Number of Views: 58
Smith, Christian. 1991. The Emergence of Liberation Theology. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Rating:
10
Summary:
The Emergence of Liberation Theology attempts to comprehensively understand the social movement ‘Liberation Theology’ or the ‘Liberation Theology Movement’. In reviewing this book, I will summarize the contents, comment on the methodology, and conclude with an examination of the social movements perspective used in the analysis.
Smith begins the book’s Introduction with an account of the murder of Archbishop Oscar Romero. He uses this story to illustrate just how controversial the movement became and the violence that it eventually evoked. At the end of the Introduction, Smith explains the necessity of his work, “One important question, however, has not, as yet, been explored in a focused, systematic manner: How and why did the liberation theology movement emerge and survive when and where it did?” (p. 5, author’s emphasis).
The first chapter, ‘A Brief History of the Liberation Theology Movement’, is a synopsis of the book. In this chapter, Smith lays out the history of the Liberation Theology Movement from its early founders and political/cultural foundations to the time of the books publication (1991). He also gives brief glimpses into the analyses and ultimate conclusions at which he will arrive at the end of the book. Though the origins and history are more fully explored in chapters four through ten (and in reviewing those chapters I will include more details about the movement), the Liberation Movement’s earliest roots can be traced to the Catholic reformations that took place in Latin America during the 1930′s. These changes were in response to the increasing conversions of Latino’s to Protestant denominations. The reformations reached their climax, Smith argues, in the development of ‘Liberation Theology’; the philosophy/ideology being fully articulated for the first time – and named – in Gustavo Gutierrez’s 1971 work A Theology of Liberation.
Numerous organizations played parts in developing the Liberation Theology Movement (e.g. Christians for Socialism, World Council of Churches). Also, the leadership of the social movement (not necessarily the social movement organizations) used existing organizations within the Catholic Church in Latin America (e.g. CELAM, CNBB) to further the causes of the movement. The late 1960s and early 1970s were, for the most part, the halcyon days for the Liberation Theology Movement. Progressive and Liberal Catholic clergy controlled some of the most influential Catholic organizations in Latin America and worked tirelessly to further the Liberation Theology Movement cause; gaining international support from other Catholic organizations, ecumenical groups, and even the concurrent Pope. Toward the end of the 1970s and in the early 1980s, the conservative elements of the Catholic Church, combined with politico-military governments, responded in force to the more liberal/progressive elements of the Liberation Theology Movement. The conservative Catholics wrested power from the liberals in the Catholic-based organizations and the politico-military governments embarked on a mission to purge Liberation Theology from their constituents. Though the 1980s saw a decline in the influence of Liberation Theology Movement leaders and organizations, the movement still exists, though in a slightly different form and with a modified philosophy among most of its membership.
The second chapter, ‘What is Liberation Theology’, examines some of the basic concepts and elements of Liberation Theology. “What, then, is liberation theology? … To begin, liberation theology essentially is an attempt to reconceptualize the Christian faith from the perspective of the poor and oppressed” (p. 27). Smith then extrapolates on the elements of Liberation Theology, including: Revelation and Faith; Scripture and Tradition; God; Creation; Original sin; Jesus Christ; Grace; the Church; the Sacraments; and the Last Things. Instead of quoting the entire chapter, it suffices to say here that Smith illustrates how each of these elements relates to the main concern of Liberation Theology, namely, Christianity from the perspective of the poor and oppressed.
The third chapter, ‘Theoretical Tools for Analysis,’ is extremely valuable. Here, Smith lays out the conceptual tools that he will be using to analyze the Liberation Theology Movement. His analysis is based on the Political Process Model of Doug McAdam and includes three elements for understanding social movements: Political Opportunities, Organizational Strength, and Insurgent Consciousness.
Chapters four through ten are detailed historical analyses of the Liberation Theology movement, each covering a period of time from one important moment in the movement’s history to another. Smith uses these chapters to draw connections between historical events and the three elements of the Political Process Model he is using to analyze the movement.
Chapter four lays out in more detail the historical antecedents to the movement; covering the years 1930-1955. In this chapter, Smith illustrates that Latin America was urbanizing and that Protestant religions were gaining a following in the Western Hemisphere stronghold of Catholicism. He also analyzes the events that led to the eventual creation of CNBB (National Conference of Brazilian Bishops) and CELAM (Latin American Episcopal Council) two of the Catholic organizations that were influential in the creation and dissemination of Liberation Theology.
