Modernity and the Catholic Church

Summary

1 Modernity

1.1 Changes of Modernity

1.2 The Secularization Process

2 Modernity and the Catholic Church

2.1 The Beginning of the “Cultural Wars” in Europe

2.2 The Modernist Crisis

2.3 Social Commitment of Conservative Catholicism

3 Modernity and the Catholic Church in Latin America

3.1 Consolidation of States and Churches

3.2 Social Catholicism in Latin America

4 The Complex Relationship Between the Church and Modernity

4.1 The Church’s Attempts at Reconciliation with Modernity

4.2 Vatican Council II and the Latin American Episcopal Conferences

4.3 The Necessary Dialogue with Historical Times

5 Bibliographical References

1 Modernity

1.1 Changes of Modernity

Western society underwent profound changes starting in the second half of the 18th century. On one hand, the Industrial Revolution caused irreversible economic and social changes, with significant consequences for Latin America, which entered Atlantic trade with a new role. On the other hand, in the political field, the regime of civil and religious liberties symbolized by the “Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen” ushered in a period of turbulence that many feared. It seemed there was “a direct relationship between the beginning of 1789 and the destruction of traditional values in the moral, social, and religious order” (AUBERT, 1977, p.44). The Western world entered the “age of revolutions,” according to the classic expression by Jacques Godechot—an era that would last for several decades. The revolution of the English colonies, the French Revolution, the revolution of Spanish America, and the liberal revolutions of 1830 and 1848 gave rise to diverse political and social realities. New collective actors—ideological movements, parties, armies, states, republics, nations—became the new protagonists of history. Liberalism, democracy, and citizenship came into play both in Europe and in the Americas.

These processes involved changes in ideas, beliefs, imaginaries, values, and behaviors. According to François-Xavier Guerra, a “new system of references” emerged: the triumph of the individual, considered the supreme value and reference criterion by which institutions and behaviors should be measured. Guerra notes that this triumph of the individual had significant consequences in the field of sociability. The new modern sociability was characterized by the association of individuals from diverse backgrounds, who gathered to discuss together and draw their own conclusions. Salons, clubs, social gatherings, and associations were egalitarian societies, where the “modern public opinion, a product of public discussion and consensus among its members,” was born (GUERRA, 2009, p.40).

However, one should not consider that modernity arose in opposition to the Catholic Church. On one hand, this would mean entirely identifying the origins of modernity with some principles of 18th-century Enlightenment. And certainly, there were Catholic Enlightenment thinkers. On the other hand, as Christopher Clark points out, one cannot ignore the selective and ideological character, in the 19th century, of the use of the terms “modern” or “anti-modern” (CLARK, 2003, p.46). In short, the antithetical image of the Church and Catholics who completely reject modernity should be nuanced.

1.2 The Secularization Process

In the context of industrial modernization and changes in social references and customs, processes of secularization developed, through which certain spheres of social life began to gain autonomy from the religious domain. The concept of secularization should not be oversimplified, as it is certainly very complex; nor should its development be confined to specific historical periods. It is preferable to conceive of secularization as a “continuous development, as a permanent work of religion that, in our modern societies, is recomposed, relocated, and acquires multiple, fragmented, subjective, perhaps elusive modalities.” Secularization is – as Di Stefano states – “(…) on one hand, the transition from Christendom regimes to those of religious modernity; on the other hand, the permanent re-creation of religious identities that this transition set in motion” (DI STEFANO, 2011, p.4).

This process developed on different levels and with various consequences. According to Karel Dobbelaere’s proposal, three levels of secularization can be distinguished. “Societal secularization” refers to the relationship between society and religion and the progressive desacralization of social life, being linked to the secularization promoted by politics. At the intermediate level, “organizational secularization” involves the gradual autonomy of organizations—most of ecclesiastical origin—that distance themselves from their moral and religious references and gradually adapt to a secular environment. Finally, “individual secularization” relates to the decreasing ecclesiastical influence on people’s beliefs and behaviors, which does not necessarily imply a decline in belief in God or in religious spirit (DOBBELAERE, 2002, pp. 29–43).

In Latin America, this intricate process became more evident in the second half of the 19th century and had a greater impact on intellectual sectors—those influenced by rationalist and positivist schools of thought—and on societies with later Christianization. Secularization was especially felt among elite groups which, although small, played a leading role in political, cultural, and social life. In any case, the Catholic Church continued to exert broad and deep influence over vast social and cultural sectors.

