|
Fr
Clodovis Boff, OSM I. Background notes
1. One of the ways of ecumenism is ecumenism of action for an ecumenical encounter based on a theological and doctrinal debate, the way of missionary collaboration among the ministers and the way of prayer, which can be the most effective, also because it is more simple, more within the reach of people, especially the laity. 2. This movement of ecumenism of action has a long history. It started in 1925, based on the idea that life is action. The motto of the movement was: "doctrine separates, action unites". It has left a great mark on the structure of the World Council of Churches. For instance, the programme on racism, women, human rights, ecology, etc. that the World Council of Churches has been carrying out since 1966 is the movement’s contribution to the Council. In the ’60’s, in Latin America it started ISAL (Church and Society in Latin America), which began to speak of the social diakonia of the Church not on the basis of a Church-centred approach but rather of the notion that the Kingdom of God has to be placed in the context of society. In the ’80’s the official ecumenical bodies were founded: CLAI (Latin American Council of Churches) and, in Brazil, CONIC (National Council of Christian Churches), which played a very important role under the dictatorships, denouncing desaparecidos, torture, assassination. Today, they continue to issue joint documents on issues like foreign debt, neoliberalism, unemployment. Their documents have quite a significant impact. 3. Around the ’60’s CEBs (Basic Ecclesial Communities) were born which introduced a new form of ecumenism: ecumenism not for the poor, for their justice and liberation, but ecumenism carried out by them, by the poor themselves, who join forces is order to engage in social struggles. Catholics and Pentecostals campaigned together against the agrarian reform, to regain civil rights under dictatorships. This was possible because hunger is ecumenical, the most ecumenical reality there is; it is neither Catholic nor Protestant. Liberation theology was born with the basic communities, like flesh and bone, it was born ecumenical. Just think, for instance, of Rubem Alves, a Methodist minister who in 1969 published a book entitled "Liberation theology" (which the publisher changed to "Theology of Hope") and shortly thereafter, in 1970, Gustavo Gutierrez, a Catholic Father, wrote the book entitled "Liberation theology". Still today, both Catholics and Protestants continue to develop liberation theology. I myself have written a book — which was published in the Liberation theology series — with an American Baptist minister, Jorge Pixlei (?) on the preferential option for the poor because justice also is not atheist or religious, Catholic or Protestant; justice is for everyone, for human individuals. 4. Since the ’80’s ecumenism of action has been faced with new problems: 1) it is no longer sufficient to say that doctrine separates whereas action unites because today we can see that an action that is not supported by sound doctrine cannot go very far, it is not strong. Action needs to be based on a doctrine. 2) The rise of the new Pentecostal churches, which are more numerous than the established churches that are declining. They present themselves with a much stronger pastoral and missionary dynamism than the established churches. They are the churches of the poor, of the outcasts; they are the expression of the religiosity of the forsaken which reach out to millions of people. II. The New Churches and Social Action Let us begin with the following question: do the new Pentecostal churches serve the poor or do they alienate them? Sociologists have contrasting views. One trend believes they are alienating, because they are religions of evasion; others, instead, say they are useful, helpful. In the beginning, liberation theology was against the new churches, it did not believe in the value of this phenomenon. Recently, however, it has become more cautious, less convinced of its stance; it considers this phenomenon with greater interest and sympathy. The interpretation and thesis that I wish to present here is as follows: the new churches are alienating, they alienate, they do not transform the system at the macro-social level, at the systemic level; however, at the micro-social level, on a small scale, at the community level, they are useful, they are reformist, meliorist. 1. In order to understand their social strength we must always consider the context in which they work, the social groups that they reach out to, namely the outcasts. What is exclusion: extreme deprivation of means for survival, of work. Unemployment is the first form of exclusion, exclusion from the market. Then comes exclusion from civil rights; they are excluded from the official social system, so they are exposed, vulnerable groups that have no social security whatsoever. These are the Pentecostals. Pentecostalism helps the outcasts in their daily struggle for survival. The new churches help them in their fight for survival by strengthening their subjectivity, building up their self-esteem, giving them a sense of dignity. A poor man said to me: what kills is not hunger, it is humiliation, contempt. Pentecostals give them the sense of dignity. They are born again, they are the children of God, they are chosen, saved. And the outcasts lift their heads up and fight to survive. This occurs especially with blacks, who are the most outcast, who are often lumped with the marginalized, drug pushers, thieves, prostitutes, etc., but when they become Pentecostals they say: we are good people, we are worthy people. And they are respected because people look at them and say: he is a decent man, she is a decent woman. This recovered individuality is underpinned by faith, Pentecostal faith. The converts are born again, they are new people, they are not old people like the rest, like modern Catholics. They are new people, they are different, they have experienced a personal revolution. It may seem like an illusion, and perhaps it is, but it does have a social effect. The other important aspect is that they all carry the Holy Spirit, everyone can speak in tongues. It does not matter that it is an illusion; such a conviction gives them the strength to have control over their life. They especially are able to overcome the sense of powerlessness in a society that excludes them. One might object that we are now talking about a psychological, emotional subject, not a social, historical one. But if there is not an individual subject, who walks and talks, how can there be a social and political one? If the individual does not even know how to walk, how can he/she be expected to take part in a parade, an event, a trade union, a peoples’ movement? He/she is crushed, annulled before himself. He must be helped to his feet. So, before we talk of a social subject we need to talk of a human subject. 