Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
| PentecostalTheology.com
Poverty
as a
Meeting and Contrasts
and
167
Parting
in the
Experiences Pentecostalisms and Ecclesial
Adoniram Gaxiola*
‘
became clear
is understood
by Protestant
groups
Place: Similarities
of Latin American Base Communities
groups,
and to a lesser in the
area, is one of the
a which in turn have
pro-
.
The
growth
of Latin American Pentecostal
extent that of the historical Protestant churches
elements that has forced the Roman Catholic Church to introduce series of
theological
and
pastoral readjustments
duced the
theologies
of liberation. Indeed, it was in the 1950s that it
that the number of Catholic
priests
was not sufficient to serve
adequately
the Latin American Catholic
population,-
a situation that
the
hierarchy
to be a facilitator of the rapid advance of
in the
region,
Pentecostals
among
them.
According
to Samuel
Escobar, the meeting of Latin
American
bishops
in Rio de Janeiro,
in
1955, considered the
possibility
that
,.. superiors may transfer to Latin America the personnel that has been in the
displaced
territories under communist dominion. This would
increase the personnel needed for repelling the influence that could be
exerted among our people by the Protestant pastors displaced from the
aforementioned territories, who are now being sent, in an alarming num-
to Latin America. 1
ber,
lay people, especially
was observed.
With such a motivation since the
early sixties,
the Roman Catholic Church has sent a considerable number of priests, woman
religious,
and
North Americans and
Spaniards
to Latin America. They
were
particularly designated
to work in the countries in which a greater growth
of Protestant and socialist movements
One such
example
is the
country
of Guatamala. As indicated
by Dennis Smith
only
about 15%
percent
of the
priests
and nuns who serve in Guatamala are from that
country,
while about 95% of the Protestant
the revolutions
that were
pastors
were bom in Guatemala.2 The social
movements, inspired by Marxism,
and in
particular
contributed in an undeniable
way
to the conscien-
*Adoniram Gaxiola is Director of Human Resources and Church Relations for the Mexico Bible
Society.
At the School of Social and Political Sciences at the National
University
of Mexico he ized in the
special-
study
of Marxist
ideology.
.
ISamuel Escobar, La Fe Evangilica y las Teologtas de la Liberación (El Paso: ‘
Casa Bautista de Publicaciones, 1987) 34.
2Dennis A. Smith, “Coming of Age: A Reflection on Pentecostals, Politics and
Pneuma 13:2 (Fall, 1991), 131-1’39.
Popular Religion,”
1
168
tization of
growing
numbers of
people regarding
the mechanics of the economic
system
that has been
imposed
on the .sub-continent.
Thus, according
to Galeano
Latin America is the region with its veins open. Since the
until
Discovery
now, every thing has been transformed into European or, later,
North American capital, and, as such, it has been, and still is, accumu-
lated in distant centers of power…. In the colonial and neo-colonial
alchemy, gold
is transmuted into junk, and food is converted into
poison.3
It is this consciousness which is found both within the Catholic and Protestant sectors, that
provokes
the
searching
for biblical and
theologi- cal clues which will not
only
allow for a better
understanding
of the social Latin American
problems,
but will also
permit
the
structuring
of a more
just
social model which is coherent with Christian
hope.
The insertion of
many
of the Catholic missionaries in Latin America becomes,
in
fact,
a true incarnation. Their contact with Latin American reality
allowed
these
missionaries to have a better
understanding
of the reality
of poverty and
oppression among
the
peoples living
south of the Rio
Grande,
as well as the causes that
originate
them. In
particular, those who came from the United States and
Canada,
had to face criti- cally
and in the
light
of the
gospel,
the role that their own countries
play in the region.
