The Five General Conferences of the Latin American Episcopate

The five General Conferences of the Latin American Episcopate

Summary

Introduction

1 Rio Conference

2 Medellin Conference

3 Puebla Conference

4 Santo Domingo Conference

5 Aparecida Conference

Conclusion

References

Introduction

1 Rio Conference

The first General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate was convened by Pius XII and took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1955. He expressed it as follows:

It seemed opportune, having also gathered the vote presented to Us by the Episcopate of Latin America, that the Latin American Hierarchy should meet to carry out an in-depth study of the problems and the most suitable means to solve them, with the promptness and fullness that the needs demand (PIO XII, 1955).

The most notable outcome of this Conference was undoubtedly the agreement to create the Latin American Episcopal Council (CELAM): “The General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate unanimously approved, and attentively requested the Holy Apostolic See, the creation of a Latin American Episcopal Council” (DR 97). The mission assigned to it is to prepare the General Conferences of the Episcopate, in addition to carrying out organic pastoral work through five subsecretariats (DR 97)[2].

However, it should also be noted that the bishops, instructed by the most charismatic, truly met as bishops of the Great Homeland and debated the themes.

The greatest limitation, however, was that both the president of the Conference and his assistant were Italians elected by the pope, who also set the tone, focus, and theme. The letter he sent them before the sessions was almost literally the guide for the initial Declaration and the Conclusions. The bishops themselves acknowledge this: “the very important Apostolic Letters ‘Ad Ecclesiam Christi’ [which] constituted for us the ‘Magna Carta’ in the works and conclusions of the Conference” (DR, Declaration). However, this should not be seen as interference, because the bishops were in agreement that they were, so to say, the arms of the pope.

The needs, according to the pope and the bishops, were primarily those of the ecclesiastical institution. As they testified in the Declaration and repeated in the concluding document: “The Conference had as its central objective the fundamental problem afflicting our nations, namely: the shortage of priests.” They qualified it as “the most urgent need in Latin America.” Hence, the insistence on promoting vocations and their preparation in seminaries, as well as, more generally, on religious instruction. The value of Christian doctrine could not be more emphasized:

The Holy Church, by God’s provision, is the depository of Christian doctrine which, founded on the eternal and indestructible principles of divine truth, provides the solution to all those problems that touch, directly or indirectly, the spiritual and moral life of man, so that he may fully realize his condition as a son of God and become worthy of the promises of Heaven (DR, Declaration).

The value of the doctrine and the ecclesiastical institution, which is its depository, is so great that, in recommending what they call “the Sacred Scriptures,” they insist on highlighting “the most important and fundamental texts, such as those relating to the Primacy of Peter, the infallibility of the Ecclesiastical Magisterium, the value of Tradition, etc.” (DR 72). As can be seen, the Bible, and particularly the Gospels, are not a narration of a salvific event proclaimed so that we may integrate into it, but a repertoire of texts that ratify the sacredness and authority of the ecclesiastical institution.

From this absolutization of the ecclesiastical institution, the Pope and subsequently the bishops refer to the enemies. Let us quote the Pope:

Many are, unfortunately, the attacks of cunning enemies and, to reject them, vigorous vigilance is necessary: such as Masonic deceptions, Protestant propaganda, the various forms of secularism, superstition, and spiritism, which the more serious the ignorance of divine matters and the more dormant Christian life is, the more easily they spread, taking the place of true Faith and deceitfully satisfying the cravings of a people thirsty for God. To these are added the perverse doctrines of those who, under the false pretext of social justice and improving the living conditions of the humblest classes, tend to strip from the soul the invaluable treasure of religion (PIO XII, 1955).

Therefore, to defeat them, they insist so much on the diffusion of Catholic doctrine and morals.

Given the shortage of priests, they encourage laypeople who “serve in one or another apostolate organization, with full submission to the directives and dispositions of the Roman Pontiffs and the Sacred Hierarchy” (PIO XII, 1955). They recognize that

the apostolate, while being a proper mission of the priest, is not exclusive to him but also belongs to them, by their very character as Christians, always under the obedience of the Bishops and Parish Priests and within the forms and offices that are not exclusive to the priestly ministry (DR 43).

Its content is absolutely ecclesiocentric:

in addition to a continuous effort to preserve and fully defend the Catholic faith, it must be a missionary apostolate of conquest for the expansion of the kingdom of Christ in all sectors and environments, particularly where the direct action of the priest cannot reach (DR 46).

However, we want to highlight that, despite so much intervention, they recognize what will later be emphasized in Vatican II: the mission belongs to them as Christians, that is, by baptism.

The social issue is underscored by the pope due to its intimate relationship with religious life: “the social field: a theme that is deserving of the greatest consideration in all peoples, but in Latin American Nations there are particular reasons to claim the pastoral solicitude of the Sacred Hierarchy, since it is an issue closely linked with religious life” (PIO XII, 1955). The bishops, in the same vein, insisted that the disciple of Christ should view such issues as a moral duty. The situation is fundamentally seen from the perspective of underdevelopment: “many of its inhabitants – especially among the workers in the fields and cities – still live in a distressing situation” (DR, Declaration). Therefore, the upliftment of the needy classes will occur with progress, and collaborating to make it happen is a moral duty for a Christian:

The Christian thought, in accordance with the pontifical teachings, regards as a very important element the upliftment of the needy classes, whose energetic and generous realization appears to every disciple of Christ not only as a temporal progression but as the fulfillment of a moral duty (DR, Declaration).

This upliftment, concerning the indigenous, is understood as moving from barbarism to civilization: “a persevering effort so that the ‘indigenous’ may honorably integrate into the bosom of true civilization” (DR, Declaration). As can be seen, they identify Western culture with culture, and consequently, indigenous cultures as barbarism.

To specify further, they refer to social justice, which entails achieving harmony between capital and labor: “to solve these problems, mainly aiming to establish Christian harmony between capital and labor” (DR 80). The Church’s action should primarily aim to imbue the economic world with its doctrine and the spirit of harmony that animates it: “the active presence of the Church is required in order to influence the socio-economic world, guiding it with the light of its doctrine and animating it with its spirit” (DR, Declaration).

Following the Pope, they specifically refer to “spiritual assistance to migrants” (PIO XII, 1955).

