Progressive Catholicism

Most scholars view the appearance of progressivethey still reached only a small fraction of the country's
Catholicism as a dramatic break with the past. TheCatholic population. Episcopal criticisms of human rights
shift in attention toward solving the economic andabuses and economic injustice grew increasingly
political problems of the poor defines progressivecommon beginning in the late 1960s with the
Catholicism (Bruneau 45). Catholic progressivism inappointment of Dom Aloísio Lorscheider as
Latin America is typically dated from the Secondgeneral secretary of the Church's episcopal
Vatican Council (1962-65). It was at this historicconference and with the ascension of Dom Paulo
conference (originally designed to meet the challengesArns to the archbishopric of São Paulo in 1970
of modernization in Europe) that "democratic" reforms(Serbin 45).
were first introduced and sanctioned by the papacyBrazil witnessed the emergence of the region's most
(Hewitt 123). Mass was to be said in the vernacular,progressive episcopacies comparatively early, before
Church members were to practice toleration forVatican II. This immediately raises the question of how
alternative ideas, and greater attention was to be paidVatican II could have shaped progressive pastoral
to social justice. But, in reality, a few Latin Americanreforms in this country when it had not occurred yet. It
Churches anticipated these reforms by at least ais important that Brazil experienced rapid growth of
decade, especially with regard to social justice. Brazilnon-Catholic religions during the 1930s and 1940s, when
led the way. During the 1950s, bishops in BrazilProtestant growth was still relatively slow elsewhere.
expressed interest in land reform, literacy campaigns,Consequently, bishops in Brazil implemented
and rural cooperatives (Mainwaring 128). These effortsprogressive reforms in the 1940s and '50s in an effort
went beyond the traditional alms giving favored in theto improve their credibility among the popular classes
past; instead, they represented a sincere desire toand slow the exodus from the Catholic faith. As for
improve the long-term living conditions of the lowerpolitical alliances, each episcopacy sought state
classes. Even before the convocation of Vatican II,assistance from the democratic regimes preceding
attention also was given to promoting greater laymilitary rule, but there was a noticeable drift toward
involvement in religious services in Brazil.reformist parties that were more in tune with the
No event in Latin America crystallized the progressivemasses.
movement more than the Second GeneralThe Brazilian bishops first sought to stave off the
Conference of CELAM, held in Medellín, Colombia,Protestant advance in the 1930s and 1940s by seeking
in 1968 (Mainwaring 148). The purpose for gatheringprohibitions on the entry of missionaries into their
bishops from throughout the region was to apply thecountry (Mainwaring 197). A renewed and
reforms and recommendations of Vatican 11 to thestrengthened alliance with the state under Getúlio
Latin American context. Under the leadership ofVargas enhanced their ability to take such defensive
progressive bishops such as Hélderactions, although the state's cooperation on this issue
Câmara ( Brazil) and Raúl Silvawas lukewarm at best. At a higher level, bishops tried
Henríquez ( Chile), this conference wasusing their connections with the political elite to impede
celebrated for its declaration in favor of social justice,the entrance of missionaries. Laws were passed,
later called the "preferential option for the poor."strengthened, or enforced in several nations making it
Supposedly, the poor always possessed a specialillegal to import the Bible. At the urging of several
place in Catholic doctrine. Nevertheless, the Brazilbishops, president Getúlio Vargas pressured the
bishops thought it necessary to publicly declare supportUnited States government to limit the number of
for this social group. Given the tarnished past of theevangelical missionaries entering Brazil in the 1940s
Church when it came to serving the poor, this was the(Hewitt 44). This issue arose when the United States
least they could do.tried to persuade Brazil to join the Allies in World War II.
To put the preferential option into action, theVargas, not particularly interested in getting militarily
participants at the Medellín conferenceinvolved, delayed Brazil's entry until the war was
advocated the development of comunidadesassuredly won. The negotiations over Protestant
eclesiales de base (CEBs), known in English Asmissionaries, while directly beneficial to the Catholic
ecclesial base communities (Mainwaring 89). Overall,hierarchy, probably served as one of Vargas's many
the range of CEB activity is quite broad. Despite theirstalling tactics, rather than representing a sincere desire
notoriety for radical political activity, no presuppositionto help the Church. The restrictions were never
should be made regarding their ideological content.enacted.
Most people participate in base communities primarilyMany Church leaders realized that a new pastoral
for their religious content and often ignore the politicalcommitment was needed if Brazil was to remain a
messages propagated by their progressive leaders.predominantly Catholic nation ( Mainwaring 213).
