Nearly two years into the Nicara-
guan revolutionary process, the
Church continues to be an arena of
conflict between the country’s so-
cial forces. While most sectors, in-
cluding the Church, were united in
the struggle against Somoza, the
Church hierarchy has become less
cooperative in the face of the San-
dinista government’s clear commit-
ment to true social revolution.
Last October, the bishops laid
down an ultimatum to the three
priests with government posts, at-
tempting to force them to choose
between the Church and politics.
Expulsion from the priesthood was
the penalty for the latter. The ultima-
tum was part of a strategy aimed at
thwarting the power of the progres-
sive Church. The hierarchy’s efforts
to maintain the traditional power
structure by bringing grassroots
Christian organizations into line and
challenging radical clergy, throws in-
to relief the polarity of class interests
encompassed by the Church.
A predominantly Catholic and de-
vout people, the Nicaraguans’ fight
against tyranny took sustenance
from their faith. This incorporation of
faith into the liberation struggle must
be considered in light of the 1968
Bishops’ Conference in Medellin
which denounced the unjust distri-
bution of wealth and victimization of
the masses. The bishops called for a
society where the poor were not ob-
jects but agents of history, a radical
transformation which had as its cor-
ollary an alternative interpretation of
Christian love. The virtues of stoi-
cism, benign suffering and ability to
forgive all were replaced by those of
an active defense of the poor, a love
expressed by commitment to and
solidarity with the cause of the poor.
Although the bishops’ appeal was
not accompanied by strategy for ac-
tion against the ruling class, for
many believers it sanctioned the
struggle for change. Eleven years
later, at the Puebla Conference of
Bishops, the principle was rein-
forced by the official proclamation
of the Church’s “preferential option
for the poor.” The concept of the
kingdom of God, hitherto reserved
for an afterlife where the poor would
be rewarded and the rich punished,
shifted to life on earth where, by
means of structural changes, jus-
tice and equality for all would be
safeguarded.
The impetus provided by this op-
tion for the poor manifested itself
throughout Latin America. Grass-
roots Christian organizations sprang
up in poor neighborhoods and peas-
ant lay preachers were appointed in
the countryside. Gospel teachings
were interpreted in light of the daily
experiences of an oppressed peo-
ple. Social issues, such as the need
for health facilities and education,
became their focus.
Grassroots Activism
In Nicaragua, this radicalization
of Christian practice was an essen-
tial prelude to the struggle against
Somoza and the National Guard.
From the late 1960s, Christians be-
came a dynamic force within the lib-
eration movement, both ideological-
ly and organizationally. They joined
the other mass organizations-
street defense committees, peas-
0,
0,
0, Co
MaylJune 1981 45update * update . update * update
ant, womens’ and student bodies– as mainstays of the guerrilla move- ment.
In the early 1970s, a group of Christian students set up a com- munity in a poor Managua neighbor-
hood, Riguero, based upon the twin
principles of socialism and Chris- tianity. The group’s integration into the community and commitment to its problems generated an ad- vanced degree of politicization, manifested in hunger strikes and church occupations demanding the release of political prisoners. Luis Carrion and other members of the
group later became leading FSLN
representatives. In Esteli, known for
its radical diocese, clergy and nuns
organized clandestine street com- mittees, supplying arms and com- batants, as well as giving refuge,
passing messages and distributing
food during the insurrection. In the countryside, peasants were also organized into Christian communities, served by lay minis- ters drawn from their ranks. The
peasants’ political consciousness
was nurtured by the emphasis on a social interpretation of the gospel as
well as the lay priests’ participation
in the peasant organization that was later to become the Rural Workers
Association (ATC). This conscious-
ness proved a prerequisite for coop-
eration with the Frente during the
guerrillas’ entrenchment in the
countryside.
Cleagy Join Armed Struggle
Many priests became radicalized
by direct engagement between faith
and social conditions. In 1977, priests and nuns, mainly of the Ca-
puchin order, wrote to Somoza de-
nouncing the disappearance and
murder of 350 peasants in the Atlan-
tic region. They also wrote to Presi-
dent Carter asking him to cease mili-
tary aid to the Somoza regime, a
measure which helped isolate the
dictator. Monsignor Obando y
Bravo, Archbishop of Managua and
a figure associated with the forces
4′
seeking an alternative to the dicta- torship, acted as a mediator be- tween the Frente and Somoza.
