Fuller Theological Seminary
CH 504 Modern Church History
Barbara Williams
May 16, 2011
The goal of this paper is to compare and contrast the attitudes of two Archbishops in El Salvador during a time of civil unrest in the late 1970s through the 1980s. Both archbishops had a heart for the gospel, identified with the poor and had a desire for social change. But the two differed in their approach to affect change. I will argue that Archbishop Romero had a radical attitude that put him, other priests and the peasants at risk of harm, and even death. Romero encouraged peasant workers to be rebellious, did not take the advice of the pope, was antagonistic to the government and did not listen to the recommendations of his fellow priests and colleagues. In contrast, his successor Archbishop Rivera Damas, took a more moderate approach, not wanting to have any lives sacrificed and hoping for a more peaceful solution to the crisis. I believe that these contrasting attitudes had varying effects on the community and the lives of the Salvadoran people, with Rivera's path having the more peaceable and lasting outcome.
BACKGROUND
El Salvador is one of the poorest countries in the world with a long history of poverty. Since the time of early explorers, men in authority have dominated and exploited the poor. The old 'way of being the church' was to accept all of this: massive wealth for a few and grinding poverty for all the rest -- was to be understood as God's design. The resultant message was clear: accept your lot, whether good or bad, don't make waves, and you will receive a reward in heaven (Brown). The Civil War in El Salvador had its beginnings with the guerrilla insurgency with support from Christian, union and peasant organizations from 1970 to 1979, reflecting frustration with lack of means to change the status quo.
OSCAR ROMERO
From cooperation to radical change
In the midst of this political and church conflict, Oscar Romero was installed as the new Archbishop of San Salvador on February 22, 1977. Romero was chosen for the position because of his conservative viewpoint. In fact, forty-odd businessmen, government and military leaders, and society ladies whom the Vatican ambassador consulted, all were favorable to the choice of Romero (Brockman). "On February 10, 1977, La Prensa Grafica of San Salvador published a brief interview with the archbishop-to-be, 'We must keep to the center, watchfully, in the traditional way, but seeking justice,' he said, and to his fellow priests he offered his friendship, 'I wish to tell you of the spirit of cooperation that I offer you and that I need from you so that together we can share the honor that Christ gives us of helping him build his church.'"(Brockman) But Romero was under much pressure. Priest Jon Sobrino, wrote of his friend, "To me it is clear that Archbishop Romero was subjected to many pressures. It could not have been otherwise. The government, the oligarchy, the Vatican, and the Salvadoran Bishops Conference all pressured him." (Sobrino)
The growing conflict between the poor on one side and the military-controlled government on the other, along with the machine-gun killing of fellow priest and friend Rutilio Grande in March 1977, brought Romero to a place of transformation (he called it a "process of growth") (Brett,1995). One can see the progression of Romero's thought in his pastoral letters. In his first pastoral letter, on April 10, 1977, Romero wrote that the function of the church was to serve the world, "The church does not exist for itself. Its raison d'àtre is the same as that of Jesus: service to God to save the world." (Romero,1985) In his second pastoral letter on August 6, 1977, he said that the church must carry on the mission of Jesus to the world, because Jesus is in everyone, and "in Jesus' proclamation of the kingdom, his preference for the poor is also evident." (Romero,1985) In his final letter of August 1979, Romero briefly wrote of the Marxist solution for Catholics in El Salvador and hints that violence is an option as a last resort, "Before any violent defense of the common good, or of human rights, can be undertaken, all nonviolent methods must be tried." (Romero, 1985)
Encourages rebellion
In an interview with Prensa Latina on March 7, 1980, Romero not only hinted at rebellion, he encouraged it. "Profound religion leads to political commitment and in a country such as ours where injustice reigns, conflict is inevitable... Christians have no fear of combat; they know how to fight but they prefer to speak the language of peace. Nevertheless, when a dictatorship violates human rights and attacks the common good of the nation, when it becomes unbearable and closes all channels of dialogue, of understanding, of rationality, when this happens the Church speaks of the legitimate right of insurrectional violence." (Pearce)
Antagonizes the government
The Salvadoran constitution severely limited the church in political life. Clerics were forbidden to engage in political advertising in any form. During church worship or religious instruction, criticism could not be made of the laws of the state, of its government, or of individual public officials (Brockman). Despite this restriction and faced with crumbling social order, Romero denounced the injustices. He became highly critical of the rulers and called for those who had yielded to corruption to be punished (Romero, 1985).
