In 1968, educator Paulo Freire published his seminal work, Pedagogy of the Oppressed. In this book, he is critical of any society that complacently sits back and tolerates systemic poverty in the context of great wealth and power. Instead, he advocates for solidarity with the oppressed. This means that people with wealth and power should lay aside their wealth and power and stand (silently) with the oppressed. The oppressed must think and speak for themselves. If the powerful attempt to speak on behalf of the oppressed in any society, they once more suppress their freedom. As he articulates this, “To glorify democracy and to silence the people is a farce; to discourse on humanism and to negate people is a lie.” Freire argues that the poor and the powerless must be trusted to think and speak on their own behalf. In another place he asserts, “No pedagogy which is truly liberating can remain distant from the oppressed by treating them as unfortunates and by presenting for their emulation models from among the oppressors. The oppressed must be their own example in the struggle for their redemption." Thus, his message is that powerful must stand with and beside, not above or on behalf of the poor and oppressed. Solidarity is the pedagogy of the oppressed.
In 1971, Peruvian Catholic Priest and theologian Gustavo Gutiérrez published his seminal work, A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation. This book is commonly thought to be the formal beginning of Latin American Liberation Theology, inspiring a theological way of thinking and being framed by a "preferential option for the poor" (as Gutiérrez expresses this). Here is his definition of the preferential option for the poor, from a 2003 interview:
“Yes, I do believe that the option for the poor has become part of the Catholic social teaching. The phrase comes from the experience of the Latin American church. The precise term was born sometime between the Latin American bishops’ conferences in Medellín (1968) and in Puebla (1979). In Medellín, the three words (option, preference, poor) are all present, but it was only in the years immediately following Medellín that we brought these words into a complete phrase. It would be accurate to say that the term “preferential option for the poor” comes from the Latin American church, but the content, the underlying intuition, is entirely biblical. Liberation theology tries to deepen our understanding of this core biblical conviction.
The preferential option for the poor has gradually become a central tenet of the church’s teaching. Perhaps we can briefly explain the meaning of each term:
• The term poverty refers to the real poor. This is not a preferential option for the spiritually poor. After all, such an option would be very easy, if for no other reason that there are so few of them! The spiritually poor are the saints! The poverty to which the option refers is material poverty. Material poverty means premature and unjust death. The poor person is someone who is treated as a non-person, someone who is considered insignificant from an economic, political and cultural point of view. The poor count as statistics; they are the nameless. But even though the poor remain insignificant within society, they are never insignificant before God.
• Some people feel, wrongly I believe, that the word preferential waters down or softens the option for the poor, but this is not true. God’s love has two dimensions, the universal and the particular; and while there is a tension between the two, there is no contradiction. God’s love excludes no one. Nevertheless, God demonstrates a special predilection toward those who have been excluded from the banquet of life. The word preference recalls the other dimension of the gratuitous love of God—the universality.
• In some ways, option is perhaps the weakest word in the sentence. In English, the word merely connotes a choice between two things. In Spanish, however, it evokes the sense of commitment. The option for the poor is not optional, but is incumbent upon every Christian. It is not something that a Christian can either take or leave. As understood by Medellín, the option for the poor is twofold: it involves standing in solidarity with the poor, but it also entails a stance against inhumane poverty.
The preferential option for the poor is ultimately a question of friendship. Without friendship, an option for the poor can easily become commitment to an abstraction (to a social class, a race, a culture, an idea). Aristotle emphasized the important place of friendship for the moral life, but we also find this clearly stated in John’s Gospel. Christ says, “I do not call you servants, but friends.” As Christians, we are called to reproduce this quality of friendship in our relationships with others. When we become friends with the poor, their presence leaves an indelible imprint on our lives, and we are much more likely to remain committed.” (Daniel Hartnett, “Remembering the Poor: An Interview with Gustavo Gutiérrez,” America: The National Catholic Review, February 3, 2003: http://americamagazine.org/issue/420/article/remembering-poor-interview-gustavo-gutirrez [accessed August 15, 2013].)
One of the great protagonists of Liberation theology was the Archbishop of El Salvador in the late 1970's, Oscar Romero. He stood with the people of El Salvador at a time of great oppression and violence. He paid for his preferential option for the poor with his life. Romero's assassination/martyrdom has inspired millions of people. The selection of Pope Francis from Argentina (who chooses to live more simply and commonly than his power and privilege allows) shows that the inspiration of such amazing faith and bravery as seen in the life and death of Archbishop Romero has permeated the Catholic imagination. Liberation Theology has come a long way.
Here is the beginning of a documentary about Archbishop Romero's life and his stance against the extreme injustice in El Salvador. (The entire documentary is on instant play on Netflicks right now.):
No comments:
Post a Comment