There is no mention of the causes of this situation of lack of essentials for the majority, nor – clearly – any condemnation. It seems that the dissemination of Christian doctrine and the fulfillment of moral duty would be enough to achieve development that would essentially solve the problem. Therefore, Fernando Torres Londoño, after a precise analysis in which he recognizes all that is positive, concludes that this first Conference,

by its spirit, the themes it addressed, and the conclusions it reached, is on the same trajectory as the Latin American Plenary Council of 1899. The First Conference shows a Church that still thinks and conceives itself in terms of itself and its clerical structures (LONDOÑO, 1995).

2 Medellin Conference

To understand Medellin, it is necessary to comprehend its mode of production. At first glance, it might seem that gathering in a seminary, in the center of a forest, would not help to embrace reality, but the isolation caused the group as such to emerge: the bishops, experts, and observers became deeply involved in the Eucharists and initial conferences, in work groups, and in sharing meals and rest, in such a way that everyone was captivated by the theme and focused on it from a unified spirit. Thus, in most cases, differences became internal and everyone opened up to contribute the best of each to the joint elaboration. “Over two weeks, about 250 participants of the assembly, cardinals, bishops, observers, religious and lay men and women, shared everything: the work, the table, and the liturgy” (SCATENA, 2019, p. 14). For this reason, with the exception of two chapters (one on popular pastoral and one on the elites), the rest possessed an organic unity very difficult to achieve in group-drafted documents. For this reason, “in this experience, the memory of many of the protagonists imposed the idea of a palpable effusion of the Spirit of Pentecost, as later said by the Argentine Pironio” (SCATENA, 2019, p. 12). Or as Cardinal Landázuri pondered in his closing speech:

The new Pentecost about which we have spoken several times concerning this meeting is the great idea, the great event. The prophetic consciousness, which in these days was awakened and enlivened, is the new light for the church, the new Pentecost for the Great Homeland. A new Pentecost that occurred at the very moment when the Latin American church decided to face the new Latin American reality instead of looking at itself (SCATENA, 2019, p. 27-28).

Indeed, the title of the Conference was: “The Church in the current transformation of Latin America in the light of the council,” meaning the theme was not itself, but Latin America. The Church was the subject discerning – being certainly part of the theme – and the bishops were able to prophetically interpret the transformation that was taking place, both socially, economically, and politically, as well as anthropologically, both among the developmentalist elites, the committed professionals, and the people. As they contemplated the ongoing transformation from the perspective of Jesus of Nazareth, they viewed it not from above, but from the people, from their solidarity with them, and therefore, from the choice of a way of life attentive to the essentials. This perspective was so decisive that the option for the poor became a transversal axis and the perspective to see and judge the reality and the action of the Church, reflecting mainly in the consideration of the poor as subjects in society (DM 2,27) and in the Church, and also in the commitment of the bishops to be close to the poor and, to some extent, to be poor themselves (DM 14: The poverty of the Church).

The methodology of Medellin is to see, judge, and act, but always keeping in mind the interaction of the three phases. Those who drafted the documents were already engaged in pastoral action. They approached it with a Christian vision and stance, and from there, they contemplated the situation. This is the starting point of the inspiring documents of Medellin. They relaunch them onto the Church and public opinion in a more objective manner: starting with the vision of reality, enlightening it with Christian revelation, and proposing commitments that stem from the awareness of what God demands of us to respond to this situation. Clearly, those who do not share this option will also not share this vision of the continent, even if they do not reject the data.

The documents view the situation in Latin America through indicators that describe it and vectors that indicate its lines of force. The indicators compose a situation of underdevelopment. Meanwhile, the vectors of the more organized social forces move in two directions: developmentalist modernization and structural revolution. However, coinciding with neither, there is the awareness and mobilization of the popular masses for better living conditions, the overcoming of unjust oppressions, and greater personalization and socialization.

The documents include four general diagnostics of the state of Latin America and its dynamics, which accurately characterize the most decisive aspects of the Latin American framework. They also contain a typology of organized social actors (DM 7,5-8). Moreover, they describe the situation of the family (DM 3,1-3), education (DM 4,2-6), youth (DM 5,1-3,9), and the impact of media (DM 16,1-2.6). But, primarily in the document on Peace, they develop a structural view of the subcontinent. They focus, firstly, on the tensions between classes: marginalization and increasing frustrations, excessive inequalities, oppression, and repression. They characterize the dominion of the upper classes over the others as internal colonialism, and foresee that maintaining peace will be difficult due to the insensitivity of the “upper” classes, the growing awareness of the “lower” classes, and the interest of revolutionaries in exacerbating the contradictions.

Subsequently, they characterize as neocolonialism the situation of dependency on transnational corporations and globalized financial capital, calling it international imperialism of money. The distortion of international trade, the flight of dividends and economic and human capital, tax evasion, progressive indebtedness, and political and even military interventionism are the most decisive indices. Lastly, they refer to the tensions between Latin American countries and the arms race.

The bishops distance themselves from those who promote armed revolutions as a way to overcome this situation. Even recognizing the nobility of their motivations, they insist that the consequences will be a worsening of the situation (DM 2,15.19). They accuse those who oppose necessary reforms of being the cause of the revolutions of despair that may follow (DM 2,17). They propose comprehensive development. They place love as the great liberating force from injustice and oppression and as the inspiration for social justice, understood as a conception of life and as a drive for comprehensive development (DM 1,5). Comprehensive development is understood as the transition from less humane living conditions to more humane ones:

The transition from misery to possession of the necessary, the victory over social calamities, the expansion of knowledge, the acquisition of culture […], the increase in the consideration of the dignity of others, the orientation towards the spirit of poverty, cooperation for the common good, the will for peace, […] faith […] and unity in the charity of Christ, who calls us all to participate as children in the life of the living God, Father of all men (DM Introduction,6; cf. DM 2,14a).

This process requires both structural and personal changes. The situation “demands global, bold, urgent, and deeply renewing transformations” (DM 2,16). This implies overcoming the fear of “sacrifices and personal risks that every bold and truly effective action entails” (DM 2,17). The risk increases due to the opposition of those who hold this unjust and oppressive power. Therefore, they speak of the “strong and peaceful energy of constructive works” (DM 2,19). These are mentioned in the documents about the family, education, youth, and the laity. They are also those proposed in the documents on Justice and Peace, of a more global, that is, civic and political character, with its inevitable economic dimension.

As Latin America considered itself a Catholic continent, as the rulers saw themselves as such, and equally did the vital forces of the continent, saying both represented Catholic peoples, this diagnosis was intolerable for them. They then embarked on a virulent campaign of ideological persecution against bishops and theologians identified with this line, accusing them of being communists.