"His opposition to the repressive violence came to a climax in his Sunday homily on March 23, 1980. He called firmly upon the troops and the national guardsmen to obey the law of God and therefore not to obey the orders of officers who might instruct them to kill their brothers and sisters: 'In the name of God, then, and in the name of this suffering people whose cries rise daily more loudly to heaven more loudly each day, I implore you, I beg you, I order you in the name of God: Stop the repression.'"(Romero 2010)
Confronts the pope and fellow bishops
In 1979 Pope John Paul II addressed the opening session of a conference in Mexico, and warned that "the church's mission is not political" and that Jesus should not be presented as a revolutionary (McGovern). The pope did not approve of Romero's closeness to liberation theology. In addition, the pope did not approve of Romero's involvement in condemning the military's and the government's actions. "As Romero became more outspoken in defense of the oppressed masses, the conservative bishops and the nuncio flooded Rome with complaints." Eventually, the other Salvadoran bishops had asked that Romero be removed from their diocese (Brett, 1995). Twice Pope John Paul II privately chastised the archbishop (Huntington).
RIVERA DAMAS
Toward the center
Early in his career, Rivera Damas had much in common with his predecessor. He was profoundly affected by Vatican II and was dedicated without reservation to the liberation of the poor and oppressed (Brett, 1995). Like Romero after his transformation, Rivera made enemies with the rich oligarchy of El Salvador. Like Romero, Rivera "realized that an activist clergy was essential if their reforms were to bear fruit." (Brett, 1995). Like Romero, the reforms proposed by Rivera put him at odds with conservative Salvadoran bishops (Brett, 1995). Finally, "Rivera consistently denounced the brutalities of the security forces" and opposed U.S. military aid, just as Romero did (Brett, 1995). Yet, Rivera was not as divisive as his predecessor.
Listened to the government
Rivera felt that he could be more effective as an Archbishop by abandoning the outspoken methods of Romero. He "tried to take a neutral position in the civil war, calling for dialogue and a negotiated solution, while sometimes acting as a mediator between Government forces and the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front." (Brett, 1995). In 1983, he "defined the church's role in El Salvador as a non-partisan intermediary between the government and the opposition forces and as an active promoter of a non-military resolution of conflict."(Staff) "He signed letters that he was not totally in agreement with, but he felt he had to sign them because of his mandate [the unity of the church]. He was trying to be a prophet to two opposed camps at the same time." (Erdozain)
Responsive to fellow priests
Rivera's change in tactics was also influenced by the decrease in the number of priests in El Salvador during the civil conflict. "In 1977, there were only about 330 priests in El Salvador. Between that date and 1982, 10 were murdered along with a deacon and four U.S. churchwomen. About 40 priests were expelled from the country. If the church was to be effective in its option for the poor, it simply could not afford to keep losing priests to assassination, arrest, and exile." (Brett, 1995) He was concerned about the safety of the priests.