Chapter five explores the period between 1955 and 1965, or ‘From the Creation of CELAM to Vatican II’. During this time, political opportunity was increasing. Smith uses the example of the revolution in Cuba – a transition to socialism/communism – to illustrate that the time was ripe for political change. Smith also explores the influence of Vatican II on the changing political environment in Latin America. “Vatican II produced a major ‘rethinking [of] the nature of the Church, the world, and the proper relation between the two’.” (p. 94) With the Catholic Church recognizing the changes taking place in the world, both politically and religiously, Smith considers this time period to be especially important in leading up to the creation of Liberation Theology. He also explores how Vatican II served as a training and networking opportunity for the Latin American Catholic Bishops that attended the meeting in Rome; thus functioning to fortify the future organizational base of the Liberation Theology Movement. Smith also discusses the development of BECs (Base Ecclesial Communities) during this time period and foreshadows their future role in the Liberation Theology Movement.
Chapter 6 covers three years, from 1965 to 1968, or the period from Vatican II to Medellín. Smith describes this period as one of power for the progressives of the Catholic Church. Their influence in CELAM and other major Latin American Catholic organizations increased. They were also engaged in an effort to gain support among the Catholic bishops to use the Catholic Church as an influence on the political structure of Latin America. This aim was for the Catholic Church to serve as an advocate of the poor in Latin America. Also, increasing numbers of Catholic clergy were working among the laity and poor in Latin America; this increased the awareness of the poor person’s plight among the Catholic clergy in Latin America. Smith also explores the influence social research and dependency theory had on the developing liberation theology.
Chapter seven explores the conference at Medellín. This conference was extremely important for the progressive Catholic clergy in that it resulted in concluding documents that promoted liberation theology. Smith argues that progressives planned and prepared the conference and also ran the conference in such a fashion that the resulting documents – something of a declaration of purpose and intent for Catholicism in Latin America – favored the progressive agenda; a definitive precursor to liberation theology.
Chapter eight discusses the events between 1968 and 1972, covering the time between two conferences of Latin American Catholic bishops, Medellín and Sucre. Though this time period was when Liberation Theology finally became a corporeal philosophical/theological approach to religion and politics, it was also the beginning of organized opposition to liberation theology. During this period, the number of supporters of liberation theology grew along with the literature expounding the movement and the amount of scholarship exploring the possible avenues of political action. But, this was in contrast to organization on the part of the conservative elements within the church to curtail the endeavors of the progressive clergy.
Chapter nine covers most of the 1970′s (1972-1979), also spanning the time period between two conferences: Sucre to Puebla. At Sucre, the conservative elements of the Catholic Church regained control of CELAM and many of the other Catholic organizations in Latin America; thus reducing the influence of the progressives and the Liberation Theology Movement. Also during this time period, the Liberation Theology Movement began to feel the effects of political oppression. Many Latin American countries underwent revolutions involving military coups that resulted in the quelling of political dissent. Despite all of the setbacks, liberation theology, through some decisive maneuvering and planning, was able to influence the final documents produced at the bishops’ conference at Puebla enough that they could still be interpreted in such a fashion that liberation theologians could take them to support the Liberation Theology Movement.
Chapter ten covers the movement since Puebla, or, essentially, the 1980s. Since Puebla, there has been a gradual decline in the influence of liberation theology. There has also been a marked shift in the aims of the movement; most adherents adopting a pro-democratic stance rather than a pro-socialist stance. Smith ultimately concludes that the movement will continue, though it has been weakened, its number of supporters is diminishing, and the aim of the movement has shifted.
Review:
Methodology
For all of Smith’s historical analysis, there was one element missing: an exploration of the role of lay participants. Undoubtedly, leadership in social movements is important; perhaps of the utmost importance in this particular case. However, for a movement to exist it must have a membership; an element that I felt was, for the most part, ignored in this book.
In chapter seven, ‘Making Medellín’, Smith touches upon the demographics of Latin Americans illustrating the predominant socio-economic status: abject poverty. He uses this data to illustrate the idea of insurgent consciousness or the injustice frame but never cites surveys or diaries or literature examining the views of the average Latin American. Perhaps this is ignored because there is no data available. Even so, it is an element that would lend toward greater understanding of the phenomena under investigation.