The raison d’être and the fundamental inspiration of this document, as well as its Christian justification, is that Jesus incarnated in humanity. By Him, who became not only one of us but specifically our Brother, God “took a chance” with humanity. In turn, humanity cannot be properly understood without reference to Him, not only as Creator but also as Father, through His only Son, who became forever our Brother and specifically as a poor person, and therefore, from the perspective of the poor. Thus, “every ‘growth in humanity’ enables us to ‘reproduce the image of the Son, so that He may be the firstborn among many brothers’” (DM 4,9)

This unity between Christianity and humanity is what the document on Catechesis insists must be emphasized:

Without falling into confusions or simplistic identifications, the profound unity that exists between the divine plan of salvation, accomplished in Christ, and the aspirations of man; between the history of salvation and human history; between the Church, the people of God, and the temporal communities; between the revealing action of God and the experience of man; between the gifts and supernatural charisms and the human values must always be expressed. (DM 8,4).

Therefore, by contemplating this situation from within, the bishops qualify it as “institutionalized violence” (DM 2,16) that constitutes a situation of sin (DM 2,1). Indeed,

Peace with God is the ultimate foundation of inner peace and social peace. Therefore, where social peace does not exist, where there are injustices, social, political, economic, and cultural inequalities, the gift of the Lord’s peace is rejected; even more, the Lord Himself is rejected (DM 2,14c).

As can be seen, it is not merely a social analysis or a merely political judgment, but a fundamentally Christian stance.

Therefore, the alternative must be to work for humans to assume their dignity and responsibility, and thus strive to transform the structures that hinder life and humanity from developing:

The originality of the Christian message does not consist so much in the affirmation of the need for structural change as in the insistence that we must focus on the conversion of man. We will not have a new continent without new and renewed structures, but above all, there will not be a new continent without new men who, in the light of the Gospel, know how to be truly free and responsible (DM 1,3).

What characterizes the Document most is its responsible nature (TRIGO, 2018, p. 33-57): they assign to the Church, for which they are responsible, the equivalent of what they point out for society, and in both fields, they are prepared to put it into practice, both as leaders and as citizens and members of the people of God (DM Introduction 3). First and foremost, they exhort the privileged (DM 2,17), the passive (DM 2,18), and the violent (DM 2,19), as well as Christians, to assume their responsibility and promote peace by working for justice (DM 2,14.16.22). In this direction, the various expressions of pastoral care (DM 2,24), our schools, seminaries, and universities (DM 2,25), the spirituality of the laity (DM 10,17), and the task of the bishop (DM 15,17) should proceed.

The alternative must start with personal change (DM 1,3), which is simultaneously personalization and fraternal cohesion (DM Introduction 4) and awareness of reality (DM 2,7). Educators are exhorted to this (DM 4,8; 5,14), which, speaking Christianly, is a conversion (DM Message; DM 14,17; 6,8.15). Therefore, the bishops say it corresponds to them to educate consciences in all these aspects (DM 2,20-21) and also to foster communal habits with a view to collaboration (DM 1,17). This critical awareness of reality is fundamental for Christians (DM 1,6) and thus an inescapable part of catechesis (DM 1,17), since to know God, one must know the human being and in Jesus of Nazareth the human mystery is manifested (DM Introduction 1). This participation must reach politics as an exercise of charity (DM 1,16).

The proposal for personalizing education (DM 4,4.8.11) is expressed for the Church as the need to initiate comprehensive catechesis (DM 8,1.6). They propose that both society (DM 7,21;5,1; 2,15;1,7;4,12; 1,12.16) and the Church (DM 15,3.6; 5,13,14; 11,16.19) be participatory. The need for society to restructure itself from grassroots communities (DM 2,14.27) corresponds to the need for the Church to do so from basic Christian communities (DM 15,10.13;8,10;6,14). There is also a correspondence between the proposal of participatory planning for society (DM 1,15;7,21) and that of joint (organic) pastoral care for the Church (DM 15,5.9.23; 9,13; 15,10). This same correspondence can be observed between societal expressions according to different cultures (DM 4,3;5,11) and the inculturation of the pastoral (DM 8,15; 6,1; 8,8; 9,7.10-11).

A particularly relevant and significant correspondence occurs between the demand that elites relinquish their privileges in favor of the lower classes (DM 14,10; 2,5.17) and the decision of the ecclesiastical institution to change the privileged recipient, social condition, and situation (DM 14,9.11.15.16).

If we carefully consider what the first episcopal conference was, it will be easy to understand the astonishment at the conclusions of Medellin among the media and intellectuals and, more generally, among the Latin American elites, as well as in the Vatican Curia and the Christianity of the West and the Third World. This surprise was mainly noted among most of the Latin American ecclesiastical institution and the clericalized Catholics, who, for the most part, were either unaware of the novelties of Vatican II or had not opened themselves to them, and therefore could not accept what was, in fact, its creatively faithful reception.

The assumption of all of them was that in the Latin American episcopate, there was no subject with sound autonomy, Christian quality, and historical acuity. Thus, it was not clear where the Medellin document had come from. It seemed impossible to them that it reflected the thinking and feeling, the vital stance, and the discernment of the Latin American bishops. For this reason, it is especially worthy of mention that Pope Paul VI, who had presided over the inauguration of the conference, gave it his vote of confidence and approved its conclusions before reading them.

3 Conference of Puebla

This distrust of the Roman Curia towards the direction that the Latin American episcopate was taking was institutionally expressed when it intervened in CELAM in 1972, imposing, through the nuncio, López Trujillo as secretary (COMBLIN, 2011, p. 147). He prepared the working document for Puebla and also proposed to coordinate the meeting. However, the president of the assembly, Lorscheider, submitted the matter to a vote and the assembly rejected both measures. Although the initial speech of the Pope imposed, to some extent, the themes of Jesus Christ, the human being, and the Church, the assembly worked freely and endorsed Medellin in various texts (DP 12, 15, 25, 96, 142, 235, 260, 462, 480, 550, 590, 648, 1134, 1165, 1247). However, not all the guidelines followed this line. Thus, we can consider the document as a compromise between various currents (TRIGO, 1979, p. 98-107).

The proposal of the minority consisted of contrasting the radical Catholic substratum of Latin American culture and the secularism of the emerging universal culture and opting for modernization without secularism. However, the document insists emphatically on the scandalous fact that “in peoples of deep-rooted Christian faith, structures generating injustice have been imposed,” which is “an accusing sign that faith has not had the necessary strength to penetrate the criteria and decisions of the responsible sectors of leadership” (DP 437).

