Liberation Theology Political and Social Implications in Latin America and the World

Liberation Theology

Political and Social Implications

Juan A. Lozada Leoni

World Religions and International Affairs

IR 8311G Fall 2011

Introduction:

Liberation Theology (LT) is a social and intellectual Christian movement that began

within the Roman Catholic Church in Latin America (LA) during the 1960s. 1

It was first defined

as a critical reflection of praxis in the light of the word of God and its main goal is encouraging a

re-creation of society in order to make it more just for the underprivileged and exploited. The

fact that this movement originated in LA was not an accident. LA is a very inegalitarian society

and its foundations “were already firmly set within decades of the arrival of the conquista-

dores.”2

Large native populations were quickly subdued in LA, “forming a vast, racially distinct

underclass that could be exploited for the enrichment of a small European elite.”3 The racially

distinct underclass element has tremendous repercussions for the development of democratic

institutions in the region, with countries which did not possess a “racially distinct underclass to

exploit” developing more egalitarian systems. 4

This paper attempts to identify several variables that impacted the strength and impact of

LT movements in individual countries in LA. There is some evidence to suggest that countries

1 Marian Hillar,, “Liberation Theology: Religious Response to Social Problems”. Anthology of Essays, American

Humanist Association, Houston, 1993. 35

2 Jan K.. Black, Latin America: Its Problems and its Promises (Westview Press. 2011), 303

3 Ibid., 163

4 Ibid.

that possessed racially distinct underclasses were more likely to engender strong LT movements.

Also, countries that were extremely inegalitarian, by LA standards, also tended to attract stronger

LT movements and in turn experienced the largest impact in their political landscapes.

Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Brazil all have large populations of this racially distinct

underclass, countries like South Africa (during apartheid), the United States (during the civil

rights movement) and India (Dalit liberation movement) shared some surprising similarities with

these four Latin American countries. The countries mentioned above all had devastating colonial

experiences. Demographically, they all include large, racially distinct underclasses. All these

countries were impacted by strong LT or LT-aligned movements during the 1970s and 1980s.

The fact that LT movements in South Africa, India and the United States inspired substantial

reforms makes them worthy of mention when attempting to assess LT’s global political impact.

Preferential Option for the Poor:

LT interprets Christian doctrine through the perspective of the underprivileged and its

theologians speak of the “preferential option for the poor.”5 LT is a call to action for members of

the church; it encourages a re-creation of society in order to make it more just 6 and encourages

the abandonment of social systems that worsen economic inequality among the rich and poor.7

Much of LT’s “basic sociological apparatus is clearly borrowed from Marxism.8” LT has

historically played a role in strengthening the democratic process, not only in places like

5 John L. Kater, Jr. “Whatever Happened to Liberation Theology? New Directions for Theological Reflection in

Latin America” Anglican Theological Review (Fall 2011): 2.

6 Dawsey, James M. “Liberation Theology and Economic Development.” The American Journal of Economics and

Sociology, Volume 60, Issue 5, 2001. 206

7 Nunez, Miguel A. “Relevancia y Pertinencia Actual de la Teologia de la Liberacion.” DavarLogos Revista Biblio-

Teologica, 4.1, 2005. 46

8 Levine, Daniel H. “Assessing the Impact of Liberation Theology in Latin America.” The Review of Politics. Vol

50, No 2, Spring 1988. 246

Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Brazil, but also in far away countries like the

Philippines, India and South Africa as well as the Palestinian Territories. LT has grown to take

many new forms “internationally and inter-denominationally, all based on the original

revolutionary reworking of tradition towards a fairer society.” 9

Defining Liberation Theology. LT affirms the relevance of Christianity in the struggle

for a more just, temporal world. LT is “by no means a homogenous and uniform system. . . it has

been practiced in different contexts and continents. . . It has targeted various arenas of oppression

– gender (womanist), sexual orientation (Gay and Lesbian Theology), race (Black Theology),

class (LA Theology), culture (African Theology) and religion (Asian Theology). ” 10

