Missing Code Language
The code words for Protestants coined by Pope John XXIII, “separated brethren,” never appear in this section. Instead concern is expressed for the rapid growth of “free religious movements” and their proselytism. The bishops believe that Latin Americans belong to the Catholic church because “the continent was evangelized during the colonial period.” However, both ecclesiastical and secular historians often question the evangelization carried out by Spanish conquerors who, they say, came for gold, glory, and God, in that order.
The document’s stance toward the “free religious movements” is: study their appeal to the masses, and especially their “lively liturgy, felt sense of brotherhood, and active missionary participation.” Months prior to the Puebla conference, priests questioned leading evangelical preachers and movements in Latin America about their methods, for reports to the bishops.
But a tightening within the Catholic community in Latin America is also indicated. Catholics should be warned, says the document, about other religious forms and “the distortions they carry regarding a living expression of the Christian faith.”
Banned liberation theologians had a greater influence on the conference than was grasped by many conservative bishops. Progressive bishops brought thirty-eight sympathetic theologians who met in an outside think tank while the sessions were in progress. Bishops solicited their suggestions, and sometimes returned with sections composed by the excluded liberation theologians for incorporation into the final document. Exulted Brazilian liberation expert Hugo Assmann: “We were not condemned here as we had expected. Instead this document goes farther than the one put together in Medellín in describing the process of economic cause and effect in Latin America. And finally, they recognized here, by referring to ‘differences of opinion,’ that we are a real force in the church.”
Liberation theologians plan to use the parts of the document with which they agree, and forget the rest. They also hope to get the jump on the popular interpretation of Puebla by releasing a small booklet in each country of Latin America, explaining the conference and its conclusions.
“But,” complained Pierre Primaeau, a French Canadian priest working at CELAM headquarters in Bogotá, Colombia, “these theology of liberation people work with grants from the World Council of Churches. The Catholic Church certainly doesn’t give them funds for their centers in Costa Rica and other places. This is not fair. We are happy to participate in ecumenism, but not this kind.”
Cardinal Sebastiano Baggio, liaison between the Vatican and the Latin bishops, commented cheerfully at the close of the conference, “This came out much better than I had expected.” The document had been unanimously approved by the voting bishops. Some observers believe, however, that that was because everyone saw his own preferences expressed somewhere in the declaration: each could push into his own spiritual waters, while ostensibly remaining faithful to the Pope, his teaching, and the Roman Catholic Church.
WILLIAM CONARD