Starting with the method, Puebla assumes the see, judge, and act method used in Medellin: it begins with the pastoral vision of Latin American reality, continues with God’s designs on the reality of Latin America, proceeds with the centers, agents, and means of evangelization, and finishes with the preferential options and actions. To put the conclusions of the assembly into action, it proposes a process of participation by educating “in a methodology of analysis of reality, then reflecting on that reality from the Gospel’s viewpoint, choosing the most suitable objectives and means, and their most rational use in evangelizing action” (DP 1307).

The theological foundation of the method is that salvation occurs in history, but history is not an epiphany of God. Therefore,

for all this to be done according to the spirit of Christ, we must practice discernment of situations and the concrete calls that the Lord makes in each time. This requires an attitude of conversion and openness and serious commitment to what has been recognized as authentically evangelical (DP 338).

It is for this reason that they place as the first pastoral option the Church’s own conversion, which they very pertinently concretize (DP 973-975).

For Puebla, the primary cause of all problems is the prevailing economic system, which does not consider the human being as the center of society and, therefore, is not interested in achieving a just society (DP 64, 129). As a result, the effect of this system is the increasing polarization between rich and poor (DP 1, 28, 30, 38, 47, 129, 138, 494, 542, 778, 1135, 1207-1209, 1264). As in Medellin, the bishops qualify this situation as “sinful” (DP 28, 70, 73, 281, 452, 487, 509, 1032) and also propose “personal conversion and profound changes in structures” (DP 30; cf. DP 436-438 et passim).

The focus of Puebla was on cultures and ideologies. As a historical trend, they state: “the programming of social life will increasingly correspond to the models sought by technocracy, without correspondence to the aspirations of a more just international order” (DP 129). It will utilize the mass media: “they will increasingly program the life of man and society” (DP 128; cf. DP 1072-1073). Puebla captures the shift from traditional Latin American culture to what it calls “the emerging universal culture,” which, driven by the great powers, “intends to be universal. Peoples, particular cultures, various human groups are invited, and even more, compelled to integrate into it” (DP 421). “The Church does not accept that instrumentation of universality which equates to the unification of humanity through an unjust and harmful supremacy and domination of some peoples or social sectors over other peoples and sectors” (DP 427). However, it recognizes that this culture has permeated everything, to such an extent that “one can rightly speak of a new era of human history (GS 54)” (DP 393).

Regarding ideologies, the bishops refer to capitalist liberalism (DP 47, 437, 452), Marxist collectivism (DP 48, 437, 543), and National Security (DP 49, 547-549). As inadequate visions of the human being, they mention the deterministic (DP 308-309, 335), the psychologist (DP 310), the economistic (DP 311-313), the consumerist (DP 311), the liberal (DP 312), the collectivist (DP 313), the statist (DP 314), the scientist (DP 315).

They insist on human rights and the absolute dignity of the human person. They emphasize the non-recognition of this dignity (and therefore the massive violation of its rights), the foundation of these rights and the positive presentation about what such dignity means, and they specify what to do to safeguard and promote it. Therefore, they denounce what most radically denies the person, i.e., the idolatries of our time: money and power, combined, which act seeking to expand and, for this reason, instrumentalize everything else (DP 493-501). “It is urgent to liberate our peoples from the idol of absolute power to achieve social coexistence in justice and freedom” (DP 502). For this reason, the document insists on the primary right of humanity to the goods of the earth, a right to which are subordinated the rights of private property and free trade (DP 492, 542, 747, 1224, 1281).

This evangelization must penetrate cultures. The bishops opt for two complementary directions: the evangelization of the culture that has been forged in Latin America over these five centuries, through the evangelization of popular religiosity, which is its deepest source, and of the peoples, who are its bearers; and simultaneously, the evangelization of the emerging universal culture through the evangelization of the builders of the pluralist society that is being forged in our days. However, they insist additionally that the poor are also evangelizing subjects:

The commitment to the poor and oppressed and the emergence of Base Communities have helped the Church to discover the evangelizing potential of the poor, as they constantly challenge it, calling it to conversion and because many of them live in their lives the evangelical values of solidarity, service, simplicity, and availability to receive the gift of God (DP 1147).

Furthermore, the option for the poor is not just one of the chapters of the document, but a cross-cutting axis that completely traverses it (TRIGO, 1979, p. 108-111). For this reason, this is the aspect of Puebla that has the greatest historical transcendence, and which, being assumed by the Latin American Church, was repeatedly proposed by Pope John Paul II to the universal Church. In Puebla, this option is so crucial that it can be considered, along with the presentation of Jesus of Nazareth, as what energizes, structures, and unifies the entire document. Its theological foundation is particularly pertinent: God takes up their defense and loves them because “created in the image and likeness of God to be His children, this image is obscured and also scorned” (DP 1142). And it asks us to look at very concrete faces that generalized poverty takes among us (DP 32-39), to recognize in them “the suffering features of Christ, the Lord, who questions and challenges us” (DP 31). Therefore, “service to the poor is the privileged measure, although not exclusive, of our following of Christ” (DP 1145). Christ, who throughout the document is unequivocally Jesus of Nazareth, who “was born and lived poor among His people of Israel, had compassion on the crowds and did good to all” (DP 190).

The measure of the integrality of the option for the poor is the evangelical poverty which is “required of all Christians” (DP 1148) and is characterized by three elements: an attitude of trusting openness to God; a simple, sober, and austere life, which wards off the temptation of greed and pride; and the sharing of material and spiritual goods with the poor (DP 1149-1150). For the bishops, “this poverty is a challenge to materialism and opens the doors to alternative solutions to the consumer society” (DP 1152). The bishops rejoice in seeing that many of their non-poor children live this Christian poverty (DP 1151).

From the freedom that evangelical poverty affords, the proposals that are outlined make sense: the condemnation of anti-evangelical poverty to which the majority of Latin America is subjected, the effort to increasingly understand the mechanisms that cause this tragedy and to denounce them, joining forces with those fighting to eradicate it and create a more just and humane world, supporting workers who want to be treated as free and responsible and to participate in decisions concerning their lives, defending the right to create their own organizations (Cf. DM 2,27), and respecting and supporting indigenous cultures (DP 1159-1164).

From this option, their message to the builders of the pluralistic society is understood. We highlight two elements: the first concerns the defense of workers’ wages, the right to organize and participate in companies, and the more general right to an economic policy that does not aim at reducing employment; the second relates to justice specifically in contracts, beyond their legality, it addresses the more generic point of the primary allocation of the earth’s resources to humanity as a real magnitude, as a collective subject, subordinate to private property.