LT’s father

in LA was Gustavo Gutierrez, a Dominican friar from Peru with indigenous heritage. He defined

LT as a “critical reflection of praxis in the light of the world of God,” and he outlined two basic

principles. First, LT recognized a need for liberation from any kind of oppression, political,

economic, social, sexual, racial and religious, a type of non violent solidarity. Second, Gutierrez

asserted that LT needed to grow out of the Christian community and “should not be imposed

from above, that is, from infallible source book or from the magisterium of an infallible Church”

11

In terms of sacred books and methods of interpretation of these books, LT proposes the

adoption of the “hermeneutic circle,” (living tree idea) which entails the “continuing change in

our interpretation of the Bible which is dictated by the continuing changes in our present-day

9 Westwell, Arthur. “Where Religion Meets Revolution: Liberation Theology and the Impulse to Social Justice in

World Religion.” The Cambridge University Journal of Politics. May, 2011. 2

10

Dawsey, James M. “Liberation Theology and Economic Development.” The American Journal of Economics and

Sociology, Volume 60, Issue 5, 2001. 203

11

Boof, Clodovis, Theology and Praxis: Epistemological Foundations, trans Robert Barr, 1987. Maryknoll, NY,

Orbis. 67

realities.” 12

This method has allowed feminist theologians to unmask patriarchy and

androcentrism hidden in Christianity, justify a new post-colonial interpretation of the Bible

among Asian theologians and encourage Black theology to reveal racial motifs in the Bible. 13

Historical Context:

Highly Stratified Socio-political systems: LT exerted only a nominal influence in the

praxis of Western European churches; its impact is mostly felt in LA and some parts of Asia and

Africa. LT seems to exert a disparate impact on former colonies, particularly those with highly

stratified social and political systems. Social inequalities in LA, parts of Asia and Africa are

staggering, extreme poverty afflicts the majority of their populations and this poverty coexists

with the fabulous wealth of very small elite. This socio-economic system is a legacy of colonial

times, closely link with early Catholicism.

In LA, the conquistadores imposed a model of Christendom where church and state were

interconnected; this social and political structure “had its roots in the ecclesial doctrines. . .

Society represented a rigid, hierarchical, feudal structure fixed once forever.” 14

This political

model has maintained its primacy in LA for more than five hundred years. Sociologist Christian

Smith labels this model a “monistic corporatism” and maintains that it is “grounded in the pre-

enlightenment, pre-scientific-revolution, pre-capitalist, aristocratic, patrimonialist, monolithically

Catholic and structurally semifeudal world of the Iberian Peninsula.” 15

From the Reconquista

12

Hillar, Marian, “Liberation Theology: Religious Response to Social Problems”. Anthology of Essays, American

Humanist Association, Houston, 1993. 35

13

Phan, Peter C. “Method in Liberation Theology.” 2000. Theological Studies 61. 45 14

Hillar, Marian, “Liberation Theology: Religious Response to Social Problems”. Anthology of Essays, American

Humanist Association, Houston, 1993. 36.

15 Smith, Christian. “The Spirit of Democracy: Base Communities, Protestantism, and Democratization in Latin

America. Sociology of Religion Journal, 1994. 55:2 119.

forward, this oppressive manipulation of faith has been challenged in the theology and praxis of

LT.

Racially Distinct Underclass: LA had become, since its early origins, a fertile breeding

ground for a particularly pernicious form of human exploitation. Later, with the advent of an age

where social Darwinism managed to achieve significant acceptance, the historical development

of patterns of exploitation of racially distinct under classes only became more widespread.

