Liberation Theology and Christian Radicalism in Contemporary Latin America

7/27/2019 Liberation Theology and Christian Radicalism in Contemporary Latin America

1/21

Liberation Theology and Christian Radicalism in Contemporary Latin AmericaAuthor(s): Michael DodsonSource: Journal of Latin American Studies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (May, 1979), pp. 203-222Published by: Cambridge University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/156414Accessed: 23/09/2008 00:45

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the

scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform thatpromotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toJournal of

Latin American Studies.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/stable/156414?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/156414?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/21

J. Lat. Amer. Stud. II, I, 203-222 Printed in Great Britain 203oo22-2i6X/79/JLAS-IIIo $02.00 ) I979 CambridgeUniversityPress

Liberation Theology and Christian Radicalismin Contemporary Latin Americaby MICHAEL DODSON

For the past decade and a half, Latin AmericanCatholicismhas been afocalpointof extraordinaryeligious hangeandpoliticalactivism.Althoughthe first visiblesigns of religiousrenewal n the traditionally onservativeLatinAmerican hurchdid not appearuntil the earlyIg6os,1 meredecadelater,in 1972,Christians or Socialismhad held an internationalmeetingofradicalChristians n Santiago,Chile. Today, Latin AmericanbishopsandChristianbase communitieshroughouthe continentaredeeply nvolved nthe struggleto preservehumanrights againstthe encroachmentsf auth-oritarianregimes. One of the most controversialaspectsof the changingLatin Americanchurchhas been the emergence f organizedmovementsofChristian adicalswho soughtto use religionas a base from whichto trans-form society throughpoliticalaction.Sizeablepriestmovementsof the leftappearedn suchcountriesas Argentina,Chile,Colombiaand Peru,wherethey had a notableimpacton nationalpolitics.Actingfrom the premise hatChristian aith must be linkedto socialactionto be meaningful,radicalizedChristiansjoined a dialogue with Marxism,denounced social injustices,provided eadershipo politicallymarginalgroupsand struggled o changethe verynatureof the Latin AmericanCatholicChurch.The rationaleandjustificationf such actionwasprovidedn the collectionof writingsknownas thetheologyof liberation.21 Examples of early attempts to assess the changing Catholic Church in Latin America are:John J. Considine (ed.), Social Revolution in the New Latin America (Notre Dame,Indiana, I965); Considine(ed.), The Religious Dimension in the New Latin America (NotreDame, Indiana, 1966); William V. D'Antonio and Fredrick B. Pike (eds.), Religion,Revolution and Reform: New Forces for Change in Latin America (New York, I964); andFrancois Houtart and Emile Pin, The Church and the Latin American Revolution, trans.GilbertBarth(New York, 1965).2 Major authors and works in the theology of liberation are: Hugo Assman, Teologia desdela praxis de la liberacion (Salamanca, I973), Aldo J. Buntig and C. A. Bertone, Hechos,doctrinassociales y liberacion (Buenos Aires, I973); Enrique Dussel, Caminos de liberacionlatinoamericana Vols. i and in (Buenos Aires, I975); Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology ofLiberation (Maryknoll, N.Y., '973); Enrique J. Laje, S.J., Iglesia y liberacion (BuenosAires, I975); Juan Luis Segundo, Liberacion de la teologia (Buenos Aires, I975).











3/21

204 Michael DodsonThere is now a sizeable literature on religious change in Latin America,3but outside the continent not much critical attention has been given to

liberation theology and the radical Christian politics it justifies. Existingstudies have been interested primarily in the theology of liberation ratherthan in its social analysis or the political action flowing from it.1 Thepresent article looks at liberation theology as a political phenomenon, andattempts to show why it arose in Latin America at this particularjuncture,how it justifies a 'prophetic' political involvement by the Church in termsof the Christian gospel, and what it seeks to accomplish through politics.Within this framework, the specificfoci of analysiswill be: (i) the centralityof dependence and underdevelopment to the theology of liberation; (2)

