Where Are the Poor?

A Comparison of the Ecclesial Base Communities and Pentecostalism—A Case Study in Cuernavaca, Mexico

Philip D. Wingeier-Rayo

• Publisher: Pickwick Publications
• Year: 2011
• Print ISBN:
  9781606089019
  9781498254373
• eBook ISBN:
  9781630876401
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Christian Church

The Ecclesial Base Communities (CEBs) emerged in the wake of Latin American liberation theology and are often referred to as "the Church of the Poor." This book, however, addresses whether or not CEBs are indeed the Church of the Poor today. It is an open question now if Pentecostalism has in fact become the new church of the poor. To answer this question Philip Wingeier-Rayo conducted a one-year ethnographic study of both movements in a marginalized barrio in Cuernavaca, Mexico. Using the anthropological method of participant-observer, the author studied a Roman Catholic Church and a Pentecostal Church--just 100 yards apart--compiling surveys, life interviews, and field notes to relay his findings. For those interested in liberation theology, Pentecostalism, new religious movements, or the influence of religion on society, this in-depth ethnographic study will be of great interest.

1

Introduction and Hypothesis

Two contemporary ecclesial movements are capturing the attention of the poor in Latin America: the Ecclesial Base Communities and Pentecostalism. The former, a renewal movement within the Roman Catholic tradition, has been criticized for being overly political, and even a front for communism. The latter, an outgrowth of the nineteenth-century North American holiness movement, has been accused of being an opiate of the people that offers an escape from the harsh realities of Latin America. Frequently, both movements work among the same sectors of society, and even in the same barrios. Why would some people choose to participate in an Ecclesial Base Community and others, seemingly of the same socio-economic background, choose to join a Pentecostal church? How is it that these seemingly contradictory movements come from the same Latin American context? Are Base Christian Communities indeed a political organization, or do they have a spiritual foundation? And similarly, are Pentecostal churches a vehicle for escapism or do their members develop social consciousness and empowerment to confront social injustice?

These questions have become urgent to me as I have traveled and worked in Latin America over the last 25 years. During the late 1980s in Nicaragua, I had the privilege to work with the Comunidades Eclesiales de Base (CEBs) that I will refer to by their Spanish acronym CEBs from here on. These neighborhood-based Bible study and reflection groups were interpreting the gospel in light of the revolutionary context in which they were living.1 Prior to the 1979 triumph of the Sandinista Revolution, the CEBs understood the oppression and injustice imposed by the Somoza dictatorship to be against the principles of the gospel. Therefore they engaged in protests, strikes, and in some cases directly supported the Sandinista guerrilla army with food and shelter. Some of the CEB’s young men and women joined the Sandinista movement as an outgrowth of their faith.

I lived in Nicaragua while the Sandinista government was in power—a time of great revolutionary fervor. The government was promoting health care, education and land reform with the support of the masses. Young people across the country had participated in vaccination and literacy campaigns, predominantly among the rural poor. The CEBs had enthusiastically supported these reforms as signs of the Kingdom of God and were developing their own social service projects to complement the government programs. In Managua, the CEBs had a network of local Bible study groups working in twenty-three different neighborhoods. Their interpretation of the gospel had moved them to begin alternative health care and nutrition projects among the poor in five Managua barrios. They promoted homeopathic medicine and highly nutritious soy food as low-cost alternatives for the poor. Part of their service involved the purchase of basic staple foods in the countryside to be distributed in the poor urban neighborhoods at cost.

The CEBs developed a worldwide solidarity network in Europe, North America and Latin America where they received economic and moral support. Sometimes they received donations of used clothes and distributed them for a minimal fee in the barrios. As I participated in these service projects in addition to Bible studies, retreats and seminars, I developed a deeper social consciousness that was transformative for my personal spiritual journey.