Harvey
Cox claims that
By living with the poor and talking daily with irate farmer leaders, many
North American missionaries lost their political innocence.4
The same
thing
can be said of other
religious missionaries,
both Catholic and
Protestant, especially those living
in countries where the political
and economic situation
attempted
to work more
clearly against the
presuppositions
of the
kingdom
of
God,
like Brazil, El
Salvador, Guatemala, Peru,
etc. This loss of political innocence had
already
been encouraged by
John
XXIII, when, again
according
to Cox, some time before the
beginnings
of Vatican
II, he declared:
Regarding the undeveloped countries, the Church presents itself as it
is and desires to be: as the church of all human
exactly
beings, and in par-
ticular, of the poor.5
Although
the
guiding principle
of Vatican II was not
exactly
the con- sideration of a commitment to the
poor,
there were inside the Council a series of movements that wanted the
aggiornamiento (bringing up
to date)
in the Catholic Church to have as its main
basis,
the return of the churches to the
poor. According
to Cox, Cardinal Lercaro,
Archbishop of Bologne,
propounded:
3Eduardo Galeano, Las Venas Abiertas de America Latina (México, D. F.: XXI
Siglo
Editores, 1986) 2, 3.
4Harvey Cox, La Religidn en la Ciudad Secular (Madrid; Sal Terrae, 1985) 104.
5Cox, La Religión en la Ciudad Secular, 104.
2
169
‘
‘
We will not respond to the most authentic and profound experiences in our time, nor to the hopes that all Christians have of attaining unity, if we deal with the subject of the
the themes of the Council. evangelization
of the poor simply as one more among This is not a theme like the others; it is somehow the theme of our Council.
‘
If it is correct to say, as it has already been done in several occasions,
that the purpose of the Council is to conform the church to the truth of
the gospel and to make it capable of responding to the problems of our
time, then we can affirm that the fundamental theme of this Council is
precisely that of the Church as the Church of
the poor.6
The influence of the socialist
movements,
the collision with
reality
on the
part
of the missionaries from the First World, and the ferment of the new
Evangelical
conscience were
determining
factors in this
process. The alternative
pastoral
model which was
proposed by
the Catholic Church,
The Ecclesial Base
Community (EBC),
which was intended as a means of
stopping
Protestantism,
was reversed and the result instead was,
“a
parallel church, and,
in the last
instance,
a schismatic church.” As Cox himself tells us:
.
The intention of the ecclesial machinery in giving life to the ecclesial base communities was to re-organize the periphery and to direct it towards a centralized power (but) this time the mechanism “went hay- wire,” and the periphery distanced itself still more from the centralized power.
The base communities rebounded against… the vertical structure and dismantled
‘
Thus the ecclesial base communities became the
popular expression
of
the
theologies
of liberation. In contrast with other currents of the same
movement, theological
reflection and the pastoral models are determined
by
the
daily experience
and the
reading
of the Bible in which these
communities are
engaged.
There
is,
in such
communities,
the
strong
conviction of their nature as the
People
of God, a nature that is not
conditioned
by
doctrinal
presuppositions,
but
by
their condition as , the
poor. According
to Leonardo Boff the ecclesial base communities
presuppose …. , .
.
, ‘
The construction of a living church more than the multiplication of material structures … A more vital and intimate participation of the members who are inserted in one same reality which is more or less homogenous, living
the essence of the Christian message which is the universal fatherhood of God, brotherhood with all men, the following of Jesus Christ dead and resurrected, the celebration of the resurrection and of the Eucharist and the construction, already initiated in the history of the Kingdom of God, which is the liberation of all of man and all men.8
.
‘
6Cox, La Religifn en la Ciudad Secular, 106.
7 Cox, La Religi6n en la Ciudad Secula, 111.
8Leonardo Boff, “Eclesiog?nesis,” Presencia Teol6gica (Madrid: Sal Terrae, 1980), 14.
3
170
Such a conviction allows the ecclesial base communities, in
general terms, not to understand their raison
d’etre to be the
arresting
of Protes- tant
growth,
as was the initial interest of the Catholic Church
according to Father Lombardi’s
project,
but those who
put
into
practice,
under Pope
Pius
XII,
the “Excercitations for a Better World.” These bases are still
willing
to promote the so-called “base ecumenism” with the
poorer Protestant sectors who are more conscious of their own
reality:
the Pen- tecostals. In fact, from an
attempt
to prop up a tottering ecclesial
appara- tus,
there has
gushed
a fountain of renewal in both Latin American church and
society.