Furthermore, in most Latin American republics, the secularization process coincided with two other major developments, which intensified debates and conflicts. In fact, the construction of national states and the configuration of local and Romanized Catholic churches emerged as processes not exempt from tension. Additionally, these processes were both agents and outcomes of secularization, which required defining boundaries, determining specific spheres, and redefining the relationship between religion and politics (DI STEFANO, 2012, pp. 220–222).

2 Modernity and the Catholic Church

2.1 The Beginning of the “Cultural Wars” in Europe

The Catholic reaffirmation that began in Europe after 1815 was consolidated with the Restoration, which revitalized the alliance between throne and altar. Although the liberal revolutions were accompanied by new waves of anti-clericalism—coinciding with the birth of industrial society—Christian life experienced a period of strengthening that lasted until 1880. On one hand, the revitalization and creation of religious orders and congregations were solidified. On the other, pastoral activity developed with a new spirit that placed special emphasis on popular religiosity. These were times of patronal festivals and processions, youth works and popular religious books, devotion to the Sacred Heart, Eucharistic adoration and Marian piety, church construction, and a strong surge in collective pilgrimages.

In mid-1846, Giovanni Mastai Ferretti—who had traveled through the Southern Cone capitals in the 1820s—became Pope Pius IX. His pontificate, which lasted over 30 years, coincided with this religious revival and with the process of Roman centralization, which seemed to be based on a certain concern over the multiplicity of local churches and supported the subordination of bishops to the directives of Rome. The pope and his advisors were convinced that this was the way to ensure the restoration of Catholic life and regroup the Church’s forces to face the challenges of anti-Christian liberalism. With the support of the nunciatures and religious congregations—especially the Society of Jesus—Romanization marked the Church’s life for decades and had the enthusiastic support of Catholic masses, drawn to the integrity and charisma of Pius IX.

In defense of Christian values, Roman Catholics and those aligned with Romanization adopted all modern means of organization, mobilization, and communication. They founded newspapers and magazines that criticized political liberalism and secularized culture, and supported the creation of political parties to maintain Catholic solidarity and morality, forming a true network across Europe and, somewhat later, in Latin America.

2.2 The Modernist Crisis

Since the mid-19th century, the affirmation of the Church of Rome as a reference for the universal Church, as well as the progressive condemnations of liberal ideas and the advances of rationalism, led to growing rejection from ruling groups and from those who interpreted the Vatican’s stance as a sign of rupture with modernity. Additionally, between 1861 and 1870, the “Roman question”—concerning whether Rome should serve as the capital of the Papal States or of the forming Kingdom of Italy—motivated European Catholic society to rally around the pope, whose full freedom was demanded.

In the Apostolic Constitution Ineffabilis Deus of 1854, Pius IX defined the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary. On December 8 of the same year, the feast of the Immaculate Conception, the corresponding decree was promulgated. Mary, called to be the Mother of God, was preserved from original sin, which is considered the source of the initial weakness of human reason. Exactly ten years later, on December 8, 1864, Pius IX issued the encyclical Quanta Cura, accompanied by a catalogue of eighty propositions deemed unacceptable, known as the Syllabus errorum. In this document, Pius IX condemned errors rejected by all theological schools and included warnings against state totalitarianism and the excesses of economic liberalism. He also openly opposed the liberal conception of religion and society—state monopoly on education, the secularization of institutions, separation of Church and State, freedom of worship and of the press. The final condemned error stated: “The Roman Pontiff can and should reconcile himself with progress, liberalism, and modern civilization.” The Syllabus was a controversial text and provoked complex reactions both within and outside the Catholic Church, especially among liberal Catholics in France and Belgium (AUBERT, 1977, pp. 49–50). The advance of Italian troops, mistrust toward Protestant Prussia, the pressure from the anti-clerical bourgeoisie prevailing in liberal republics, the rise of socialism—consolidated with the founding of the First International in London in 1864—, the spread of scientistic positivism and Charles Darwin’s evolutionism, as well as the development of secularist propaganda, all generated great alarm, exacerbated tensions, and led to strong condemnations.