Furthermore, “notions of racial superiority fostered the government’s belief that significant

structural change and westernization could only come from the top down.” 16

Before LT, the

Catholic Church in LA had traditionally worked closely with the established oligarchy in

fighting popular uprisings, as LT began to take hold in LA, priest began to disseminate ideas that

violent revolution was in fact justified by the teachings of Jesus Christ.17

LT reversed a long

standing trend in LA, as exploitation of the poor was no longer moderated and condoned by the

Church, as the church abandoned its traditional support for the elites and moved towards

supporting indigenous peasantry.18

Brazil’s Afro-Brazilian population makes up almost fifty-percent of the population, while

in Guatemala, seventy percent of the entire country is either Mayan or from Mayan descent. In El

Salvador and Nicaragua most of the indigenous population disappeared but mestizos made up the

majority of the poor under-classes. In all four of these countries, white Europeans made up most

of the ruling upper class and LT was particularly active. The dynamics of the Cold War, and the

16

Bryan Manewal,. “Religion in the Trenches: Liberation Theology and Evangelical Protestantism as Tools of

Social Control in the Guatemalan Civil War (1960-1996). 2007. McNair Scholars Journal, Vol 11, Issue 1, Article 8.

17

Manewal, page number??

18

Black, 163

US aggressive policy to eradicate left leaning movements in its hemisphere, did attempt to

minimize the transformative impact of LT in El Salvador and Guatemala. The success of the US

policies in dwarfing the impact of LT in LA remains a subject of great debate.

Vatican II. LT developed in the context of dramatic changes to Catholic praxis. The

reforms of the Second Vatican Council on 11 October 1962 encouraged a thorough evaluation

and restructuring of its pastoral ministry.19

In Chapter One, Article 7 of “the Dignity of the

Human Person,” Pope Paul VI stated: “the social order requires constant improvement. It must

be founded on truth, build on justice, and animated by love; in freedom it should grow every day

towards a more humane balance.” The Catholic Church was implementing a massive effort to

modernize itself; this effort included the “adaptation of a universal church to national and local

cultures, and awareness of the presence of God in other religion.”20

During the 1960s, the population of LA was almost entirely Catholic. LA sent 601

representatives to the Council and “the increased focus on social justice lead many high ranking

figure of the Latin American Churches to openly declare their sympathies for the poor.” 21

The

General Council of LA Bishops in Medellin in 1968 stated in unambiguous terms “we are vitally

aware of the social revolution now in process. We identify with it.” 22

In many respects, “what

emerged from Medellin was a different Church, one that in theory no longer expected the poor to

19

Kater, John L. Jr. “Whatever Happened to Liberation Theology? New Directions for Theological Reflection in

Latin America. Anglican Theological Review, Fall 2011. 2.

20

International Bulletin of Missionary Research, Vol 29, No 4. 2006

21

Westwell, Arthur. “Where Religion Meets Revolution: Liberation Theology and the Impulse to Social Justice in

World Religion.” The Cambridge University Journal of Politics. May, 2011.

22



stoically face their lot in life and obediently await entrance to heaven as the reward for their

suffering.” 23

Also, adherents of this new ideology viewed sin not solely as an individual issue

but as an institutional problem.” 24

Due to significant economic and developmental differences among Latin American

countries, the strength of LT varies along a continuum. Francis Hagopian argues that there is a

direct correlation between the strength of ties between the laity and civil society groups and the

willingness of the church to place social justice as the governing principle of their agenda. The

stronger the ties, the higher the chances that the church would place social justice over personal

morality issues in top of their agenda. 25

This is not to say that LT did not have an impact on the

whole continent but that the impact in countries like Colombia and Venezuela was significantly

less pervasive than in Brazil or Nicaragua.

LT has always generated enormous controversy within the Catholic Church. Its use of

Marxist nomenclature, the emphasis on praxis over abstract orthodoxy and the advent of non

hierarchical community organizations like the Base Ecclesiastical Communities (BEC) have

been a source of great debate among the different factions of the church. In 1967, Pope Paul VI’s

encyclical “Populorum Progressio” explicitly condemned the current form of capitalism for the

social evils that it promoted and called for development through consensus. Subsequent popes

were a lot more restrained or even outright hostile to the movement. Current Pope Benedict XVI

led the countercharge against LT when he was a Cardinal and head of the Congregation of the

23

Montgomery, Tommie S. “Liberation and Revolution: Christianity as a Subversive Act in Central America.”

1980, 80

24

Berryman, Phillip. “The Religious Roots of Rebellion,” 173.