theuse of a class struggle perspective to explain social conflict and justifypolitical action; (3) the actual exerciseof a political role by radicalChristiansto achieve religious as well as seculargoals. The experienceof the ArgentineMovement of Priests for the Third World, the largest priest movement inLatin America, will be used to provide concrete examples of the pointsdiscussed.Since liberation theology and Christian radicalism are a major responseof Latin American Catholicism to the perception of a development crisiswhich pervaded the region in the early I96os, a brief review of both socio-economic and religious conditions preceding the rise of liberation theologywill be helpful. During World War II and shortly thereafter, the countriesof Latin America enjoyed favorable terms of trade with the Western indus-trial nations. During the war and the period of post-war recovery, the highdemand for minerals and agriculturalgoods led to a high volume of tradeon terms favorable to Latin America. Favorable trade conditions made itpossible for some Latin American countries to initiate industrialization andfor others to accelerate ts tempo. However, these favorableconditions beganto deteriorate after I950, so that a process of independent, self-sustainingeconomic development did not take hold in Latin America. Neither pro-3 Recent major works on religion and social change in Latin America are: Thomas Bruneau,The Political Transformationof the Brazilian Catholic Church(CambridgeUniversityPress,

1974); Emanuel de Kadt, Catholic Radicals in Brazil (Oxford University Press, I970);Gerhard Drekonja, 'Religion and Social Change in Latin America', Latin AmericanResearch Review, Vol. 6 (Spring, I971); Daniel Levine and Alex Wilde, ' The CatholicChurch, "Politics ", and Violence: The Colombian Case', The Review of Politics, Vol.39 (Apr. 1977); Brian Smith, ' Religion and Social Change: Classical Theories and NewFormulations in the Context of Recent Developments in Latin America', Latin AmericanResearch Review, Vol. Io (Summer, 1975); Ivan Vallier, Catholicism, Social Control andModernization n Latin America(EnglewoodCliffs, 1970).4 A very thoughtful and probing exception is: T. Howland Sanks and Brian Smith,'Liberation Ecclesiology: Praxis, Theory, Praxis ', Theological Studies, No. 38 (Mar.1977)-














4/21


5/21

206 Michael Dodson06 Michael Dodson06 Michael Dodson06 Michael Dodsonappeals were making severe inroads among the Catholic faithful. Thechurch's response to this crisis was a commitment to enlarge the numberof clergy and to upgrade the quality of pastoralaction. Foreign priests wereurged to go to Latin America and large numbers of clergy, domestic andforeign alike, were encouraged to take up ministries among the poor.Although the latter took various forms, for simplicity I will refer to it asthe worker-priest experiment. It is within the broad worker-priest sphere ofaction that the church became intimately caught up in the struggle toresolvethe development crisis.The theology of liberation grew most fundamentally out of the church'sdirect involvement with the working poor, both urban and rural. Thisinvolvement began quietly and modestly in the early i96os with the pro-motion of the worker-priest concept in such countries as Argentina, Chileand Uruguay. Aware that the church seemed to be losing contact with themasses, particularlyin the cities, bishops in many dioceses supported a planfor parish priests to take employment in factories and workshops in orderto get closer to working people, understand their needs more intimately, anddevelop a ministry appropriateto them. The case of Argentina is illustrativeof what evolved out of this project. For most worker-priests,direct involve-ment was a profoundly unsettling experience in consciousness-raising.Theyrealized that the church was alienated from the poor and began to see bothreligion and the social order through a Marxist lens. They began to see thechurch as an agent of pacificationand co-optationsince it made little effortto change social conditions or draw attention to the structuralcauses under-lying poverty. For clergy who wished to act on the basis of this new aware-ness, it became necessaryto rethink the priestly vocation, the mission of thechurch, even the very meaning of faith itself.7