Members of the clergy joined the Frente, including internationally ac- claimed poet, Ernesto Cardenal, now Minister of Culture. Others took up arms in defense of the people. One of the few who sur- vived is the Spaniard, Antono San- jines who fought alongside Gaspar Garcia Laviana, a priest also of Spanish origin who was killed in combat. Of the discrepancy be- tween the armed struggle and Chris- tian doctrine, Sanjines says: “As a Christian and a priest, I never had any doubts about joining the Frente Sandinista and taking up arms in defense of the poor.” For many, any remaining qualms about armed struggle were resolved by the bombings of September 1978. All attempts at mediation with Somoza in hopes of mitigating the suffering had failed. In preparation for the shelling of major cities, civil- ians were threatened with arrest if
they appeared on the street. Houses, full of men, women and children were easy targets for Somoza’s flying death squads. The bishops of Nicaragua issued
a document in early June 1979 con-
doning the armed struggle, based on what they called a “just war theory.” First, war may be declared by an authority which is truly repre- sentative of the majority and not just of an elite group. Second, the lead- ers must have just intentions or
goals leading to a more humane
society, and not seek power to their own ends. Third, violence may only be used as a last resort when non- violent means have failed. The bish- ops emphasized that violence is in- stitutionalized in the third world and in using violence to do away with vio- lence, the good outweighed the bad. Although of marked significance to a religious people, the late appear- ance of the document, at the begin- ning of the final insurrection, indi- cated the hierarchy’s begrudging support for the liberation movement.
Bishops Join Bourgeoisie
In the absence of a bishop of the stature of the late Archbishop Romero of El Salvador, the Nicara- guan Church hierarchy has, since the victory, adopted an at best cautious and at worst hostile at- titude to the revolution. In November
1979 they issued a document pro- claiming their “Christian commit- ment to the new Nicaragua,” ap-
plauding measures leading to better living standards for the destitute and linking the gospel to the reigning spirit of solidarity with the poor. They have, however, recently become in- creasingly critical of the Frente’s socialist program. For many traditional clergy, the
desire to eradicate poverty is based in paternalism and charity, senti-
ments incompatible with the mass
mobilization for structural change and self-determination taking place in Nicaragua. The replacement of
mass subjection to autocratic rule
by mobilization around a materialist idea transcending personalities and rituals is, by its very nature, threat- ening to a traditionalist church. And the potency of the Christian cham- pioning of the poor, as a rallying cry for grassroots Christians, reinforces
the hierarchy’s fear that control is slipping out of their hands.
Opposition to the Frente’s politi- cal program has taken the form of public criticism by the hierarchy,
along with some sectors of the bou r- geoisie, of a new educational scheme. Called Escuela Campo (work study), the scheme is de-
signed to introduce school children to productive work in industry or agriculture for short periods. As well as acquainting schoolgoers with working conditions, the plan rein- forces the contact between workers
and students established during the
1980 literacy campaign. The project has been denounced by the bour- geois opposition as a subterfuge to undermine the nuclear family by
“forcing” (in spite of the declared voluntary character of the scheme)
NACLA Reportupdate * update . update * update
children to spend part of their school
holidays in government sponsored
activities. Traditional elements
within the Church share the fear that
this work study program augurs the
transfer of parental authority to the
state.
That the Church hierarchy, with
CELAM (Conference of Latin Ameri-
can Bishops) as its ideologue,
should find a community of interests
with the bourgeois “democratic”
opposition is hardly surprising. The
Latin American Church’s predomi-
nant identification with concentra-
tions of wealth is legion, and Nicara-
gua has been no exception. Since a
popular church has become an or-
ganized force in the continent,
CELAM has become the reaction-
ary counterbalance. By various
means, the bishops have expressed
their discontent about Nicaragua’s
development. They prevented
Obando y Bravo from speaking at
Puebla in March 1979 to raise sup-
port for his harrowed country, and
after the Sandinista victory, devised
a plan of “aid” to Nicaragua, includ-
ing an exhortation to pray for its sal-
vation from totalitarianism.
Recently, CELAM, acting through
the Nicaraguan bishops, has taken
more serious measures. Starting
with the dismissal of Father Ortiz of
Leon for alleged neglect of his flock,
a campaign has been unleashed to
remove progressive clergy from
their posts. Priests and nuns in San
Judas, a Managua neighborhood
noted for its radical Christian com-
munity, were given notice by the
bishops of their transferral to other
countries. After community pro-
tests, the hierarchy backed down, at
least in part. The nuns were rein-
stated while the priests must leave
when their assignments are com-
pleted.
