence:
A
Proposal
for
Revolutionary
Ecumenism
It is
my
conviction that radical Catholic CEB’s and
emerging Pentecostal communities have much in common
spiritually
and
politi- cally.
Their
antagonism
toward each other arises from a failure to per- ceive crucial
experiential
commonalities. Liberationists are frustrated by
the
political apathy
of Pentecostals. Pentecostals are hostile to
any- thing
Catholic
(read: hierarchical, traditional), especially groups
which emphasize political
action over
spiritual
affections. Such conflicts will not be resolved
quickly; indeed, any organizational unity
is decades away. Cooperative
action and
meaningful dialogue
and
fellowship,
on the other
hand,
could be
immediately
realized if the
following points of intersection are taken into account
by both groups.
Community experience
as a starting
point
for
spirituality
and theol- ogy
is affirmed
by
both
groups.
God is not to be found in abstract dis- course or
alienating
rituals. God is
experienced
as
gracious
and
holy, merciful and
just,
as the
people
turn
away
from
egoism
and
hyper- introspection
and commit to
serving
one another. This is not a reduc- tionism or a denial of Divine transcendence. God’s
“power”
and “sovereignty”
are disclosed when believers choose to live under the
‘
cross, suffering
for
justice
and
love, rather than
seeking
a
temporary glory
which
ultimately
fades.
Though many
differences in eucharistic theology
and
liturgical
tradition
remain,
these two
groups
of radical (rooted, grounded)
Christians can
enjoy
a common
experience
of God’s
presence
in worship and
evangelistic
endeavor.
Liberationists are
beginning
to confront
ungodly
machismo and strive for
genuine egalitarianism
between men and women. For
years Pentecostalism has been
dignifying
and
humanizing
men who
experi- ence conversion and consecration
by
the
Spirit. Women, always
the core of
any community
of
faith,
are
acknowledged
as equal recipients of the
Spirit’s gifts
and
graces.
A common commitment to
support rather than subvert women’s liberation is shared
by
both
groups. Pentecostals have been instrumental in
affirming indigenous
cultures and
languages
while
affirming experiential fellowship
between various races. CEB members can learn from this
unity-in-diversity
which is affirming
of ethnic
identity
and
supplanting
of prejudicial attitudes . Social action which stresses issues of
justice
at the local level is another area of common conviction and interest. CEB Christians are accepting
revolution as a gradual, grassroots movement which is inclu- sive of the
poor
rather than a sudden, violent
upheaval
led
by
an elite who too often become new
oppressors. Pentecostals,
ever
wary
of worldliness,
have a fundamental commitment to be God’s co-workers in
redeeming
the world from all
aspects
of
sinfulness, including
insti- tutional
oppression.
There is much common
ground
for concerted efforts to achieve
justice
and
practice
love.
13
72
Liberation which
Pentecostals
“acceptable year
of the Lord” his
emphasized poor,
lynch
mob
(see
Luke
4:14-31). confront the destructive wealth with a
message
within the church. This blend of
and hoarded liberation and
community
a repentance from sinful
theologians
have
begun
to articulate a
political program
includes elements of
private ownership
and
personal liberty while
retaining
a socialist vision of
caring
for the whole
by guarantee- ing rights
of food, education, and medical care. A leftist
democracy
is seen as an
acceptable goal, though
some view this as a step towards a fully
socialist state. Pentecostals have
always emphasized personal freedom and collective
accountability
freedom and
patron authority provides
a creative tension
necessary
for any representative
form of
government. Again,
radical Catholics and
are not that far
apart
when it comes to their actual
goals for human
experience.
When Jesus came to his hometown
synagogue announcing
the
audience was amazed at his
gracious- ness and stirred
by hopes
of liberation from Rome. When Jesus
that
“setting
the
captive
free” meant
doing justice
for the
the
prisoner,
and the outcast, the
community grew
restive. When Jesus declared that God’s
grace
was at work outside the boundaries of traditional
Judaism,
his former
supporters
were transformed into a
Both CEB and Pentecostal Christians
forces of
power, repression
of
servanthood,
sharing.
This
message
demands a metanoia,
self-centeredness. This
message
also creates a new
hope
based
upon the
reality
of Jesus’
presence
as the Risen One able to begin liberation now and consumate it at the eschaton.
Hope
is faith
looking ahead; love is faith
practicing justice today (Micah 6:8).
Such faith
hope
and love
provide
an
abiding basis
for
revolutionary ecumenism, which,
if
transform the church and
society
in Latin America. Such
unity
is unwelcomed
wealth are derived from
oppressive pratices.
The
great enemy
of Chris-
that ancient accuser called Satan, will work
mightly
to
keep
divided and
warring against
each other. Such divisions are not God’s
plan,
for in
Jesus,
all divisions
high priest,
Christ has
prayed
for
unity
of all Christians to live as the answer to
experimented
with,
could
tians, believers
Ephesians 2).
As the church’s (John 17).
The
priviledge the Lord’s
Prayer.
by
those whose
power, status,
and
are reconciled
(2
Cor.
5;
is
14