Nevertheless,
the ecclesial base communities face the constant risk of a very particular
form of
alienation,
that of
understanding
the
salvific
act as something that is merely or primordially socio-political. This
approach leads to a privileged
position
of men and women insofar as
they
are social entities and to the detriment of their
individuality, particularly
in that which is related to his salvation and
redemption
from sin. It is not strange
to find
among
the members of the ecclesial base communities people
who have mastered a liberationist
lingo,
or others who
reject
all personal responsibility
in the face of “institutional sin.” On the other hand,
some sectors have been
permeated
and instrumented
by
the Neo- pentecostal
and charismatic movements with the encouragement of some segments
in the Catholic
hierarchy
who are worried because of the evangelizing
ferment of these communities. In any
form,
it would seem that the ecclesial base communities face the challenge of a rapproachment as an answer to the new
pastoral
alternatives induced
by
the new charismatic renewal
movement,
both Catholic and Protestant, as well as the new world order in which the failure of socialism
(or,
would it be better to call it “the
stumbling”
of
socialism?) plays
such a prominent role.
For their
part,
the Pentecostal movement arose as an instrument of renewal in the historic Protestant churches which were
generally
middle or lower middle
class,
and also as alternative
religious
societies for the poorer
sectors of the Latin American
population.
From the
parallel
and sometimes coincidental
development
of both models
of Pentecostalism, an ambivalence was bom between the
practice
and the discourse of both Pentecostalisms.
In
general
terms the
origin
of these Pentecostal movements can be considered as the differential element between the models of Pentecostal- ism mentioned above. In Latin
America,
the
missionary
Pentecostal movements
proceed
from the United States in the
majority
of the cases. This
implies
that the
missionary
discourse must have
ideological
ele- ments which are
proper
to the middle class even if the
missionary
work is done
among
the lowest sector of the Latin American
population.
On the other
hand,
the Pentecostal models that rise as alternative
religious societies were
generated quasi-spontaneously
and
quasi-autochtho- nously. Among
these we must differentiate those that have been bom
,
‘
4
171
from national Protestant churches, those that come from
Catholicism, and those that are the result of intra-Pentecostal divisions.
Although
different in their
origin,
the distinct Pentecostal models tend to meet with one another
temporally
and
spatially during
their
stages
of proselytism
and fortification. The
meeting point
is constituted
by
the “poverty stage”
which is faced
by
the different Pentecostal movements in their
totality
or
independently
of their
origin. Perhaps
the common element is the coincidence that exists between two
positions
which are apparently contradictory:
That which is
given
between the
proposal
to legitimize
the status
quo,
which is natural in the case of a Pentecostalism that is inspired
by
the
ideology
of the middle
class,
and the
“liberating” proposal
that arises as an alternative in the
presence
of a
reality
of poverty
and
oppression.
For the first
group
the
“poverty
moment” is a necessary
evil that has to be faced
transitorily,
while for the other the aforementioned
“poverty
moment” is an undesirable
reality
which can be surmounted with the
help
of the
divinity.
Due to this and, in
general terms,
we can
say
that
among
Pentecostals we do not find a disposition to recognize themselves as
poor
or unim- portant
and much less to
accept
that
they
are members of the
Kingdom of God because
they
are
poor. Consequently,
it is not their condition as poor
that fosters their
theological
reflection nor its
pastoral proposals. Much less are
they willing
to launch themselves into a process of social transformation because
(1) they
are involved in a dynamic process of upward mobility,
and
(2) they
think “this world” is irredeemable and is headed towards a disaster. Juan
Sepulveda says:
‘
.
(The average Pentecostal)
… does not
perceive
his condition as
He is poor because of his own guilt or because of the deter-
minations of his destiny … These characteristics converge in an attitude
oppressed:
.
that is markedly pessimistic, without hope and with a strong feeling of
culpability.