The service of the people of God to the peoples is evangelization. It

reveals Jesus as the Lord who reveals the Father and communicates His Spirit to us. It calls us to conversion which is reconciliation and new life, leads us to communion with the Father who makes us children and brothers. It brings forth, through charity poured into our hearts, fruits of justice, forgiveness, respect, dignity, and peace in the world (DP 352).

The document insists on the binomial of communion and participation, both as the structure of the Church and a mission that it must carry to the world. The reason is that the Kingdom “is realized in some way wherever God is reigning through His grace, His love, overcoming sin and helping men to grow until they achieve the great communion that is offered to them in Christ” (DP 226). God’s design is for human beings to build communion “in all their life,” including “in its economic, social, and political dimension” (DP 215). This communion, which is the most genuine human production from the perspective of the transcendental plan, is “produced by the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,” because “it is the communication of their own Trinitarian communion” (DP 215). Thus, the forms of human communion

in their various aspects, “are animated by grace, first fruits of it” (DP 218). However,

sin, a force of rupture, will constantly prevent growth in love and communion both from the hearts of men and from the various structures they have created, into which the sin of their authors has imprinted its destructive mark. In this sense, the situation of misery, marginality, injustice, and corruption that afflicts our Continent demands from the People of God and each Christian authentic heroism with their evangelizing commitment, in order to overcome such obstacles (DP 281).

The Gospel must teach us, in the face of the realities in which we are immersed, that one cannot truly love one’s brother or therefore God in Latin America today, without a man committing himself at a personal level and, in many cases, even at a structural level, to the service and promotion of the poorest and most humiliated human groups and social strata, taking on all the consequences that follow (DP 327).

This is what the sacramentality of the Church consists of: being a credible sign of communion. Therefore,

each ecclesial community should strive to be for the Continent an example of a way of coexistence where freedom and solidarity are united, where authority is exercised with the spirit of the Good Shepherd, where a different attitude towards wealth is lived, where forms of organization and structures of participation are tried out, capable of paving the way for a more humane type of society (DP 273).

For them to be part of this sign, pastors are at the service of the Family of God as brothers: “They are brothers called to care for the life that the Spirit freely arouses in other brothers. It is the duty of pastors to respect this life, to welcome it, guide it, and promote it, even if it has been born independently of their initiative” (DP 249).

4th Conference of Santo Domingo

This conference was held on the fifth centenary of the “discovery.” The most logical approach would have been to discern these five centuries, the action of Christianity within them, and to make proposals to strengthen the good and overcome the bad. However, the Vatican intervened so that, at a structural level, it was not a conference of the episcopate, since more than half of those present were not elected by the bishops. The working document was discarded, those who presided came from Rome, and from there also came the directives and, mainly, because it did not allow for the global editing of what the working groups had developed and which, except for the doctrinal ones, were in line with Medellín and Puebla and advanced in that direction. Nor did it admit the method of see, judge, act, which was replaced by a pre-conciliar doctrine about Jesus Christ and the Church. The assembly almost discarded everything. In the end, however, what could be restructured was, and the result was satisfactory for the majority, considering that the chapters on human promotion and Christian culture seemed adequate channels for the pastoral.

Moreover, the separation between the lodging location and the workplace, nor the housing of the episcopate in luxury hotels, which continued to function as such, were not favorable. In this sense, it was the most opposite to Medellín.

The theme was “to propel, with new ardor, a New Evangelization that projects into a greater commitment to the integral promotion of man and permeates with the light of the Gospel the cultures of the Latin American peoples” (DSD 1). The first part, “Jesus Christ, Gospel of the Father,” unfortunately, did not capture the richness of the living knowledge of Jesus of Nazareth through the prayerful reading done in the communities, one of the great riches of Latin American Christianity that was expressed in Medellín and Puebla. Nor does it even say that he was delivered to the Roman procurator to be crucified as a subversive by the religious authorities, especially the priestly aristocracy, who resented his leadership among the people, undermining its institutional character; “everyone is following him” (John 12:19). What is proposed is

to provoke in Catholics personal adherence to Christ and the Church through the announcement of the risen Lord; to develop a catechesis that properly instructs the people, explaining the mystery of the Church, sacrament of salvation and communion, the mediation of the Virgin Mary and the saints, and the mission of the hierarchy (DSD 142).

As can be seen, Jesus of Nazareth is replaced by the risen Christ and catechesis, instead of focusing on following Jesus, is restricted to the Church, the hierarchy, and devotion to Mary. Thus, in the document, the liturgy is not the celebration of fidelity in following Jesus in historical life, but the source and center, to be applied to life (DSD 34-35). The doctrinalism is such that they even claim that the “values, criteria, behaviors, and attitudes” of popular religiosity, which “constitute the wisdom of our people,” “originate from Catholic dogma” (DSD 36).

However, there are many redeemable texts: the need for a

new evangelization arises in Latin America as a response to problems presented by the reality of a continent in which there is a divorce between faith and life, to the extent of producing blatant situations of injustice, social inequality, and violence. It involves tackling the grand task of infusing energy into Latin American Christianity (DSD 24).

The bishops assert that “the content of the New Evangelization is Jesus Christ” (DSD 27). New situations demand new paths. It cannot lack “the testimony and personal encounter, the presence of the Christian in all things human, as well as confidence in the salvific announcement of Jesus” (DSD 29). Christianity and the Church must “inculturate more in the ways of being and living of our cultures. (…) Thus, the New Evangelization will continue in the line of the incarnation of the Word” (DSD 30).

4th Conference of Santo Domingo

This conference was held on the quincentenary of the “discovery.” It would have been logical to discern these five centuries, the role of Christianity within them, and to propose ways to strengthen the positives and overcome the negatives. However, the Vatican’s intervention meant that structurally, it was not a conference of the episcopate, as more than half of the attendees were not elected by the bishops. The working document was discarded, those presiding came from Rome, and from there came the directives, and chiefly because it did not allow for the comprehensive editing of what the working groups had developed, which, except for the doctrinal ones, followed the lines of Medellín and Puebla and progressed in that direction. Nor did it allow the method of see, judge, act, which was replaced by a pre-conciliar doctrine about Jesus Christ and the Church. The assembly nearly discarded everything. Ultimately, however, what could be restructured was, and the result was satisfactory for the majority, considering that the chapters on human promotion and Christian culture seemed adequate channels for pastoral work.