The invasion of the Papal States and the fall of Rome in September 1870 would further aggravate the “Roman question.” At the First Vatican Council, opened on December 8, 1869 and suspended due to the entry of Italian troops into Rome, two major documents were approved after intense debate: the dogmatic constitution Dei Filius—which reaffirmed the foundations of Christianity against modern errors such as rationalism, materialism, and atheism—and the constitution Pastor Aeternus, which established the primacy of the Bishop of Rome and papal infallibility.

Between 1870 and 1914, the “modernist crisis” reached its peak and affected the main nations of Western Europe: the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Germany, England, France, Belgium, and Italy. Biblical exegesis of Protestant origin and the publication of Charles Darwin’s early evolutionary works influenced this process. The papacy and Catholic societies resisted, in various ways, the advance of secularization and anti-clericalism. However, in 1878, the pontificate of Pope Leo XIII began, marked by prudence and a pedagogical style. Although the new pope maintained the condemnation of liberalism—freedom of religion, press, education, and conscience—, as well as of indifferentism and secularism, his proposals brought renewal in the social and even political sphere, through encyclicals such as Catholicae Ecclesiae (1890), Rerum Novarum (1891), and Graves de Communi Re (1901).

At the beginning of the 20th century, the revival of so-called theological modernism, influenced by Protestant theology—especially the Tübingen School—caused new tensions. In this new phase, two key figures stood out: the French theologian Alfred Loisy (1857–1940) and the Irish Jesuit George Tyrrell (1861–1909), both of whom were condemned. According to Cardinal Désiré Mercier, Archbishop of Malines, a renowned Neo-Thomist theologian and rector of the Catholic University of Leuven, theological modernism had two major errors at its origin: first, “the supposed antagonism between the Church and progress,” and second, “the unconscious assimilation of the constitution of the Catholic Church to the political organizations of modern societies,” ignoring the authority of the Pope and bishops as “continuators of the apostolic mission” of Jesus Christ (MERCIER, 1907, pp. 35–38).

In 1907, the encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis by Pius X condemned modernism as “the synthesis of all heresies.” It also instituted the “anti-modernist oath,” which became mandatory for “all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors of philosophy and theology in seminaries.”

2.3 Social Commitment of Conservative Catholicism

Alongside the condemnation of modernity, both in Europe and the Americas, there emerged a progressive commitment of conservative Catholics to address the “social question.” Various proposals and denunciations shared a strong rejection of individualist liberalism and of socialism, which was associated with the use of violence. In 1848, Frédéric Ozanam issued his call “Let us go to the barbarians and follow Pius IX”; the “barbarians” were the workers—considered dangerous by many Christians—oppressed by mechanization and whose needs Ozanam understood well. Warnings followed from numerous bishops: Bishop Wilhelm Ketteler in Mainz, Bishop Maurice de Bonald in Lyon, Archbishop Henry Edward Manning in Westminster, and then-Bishop Vincenzo Pecci in Perugia—future Pope Leo XIII—who all appealed for lay Catholic engagement. Their goals were to defend the Church, besieged on several fronts, and to reclaim society for Christ.

Although emerging social Catholicism included various currents, the most anti-liberal trend prevailed, in part due to the revolts of 1848. In this context, several sources of social Catholicism converged. While imprisoned during the Franco-Prussian War, Frenchmen Albert de Mun and René de la Tour du Pin discovered German social Catholicism and the figure of Monsignor Ketteler. Once released, De Mun and La Tour du Pin promoted Catholic Workers’ Circles in France. This initiative spread across Europe and significantly contributed to the re-Christianization of the ruling classes and the strengthening of Christian worker groups.

The coordination of European social Catholicism was stimulated by the fall of Rome, through the association of conservative lay Catholics deeply engaged with social issues. In October 1870, with papal support, the “Catholic Defense Committee” was founded in Geneva, also known as the “Geneva Committee,” presided over by Monsignor Gaspard Mermillod, auxiliary bishop of Lausanne-Geneva. Composed of prominent Catholics from Austria, France, Switzerland, Belgium, and the Netherlands, the Committee undertook two key tasks: publishing the newspaper Correspondance de Genève, which secretly conveyed information from the Vatican, and promoting Catholic social initiatives through permanent contact with European Catholic committees and the Vatican. From 1871 onward, the Committee members referred to themselves as the “Christian or Catholic International,” also called the “Black International,” and the “social question” became a central theme in their annual meetings. They argued that the Church’s great social challenge was the fight against poverty and advocated for greater social engagement by the clergy, the establishment of Christian workers’ associations, the organization of popular lectures, the creation of a popular press, and, above all, “the restoration of Christian public law” as a necessary social foundation. In 1875, the Committee approved the principle of state social intervention and called on Catholics to promote the regulation of women’s and children’s labor, the improvement of workers’ housing, and the preservation of Sunday rest.