Under these conditions, the poor expect nothing
is the
good from
society. Rather, society permanent threat of failure and lack of ”
sense. In this context, his encounter with God through the
of the Pentecostal
proclamation
community, gives new sense to his life, in spite of
the senselessness of life in the world.9
Nevertheless,
there exists a basic contradiction in the Pentecostal movements that
promote
an integral salvific
practice
for human
beings within a context that could be considered as a “constant
fleeing
from reality.” Especially during
the “moments of
poverty,” they emphasize the salvific
possibility
of men and women in their
integrity
as human beings: spirit,
soul and
body,
as well as their social
environment, although
their most immediate environment
may
well be generally that of their
family
and their closest friends. In effect, the traditional Pentecostal emphasis
on divine
healing
and the
abandoning
of
vices,
as well as the
,
9Juan Sepulveda, “Pentecostalismo y Teologia de la Liberaci6n: Manifestaciones del Trabajo del Espiritu Santo por la Renovaci6n de la Iglesia,” (Mimeo: 1991) 3.
5
172
improvement
of the socio-economic status of those who are
converted, constitute
integrating
elements of a proposal for a re-creation in which the
fulfilling
of these
aspirations
is an evidence of the reality of the
king- dom of God and its communal dimension.
Also,
the transformation of the
family
and a more
ample
social transformation are
implicit
in the transformation of the individual.
Besides
this,
the Pentecostal movements
propose
an
integral
salvific project
to the
degree
in which
they incorporate
into their cultural and liturgical practice
the elements which
belong
to their culture. In this sense the inclusion in the
liturgical practices
of artistic manifestations which are
part
of their culture is
nothing
but an extension of their understanding
of the
cosmology
of social
reality,
as well as the
natural, and even
supernatural powers.
Pentecostals have no problem when
they incorporate
into their
religious practice “germs
and
spirits”
and much less when
accepting
that one and the other
are,
and not
only
will
be, subject
to the
Lordship
of God.
Seen from
this perspective,
the Pentecostal movements subvert the traditional Protestant order in
particular,
as well as the social order in general,
but
they
do not do this
permanently. Experience proves
that to the
degree they experience
accelerated social evolution
(which
is the apparent
fatal
destiny
of the Latin American Pentecostal
movements),
the above-mentioned
emphases
tend to be debilitated or under-valued. The Pentecostals who
ideologically
come
from,
or were
encouraged by,
a Protestant middle class, not
only
return to their class
origins
but
they also
permeate
the
higher
sectors of
society
in
general.
Under such cir- cumstances
they
are not
any
more in a position that would
grant
them an integrating approximation
in their salvific discourse. On the
contrary, their
theological
discourse is now
distinguished
as (1)
legitimizer
of the established
order,
of which Pentecostalism is now a
beneficiary by divine
design,
and
(2)
as an excluder of those
who,
also
by design
of God and
perhaps by
their own
guilt,
are not the beneficiaries of the new status reached
by
those who “are saved.”
The under-valuation of the traditional Pentecostal
emphases
is cause and effect of the charismatic-institutional-bureaucratic
process
that Latin American Pentecostal movements are
undergoing, especially
those that were established more than
fifty years ago
and include three or four
gen- erations of members.
Basically
the
dynamics
of transformation of the pastoral
model is an indication of the moment in which Pentecostal movements find themselves.
The “charismatic
pastoral
model”
belongs properly
to the
“poverty moment” of the Pentecostal movements. In this model the
pastor
is char- acterized not
only by
the
proclamation
of a simple faith and a missionary fervor,
but also
by
the unconditional surrender of self and
possessions in favor of the
community being
served.
Speaking
of the Pentecostal pastor
who is
typical
of the
“poverty moment,” .
Gaxiola-Gaxiola has said,
.
6
tually, socially
interdependence
173
. ‘
rela-
He is one of them, in many cases he founded the church and
and
grew spiri-
economically with it. He was commonly as poor as
the other people … He preaches and advises as any other minister does,
but at the same time he helps the members in many other ways. He
seeks employment for them and out of his own pocket he provides them
with money when necessary.10
One of the elements that
explains
such a capacity for identification and
is the fact that pastors understand their call in relation to a
specific community.