Clergy radicalized by direct involvement with the poor required tools forexplaining the social relationshipsthey encountered, and for justifying someform of political action to ameliorate those conditions. Hence, liberationtheology evolved as an amalgam of Marxist social analysis and a reinter-pretation of the prophetic tradition in Christianity. Radical Christiansneeded a theology which called for the liberation of people from the con-crete social conditions of Latin American dependency. Through a Marxistlens, they now saw sharp class inequalities, the concentration of poweramong elites, chronic political instability and a lack of social mobility asintegral aspects of Latin America's uniquely dependent condition. Let usnow look briefly at the theology which proposed to justify Latin American7 Vivid personal accounts of this experience can be found in Jose Maria Diez-Alegria, Yocreo en la esperanza! (Bilbao, 1972); Carlos Mugica, Peronismo y cristianismo (BuenosAires, I973); Jose M. Llorens, S.J., Opci6n fuera de la ley (Mendoza, 1972).

appeals were making severe inroads among the Catholic faithful. Thechurch's response to this crisis was a commitment to enlarge the numberof clergy and to upgrade the quality of pastoralaction. Foreign priests wereurged to go to Latin America and large numbers of clergy, domestic andforeign alike, were encouraged to take up ministries among the poor.Although the latter took various forms, for simplicity I will refer to it asthe worker-priest experiment. It is within the broad worker-priest sphere ofaction that the church became intimately caught up in the struggle toresolvethe development crisis.The theology of liberation grew most fundamentally out of the church'sdirect involvement with the working poor, both urban and rural. Thisinvolvement began quietly and modestly in the early i96os with the pro-motion of the worker-priest concept in such countries as Argentina, Chileand Uruguay. Aware that the church seemed to be losing contact with themasses, particularlyin the cities, bishops in many dioceses supported a planfor parish priests to take employment in factories and workshops in orderto get closer to working people, understand their needs more intimately, anddevelop a ministry appropriateto them. The case of Argentina is illustrativeof what evolved out of this project. For most worker-priests,direct involve-ment was a profoundly unsettling experience in consciousness-raising.Theyrealized that the church was alienated from the poor and began to see bothreligion and the social order through a Marxist lens. They began to see thechurch as an agent of pacificationand co-optationsince it made little effortto change social conditions or draw attention to the structuralcauses under-lying poverty. For clergy who wished to act on the basis of this new aware-ness, it became necessaryto rethink the priestly vocation, the mission of thechurch, even the very meaning of faith itself.7







6/21

Liberation Theology and Christian Radicalism in Latin America 207liberation; then we will examine critically the social analysis and politicalaction strategies which a typical radical priest movement pursued in orderto bring that liberationabout.As we have seen, from the perspective of a worker-priest in the earlyI96os the Latin American social order appeared laden with structuralobstacles to change. Poverty was the inevitable by-product of the socio-economic system, not the result of individual failure. As constituted, thesystem benefited domestic and foreign elites whose interests were not onlyinconsistent with but directly opposed to those of the Latin Americanmasses. Such a perspectivevividly recalled the prophetic vision of an earlierbiblical tradition. Indeed, the prophetic tradition in Judeo-Christianhistoryhad been fashioned precisely to meet a condition of captivity, exploitationand oppression. The question was, how to adapt a pastoral ministry to thedemands for prohetic action in the context of present-dayLatin Americanoppression,i.e. dependency.The obvious answer was to move out of confessional roles and into thepublic arena, where a two-fold action strategy evolved. On the one hand,a prophetic ministry came to mean interpreting the gospel within a frame-work which posited social conflict and exploitation rather than socialharmony and consensus. Radical clergy referred to this as interpreting the'signs of the times.' The priest must analyse the society in which he works,determine where the chain of exploitation begins, and denounce publiclythe social and political relationships which are found to lie at the root ofexploitation. In theological terms this amounted to 'desacrilizing' certainaspects of the social order. Whereas conservative clergy had long beenidentified with the status quo, and liberal clergy sought change throughaccommodation within the existing social system, these radical clergydeveloped a theology which demanded fundamental changes in the systemitself. A major purpose of this article is to examine and assess the socialcriticismofferedby liberationtheologians, both in terms of general categoriesor concepts of analysis, and in their concrete application to the experienceof Argentina.The second aspectof the propheticrole was community leadership.Radicalclergy organized their followers for political action, guided by a vision ofthe Christian promise of redemption which directly linked the temporalsphere with the spiritual. Social change in the present was seen as integralto the long-range spiritual redemption of mankind. Concretely, in LatinAmerica, this implied the demand for the full participation of ordinarypeople in the shaping of their own lives. Profound dependence and passivitymust be replaced by full participation and self-determination in the econ-





