SANTO DOMINGO, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC - Rigoberta Menchu, who was named a Nobel laureate during the October 12-28 meeting of the Latin American bishops, was not present in person in Santo Domingo. But present she was nonetheless in the hearts of many, representing clearly the strong voices of those on the margins who have done so much to re-create the Latin American church and who have enabled the church to enflesh a "preferential option for the poor."
The opulent setting of the Fourth General Conference of Latin American Bishops (CELAM IV) could not have been farther from the reality of Rigoberta's indigenous roots--it could not have been farther from the reality of most base communities more often found in barrios or favelas. But the strength of Rigoberta's witness captured the attention of those gathered in the Dominican Republic and sharpened hopes that the bishops would again speak prophetic words about the commitment of the church to the most marginal of the continent, including indigenous people and Afro-Americans.
Occasionally an opportunity presents itself to witness the lumbering machinations of a ponderous institution in operation, to glimpse the contrasts more clearly--the grace and sin, the dangers and opportunities, the worldly power and the power of God. Such was the case at the bishops' meeting, where the Latin American church encountered the Church of Rome--and maneuvered around a dance floor upon which were laid out the hopes and struggles for justice of an impoverished and faithful people who have poured out their life's blood in pursuit of the reign of God. "Will the church," they asked, "continue to have relevance in our lives when, after 500 years of evangelization, we continue to suffer in a reality of injustice and dehumanization?"
The answer may well be yes and no. Would the bishops at Santo Domingo, for example, modify or retract the preferential option for the poor articulated in 1979 at Puebla? In statement after statement, Pope John Paul II and the bishops reaffirmed the preferential option, stating that the vision of Puebla and Medellin would still be operative in the Latin American church after Santo Domingo, that this option for the poor is rooted in the gospel and therefore not negotiable. However, they offered much less clarity on how an option for the poor would be implemented, how the church would engage in "human promotion."
Questions about the meaning of the "economics of solidarity" and of hemispheric "integration," both repeatedly emphasized by the pope, were not answered. Nor was much said about the relationship of these concepts to free market, neoliberal economic policies that deliberately exclude millions of people throughout Latin America.
In fact, references to the devastating burden of the external debt, the impact of structural adjustments, and neoliberalism were largely absent, or at best ambiguous and pallid, in the concluding document sent to Rome for approval. It remains to be seen whether the economics of solidarity suggests any serious critique of neoliberalism, and whether integration suggests anything beyond collective positioning for participation in a U.S.-dominated American trading bloc.
TESTIMONY TO the continued vitality of the church of the poor was noticeably present in Santo Domingo, often in striking contrast to the setting and procedure inside the conference. One example was given by the members of a base community gathered for dialogue with Colombian Bishop Dario Castrillon, former president of CELAM, on a Sunday morning during the conference. This group articulated well the significance of the bishops' meeting for their communities.
Simply put, they wanted to know what the church would do about the option for the poor and about base communities like their own. They underscored the critically important role of women, youth, and lay people in church and society in Latin America. They begged the bishops to have more contact with the people.
"We need to seek solutions together," they said. "People from poor communities need opportunities to talk with the church about the poverty in which they live." Solidarity without attention to injustice, they insisted, is worthless; emotion for the poor is empty if one continues to live far from the poor in safety and security; words without content and without action are meaningless.
Vatican and episcopal words of support for ecclesial base communities were plentiful prior to and at the CELAM meeting. But if the dialogue that Sunday morning with Bishop Castrillon is any measure, the response of too many hierarchs seems out of touch with the painful reality of their peoples' lives. He urged the community to work harder, to get moving earlier in the morning, to find their niche in the global market through, for example, coffee and tourism--to pull themselves up by their bootstraps!
Other Latin American bishops who have given their lives to the poor (and there are many), who accompany them in the daily struggle for survival (and who themselves seemed out of place in Santo Domingo's "five-star" hotels), do understand better the unjust systems in which their people struggle.
An additional and very real concern of many base Christian communities is that they will soon be "brought under control" by Rome and that the life force of their integration into the lives of ordinary lay people will be lost. The pope, in his opening address, said, "Basic Christian communities...must be stamped with a clear ecclesial identity and find in the Eucharist, presided over by a priest, the center of their life and communion among their members, in close union with their pastors and full harmony with the church's magisterium."
IN THE FIRST days of the conference it became evident that significant differences exist among the bishops regarding the appropriate stance of the church vis-a-vis the atrocities of the past 500 years. Some observers (and some bishops) would say that the very ability of the Latin American bishops to speak prophetic words about justice in the future rested on their ability to own the church's participation in the grievous sin associated with the conquest.
Several national conferences of bishops throughout the Americas, including the Brazilian and Guatemalan conferences, have expressed sorrow for the church's complicity in abuses against indigenous people and Afro-Americans, but the pope consistently emphasized the positive role of the church. "The Catholic Church," he said in his opening address, "has been a tireless defender of the Indians, a protector of the values present in their cultures, and a promoter of humane treatment."
Some bishops at the CELAM meeting called for a public penitential event in a symbolically important location that would ritualize the church's acknowledgment of, and sorrow for, sins against indigenous and African peoples, a plea for forgiveness, and a commitment to rectify ongoing injustice. Others objected strenuously to such an admission of guilt, believing that the violations attributed to the colonial period were exaggerated, that such a gesture could be manipulated, or that the role of the church in the Americas has always been largely positive.
After heated debate, a service of repentance did take place--privately in the chapel of the seminary where the bishops were meeting, well out of the public eye. The homilist, Spanish Cardinal Angel Suquia, emphasized reconciliation, mutual pardon for offenses, and ecclesial communion--all laudable, but hardly a plea for forgiveness. Despite the efforts of particular episcopacies, a historic opportunity for reconciliation may well have been lost.
THE HEAVY HAND of the Vatican was evident throughout the meeting. For example, the pope's proposal in his opening address for an all-American synod that would bring together North American and Latin American bishops evoked much concern. Was it intended to signal a Vatican desire to reduce the status and visibility of the Latin American Bishops' Conference, which articulated such prophetic insight at Medellin and Puebla? Participation of U.S. and Canadian prelates would drastically alter the character of any future gathering of Latin American bishops.
The work of the 30 thematic commissions during the meeting produced some excellent material, particularly regarding indigenous people and Afro-Americans, ecology, women, and ecumenism. However, the document into which they were placed began with abstract theological ideas, in an explicit rejection of the experientially rooted theological process characteristic of the Latin American church.
The final document of the conference will not be published officially until the pope has approved it, probably in several months. Only time and reflection in the light of the Latin American reality will determine its ultimate significance.
Internally it appears that the Santo Domingo meeting marked a high point in the centralizing efforts of this papacy. Yet the valuable contributions of the preparatory process and the commissions that met during the conference will nevertheless impact the future of the Latin American church. There is hope, in the balance, that the bishops' gathering will also thrust the Latin American church even more deeply into the world on the side of the most oppressed.
Marie Dennis attended the Santo Domingo conference as the Maryknoll Society's associate for Latin America and the national chair of Pax Christi USA.
Got something to say about what you're reading? We value your feedback!