Furthermore, the separation between the accommodation location and the workplace, nor the housing of the episcopate in luxury hotels, which continued to function as such, were not favorable. In this regard, it was the most opposite to Medellín.

The theme was “to propel, with new ardor, a New Evangelization that is projected into a greater commitment for the integral promotion of man and permeates with the light of the Gospel the cultures of the Latin American peoples” (DSD 1). The first part, “Jesus Christ, Gospel of the Father,” unfortunately, did not capture the richness of the living knowledge of Jesus of Nazareth through the prayerful reading done in the communities, one of the great riches of Latin American Christianity that was expressed in Medellín and Puebla. Nor does it even mention that he was handed over to the Roman procurator to be crucified as a subversive by the religious authorities, especially the priestly aristocracy, who resented his leadership among the people, undermining its institutional character; “everyone is going after him” (John 12:19). What is proposed is:

to provoke in Catholics personal adherence to Christ and to the Church through the announcement of the risen Lord; to develop a catechesis that properly instructs the people, explaining the mystery of the Church, sacrament of salvation and communion, the mediation of the Virgin Mary and the saints, and the mission of the hierarchy (DSD 142).

As can be seen, Jesus of Nazareth is replaced by the risen Christ and catechesis, instead of centering on following Jesus, is limited to the Church, the hierarchy, and devotion to Mary. Thus, in the document, the liturgy is not the celebration of fidelity in following Jesus in historical life, but the source and summit, to be applied to life (DSD 34-35). The doctrinarism is such that they even claim that the “values, criteria, behaviors, and attitudes” of popular religiosity, which “constitute the wisdom of our people,” “originate from Catholic dogma” (DSD 36).

However, there are many redeemable texts: the need for a

new evangelization arises in Latin America as a response to problems presented by the reality of a continent in which there is a divorce between faith and life, to the extent of producing blatant situations of injustice, social inequality, and violence. It involves tackling the grand task of infusing energy into Latin American Christianity (DSD 24).

The bishops assert that “the content of the New Evangelization is Jesus Christ” (DSD 27). New situations demand new paths. It cannot lack “the testimony and personal encounter, the presence of the Christian in all things human, as well as confidence in the salvific announcement of Jesus” (DSD 29). Christianity and the Church must “inculturate more in the ways of being and living of our cultures. (…) Thus, the New Evangelization will continue in the line of the incarnation of the Word” (DSD 30).

The treatment of culture suffers from the same focus problem as in Puebla, as it attempts to identify the signs of Catholic identity, massively present on the continent, with its condition of being evangelized. I also disagree with the notion that there could or should exist a Christian culture (DSD 229). The evangelization of culture relies on positive elements, but it will never fully correct the structural negatives. Moreover, I disagree that the inculturation of the gospel consists of introducing values (DSD 230): it is too ethereal.

I agree with the importance of catechesis, but I concur with the paradox of “a lack of doctrinal knowledge alongside deeply rooted Catholic experiences based on the principles of the Gospel” (DSD 247). They rightly insist on “presenting moral life as following Christ” (DSD 239). However, it is a weakness that, in presenting Jesus, they omit his concrete life.

The statement about what the evangelization of black culture means is valuable:

Being aware of the issues of marginalization and racism that weigh upon the black population, the Church, in its evangelizing mission, wants to partake in their sufferings and accompany them in their legitimate aspirations for a more just and dignified life for all (DSD 249).

The same applies to indigenous cultures:

To contribute effectively to stopping and eradicating policies aimed at the disappearance of native cultures as means of forced integration; or, on the contrary, policies that want to keep indigenous people isolated and marginalized from national reality (DSD 251).

When referring to the evangelization of modern cultures, the bishops note from the beginning the “inconsistency between the values of the people, inspired by Christian principles, and the social structures that generate injustices, which prevent the exercise of human rights” (DSD 253).

The characterization of the city and the proposed pastoral care for it reveals a lack of deeper understanding of its reality and adaptation to it (DSD 255-262).

“Christian education develops and ensures every Christian their life of faith and makes it truly that in him his life is Christ” (DSD 264) – Is this statement what happens, or what we would like to happen? Is this even contemplated in what is called Catholic education?

What is stated about Christian education is so pertinent that it would be good if it were at least considered in the processes of Christian initiation:

Christian education is founded on a true Christian anthropology which means the opening of man to God as Creator and Father, to others as his brothers, and to the world as something given to him to enhance its potentialities, not to exercise despotic dominion that destroys nature (DSD 264).

The challenges of reality are well defined:

Latin American reality challenges us by the exclusion of many people from educational schooling, even the basic, by the large illiteracy existing in several of our countries; challenged by the crisis of the family, the first educator, by the existing divorce between the Gospel and culture; by the social and economic differences that make Catholic education costly for many, especially at higher levels. It also challenges us the informal education received through so many non-explicitly Christian communicators, e.g., television (DSD 267).

There is a very realistic awareness of the direction of the demand:

Generally, we are asked, based on secularist criteria, to educate the technical man, the man capable of mastering his world and living in an exchange of goods produced under certain minimal political norms. This reality strongly challenges us to be aware of all the values contained in it and to be able to recapitulate them in Christ (DSD 266).

Is it possible, or do we have to discern what yes and what not? Hence, they call for a dialogue with the technical man and Christian humanism, so that we may reach Christian wisdom (DSD 268).

The anthropological foundation on which the treatment of communication is based is accurate: “Each person and each human group develops its identity in the encounter with others (alterity)” (DSD 279).

The problem is well defined:

We realize the development of the communication industry in Latin America and the Caribbean which shows the growth of economic and political groups that increasingly concentrate in a few hands and with enormous power the ownership of various media and manage to manipulate communication, imposing a culture that stimulates hedonism and consumerism and steamrolls our cultures with their values and identities.

We see how advertising often introduces false expectations and creates fictitious needs; we also see how especially in television programming violence and pornography abound, aggressively penetrating the heart of families (DSD 280).

What is said about social communication and culture is adequate, although it is recognized that it is just beginning (DSD 275-286).

In summary: “we commit to working on: 1. A New Evangelization of our peoples. 2. A comprehensive promotion of the Latin American and Caribbean peoples. 3. An inculturated Evangelization” (DSD 292). These are the three themes proposed by the Pope and assumed by the Conference.

5th Conference of Aparecida

The title of the Aparecida Conference (2007) is “Disciples and Missionaries of Jesus Christ, so that in Him our peoples may have life,” a title that aptly expresses our Christian being.