Listened to the pope
Whereas Romero sometimes acted contrary to the pope, Rivera was more agreeable. "In August 1982, Pope John Paul II sent a letter to the Salvadoran bishops exhorting them to make reconciliation through dialogue a top priority," (Brett, 2008) and that is exactly what Rivera did. From 1980 onward, "Rivera's primary focus was on the creation of a dialogue between governmental and guerrilla forces." (Brett, 2008) "The pope in his one-day stay in El Salvador made it clear to all that Rivera's policies now had the full support of Rome." (Brett, 2008)
Worked to find a peaceful solution of the civil war
Rivera's greatest contribution to end the strife of Central America was his tireless devotion to finding a peaceful solution to the civil war. Rivera "offered the services of the Church as a mediator and has also supported various political initiatives toward the realization of dialogue." (Staff) The archbishop was "credited by both rebel leaders and government officials with playing a key role in pushing the country toward peace accords in January 1992. He had mediated the first peace talks in 1984 and constantly pressured both sides to choose dialogue over war." (Obituary)
ROMERO'S EFFECT ON THE LIVES OF PEOPLE
The homilies that Romero delivered were not only scripturally-related and provided religious instruction, but "included a reading of every documented case of persons who had been killed, assaulted, tortured, or disappeared by any group on the left or the right...and would conclude with a 'pastoral position'." (Montgomery) Imagine if you were a member of a Romero's congregation, how would you feel if you were asked to rebel against your boss in the field? To lay down your life for your neighbor? To gather in the public square to protest the most recent kidnapping? I might have felt intimidated and pressured into doing something that I didn't want to do because my pastor told me to do it. Not everyone prioritized action over reflection. Not everyone prioritized love for the poor over salvation of souls. Not everyone prioritized restless, pressured activity over divine mystery. The lives of the people in his churches may have been encouraged, but others may have felt coerced by Romero to participate in activity to which they were not called.
In addition, how would it feel to be a under the care of a bishop who did not want special protection for his priests? "'It would be sad,' he remarked in June 1979, 'if in a country where people are being assassinated so horribly, we didn?t count priests among the victims as well. They are the testimony of a church that is incarnated in the problems of the people'." (Peterson)
Finally, how would it feel to be a government or military leader? His homilies and letters angered the rich, the government leaders and the military. One could imagine that challenging the opposition would cause governmental and military authorities to retaliate and result in more violence.
OBJECTIONS
My main argument in this paper is that Archbishop Romero had a radical attitude that put him and others in harm's way. One might argue that to imitate Jesus we have to be radical. Jesus said that we are to give our lives for others and it was Romero, not Rivera, who was obedient to these radical teachings of Christ ("Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends," John 15:13). On the other hand, one must ask if Jesus was a religious zealot who sought radical change with radical violence. I think not. Jesus' message did not focus on political, military or economic issues.
Another person might argue that if you do not fight, then you are tolerating injustice. Therefore, Romero had no other option but to support violence and the war. In an interview in 1979, Romero promoted the idea of a just war, "Christian ethics admits of violence for a just cause. There are even constitutions that admit the right of the people to rebel; the church also admits this right. When there is a tyrannical situation, insufferable to the people, and it has not been possible to change the system by pacific means, then violence is justified on the condition that the evil of the rebellion does not become worse than the evil of the status quo." (Lancefield) On the other hand, I would argue that there is no such thing as a just war.
Finally, I have suggested in this paper, that Rivera chose the "right" path because the violence decreased after his installation. Whether this decrease in violence was due in part to the new archbishop with a new attitude, or to other factors cannot be known. Other factors that came into play during this time were increased US intervention and decreased Marxists forces. In March 1982, two years of terror in El Salvador had eased, and the government allowed for the first free election in many years. In 1984, the Christian Democratic Party won the presidency in the second free and fair presidential election in El Salvador's history (Dillon). Free elections, along with increased military aid from the US, one could argue, was what contributed to the end of the civil war, not the peace-seeking attitude of the Archbishop Rivera.
CONCLUSION
Both Romero and Rivera had a passionate quest for social justice in El Salvador. As a result of his conversion, Romero became radically driven to help the poor, despite the consequences. This attitude cost Romero his life, and put the lives of fellow priests and Catholic peasants in harm's way as well. One wonders if his "prophetic" approach was the best approach for El Salvador at the time. Rivera Damas, in contrast, had his own transformation where the radical priest and ally of Oscar Romero chose a "pragmatic" path after receiving his assignment of Archbishop of El Salvador. He lost the support of his radical, progressive colleagues, but his low-key style was successful in the end. He was able to bridge the gap between oligarchy and poor, between government and peasants. His relentless work toward peace and justice for the poor was rewarded by the peace negotiations in 1992.
WORKS CITED
Brett, Edward T. "Archbishop Arturo Rivera Damas and the Struggle for Social Justice in El Salvador." The Catholic Historical Review (The Catholic University of America Press) 94, no. 4 (October 2008): 717-739.