2. A second aspect is the moralization of private life, family life. In other words, private life is governed by a strict ethics. The context of derelicts, outcasts, is that of alcohol abuse, drugs, sex, violence, the breakdown of social relations. Pentecostalism introduces a strict ethics which, however, has very positive social effects. According to sociologists, for those who live in misery in the favelas of Brazil the popular alternative to the drug culture is Pentecostalism because it challenges the drug culture and recovers substance abusers, especially alcoholics. I once had an excellent catechist in the favelas; her father was an alcoholic and we prayed for him, we went to see him, etc., but we could not get him away from alcohol. During a Pentecostal worship session he converted, he handed himself over to Jesus, he received the Holy Spirit, he spoke in tongues and gave up alcohol. I have lost the catechist, but she has recovered her father. This strict ethics is economical, it leads to parsimony: people no longer spend money on medicine to cure depression, on vain perfumes, on fashion. To the poor this is important, they live better. Furthermore, the converts are very professional and honest; indeed, one often comes across job offers published in the leading Brazilian newspapers that read something like this: "wanted: housekeeper, preferably Pentecostal". In fact, they are hard working, they do not steal, they are honest, they accept the salary they are offered. Moral rigour translates into professional rigour. Moreover, violence is declining. Pentecostals are able to live in the favelas next to drug pedlars, they approach them and even succeed in converting them. They do extraordinary pastoral work in the prisons. There is a group of Pentecostal police officers who do a great job. In the Bangú high security prison in Rio de Janeiro, 75% of the prisoners are Pentecostal converts. Are Pentecostal women, in the context of make exclusivism in which the man is truly masculine, alienated or valued? They actually do not transform the patriarchal system, but they do introduce significant reforms, they improve their own social condition. Here are the results: Pentecostalism helps the woman to achieve greater personal independence vis à vis her husband. This is the theological foundation of their faith. They are convinced that the woman has entrusted herself to Jesus, that she is the servant of Jesus, not of her husband. This is important, it gives her personal autonomy, it gives her an almost modern mentality: the autonomy of the individual who makes choices and says ‘I choose’, even if the husband does not agree, and takes responsibility. Pentecostal faith domesticates the man, encourages him to spend more time at home, to take an interest in his children’s education, to be more faithful to his wife, because rigorous ethics applied to sex has a tremendous effect; adultery is condemned as the devil’s doing, one goes to hell for it. This gives greater stability to the family which is still the existential anchor that helps one to survive in this context of social abandonment. It also domesticates the man because it makes him more civilized, kind, peaceful, condescending; he no longer beats his wife, and this is very important because domestic violence inflicted by the husband on his wife is a daily affair, especially among the outcasts of society, where violence is part of everyday life. If, furthermore, the husband gives up alcohol or drugs, it is almost like heaven. All this makes the family more united, strong, secure and this to the poor is important in order not to sink utterly under social calamity. What is more, women leave the home to go to worship, they partake in the ministries, they are missionaries. On the one hand Pentecostalism brings the husband back home and, on the other, it takes the woman out of the house and into society. 3. The last point is that Pentecostals repair the social fabric. Modern neoliberalist society, with the destructive state of well-being and its extreme competitiveness leads to anomy, degradation, unemployment, violence, the collapse of social relations. Pentecostals recreate relations of primary solidarity, starting from the community; they call themselves brothers and sisters, when someone is unemployed everyone helps him/her to find a job, when sick people visit him/her in hospital, when someone dies people comfort the relatives. They create a rescue network. A Pentecostal never reaches the limit of social abandonment because his/her brothers and sisters are there to help him/her. There is a limit to this, though: they do not address structures, they do not challenge neoliberalism. Society is not to be transformed, it is to be conquered, from a confessional point of view. They say we will have a new Brazil when a Pentecostal President is elected; a man filled with the Holy Spirit, who speaks in tongues, works miracles, etc. We must understand that the outcasts seek immediate results, problems are vital and pressing, they want to solve them here and now, they cannot afford to wait until tomorrow or the day after; if they can solve them today with the blessing of the minister why should they go to a trade union or a political party to vote for a politician who will take action in five or 10 years? One is in deep trouble and problems need to be addressed at once. But Pentecostalism is not just a piankiller, it