Such tactics on the part of the
conservative bishops are clearly
aimed at disarming the grassroots
communities. Monsignor Obando y
Bravo, in a recently published article
in the conservative Managua daily,
La Prensa, accuses them of willfully
MaylJune 1981
criticizing the hierarchy while “hyp-
ocritically” appealing for church uni-
ty. In other words, obey or face
estrangement.
The hierarchy’s efforts to assert
authority culminated in the ultima-
tum issued to the three priests in
government – Ernesto Cardenal,
Minister of Culture; Miguel d’Escoto,
Foreign Minister; and Edgar Par-
rales, Minister of Social Welfare-to
choose between Church and poli-
tics. But once again, the hierarchy
had to back down, failing to enforce
the conditions of the ultimatum. The
deadline, December 31, 1980, went
by with no response by either side.
At a meeting at the end of January,
the priests and bishops agreed to re-
fer the matter to the Vatican which is
expected to approve the priests’
continued participation in govern-
ment. This capitulation to the pro-
gressive forces within the Church is
an implicit recognition of the support
which they command in the popula-
tion.
Nicaraguan Christianity
For members of grassroots com-
munities who have both participated
in the insurrection and in the pro-
cess of reconstruction there is no
doubt as to the compatibility of
Christianity and Sandinismo. They
have demonstrated that belief in this
union overrides their allegiance to a
traditional church. But the threat of a
divided church is a dangerous one.
While the revolution seeks a united
church carrying out its mission in a
spirit of communion with the political
and ideological climate, a divided
church can only serve imperialist in-
terests as the hierarchy dissociates
itself from its base, legitimizing the
opposition’s counterrevolutionary
stand.
The Frente’s statement on reli-
gion (October 7, 1980) reflects the
unique breadth of the Nicaraguan
revolution which embraces the
Church as an integral part of the
new society. In it, the vital contribu-
lion of Christians to the fight for liber-
ation and the construction of a revo-
lutionary society is acknowledged.
The Church’s requirements-as
laid out at Puebla and reiterated by
Nicaraguan bishops in their post-
victory document-for freedom to
carry out their evangelical mission,
to practice and teach their faith and
its moral imperatives, have been
guaranteed. “Our experience
shows that when convinced Chris-
tians are able to respond to the
needs of the people and of history,
their beliefs lead them to revolution-
ary militancy,” the Frente an-
nounced, spelling out the common
ground shared by Christianity and
Marxism. The statement marks a
turning point for both Christians and
Marxists throughout the world.
This challenge to the Church is an
historic and transcendent one. As a
spiritual and moral guide, it leaves
no grounds for vacillation. The un-
reserved commitment and energet-
ic activity of its grassroots commun-
ities is evidence that the new Nica-
ragua provides fertile terrain for
Christian values. But if the Church
hierarchy spurns its popular base,
obeying the interests of imperialism,
it will not only isolate itself, but will
also condemn itself to being an
agent of alienation and abstraction,
rather than a source of humanitar-
ian values shared by the whole com-
munity.
-Jackie Reiter works with a
Nicaraguan filmmaking collec-
tive, Tercer Cine. She recently
made a film on the Church in
Nicaragua, “Thank God and
the Revolution.”
(Editorial note: At press time, it ap-
pears the bishops have decided to
force a confrontation with the popu-
lar Church. In early June they issued
a Pastoral Letter ordering the priests
in government to vacate their posts
“as soon as possible.” The bishops
insisted their decision was based on
a desire to “strengthen religious uni-
ty” and was in no way politically
motivated.
47update update update update
“If the priests holding public of-
fice and exercising partisan func-
tions do not give up these responsi-
bilities, in order to take up their spe-
cific priestly ministry,” threatened
the letter, “we will consider them in
an attitude of open rebellion and for-
mal disobedience liable to the sanc-
tions of Church laws.”
Within two days the priests re-
sponded. In a joint communique
they reaffirmed their commitment to
the revolution and rejected the
order: “. In accord with our be-
liefs we have endeavored to serve
our compatriots in the posts they
designated and will continue doing
so in whatever place our presence
and service is necessary.” Acknowl-
edging the support that this decision
received from various Christian
groups, Archbishop Obando y Bravo
said, “One must sadly admit that the
Nicaraguan Church is divided.”)
Menu
