Cardinal Paulo Evaristo Arns, a Brazilian, was ordained as a Franciscan priest in 1945. He later studied at the Sorbonne in Paris, earning a doctorate in literature, and returned to Brazil in 1952, where he combined teaching at a Franciscan seminary and several universities with a ministry to the poor of Petropolis, Rio de Janiero.
In 1966 Arns was named auxiliary bishop of Sao Paulo, and in 1970 he became archbishop. Under his leadership the Sao Paulo diocese has been at the forefront of the struggle for workers' rights. It has taken the part of the poor against the military government and has encouraged the renewal of church life, particularly in expanding the role of the laity and women religious. These aspects of the church's mission in Sao Paulo have been carried out through the growth and development of base communities.
Cardinal Arns' role as religious leader of Sao Paulo, Brazil's financial and industrial capital, has made his witness especially important and controversial. His work in support of labor unions in numerous strikes, many against foreign corporations, and his advocacy of a better life for the residents of Sao Paulo's many shantytowns have brought him censorship and death threats.
The following interview with Cardinal Arns was conducted this June by Brady Tyson, a professor of international relations at American University in Washington, D.C. The interview is reprinted from IFOR Report, the journal of the International Fellowship of Reconciliation.
Brady Tyson: Dom Paulo, the church in Brazil is already known all over the world for the seriousness with which it is attempting to exercise the "preferential option for the poor" called for at Medellin. What are the major steps that the Brazilian church has taken and is taking to move in this direction?
Cardinal Arns: I would like to answer this question by referring to the church in Sao Paulo. The church that has made this preferential option for the poor and the oppressed is a sign of the kingdom and, as such, is a source of division. It is a church that really evangelizes because it doesn't permit anyone to remain "neutral." Jesus of Nazareth was a sign of contradiction because seeing his acts and hearing his words, people were obliged to choose.
In Sao Paulo we try to do this in a very simple way--through a common project. This project is a "pastoral plan" that is voted on in a citywide assembly. What is decided will be the basis of the life of all our communities for the next three years. The plan is based on pastoral priorities. We have three criteria in choosing these priorities:
• an important human or social problem that causes great suffering for the people;
• the urgent need to find an answer to this problem;
• the possibility of a common action that will catalyze all the tasks and ministries of the church in relation to this great problem.
In this way we choose four priorities for the next three years. All our efforts to evangelize the city will be concentrated in these four areas. Through them the city will clearly see our option for the defense of the poor and their struggle for the right to life, health, housing, and especially work. The city cannot remain neutral when it sees this witness. At this time our priorities are:
• the formation of basic Christian communities;
• the world of work;
• the defense of human rights;
• the periphery of the city, where the great majority of the people live.
Tyson: Dom Paulo, what are the prospects for significant progress in the struggle for liberation of the poor from poverty in Latin America in the next few decades, and what are the major obstacles to this struggle?
Arns: To consider possibilities of liberation, I think we should look first at the obstacles. One of the biggest is the policy of President Reagan in relation to human rights in countries "friendly" to the United States. Through this he is strengthening the neofascist governments in the Third World; he is escalating the arms race; and he is making the Third World ever more dependent on the United States. First World governments have been telling us for years that political repression is necessary to fight against communism. And we try to explain that all of this repression is an open door to communism.
They are leaving themselves with only two alternatives: to let Latin America become more and more poverty stricken, till we are one large "favela" from Central America to the southern tip of Argentina; or genocide, as it is occurring in El Salvador right now.
What possibilities do the poor have in this situation? As you know there is truly an "eruption" of the poor, sociologically and also spiritually throughout Latin America. Never have we seen such vast popular social movements. Just to think of 80,000 to 100,000 basic Christian communities in Brazil alone! Our poor make up 85 per cent of the population of the continent, and they are a people of deep and creative faith. Any hope we have for change is in this people.
Tyson: Do you think the theme of human rights and dignity is still a useful theme after the misuse it suffered at times during recent years?