____. "Arturo Rivera Damas: Another Salvadoran Hero." America, March 1995: 13-16.
Brockman, James R. "Romero A Life." Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2005.
Brown, Robert McAffee. "Liberation Theology". Louisville: Westminster/John Know Press, 1993.
Dillon, Sam. "Durante's Fix." In El Salvador: Central America in the New Cold War, edited by Patrick Lacefield, Louis Menashe, David Mermelstein Marvin E. Gettleman, 180-184. New York: Grove Press, 1986.
Erdozain, Placido. "Archbishop Romero: Martyr of Salvador." Translated by John McFadden and Ruth Warner. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1980.
Haggarty, Richard A. "El Salvador: A Country Study". 1988. http://countrystudies.us/el-salvador/38.htm (accessed May 10, 2011).
Huntington, Deborah. "Between God and Caesar." NACLA Report on the Americas XIX, no. 5 (September/October 1985): 37-45.
Lancefield, Patrick. "Oscar Romero:Archbishop of the Poor." In El Salvador: Central America in the New Cold War, edited by Patrick Lacefield, Louis Menashe, David Mermelstein Marvin E. Gettleman, 131-135. New York: Grove Press, 1986.
McGovern, Arthur F. "Liberation Theology and Its Critics: Toward an Assessment." Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1989.
Montgomery, Tommie Sue. "The Church in the Salvadoran Revolution." Latin American Perspectives (Sage Publications) 10, no. 1 (Winter 1983): 62-87.
Obituary. "Arturo Rivera Damas, 71, dies; Outspoken Salvadoran Bishop." New York Times, November 27, 1994, 66.
Pearce, Jenny. "Promised Land: Peasant Rebellion in Chalatenango El Salvador". London: El Salvador Latin American Bureau, 1986.
Peterson, Anna L. "Martyrdom and the Politics of Religion: Progressive Catholicism in El Salvador's Civil War". Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997.
Romero, Oscar. "Archbishop Oscar Romero: A Shepherd's Diary". Translated by Irene B Hodgson. Cincinnati: St Anthony Messenger Press, 1993.
___. "Homilies". Archbishop Romero Trust. The Romero Trust. 2010. www.romerotrust.org.uk (accessed May 13, 2011).
___. "Voice of the Voiceless: The Four Pastoral Letters and Other Statements". Translated by Michael J. Walsh. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1985.
Sobrino, Jon. "Archbishop Romero: Memories and Reflections". Translated by Robert R. Barr. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1990.
Staff of the CARIN/Central America Research Institute. "The Rebirth of Christian Militancy in El Salvador." In El Salvador: Central America in the New Cold War, edited by Patrick Lacefield, Louis Menashe, David Mermelstein Marvin E. Gettleman, 123-131. New York: Grove Press, 1986.
OTHER WORKS NOT CITED
Beverly, John. "El Salvador." Social Text (Duke University Press) 5 (Spring 1982): 55-72.
Dussel, Enrique. "History and the Theology of Liberation. Translated by John Drury. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1976.
Ferm, Deane William. Third World Liberation Theologies: An Introductory Survey." Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1988.
Kincaid, A. Douglas. "Peasants into Rebels: Community and Class in Rural El Salvador." Comparative Studies in Society and History (1987) 29:466-494.
LeoGrande, William M. "A Splendid Little War: Drawing the Line in El Salvador." International Security (The MIT Press) 6, no. 1 (Summer 1981): 27-52.
LeoGrande, William M. and Carla Anne Robbins. "Oligarchs and Officers: The Crisis in El Salvador." Foreign Affairs (Council on Foreign Relations) 58, no. 5 (Summer 1980): 1084-1103.
Nouwen, Henri J.M. "Gracias! A Latin American Journal." San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1983.
Trujillo, Alfonso Lopez. "Liberation or Revolution? An Examination of the Priest's Role in the Socioeconomic Class Struggle in Latin America". Huntington, Indiana: Our Sunday Visitor, Inc., 1977.