7/21

208 Michael Dodson08 Michael Dodson08 Michael Dodson08 Michael Dodsonomic and political spheres. To achieve such a goal, radical priests becamespokesmen for a political program which advocated participatorydemocracyand humanist socialism.8This entire experience of rethinking Latin American social reality canbe expressed in the categories of Christian social thought. The develop-mentalist model fits easily with a dualist theology which posited twosocieties (Christian and non-Christian) and two histories (profane andspiritual). It excused the church from any role in altering the process ofunderdevelopment. For those who wished to have some impact on theprocess, a new model had to be created; the liberation model is a step inthat direction. In rejectingthe developmentalistmodel, it acceptsthe evidenceof a single, interrelated social reality composed of social relations ofdomination and exploitation. In biblical terms, it acceptsthe idea of a singlesalvation history, the objective of which must be liberation when lived outin class societies characterizedby domination and exploitation.9Let us turnnow to a critical discussion of the social analysis upon which that projectedliberationis based.Dependency Analysis in Liberation Theology

For virtually all writers of the theology of liberationgenre, dependency isthe single most important characteristic of the Latin American socio-political order. By far the most common usage one encounters is descrip-tive, the term portrayingwhat is assumed to be the natureof Latin America'seconomic and political condition rather than a more analytical usage as atheory of the region's historical development which requires empiricalverification. Put differently, liberation theology has adopted a dependencyframework of analysis largely on the basis of the intuitive feeling that it'fits' the conditions through which Latin Americans have lived. Liberation-ists have thus employed a subtle but imprecise and still largely untested toolof analysis as though it were a finished and verified product. As representa-tive as any is the formulation of Hugo Assman:The theoryof 'dependency'growsout of the crisis of developmentalistheory.It is not a complementto the latter but rathera total rejectionof it. Under-development s not a preparatorytage precedingcapitalistdevelopment; t is adirect consequenceof such development.It is dependent capitalismwhich is aspecial orm of conditioneddevelopment. nasmuchas dependencys the shaping

8 The political theory of liberationtheology is treated at much greater length in M. Dodson,' Religious Innovation and the Politics of Argentina: A Study of the Movement of Priestsfor the Third World', Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Indiana University, I974. SeeespeciallyChap. 3.9 Gonzalez, ' Del desarrolloa la liberacion , p. 38.

omic and political spheres. To achieve such a goal, radical priests becamespokesmen for a political program which advocated participatorydemocracyand humanist socialism.8This entire experience of rethinking Latin American social reality canbe expressed in the categories of Christian social thought. The develop-mentalist model fits easily with a dualist theology which posited twosocieties (Christian and non-Christian) and two histories (profane andspiritual). It excused the church from any role in altering the process ofunderdevelopment. For those who wished to have some impact on theprocess, a new model had to be created; the liberation model is a step inthat direction. In rejectingthe developmentalistmodel, it acceptsthe evidenceof a single, interrelated social reality composed of social relations ofdomination and exploitation. In biblical terms, it acceptsthe idea of a singlesalvation history, the objective of which must be liberation when lived outin class societies characterizedby domination and exploitation.9Let us turnnow to a critical discussion of the social analysis upon which that projectedliberationis based.Dependency Analysis in Liberation Theology