25

Mackin, Robert S. “In Word and Deed: Assessing the Strength of Progressive Catholicism in Latin America,

1960-1970s. 2010. Sociology of Religion, 71: 2, 216-242.

Doctrine of the Faith. 26

The position of John Paul II on LT was not as clear. The former Pope,

took an opportunity, during his 1979 visit to Mexico, to admonish priests “not to give in to

sociopolitical radicalism which in the long run become inopportune and counterproductive. . you

are not social leaders, political leaders or employees of temporal power,” while also denouncing,

during a subsequent address during the same trip to Mexico, “the exploitation, plunder and

abandonment of Latin American’s indigenous peoples and peasants,” and emphasizing that “all

private property has a social mortgage that must be attended to.”

Marxism, Socialism and Dependency Theory. It is not possible to understand LT

outside the context of the revolutionary Marxist radicalization of the LA Left during the Cold

War. 27

In the early 1960s, “Social Marxism, imported from Cuba by revolutionaries such as Che

Guevara. . . attracted disenfranchised in large numbers. . . In Latin America it acquired a

peculiarly Latin flavor including the following of a large number of lay Catholics who saw no

conflict between their allegiance to Marxism and to the Church.” 28

Furthermore, “the

encouragement of Vatican II to use approaches to understanding the world they wished to serve

in fact nearly guaranteed that the tools of Marxist analysis would be most congenial to the work.

29” The early LT writers, like Gustavo Gutierrez, distinguished “between Marxism as an atheistic

26



27

Chaouch, Malik T. “Christianity and Politics in Latin America: The Paradigm of the Liberation Theology.”

Desafios, 2007, II S. 157-199.

28



29

Kater, John L Jr. “Whatever Happened to Liberation Theology? New Directions for Theological Reflection in

Latin America. Fall 2001. Anglican Theological Review.

and totalitarian ideology and as a tool of social analysis.” 30

Scholars of Liberation Theology

acknowledge the adoption of the Marxist interpretation of class struggle as a law of history but

clarify that what attracted them about Marx was not his formulas for a new society, but his

suggestion of the interrelationship of experience and theory (that one supported and furthered

understanding of the other). 31

Furthermore, LT embraces “the model of development towards a

social paradise present in Marx but re-imagines it as an eschatological hope for the Kingdom of

God. . . LT re-interprets Marxist concepts like alienation as collective dimensions of sin in

society. 32

In order to justify a frontal attack to capitalism and modernization theory, LT turns to the

theory of dependence to explain economic underdevelopment in LA. 33

Dependency theory

argues that underdeveloped countries are not early versions of developed countries, but have

unique features and structures of their own. The theory argues that underdeveloped nations are in

the situation of being the weaker members in a world market economy and as such, they need to

reduce their connectedness with the world market so that they can pursue a path more in keeping

with their own needs, less dictated by external pressures. LT proponents believe that LA entirely

lacked the ability to formulate pure, free trade, given its long history of bondage and dependency

30

Phan, Peter C. “Method in Liberation Theology.” 2000. Theological Studies 61. 40

31

Dressler, Alex. “Mixoac: Liberation Theology: Its Legacy in Mexico and Central America.”2009.

www.mixoac.blogspot/2009/08/liberation-theology-it-legacy-in-mexico.html

32



33

Phan, Peter C. “Method in Liberation Theology.” 2000. Theological Studies 61. 45

to Europe. 34

Dependence theory would become a staple in Latin America, and would drive the

adoption of the import substitution model throughout the 1970s and 1980s.

LT and its Martyrs. The human cost of suppressing LT movement’s efforts to increase

social justice and correct extremely skewed wealth distribution in LA was enormous. Guatemala

and El Salvador produced the most well known martyrs of LT. On 24, March, 1980, paramilitary

forces linked to the right wing government of El Salvador shot and killed San Salvador’s

Archbishop Oscar Romero while he was consecrating the Mass. Romero had dared to denounce

the terrorism of the government’s death squads in radio broadcasts and had been very vocal in

his support for LT and the right of poor Salvadorians to live with dignity.