The document revolves around life and the subject promoting it is the collective of missionary disciples, although the transcendent subject is Jesus Christ. The first part, “The Life of Our Peoples Today,” is presented as the view of the missionary disciples on reality; the second, “The Life of Jesus Christ in Missionary Disciples,” develops their call to holiness, their communion in the Church, and their formative journey; and the third, “The Life of Jesus Christ for Our Peoples,” refers to his mission of service in favor of life, the promotion of human dignity, especially of the poor, those who suffer and particularly of the family and its members of different ages and responsibilities, concluding with a chapter on the evangelization of culture.

The goal of Aparecida is “to deeply rethink and relaunch with fidelity and audacity its mission in the new Latin American and global circumstances” (DAp 11). The need for this relaunch stems from the novelty of the era, which demands evangelization and inculturation of the Gospel within it. Therefore, the document devotes many pages to characterizing it as an opportunity and risk for human life, for the human quality of this life, and more specifically, for the Christian faith. However, for the bishops, a new foundational evangelization is also indispensable due to the situation of Catholicism in our region. Indeed, the document recognizes that in the daily life of the Church, “everything apparently proceeds normally, but in reality faith is wearing out and diluting into pettiness” (DAp 12). Thus, a “foundational event” linked to a “life-giving encounter with Christ” (DAp 13) is essential.

This event concerns, in one way or another, all Catholics: “All of us are called to begin anew from Christ, recognizing that one does not start to be a Christian because of an ethical decision or a lofty idea, but by encountering an event, a Person, who gives a new horizon to life and a decisive direction” (DAp 12). Therefore, the revitalization of Catholicism “does not depend so much on grand programs and structures, but on new men and women who embody this tradition and novelty, as disciples of Jesus Christ and missionaries of his Kingdom” (DAp 11).

From this objective, the document states it was written in continuity with the previous Conferences (DAp 9, 16, 369, 396, 402, 446, 526), as they also aimed to update the Gospel in their own circumstances, aiming to contribute to the Latin American peoples having a human life according to the humanity of Jesus Christ.

We want to highlight the importance of connecting the encounter with Jesus of Nazareth with the commitment to his Kingdom. A commitment to Jesus that excludes the task of the Kingdom is not a commitment to him, but to a Christ we invent, since he rejected Peter’s proposal to stay on Tabor contemplating him (Mk 9:5-8) or that of Magdalene to remain enjoying his resurrected person (Jn 20:16-18) and sent them to continue the mission that the Father had entrusted to him (Jn 20:21). Thus, the encounter with Jesus cannot be conceived as being devotedly with him (this is what pietism consists of), but as following his mission with his same Spirit (DAp 129-153).

The method is to start from the believing gaze on reality to see in it the passage of God and what opposes the fraternal world of the daughters and sons of God, that is, the Kingdom that Jesus came to establish, or, put in other words, listening to the signs of the times:

The peoples of Latin America and the Caribbean live today a reality marked by great changes that deeply affect their lives. As disciples of Jesus Christ, we feel challenged to discern the ‘signs of the times,’ in the light of the Holy Spirit, to place ourselves at the service of the Kingdom, announced by Jesus, who came so that all may have life and ‘have it to the full’ (Jn 10:10) (DAp 33; cf. DAp 366).

Therefore, the method adopted, in continuity with previous conferences, is to see, judge, and act:

This method allows us to systematically articulate the Christian perspective of seeing reality; the assumption of criteria that come from faith and reason for its discernment and critical valuation; and, consequently, the projection of acting as missionary disciples of Jesus Christ (DAp 19).

The reason for this sequence is that to do the equivalent of what he did in his situation, which means following him (cf. DAp 139), it is not only necessary to know his way of dealing with his reality but also with our current situation.

It seems quite correct that the theme is life, since, in Latin America, life is threatened and outraged in multiple ways. On the other hand, there is, in our region, an undeniable desire for truly human life. Moreover, this is why Jesus came into the world: to give us life and, even, to give us life with his life (DAp 347-364).

5th Conference of Aparecida

It is crucial that Christians must be disciples because, as the document realistically recognizes, “if many of the current structures generate poverty, it is partly due to the lack of fidelity to the evangelical commitments of many Christians with special political, economic, and cultural responsibilities” (DAp 501). It is also accurate to link the condition of being disciples with being sent, because Jesus chose disciples to participate in his mission. If he had them by his side, it was so that, through cohabitation, they could naturally absorb his mindset, his attitudes, and his way of relating. It is also notable that the mission is not proposed as the machinery of companies to sell their products, but as an event “that needs to pass from person to person, from house to house, from community to community, especially among the homes in the urban outskirts and the countryside, seeking to dialogue with everyone in a spirit of understanding and delicate charity.” And it continues by quoting Pope Benedict XVI: “if the people met are in a situation of poverty, it is necessary to help them, as the first Christian communities did, practicing solidarity, so that they truly feel loved” (DAp 550).

The document specifies the places where we encounter Jesus of Nazareth: primarily in the Gospels (DAp 247, 255), also in the community (DAp 256), notably in the poor (DAp 257), in the religion of the people (DAp 258-265), and certainly in the Lord’s Supper (DAp 251).

From this personalized encounter with Jesus of Nazareth, the transition is made from a clericalized Church to another, in which all are subjects that build each other up and actively participate in the mission (DAp 154, 156, 159, 162). The document outlines the places of communion for the mission: the parish as a community of communities, the basic ecclesial communities and other small communities, and the episcopal conferences; then, it analyzes how each of the vocations in the Church contribute to communion.

The document notes that this mission, due to its commitment to the poor and their defense, has led to martyrs, a text that was expected since Puebla:

Their commitment to the poorest and their struggle for the dignity of every human being has, in many cases, led to persecution and even the death of some of its members, whom we consider witnesses of the faith. We want to remember the courageous testimony of our saints and those who, even without being canonized, lived radically the Gospel and offered their lives for Christ, the Church, and their people (DAp 98).

The document thematically relates Jesus to the poor in a paradigmatic way: “they are called to contemplate, in the suffering faces of their brothers, the face of Christ who calls us to serve him” (DAp 393). The reason is that “everything that has to do with Christ, has to do with the poor, and everything that is related to the poor cries out for Jesus Christ” (DAp 393). Thus, we have to dedicate time to the poor as friends and ensure that they are subjects of their own liberation (DAp 394). Therefore, just as Jesus lived and proposed the reciprocity of gifts,

the disciples and missionaries of Christ promote a culture of sharing at all levels in opposition to the prevailing culture of selfish accumulation, taking seriously the virtue of poverty as a sober lifestyle to meet and help the needs of brothers who live in indigence (DAp 540).