8/21

Liberation Theology and Christian Radicalism in Latin America 209realityof our entire history,it necessarilyarises as the appropriate cientificallyexplanatoryategoryof analysis.10Assman is both right and wrong in important respects.The perception thatthe Latin American 'developmental' experience is profoundly differentfrom that of the First World is correct,the evidence to supportit overwhelm-ing." His contention that the Latin American experience is tied to that ofthe First World is also accurate.From this perspectivethe assertionthat thetheology of liberation must use the experience of dependency as an essentialpoint of departureseems not only acceptablebut beyond argument. In thisrespect Assman and his fellow theologians are fundamentally right. Theyare wrong, however, in thinking that dependency is a clear-cut instrumentwhich itself does not require sharp, critical analysis. In this sense, Assman'sformulation as quoted above begs important questions about the specificnature and consequencesof dependency.Inasmuch as theories of dependency (for there are many) are refinedversions of Lenin's theory of imperialism, they fit easily into the Marxianframework of analysis adopted by liberation theology. Presented veryschematically, the common thread of these theories is as follows. Thenations of Latin America have had to confront economic and social develop-ment (the passage to modernity?) from a position within an already estab-lished global economic system. This position was historically determined bythe expansion of monopoly capitalism into the Third World in search ofnew outlets for capital investments and accumulation and new sources ofraw materials. This process, which Lenin called imperialism, gatheredmomentum towards the end of the nineteenth century and became fullydeveloped in the early decadesof the twentieth - before the nations of LatinAmerica had begun a process of autonomous economic development. Giventhe comparative strength of the already established capitalist economies, apattern of economic relationships was begun which 'guaranteed capitalflows from the over-capitalized economies to backward countries and10 Hugo Assman, 'El aporte cristianoal proceso de liberaci6n de America Latina ', Contacto,

8, No. 2 (June I971), 14.11 See, for example, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, and Enzo Faletto, Dependenciay desarrolloen America Latina (Mexico, 1969); Andre Gunder Frank, Capitalism and Underdevelop-ment in Latin America (New York, I967); Helio Jaguaribe, et al., La dependenciapolitico-economica de America Latina (Mexico, I970); Pierre Jalee, The Pillage of theThird World (New York, I968); V. I. Lenin, Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism(Moscow, I968); Osvaldo Sunkel and Pedro Paz, El subdesarrollolatinoamericanoy lateoria del desarrollo (Mexico, I970); Theotonio Dos Santos, ' E nuevo caracter de ladependencia', Cuadernos del Centro de Estudios Socio-Economicos, No. io (Santiago,1968); Frank Bonilla and Robert Girling (eds.), Structuresof Dependency (StanfordUniv.,Instituteof Political Studies, mimeo., I973).