Arns: I agree that the use that some governments and newspapers have made of "liberal" human rights become more of an ideology to protect their own interests than a movement to protect the rights of all the people. But as we look at all the misery of our world--hunger, disease, war, unemployment, oppression--I think we must stop immediately any intellectual discussion of vocabulary and create a worldwide movement of nations and religions that say to the world: "Basta! That's enough!" Many technicians have told me that the world could overcome hunger in a decade if it wished, but it does not wish to. The first right we must defend is the right to life.
Tyson: Dom Paulo, some people say that there can never be liberation in Latin America without armed struggle. Do you believe this is true, and, if so, does it make the nonviolent movement irrelevant?
Arns: This is a very difficult question to answer because it doesn't depend on wishes or desires, either yours or mine.
In the first place, I would like to say that I agree with Engels that violence is the arm of the rich. If the poor have a knife or a rifle, the rich have bombs and planes and tanks. The real power of a revolution is moral, and if it doesn't have that, the revolution doesn't even exist.
I would also like to say that violence isolates. A true revolution has to unite a country; violence always divides it. The hardliners become even harder in their views and only the moderates give in to one side or the other. I believe in a revolution based on respect, education, nonviolent struggle, and the faith and courage of the oppressed.
But this cannot lead us to forget or avoid a very real problem. I can say with Dom Helder Camara, and I do say it: "I would rather die than to kill another human being." But I cannot and won't say that when the poor and persecuted react to the violence of their oppressors in rural or urban areas: "I'd rather see you all dead than to have seen you defend yourselves with some form of violence."
If Latin America was what I would like it to be, in every city and rural area there would be people training other people in methods of nonviolence. But this is not so. The violence of the strong and powerful is widespread, and the poor are not prepared, as yet, for a united defense of their rights. Little landowners defend their homes that are being burned so that big corporations can take over vast acres of land. If they have no training in resistance to violence, won't they be led to respond with violence? I think they will, and who will throw the first stone to condemn them? Who is so morally superior?
Tysons: Dom Paulo, do you think that the so-called theology of liberation is inherently incompatible with nonviolence, or, as it is called in Brazil, "permanent firmness"?
Arns: I hope I am wrong, but the way in which this question is framed gives me the impression of being negative and prejudiced. It seems to present liberation theology as an instrument or theory of armed revolution. I think that liberation theology has as one of its points that it is necessary to form all the people in a popular movement to face the power of the state; to change the mechanisms of domination; to change the state from being an instrument of service to the privileged to being of service to an exploited majority. This is not simply a political service, but a ministry of charity and justice. Any serious Christians who want to arrive at a situation of charity and justice know that these must also be their means of arriving there.
Tyson: Do you believe that Adolfo Perez Esquivel has helped to make the struggle for liberation and social justice more effective in Latin America? Has he become a symbol of any significance since he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize?
Arns: I would like to start by being very frank about the First World and the symbolism the Nobel Peace Prize has for it. All the First World nations, international organizations, and the church should never have let Argentina arrive at the point it has arrived at today. It saddens me that a church that can offer to be mediator over territories does not (or did not) offer to try to stop the genocide that we have seen. In giving Adolfo the Nobel Prize they are trying to wash their dirty hands and consciences in his witness to justice. It is too little and too late. Adolfo has become a symbol because he has made visible the suffering of his country: the drama of the mothers crying for their sons and husbands who have "disappeared"; and he has made visible our repudiation of military dictatorships--the shame of Latin America.
Tyson: Dom Paulo, a few weeks ago all of Latin America remembered the assassination of Oscar Romero, the Archbishop of San Salvador, on March 24, 1980. What is the meaning of this man's life and death to the church in Latin America?
Arns: For the faithful, Oscar Romero shows us the meaning of the resurrection: His presence is felt everywhere, and we would all say without doubt he lives. He is a martyr of the church of the oppressed, and his death makes every Christian and every bishop re-think the meaning of the church in Latin America today.
In the Bible real change always comes about through the poor, the weak. I think today also we see that the smaller countries of Central America are challenging the larger and richer countries of the South to become alert to the need for change. May God help us to work for change with the wisdom and the love for justice that was always present in the life of Oscar Romero.
Brady Tyson was a professor of international relations at American University in Washington, D.C. when this article appeared.
Got something to say about what you're reading? We value your feedback!