Smith also mentions Base Ecclesial Communities (BECs) at several points throughout the book, but he never actually explores what was going on in any of them, a major oversight considering their number and potential influence: “By 1978, only ten years after Medellín there were an estimated 150,000 to 200,000 BECs in Latin America” (p. 20). When he does address the influence of BECs, he seems to relegate their importance to the realm of membership (both maintenance and conversion). He also attributes to the BECs the function of sanctuary for political dissidents (p. 204), but does not explore how they functioned in this fashion.
In the book’s conclusion, Smith argues that the Liberation Theology Movement is not like other grass-roots organizations but rather a revitalization movement (p. 234). Perhaps this distinction is Smith’s justification for ignoring the lay membership of the Liberation Theology Movement (if so, he doesn’t explain why). Regardless of the justification for focusing on the leadership of the movement and not exploring the lives of the lay members of the movement, this is an element of the movement that is not explored in this book. Perhaps a separate work on the lives of lay members in the Liberation Theology Movement is necessary.
Social Movement Model
The Political Processes model seems to offer an accurate framework for understanding the Liberation Theology Movement. In his conclusion, Smith recapitulates the elements of the movement that fit into the framework. The first element of the framework, political opportunity, is attributed to changes in the organization and goals of the Catholic Church, political upheaval in Latin America, and the changing religious make-up of Latin Americans (p. 236). The second element, organizational strength, was also developing at the same time. “Concurrent with the forces and events expanding political opportunity, organizations that would facilitate the liberation theology movement were being created and strengthened” (p. 236). These organizations included the Catholic leadership organizations as well as ecumenical groups and other academic groups that helped support the movement. The last element, the insurgent consciousness, Smith attributes to changes in theology in both Latin America and Europe and the proliferation of radical beliefs among clergy and academics. Ultimately, Smith concludes,
This combination of conditions – a band of Catholic radicals with a driving insurgent consciousness who had access to organizations capable of generating and sustaining a major social movement and who were situated in a political environment of great openness and little opposition – was the mix of key factors that produced the liberation theology movement (p. 237).
The Political Processes framework does help to make sense of the events that went into the creation of the Liberation Theology Movement. However, unlike Morris (1984), Smith makes no attempt to illustrate how other social movement models do not work to explain the creation and ‘success’ of the Liberation Theology Movement. The overlap between the Political Processes and Resource Mobilization models appears to be substantial, but this is not addressed in the book. Perhaps the reader would have been left with a better understanding of the social movement had Smith illustrated why the Political Processes model is the most accurate model for explaining the phenomena of Liberation Theology.
The one element still missing in this analysis is the influence of the non-clergy membership of the Liberation Theology Movement. Though Smith mentions the poverty of the masses in Latin America under the insurgent consciousness, nowhere in his conclusion does he mention the influence of the BECs or their contributions. Why he does not emphasize this element of the Liberation Theology Movement is, obviously, not stated. I think it is worth speculating about it at this point. Perhaps the lack of exploration of the influence of BECs, the laity, and the masses in general is due to their lack of influence in the movement. Or, perhaps the laity and masses were not interested in the movement, explaining the failure of the movement to attain its non-specified goal of socialism.
The proceeding paragraph leads me to a final comment on the book – though this may be a criticism of the Liberation Theology Movement itself and not the book per se. In describing liberation theology, Smith never explicitly states the aims of the movement. He does describe the theology of the movement in chapter two, but was the aim of the movement simply to revamp Catholic theology or was it to enact socio-political change favoring the poor of Latin America? Dismissing both of these possible aims, Smith seems to see the Liberation Movement as successful, but in terms of organizational prowess and not in terms of effectuating social or theological change. I recognize that it is difficult to pinpoint ‘success’ in social movements, nevertheless, a discussion of the aims of the movement as well as the progress toward those aims would have been beneficial.
Conclusion
The organization of the book is superb. The brief history in chapter one gives enough history so as to allow one to understand when Smith introduces the reader to Liberation Theology’s theology in chapter two and then explores the tools he is going to use for analysis in chapter three. Having laid out the basics for the non-expert in Liberation Theology, Smith then delves into a complicated web of events, ideas, organizations and people, using the tools he said he was going to use. The conclusion was brief, perhaps too brief, but still satisfactory. Though I felt he overlooked an important element, the masses or non-clergy participants in Liberation Theology, the book does an excellent job of both introducing one to and analyzing the Liberation Theology Movement.