In as much as “their”
congregation
is the testi-
their
calling, they can, therefore,
establish a permanent tionship.
Within this
relationship they hardly
think of the
possibility
of
another flock besides their own. In other
words, there is
a profound
sense of
interdependence
between the
pastor
and the
congre-
a situation in which the one considers himself or herself to be the
mony
of
pastoring
gation,
extension of the other. The
institutionalizing
homogeneous,
of
tionally are
pastoral authority, especially disposability,
degree
surrender, privileges
depend
on the
personal
to God is
necessarily understood
simply
as the
‘
power priority, together
process
of the Pentecostal movements
begins
as part
of a search. On the
part
of communities which are
more
or less
alternatives for a better service on the
evangelistic
and missionary
fields. In
general
such alternatives
imply
an
overturning
of the
primary
structures of
power
and
authority.
The
pastors,
who tradi-
the heads and maximum authorities of their
congregations, see themselves as displaced by the institutional
entity.
The institutional authority
is supra-pastoral
and, consequently,
it relativizes the traditional
because the
pastor
enters a condition of
or temporality, in the
pastoral
office. One of the results of this is that the
point
of reference for
loyalty
and commitment moves from the
congregation
to the institution and its
representatives.
A
high
of this
great
sense of renunciation to one’s own
rights
is preserved,
but this
renunciation, together
with the
subsequent personal
find in the institution the reason for their
being.
Thus the
and riches of
one,
the
institution,
poverty
of the
other,
the
person. Finally, fidelity
the
fidelity
to the institution, and the church is
denominational institution in which the
pastor
is serving.
Some Latin American Pentecostal movements have
already surpassed the institutional moment and find themselves
living
in a clearly bureau- cratic model. The
institutionalizing
that
governs
with its own
permanence
in the
hierarchy
as its first
with a series of privileges for those who contribute to the permanence of the bureaucratic model. In contrast to some hacienda models in some Latin American Pentecostal
power
is not in the hand of a person but of an elite. Under such circum- stances a status of
legitimacy
is
granted
to the
practice
of “ecclesial
dynamics
have
produced
an elite
structures,
in this
case,
of Mission
IOManuel J. Gaxiola-Gaxiola, “‘The Pentecostal Ministry,” International Review
66:1 (January 1977) 58.
–
7
174
politics,”
the same that
regulates
the access of new members to the elite as well as the instruments for the transmission of real
power.
Within the bureaucratic model the
participation
of pastors in the insti- tutional wealth is encouraged as a control measure and as an inhibitor of noncomformities that could
endanger
the new
power
structure. This
participation usually
comes
through
informal channels. For
example,
the President of a certain Pentecostal denomination
helped
all the
regional supervisors acquire
brand-new
vehicles,
and
they
in turn had no
objec- tion when the President
bought
for himself the most
expensive
car on the market with the
understanding
that he would
keep
it at the end of his term of office. Once the
system requires
a political compensation for all the benefits it grants, the institutional wealth will not
necessarily
benefit all the pastors, and this will
provoke
a series of tensions and
competition among
those who want to “climb aboard the victors’ car.”
Apparently,
there are coincidences between the Pentecostal movements and the ecclesial base
communities, perhaps
because
they share,
even if temporally,
the
“poverty space”
or some elements and
emphases
in their worship. Perhaps
one such coincidence
may
be that both movements will face both immediate and
long-term
risks. On the one
hand,
the ecclesial base communities face the
challenge
of explaining, in the
light of their
experience
and the
gospel, why
it is the Latin American
poor
are putting
the neo-liberal
governments
with their
profoundly anti-evangeli- cal
proposals
into
power.
The Pentecostal
movements,
for their
part, must face the
challenge
of
explaining
their
renunciation,
and
estrange- ment from the poor among whom
they
were bom.
Perhaps
the common risk faced
by
both movements is that
they may not
respond adequately
and
opportunely
to the challenges
they
are facing or that
they may
be displaced by new
theological
and pastoral proposals, especially
those that are less
evangelical
and
autochthonous,
and which are already
being
announced in Latin America.
8