The poor themselves are also encouraged by the bishops to do this (DAp 257, 265).

For this reason, they propose an alternative globalization, “which is based on the gospel of justice, solidarity, and the universal destination of goods, and which overcomes the utilitarian and individualistic logic, that does not submit economic and technological powers to ethical criteria” (DAp 474; Cf. DAp 64); “new structures that promote authentic human coexistence, that prevent the arrogance of some and facilitate constructive dialogue for the necessary social consensuses” (DAp 384). To make this possible, they propose

supporting the participation of civil society in reorienting and consequent ethical rehabilitation of politics […], creating opportunities for everyone, fighting against corruption, upholding labor and union rights […], promoting fair regulation of the economy, finances, and global trade (DAp 406).

For all this to be possible, the division between public and private, typical of modernity, which can declare these issues as each one’s affair without transcendence, must be overcome. On the contrary,

how much discipline of moral integrity we need, understanding this discipline in the Christian sense of self-control to do good, to be a servant of the truth and the development of our tasks without being corrupted by favors, interests, and advantages. Much strength and perseverance are necessary to maintain the honesty that should arise from a new education that breaks the vicious circle of prevalent corruption (DAp 507).

Conclusion

However, it is necessary to point out the limitation of the Aparecida document. Beyond the horizon that, like in Puebla, and even more in Santo Domingo, conceives of salvation in history and celebrates it in the sacraments, mainly in the Lord’s Supper, two other incompatible horizons also emerge: the theology of mysteries and a somewhat fundamentalist version of kerygmatic theology. It is necessary to say that the more prophetic texts were systematically suppressed by those who had final control of the writing (for example, what they say about the CEBs in n. 193-195 of the original version approved by the assembly and what remained in n. 178-180 of the definitive version). This is because those who promote more pious and transcendentalized assertions are the ones who are more adapted to this social order. Both refer to Jesus of Nazareth, but some are more restricted to his mystery (hence the abundance of John citations) and are prone to doxological languages, very abundant in this document, since, for them, the primary contact with Christ is worship. Others, on their part, insist that the mystery of Jesus shines in his history (hence they refer to the synoptics), in this history one must discover his meaning, and by continuing it, one enters into communion with him.

Both groups value the Mass and like it, but the former understand it as the fontal encounter from which they live, and the latter as the vivifying and committing celebration of following in life. For the first group, the Kingdom is identified with the person of Jesus. This has two consequences: the first is that the event of the kingdom is an intra-ecclesial event, whose door is baptism and whose nourishment is the Word and the sacraments (for example, DAp 382); the second, that the mission will consist of putting in contact with Jesus, so that they integrate into the Church, where salvation is. For the second group, Jesus is certainly internal to the Kingdom, but the reason is that in him and only in him are we sons of God and brothers of all humans (for example, DAp 139, 361).

The objective of this text is to help in the understanding of the document that was produced as a compromise by these two groups and, ultimately, to foster the understanding of the Latin American Church so that we can consciously situate ourselves in it according to the gift received.

Pedro Trigo, SJ. Faculty of Theology of the Universidad Católica Andrés Bello, Caracas, Venezuela. Original Spanish text.

References

CELAM. *I Conferência Geral do CELAM. Documento do Rio de Janeiro* (DR). Bogotá: CELAM, 1955. Disponível em: [https://www.celam.org/conferencias_rio.php](https://www.celam.org/conferencias_rio.php). Acesso: 30 ago. 2022.

CELAM. *II Conferência Geral do Episcopado Latino-americano*. A Igreja na atual transformação da América Latina à luz do Concílio. Documento de Medellín. Bogotá: CELAM, 1968. Disponível em: [https://celam.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/2-conferencia-general-medellin.pdf](https://celam.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/2-conferencia-general-medellin.pdf) Acesso: 23 mar. 2022.

CELAM. *III Conferência Geral do Episcopado Latino-americano*. A evangelização no presente e no futuro da América Latina. Documento de Puebla. Bogotá: CELAM, 1979. Disponível em: [https://celam.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/3-conferencia-general-puebla.pdf](https://celam.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/3-conferencia-general-puebla.pdf) Acesso: 26 mar. 2022.

CELAM. *IV Conferência Geral do Episcopado Latino-americano*. Nova evangelização, promoção humana, cultura cristã. “Jesus Cristo ontem, hoje e sempre”. Documento de Santo Domingo. Bogotá: CELAM, 1992. Disponível em: [https://celam.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/conferencia-general-santo-domingo.pdf](https://celam.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/conferencia-general-santo-domingo.pdf) Acesso: 25 mar. 2022.

CELAM. *V Conferência Geral do Episcopado Latino-americano*. Discípulos missionários de Jesus Cristo para que nossos povos tenham vida. “Eu sou o caminho, a verdade e a vida”. Documento de Aparecida. Bogotá: CELAM, 2007. Disponível em: [https://celam.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/5-conferencia-general-aparecida.pdf](https://celam.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/5-conferencia-general-aparecida.pdf) Acesso: 25 mar. 2022.

COMBLIN, J. O significado teológico-pastoral de Puebla. In: AMERINDIA. *Construindo pontes entre teologias e culturas*. Bogotá: San Pablo, 2011.

DUSSEL, E. *História da Igreja na América Latina*. Nova Terra, Barcelona 1964.

LONDOÑO, F. T. Rio de Janeiro 1955: Fundação do CELAM. In: IHIg (Instituto de História da Igreja). *Anuário de História da Igreja V*. Pamplona: Universidad de Navarra/Facultad de Teología, 1996. p. 405-416.

PIO XII. Carta apostólica *Ad Ecclesiam Christi* do Papa Pio XII aos bispos latino-americanos. Roma: Vaticano, 1955. Disponível em: [https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/es/apost_letters/documents/hf_p-xii_apl_19550629_ad-ecclesiam-christi.html](https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/es/apost_letters/documents/hf_p-xii_apl_19550629_ad-ecclesiam-christi.html). Acesso: 30 ago. 2022.

SCATENA, Silvia. O “Sinaí” de Medellín: A conferência de 1968 como “Novo Pentecostes” para a igreja latino-americana. *Revista Latinoamericana de Teologia*, n. 106, p. 11-28, 2019.

TRIGO, P. Medellín, uma proposta responsável. In *Revista Latinoamericana de Teología*, n. 103, janeiro-abril de 2018, p. 33-57.