After this paramount experience working in Nicaragua for two years, I was assigned (after a two-year stint in the Rio Grande Valley, Texas) to yet another revolutionary context. The other Latin America country to undertake a popular revolution was the island nation of Cuba. I went to Cuba with all my expectations and baggage from the revolutionary experience of Nicaragua. However, I found a very different context. In 1991 the Cuban revolution was in its 32nd year and the early revolutionary spirit had dwindled. To make matters worse, in August of that same year the Soviet Union experienced a coup d’état and Mikael Gorbachev stepped down as president. The Soviet Union dissolved and unilaterally reneged on its favorable trade agreements with Cuba. Without these financial subsidies, Cuba’s economy was on the verge of collapse and no major trade partners emerged to fill the void, making the decade of the 1990s extremely difficult for Cubans.

The religious landscape was also quite different in Cuba. The revolution had occurred in 1959 before the second Vatican Council, the Council of Bishops meeting in Medellin, and the emergence of liberation theology. Therefore the churches, both Protestant and Catholic, were not welcome in the revolutionary process. The government viewed the church as a partner with the counterrevolutionary movement, and, as such, an ally with the United States government and Cuban exiles. Yet by the late 1960s the church and the state had both realized that neither were going to disappear any time soon (although initially some on both sides hoped precisely that) and the government established an Office of Religious Affairs to deal with church-state relations.2 The Methodist Church in Cuba, to which I was assigned, was largely a product of U.S.-based missionary efforts.3 After experiencing a crisis in the 1960s and 1970s, the Methodist Church was undergoing a charismatic renewal from traditional Protestant to a quasi-Pentecostal worship style. During the decade of the 1990s, the attendance in the Methodist Church grew from 10,000 to 40,000 and has continued to grow since.

My personal reaction to the worship style was, at first, disdain and suspicion. I had come from a progressive United Methodist background that favored the social gospel over spiritual emotionalism. This was compounded by the revolutionary experience in Nicaragua that emphasized liberation theology and social justice. In spite of this early prejudice, Cuban Christians earned my respect for their endurance during very difficult conditions and for their contagious enthusiasm for the gospel. Over the course of time, I even became impressed by the transformative power of the Pentecostal experience that seemed to sustain and empower people to have hope in the midst of dire circumstances.

As a result, I found myself in the midst of two apparently contradictory, yet perhaps valid, interpretations of what it means to be a Christian in two revolutionary contexts. But I learned that one does not necessarily have to be in two different countries to see these contrasting faiths. During my field work in Mexico, I found these two movements existing, even flourishing, side-by-side in the same neighborhood—with different objectives, yet both calling themselves Christian. This phenomenon led me to ask: Why would some people choose to attend a CEB while others, sometimes members of the same family, choose to join the other? The CEBs claim to be a church of the poor within the liberation theology movement that has made a “preferential option for the poor.” Are they really working among the poor? The Pentecostals claim to be worshipping a God who can deliver them from suffering, but does conversion to Pentecostalism translate into better life conditions? Are there similarities between the movements which make them more alike than different?

This investigation will move beyond easy answers and stereotypes as it explores these questions and examines the central theme of how each movement relates to the poor. I hypothesize that Pentecostal churches are actually working with a more marginalized sector of the Mexican population than the CEBs. I would also like to test the theories of Emilio Willems, David Martin, David Stoll and others, as to the effects of Pentecostalism on Latin America in a specific context within Mexico—namely, that Pentecostalism is contributing toward the pluralization, democratization and modernization of the Mexican society.4 I would also like to suggest that the CEBs contribute to democratization, however on a much smaller scale due to the smaller size of their movement and the resistance from the Roman Catholic hierarchy.

As I write I am mindful of the on-going debate among scholars about Ecclesial Base Communities, Pentecostalism and the relationship between the two in Latin America. In an attempt to place my research in dialogue with past and current scholars, I will begin with a review of literature in Part I. This first section contains three chapters, the first of which examines the origin and context of Ecclesial Base Communities in Latin America in general, and Mexico specifically. The structural inequalities and military dictatorships in the 1960s and 1970s, in addition to the progressive changes in the Roman Catholic Church, created a climate conducive to Ecclesial Base Communities and liberation theology. The theoretical literature of Leonardo Boff and Juan Luis Segundo is examined to understand the theological and methodological shifts applied within the CEBs. Bishop Mendez Arceo’s leadership in Vatican II, the Latin American Council of Bishops, and in his home diocese of Cuernavaca, was instrumental in the establishment and growth of the CEB network. This second chapter then turns to the history and development of the CEBs in Cuernavaca as a background for my ethnographic research in this region.