Romero saw institutionalized social and economic injustice on a

pervasive scale. Two percent of the population controlled 57% of

the nation’s usable land, and the 16 richest families owned the

same amount of land utilized by 230,000 of the poorer families. . .

hungry farm workers were beaten or shot for eating a piece of the

very produce they had grown. Mines and factories operated under

the theory that it was cheaper to replace a dead or crippled worker

than to repair defective equipment 35

The murder of Archbishop Romero did not stop the efforts of Liberation Theologians;

they continued to preach against social injustice and government abuses. Also in 1980, four

priests working with Native American communities in rural Guatemala were murdered by right-

wing paramilitaries associated with the Guatemalan government. In 1989, the Atlacatl, an elite

military unit trained by the United States for counterinsurgency operations, massacred six Jesuit

priests and two housekeepers at the University of Central America (UCA). The Jesuits had been

labeled subversives by the El Salvadoran Government for speaking out against the oppressive

34


World Religion.” The Cambridge University Journal of Politics. May, 2011. 35

www.kellogg.nd.edu/romero/Introduction.htm

socioeconomic structure of Salvadoran society. Father Joe Sobrino, the sole survivor of the Jesuit

congregation in El Salvador, continued the fight for social justice in El Salvador and valiantly

fought the efforts of the government to sabotage the murder investigation. Father Sobrino

defined his religious vows of obedience as involving “all renunciation of totalitarianism as well

as individual freedom; rejection of consumerism and all class distinctions and profit,” 36

an

interpretation wholly aligned with LT. The death of the Jesuits brought international outrage and

condemnation upon the Salvadoran Government and contributed to the ultimate negotiation of an

agreement between the warring factions that would end the country’s long civil war. 37

Base Ecclesiastical Communities (BEC). LT is particularly revolutionary in LA

because of its long history of “monistic corporatism,” under this system “true fulfillment in a

well ordered, organic community, the component of which are harmonized by a central authority

to achieve the collectively goal of the common good,”38

this is the antithesis of what LT

proposes. Under LT, the church diametrically alters its role, they encourage mediating structures,

like the Base Ecclesial Communities, that function squarely outside paternalistic state control.

BECs served as the principal catalyst of the changes pushed through during the emergence of LT

in LA, the effectiveness of this organizational vehicle in empowering communities continues to

shape the world’s political landscape.

36

Sobrino, Jon. La Matanza de los Pobres. Madrid: Ediciones HOAC, 1993.

37

http://www.spc.edu/pages/1814.asp

38

Smith, Christian. “The Spirit of Democracy: Base Communities, Protestantism, and Democratization in Latin

America. Sociology of Religion Journal, 1994. 55:2 199-143.

BECs were lay-led groups of Christians as basic organic units of society and pastoral

action. 39

They are small groups of ten to thirty people, ordinarily homogenous in social

composition. . . at a minimum they gather regularly to read and comment on the Bible. . and

occasionally act together towards some concrete end. 40

They combined the social and

educational function with the Pastoral activity.” 41

BECs are “fundamentally religious, not

political organization. . Yet, the boundaries between personal and group empowerment and

public political activism is quite porous. ”

42 BECs proved themselves to be an antidote to a

“disempowered fatalism and passive criticism” that had characterized LA’s under classes since

the times of the colony. BECs adopted the process of “conscientization developed by Brazilian

educator Paulo Freire in the 1960s43

Through this process, individual members come to see

“many of their own troubles and society’s ills not as the results of God’s will or an unalterable

fate, but as human social products created y a minority that benefits from the social status quo.”

39

Hilllar, Marian. “Liberation Theology: Religious Responses to Social Problems. A Survey. 1993. Human and

Social Issues. Anthology of Essays. American Humanist Association, Houston. 35

40

Levine, Daniel H. “Assessing the Impact of Liberation Theology in Latin America.” The Review of Politics. Vol

50, No 2, Spring 1988

41

Hilllar, Marian. “Liberation Theology: Religious Responses to Social Problems. A Survey. 1993. Human and

Social Issues. Anthology of Essays. American Humanist Association, Houston. 35

42


America. Sociology of Religion Journal, 1994. 55:2 119

43



44 These communities did not fit into the traditional vertical, hierarchical authority system of the

Catholic Church, 45

yet they became a necessity in LA because of the scarcity of Priests in LA.