L.A.S.-14



L.A.S.-14



L.A.S.-14



L.A.S.-14


9/21

2Io Michael DodsonIo Michael DodsonIo Michael DodsonIo Michael Dodsonassured provision of raw materials in return.' 12 As a consequence, theLatin American economies were incorporated nto an internationaleconomicsystem on a dependent and unequal basis, the control over which lay else-where. The Latin American economies were dependent in the sense thatcapital in all forms was controlled by First World economies, and unequalin the sense that the exchange of raw materials for manufactured goodsbrought far greater financial return to the First World than to LatinAmerica. The exploitative character of this relationship 'could be measuredby the increasing indebtedness of [the Latin American] economies to thecentral economies',13 and by the general failure throughout Latin Americaof a self-sustaining and competitive (as opposed to cooperative and sub-ordinate) industrialization to take place. On the contrary, the role of theperipheraleconomies is to nourish the further development of the capitalistcountries at the expense of their own development. They are 'hooked' on aprocess of development which, from an economic standpoint, entails fallingever further behind the already developed countries. This is the processAndre Gunder Frank has called 'the development of underdevelopment .1Far-reaching social and political consequences accompany this economiccycle. Most importantly, there occursin the dependent countries the growthof a domestic bourgeoisie, an indigenous capitalist class which facilitatesand benefits from the process of imperialism. As allies of the internationalbourgeoisie, they are not affected adversely by the process of underdevelop-ment. On the contrary, they partakeof the profit which that processentails.This class consists of 'the principal wielders of economic resources -agrarian, commercial, industrial or financial',5 which presumably meansbankers, industrialists, large landowners, the so-called export-importelite'and, in some cases, the upper echelons of the armed forces. By virtue oftheir role in a global process of exploitation, these groups cannot but bedefined as 'oppressors'. A residual category encompassing virtually every-one else in society constitutes the oppressed. Liberation thus becomes astruggle to breakout of the cycle of political dependence, perpetualeconomicdebility and social injustice which characterizesLatin America. Liberationis the escape from dependency. In this light, the theology of liberation canbe understoodin its full implications.The attempt to make biblical reflectionand pastoralaction socially and politically liberating implies the engagementof the church in class struggle. Nothing less than the destruction of the12 Cardoso,in Bonilla and Girling, Structuresof Dependency, p. 8.13 Ibid., p. 9.14 Andre Gunder Frank, 'The Development of Underdevelopment', in James D. Cockroftet al., Dependence and Underdevelopment GardenCity, New York, I972), pp. 3-I8.15 See Michael Dodson, ' Religious Innovation and the Politics of Argentina'.

assured provision of raw materials in return.' 12 As a consequence, theLatin American economies were incorporated nto an internationaleconomicsystem on a dependent and unequal basis, the control over which lay else-where. The Latin American economies were dependent in the sense thatcapital in all forms was controlled by First World economies, and unequalin the sense that the exchange of raw materials for manufactured goodsbrought far greater financial return to the First World than to LatinAmerica. The exploitative character of this relationship 'could be measuredby the increasing indebtedness of [the Latin American] economies to thecentral economies',13 and by the general failure throughout Latin Americaof a self-sustaining and competitive (as opposed to cooperative and sub-ordinate) industrialization to take place. On the contrary, the role of theperipheraleconomies is to nourish the further development of the capitalistcountries at the expense of their own development. They are 'hooked' on aprocess of development which, from an economic standpoint, entails fallingever further behind the already developed countries. This is the processAndre Gunder Frank has called 'the development of underdevelopment .1Far-reaching social and political consequences accompany this economiccycle. Most importantly, there occursin the dependent countries the growthof a domestic bourgeoisie, an indigenous capitalist class which facilitatesand benefits from the process of imperialism. As allies of the internationalbourgeoisie, they are not affected adversely by the process of underdevelop-ment. On the contrary, they partakeof the profit which that processentails.This class consists of 'the principal wielders of economic resources -agrarian, commercial, industrial or financial',5 which presumably meansbankers, industrialists, large landowners, the so-called export-importelite'and, in some cases, the upper echelons of the armed forces. By virtue oftheir role in a global process of exploitation, these groups cannot but bedefined as 'oppressors'. A residual category encompassing virtually every-one else in society constitutes the oppressed. Liberation thus becomes astruggle to breakout of the cycle of political dependence, perpetualeconomicdebility and social injustice which characterizesLatin America. Liberationis the escape from dependency. In this light, the theology of liberation canbe understoodin its full implications.The attempt to make biblical reflectionand pastoralaction socially and politically liberating implies the engagementof the church in class struggle. Nothing less than the destruction of the12 Cardoso,in Bonilla and Girling, Structuresof Dependency, p. 8.13 Ibid., p. 9.14 Andre Gunder Frank, 'The Development of Underdevelopment', in James D. Cockroftet al., Dependence and Underdevelopment GardenCity, New York, I972), pp. 3-I8.15 See Michael Dodson, ' Religious Innovation and the Politics of Argentina'.




10/21

Liberation Theology and Christian Radicalism in Latin America 211iberation Theology and Christian Radicalism in Latin America 211iberation Theology and Christian Radicalism in Latin America 211iberation Theology and Christian Radicalism in Latin America 211' national bourgeoisie' and the severing of dependently structuredeconomicties with the First World would seem to be in order!