The intellectual engine driving Catholic progressivismLearning from the success of Protestant missionaries,
during the 1960s and 1970s was liberation theology. Asthe Catholic hierarchy promoted numerous social
defined by one of its founding fathers, Gustavoprojects and organizations aimed at improving the lives
Gutiérrez, liberation theology attempts to reflectof the working class and poor beginning in the late
on the experience and meaning of the faith based on1940s. Many of the techniques employed by the
the commitment to abolish injustice and to build a newBrazilian Church mirrored the efforts being made by
society; this theology must be verified by the practicethe Protestants, including grassroots literacy campaigns
of that commitment, by active, effective participation incentered around reading and discussing the Bible,
the struggle which the exploited social classes havehealth clinics, and rural cooperatives. Eventually, the
undertaken against their oppressors (Hewitt 56)Brazilian Church gave birth to the base community
Two elements stand out in this philosophy. The first ismovement. However, in 1964 the Brazilian military
its reliance on Marxist methodology. More accurately,came to power with the goal of demobilizing the
liberation theologians base their understanding of Latinpopular sectors. After it became clear to the
American poverty on dependency theory, aepiscopacy that the regime intended to stay in power
perspective that views poverty and repression in theindefinitely, relations deteriorated. Having made a
Third World as a direct function of the world capitalistsubstantial commitment to the needs of the poor, it
economy dominated by Western Europe and thewould have been difficult for the Church to maintain
United States. Central to the solutions for persistentcredibility had it supported a dictatorship that opposed
underdevelopment offered by many dependencytheir interests.
theorists and liberation theologians is the concept ofFor most of its Latin American existence, the Catholic
class struggle. This provided radical Catholics theChurch in Brazil enjoyed the comfort of being the sole
intellectual justification they needed to join revolutionaryprovider of religious goods and services. This changed
movements during the 1970s. Second, liberationduring the twentieth century. Although the doors for
theologians emphasize praxis, or putting the liberatingProtestantism opened as early as the mid-1800s,
words of the Gospel to work. For this reason, liberationsignificant expansion waited until after 1930. Not only
theologians have been the most fervent advocates ofdid Protestant missionaries challenge the hegemonic
CEBs, giving the base-community movement itsposition of Catholicism, but an indigenous derivative of
reputation for political radicalism. Although both CEBsNorth American
and liberation theology have had a significant qualitativeProtestantism--Pentecostalism--awoke many bishops
impact on Catholic thought and action, theseand clergy to the fact that the region may not have
movements remain quantitatively small (Hewitt 55).been as Catholic as previously thought. If the Church
Their primary influence has been to challengewas to remain a spiritual and moral force in Brazilian
non-liberationist priests and bishops to think moresociety, it needed to match the pastoral efforts put
carefully about the plight of their poorest parishioners.forth by Protestant churches. Having been associated
Many bishops were receptive to this challenge, otherswith the political and economic elite for so long, a
not.credible commitment to the poor meant publicly
In terms of Church-state relations, Catholicdistancing itself from abusive governments.
progressivism manifested itself as opposition toIt would be myopic to say that the need to compete
authoritarian rule. Not only did several episcopacieswith Protestantism was the only factor affecting the
denounce their respective military rulers, but theybishops' decision to oppose military rule. Growing
rejected authoritarianism as a method of rule per se.poverty and repression, reforms promoted at Vatican II
This represented a significant break with the Church'sand Medellín, courageous decisions on the part of
traditional preference for elite-based politics. In the past,individuals, and martyrdom catalyzed the new attitude
whenever the Church felt its interests were somehowtoward military rule. However, religious competition was
threatened by a given government, it would simplya key component in explaining the variation in
throw its support to those elites who opposed theresponses throughout the region. Competition furnished
sitting governors. Beginning in the 1960s, this strategythe wake-up call the Church needed to realize that
changed. Espousing a preferential option for the poorpoverty and repression were serious problems that
implied defending the interests of the popular classesdemanded more than temporary acts of charity.
against dictatorial abuses. The policies adopted byAll this should not imply that bishops in the
military governments during the 1970s had the effectpro-authoritarian cases in Brazil were unconcerned
of distributing income upward, away from the lowerabout poverty and repression (no matter how callous
classes. In order to accomplish this task with a minimaltheir behavior appeared). But the costs of opposing the
amount of social resistance, dictators resorted togovernment (e.g., loss of funding for Church programs
previously unseen levels of repression. Laboror physical repression) outweighed the benefits
movements and other popular-class organizations bore(measured in membership retention). Thus, the
the brunt of this assault. To show solidarity with theepiscopacy had an incentive to maintain friendly
popular sectors, bishops publicly denounced both therelations with an unpopular government in the short
economic policies and repressive tactics associatedterm while hoping for better social conditions in the
with military regimes. In addition, these bishops alsofuture. True, there were some who pleaded with the
attacked the philosophical underpinnings of authoritarianepiscopacy to rethink its association with the ruling elite,
rule as being inherently unjust.but most parishioners just remained quiet, as they
In Brazil, the episcopacy responded to the dictatorshipalways had. In other words, there was no mechanism
(1964-85) by consolidating a number of progressive(or alarm) to inform the bishops they were not acting in
elements that were already developing in severalaccordance with popular desires.
dioceses. Base communities were expanded, though