The impact of BECs in LA was remarkable, thousands of BECs were created throughout

the region and they grew like wildfire, with very large concentrations especially prevalent in

Brazil and most of Central America. In 1979, the Sandinista Front of National Liberation (FSLN)

overthrew the Somoza regime in Nicaragua, quickly followed by the launching of a major

revolutionary offensive by the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN) in El

Salvador. These movements relied heavily on radical Christians for support and “in Nicaragua,

the zones where fighting was most intense and resistance most effective during the population

insurrection were exactly those towns and neighborhoods were BECs tended to be most

concentrated.”46

LT often started at the bottom and slowly made its way to the more conservative upper

echelons of the Church. Ironically, right wing governments in LA normally used the military to

“arrest and possibly abuse or torture radical priests or BEC leaders,” 47

when conservative church

leaders would approach the government to protest the abuses, the government would threat the

church leader, this in turn ensured the conversion of many Church leaders to progressive and

44



45



46

Smith, Christian. “The Emergence of Liberation Theology: Radical Religion and Social Movement.” University

of Chicago Press 1991. 227

47



radical pastoral work even when they would have preferred closer alliances with the

government.48

Conclusions:

The distribution of wealth in LA remains one of the most skewed in the world. Although

LT may have served as a strong voice in favor of the poor and may have been instrumental in

securing better working conditions for poor workers in LA, the situation remains troubling. The

strength of BECs, the vehicle in which most of LA’s energy towards change was concentrated,

has weaken over time, “growing elite hostility to grassroots initiatives, grounded in fear of

challenges to the legitimacy and effectiveness of hierarchical authority,” 49

along with the open

hostility of the new Pope towards the movement has aided in promoting a sense that LT is passé.

However, this ignores the fact that a “new discourse about justice and equality, rooted in biblical

and religious themes is now widespread and will remain.” 50

BECs in LA arguably fortify the

democratic process by “creating open spaces for civil society, fostering attitudes of engaged

criticism, developing their members’ organizational and leadership skills and cultivating a sense

of social responsibility among its members.” 51

Beyond LA, an ecumenical movement that

includes Protestant ministers and lay people are redefining LT and contextualizing some of its

foundations to fit their respective realities. Jesuit Priest Aloysius Pieris, a Sri Lankan Liberation

48



49


50, No 2, Spring 1988.

50


50, No 2, Spring 1988.

51


America. Sociology of Religion Journal, 1994. 55:2 125.

theologian, is a leading representative of LT’s new breed. Pieris argues that Marxist tools of

social analysis are ill suited for Asia, a place where imposed poverty co-exists with voluntary

poverty (to which Marxism has not answer to). Pieris also contrasts the religious diversity of

Asia with the more homogenous LA’s Christian communities to argue for the need of adding

interreligious dialogue to any strategies of social transformation in Asia is a condicio sine qua

non 52

while this was not normally the case in LA. This is just but example of the many

directions that LT has taken. The writing of LA liberation theologians today no longer emphasize

dependency theory, after the fall of Communism, LT has also had to adopt a sociological

framework that sidesteps the failures of the Marxist utopia. Nevertheless, LT will remain

relevant because it tackles universal issues that are linked to basic human nature and widespread

socio economic dynamics of exploitation and extreme inequality. LT has empowered many but

even more remain un-empowered and exploited, the LT faithful will continue to pray for the day

that LT is no longer needed, until then; they will continue to place praxis over abstract

orthodoxy.

52

Phan, Peter C. “Method in Liberation Theology.” 2000. Theological Studies 61. 40-63

Liberation Theology Political and Social Implications in Latin America and the World

Documents

Transcript of Liberation Theology Political and Social Implications in Latin America and the World