Chapter 3 examines the birth and growth of Pentecostalism. This review of background literature explores the origin of the movement and alludes to the heated debate between scholars of Pentecostalism on the roles of Charles Fox Parham, William J. Seymour and the Azusa Street Revival. Spreading to Chile and Brazil, the origin and development of Pentecostalism in Latin America in general, and Mexico specifically are traced. Then the chapter turns to analysis of the phenomenal growth of Pentecostalism in Latin America. The work of two prominent sociologists, Christian Lalive D’Epinay and Emilio Willems, is reviewed to establish two leading paradigms. Lalive D’Epinay argues that Pentecostal growth in Latin America is an attempt to reconstruct the traditional hacienda system of society, following a period of social anomie.5 In contrast, Willems contends that conversion to Pentecostalism is a symbolic protest against the traditional unjust structure and offers an egalitarian vision leading to the modernization, pluralization and democratization of society.

These two leading paradigms have established the parameters of the contemporary debate led by scholars such as David Martin, David Stoll, Cecilia Mariz, Francisco Cartaxo Rolim, and Jean-Pierre Bastian—each building upon and nuancing earlier positions. Chapter 3 concludes by relating these contemporary interpretations to my thesis about the poor, empowerment, and political involvement.

Chapter 4 compares and contrasts the theoretical interpretations of Base Ecclesial Communities and Pentecostalism. This final chapter of Part One places the theoretical literature about both movements in dialogue with each other and explores their similarities and differences. Concerned with the characteristics of those who elect to join each movement, this chapter also studies the eventual effects of participation upon the constituency. Thus, this discussion by scholars of Pentecostalism provides a backdrop and suggests some possible themes to examine for the ethnographic research reported in Part Two.

While the Part One provides a theoretical overview of the ongoing discussion about Base Ecclesial Communities and Pentecostalism, Part Two tests the theories with concrete case studies. Given the diversity of histories and cultures throughout the different regions in Latin America, any theory about the growth of Pentecostalism is not necessarily applicable to all regions, but needs to be tested. For the same reason, one ethnographic study in one community at a given time cannot presume to have universal implications. This study, therefore, utilizes two methodologies, theoretical and ethnographic, as a check and balance against each other. Both tools are employed to explore these basic questions: What types of people are attracted to each movement? What is the impact of their participation on their lives and on the surrounding community?

1. Cardenal, Gospel in Solentiname, 1:242.

2. Wingeier-Rayo, “El Avivamiento,” 27.

3. Cubans exiled in the Florida keys, Enrique Someillan and Andres Silveira, returned to Cuba in 1883 to start the first Methodist mission in Havana. After the Spanish-American War in 1898, U.S. missionaries were officially sent to strengthen and expand the Cuban mission throughout the island. See La Disciplina, v.

4. These sociologists refer to pluralization, democratization and modernization in the classical sense of these terms. They find that Pentecostalism promote values of self-discipline, individual initiative, and participatory decision-making among the believers. These values are consistent with the principles of modernization.

5. See chapter 2, “Analysis of Pentecostalism,” for a discussion of this phenomenon.

...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Foreword
• Chapter 1: Introduction and Hypothesis
• Part 1: Review of Background Literature
• Chapter 2: The Background of Pentecostalism
• Chapter 3: The Background of the Ecclesial Base Communities
• Chapter 4: Comparison of Background Literature on Ecclesial Base Communities and Pentecostalism
• Chapter 5: Ethnographic Findings of Field Work in an Ecclesial Base Community in Cuernavaca
• Part 2: Ethnographic Findings
• Introduction to Part Two
• Chapter 6: Ethnographic Findings of the “Discípulos de Jesus” Pentecostal Congregation in Cuernavaca
• Chapter 7: Observations from Ethnography
• Bibliography