is a solution that really solves problems at the community, family, personal levels. If at the micro level the new churches are helpful, at the macro-structural level do they or do they not transform the system? Do they contribute to transforming the foundations of social relations? More specifically, let us consider the issue of political choices and parties. A. Pentecostals are apolitical; they are not interested in politics, they are indifferent towards politics as a commitment for social change. The new churches do not make their members, their communities politically aware; in this sense they are truly alienated from the system. Let us try to consider the roots of this non-political attitude: a privatized, individualistic faith. Pentecostals are aware of the great social problems such as unemployment, indebtedness, etc., but they say that with the second advent of Christ every problem will be solved (millenarianism). Violence, war, etc. are signs that precede the advent of Christ. Hence, an apocalyptic messianism, with no political implications. B. This non-political option is revealed by their political and party-political attitude. As regards political parties, Pentecostals present two characteristics: 1) they are corporatists (they only vote for Pentecostal candidates). The ministers indicate the names of the candidates to be voted for. Their political choices are not based on programmes but on names; 2) they view society in terms of Pentecostal Christianity: Brazil, Latin America, the entire world must be transformed into a great Pentecostal system. Just an example: at the last political elections held in Brazil in 1998, the "Universal Church of the Kingdom of God", which is only 20 years old, got 14 federal delegates of various parties, all right-wing, elected. With respect to the centre the Pentecostal policy is right wing. This bloc of politicians also defends corporative interests in Parliament. There are five main corporative interests: freedom of religion and worship, presence in the media, religious education in schools, freedom of mission among the indios, against abortion and homosexuality. That also explains why they are right-wing: if you want to obtain favours from the ruler you have to be his ally, hence an ally of the party in power, and of those who dominate and can grant them these favours happen to belong to the right wing. C. There are cracks in this basic conservative political attitude. Pentecostals appear as a homogenous bloc, without divisions, but there is actually a leftist minority among them. For instance, in the state of Rio de Janeiro the governor belongs to the left wing, the deputy governor is a black Pentecostal from the favelas, Benedita da Silva, also left-wing. There is Caio Prado Junior, the Pentecostal minister, who has an "esperança" factory for street children, he too is leftist. There is the great "Viva Rio" movement against violence and kidnapping in Rio de Janeiro, to which many Pentecostals belong. There are basic groups that open people’s eyes to social problems: many Pentecostals have joined the movement of the "landless", which is the largest Brazilian social movement. The police strike in Belo Horizonte was organized by Pentecostals. During a recent land invasion in Brasilia, everyone was Pentecostal. Pressing needs force them to take a stance, to open up. We have to take advantage of this. The conclusion is that in Pentecostalism there is a prophetic-political potential which is that of the Bible. If one can prove to them that the Bible talks about the struggle for justice, they will become the most revolutionary of all revolutionaries because such is the word of God. A chief of police complained to me about the fact that Pentecostals are too fanatical and he said that instead of abiding by the law they say "it is written in the Bible": God has created the earth for everyone so we must occupy the earth. Observe that for ecumenical dialogue if one refers to the Bible methodically progress can be made. III. Ecumenism of Action and The "New Churches": What Can We Do? How can we approach Pentecostals? It is hard because it is not just the doctrine that separates us but also social action. Pentecostals generally criticize us because we Catholics are very politically-oriented and forget about evangelization; we Catholics criticize Pentecostals because they are only concerned about religion and do not engage in politics. On the political plane too we are opposed. How can we overcome these differences? I would like to read to you what the basic communities wrote at the last inter-ecclesial meeting that I attended. We had to see how to engage in ecumenism with the Pentecostals starting from social action. Here is what they wrote: "We have to overcome some biases towards the members of Pentecostal Churches and, in the Catholic Church itself, towards Charismatic Renewal. In order to begin a dialogue with our Pentecostal brothers and sisters it would be best to start from daily coexistence and concrete actions and struggles in favour of the people, rooted in the Bible. These actions are paving the way for a new ecumenical dialogue and practical cooperation. The simple fact that brothers and sisters of Pentecostal churches are present is a sign that the Spirit of God wants us to live in communion". So it is possible to come together as long as everything we do is based on the Bible. I wonder whether these minorities might serve as a bridge for a dialogue with the majority of Pentecostals. I will take this one step further: could not Charismatics be a front for dialogue with Pentecostals, since they have a liturgical and spiritual profile that is very close to that of Pentecostals. I think this is a viable solution. We have to think of a new model of action that no longer presents the heavy, rigid, Marxist features of the past. It has to be a militant model that is more charismatic, more spiritual, more integrated, more flexible. This type of action would not only be more appreciated by the Pentecostals but also more biblical, more Christian, more spiritual. It may be that in this way dynamic dialogue and ecumenical growth can be begun.
|