In criticizing the dependency perspectiveas it has been incorporatedintoliberation theology, this article examines five general issues. The first pointhas been suggested already - many, if not most, theologians of liberationhave overreactedto the awareness of dependency.The unquestioned assump-tion of a single and uniform dependency framework to explain the politicaleconomy of the twenty Latin American nations illustrates this weakness.Since liberation theology is anchored in social analysis, it is accountabletothe standards of social science. In this regard it is inadequate to imaginethat a conceptualization or, at best, a suggestive model of internationaleconomic and political relationships is the same thing as an explanatorytheory of the dynamics of those relationships. Dependency is not an em-pirical theory with explanatory(in the sense of predictive) power at all. Forthat matter, as has been suggested, there is no single theory of dependencyanyway. What exists is a variety of approachesto the study of First World/Third World relationships, each of which seeks to organize analysis aroundthe common themes of capitalist expansion, unequal exchange relationshipsand class conflict. As will be suggested more fully below, within this varietyof approachesdivergent themes are developed and, therefore, the uncriticalacceptanceof a dependency theory is premature on the part of theologiansof liberation.

A related aspect of this simplification of dependency 'theory' is thetendency to treat Latin America as an undifferentiated whole; but, ofcourse, the region is characterizedby great diversity of socio-economicandpolitical conditions. Argentina's social or economic situation can hardly becomparedwith that of Bolivia. The lattercountry seems to correspondmuchmore closely to Lenin's conception of a colonial, or dependent, country thanArgentina, given its heavy reliance on raw material export, its almost totallack of industrialization (not to mention the domestic potential for it) andits highly inegalitarian society. Yet the Movement of Priests for the ThirdWorld has consistently analysed the Argentine situation as if the two coun-tries shared identical problems and those problems had precisely the samecauses. 16

A second criticism concerns the emphasis in liberation theology oneconomic variablesover and above other factors. Consistent with its adoptedMarxian theoretical framework, the theology of liberation stresseseconomic16 Renato Poblete, S.J., 'La teoria de la dependencia: analisis critico', Liberaci6n: dialogosen CELAM, Documento CELAMNo. I6, SecretariadoGeneraldel CELAM(Bogota, 1974),

p. 211.

' national bourgeoisie' and the severing of dependently structuredeconomicties with the First World would seem to be in order!In criticizing the dependency perspectiveas it has been incorporatedintoliberation theology, this article examines five general issues. The first pointhas been suggested already - many, if not most, theologians of liberationhave overreactedto the awareness of dependency.The unquestioned assump-tion of a single and uniform dependency framework to explain the politicaleconomy of the twenty Latin American nations illustrates this weakness.Since liberation theology is anchored in social analysis, it is accountabletothe standards of social science. In this regard it is inadequate to imagine

that a conceptualization or, at best, a suggestive model of internationaleconomic and political relationships is the same thing as an explanatorytheory of the dynamics of those relationships. Dependency is not an em-pirical theory with explanatory(in the sense of predictive) power at all. Forthat matter, as has been suggested, there is no single theory of dependencyanyway. What exists is a variety of approachesto the study of First World/Third World relationships, each of which seeks to organize analysis aroundthe common themes of capitalist expansion, unequal exchange relationshipsand class conflict. As will be suggested more fully below, within this varietyof approachesdivergent themes are developed and, therefore, the uncriticalacceptanceof a dependency theory is premature on the part of theologiansof liberation.

A related aspect of this simplification of dependency 'theory' is thetendency to treat Latin America as an undifferentiated whole; but, ofcourse, the region is characterizedby great diversity of socio-economicandpolitical conditions. Argentina's social or economic situation can hardly becomparedwith that of Bolivia. The lattercountry seems to correspondmuchmore closely to Le

Liberation Theology and Christian Radicalism in Contemporary Latin America

Documents

Transcript of Liberation Theology and Christian Radicalism in Contemporary Latin America