Personalities linked to the Geneva Committee or its congresses were involved in the study circles and commissions that gave rise to the Union of Fribourg, presided over by Mermillod, created in 1885 and active until 1891. Under the influence of the Viennese School and La Tour du Pin, the Union of Fribourg shaped the organicist corporatism that stood in stark opposition to liberal capitalism. With ties to the former Geneva Committee, this ideas laboratory influenced, in certain aspects, the preparation of the encyclical Rerum Novarum and the development of the Church’s social doctrine, which also included more democratic elements (LAMBERTS, 2002, pp.15–101).

3 The Modern Era and the Catholic Church in Latin America

3.1 Consolidation of States and Churches

Following the complex beginnings of independent life in the young Ibero-American states, two parallel processes of power consolidation unfolded. On the one hand, at the civil government level, there was a gradual consolidation of state power in the new nations. On the other hand, ecclesiastical authorities asserted their autonomy and gradually moved closer to Rome, which involved reexamining the historical concept of royal patronage. As a result, conflicts multiplied around two main issues: differing interpretations of the legal scope of patronage rights and diverging conceptions of the Church—viewed by some as a state-dependent institution and by others as an independent and sovereign society.

In the confrontations between ecclesiastical authorities, zealous of their autonomy, and republican governments claiming to be heirs of royal patronage, the support of the Holy See proved decisive. Additionally, the defense of ultramontanism and the papacy’s harsh condemnations of liberal ideas provoked growing rejection from intellectual groups, political leaders, and all those who viewed the positions of the Vatican and local Churches as signaling a detachment—or even a rupture—with modernity.

This process of consolidating local Catholic Churches in communion with the pope occurred through precise instruments. In addition to the presence of papal legates in some cities, there was a concerted effort to improve clergy formation through the establishment or reestablishment of seminaries, often under Jesuit leadership, and the training of priests in Rome. In this regard, the Pio Latin American College was founded in 1858 under Jesuit responsibility and welcomed seminarians from across the continent—future bishops and clergy trainers. Catholic press, cultural centers, and Catholic educational institutions also developed, aiming to reach all socioeconomic levels. The arrival of numerous religious congregations from Europe dedicated to education or social work was another fundamental contribution. Similarly, following the European model, Catholic Congresses were organized with significant lay participation: in Buenos Aires (1883), Montevideo (1889), and Mexico (1903). Finally, Latin American bishops reaffirmed their loyalty to Rome by participating in the First Vatican Council—48 of the 700 participants were from Latin America—and the Latin American Plenary Council in 1899 (LYNCH, 2000, pp.78–79).

Throughout this entire process, the role of the bishops was crucial and left a lasting mark on local churches. A generation of prelates appointed by Pope Pius IX from the late 1840s was characterized by a strong missionary profile, closeness to Rome, and frequent confrontations with liberal governments, often ending in exile. In 1847, Rafael Valentín Valdivieso was appointed Archbishop of Santiago, Chile; in 1852, Silvestre Guevara y Lira became Archbishop of Caracas; in 1853, Pedro Espinosa y Dávalos took office as Bishop of Guadalajara (Mexico) and became its first Archbishop in 1863; in 1854, Mariano José de Escalada was named Bishop of Buenos Aires and, in 1866, its first Archbishop. All participated in the First Vatican Council. Under Leo XIII’s leadership, a new generation emerged, educated at the Pio Latin American College, doctorates from the Gregorian University, and more committed to the Church’s educational and social mission. Among them were participants in the Latin American Plenary Council: Pedro Rafael González y Calixto, Bishop of Ibarra (1876) and Archbishop of Quito (1893); Mariano Soler, Bishop of Montevideo (1881) and first Archbishop (1897); Jerônimo Tomé da Silva, Bishop of Belém do Pará (1890) and Archbishop of Salvador (1893).

All of them represented, in the words of Christopher Clark, the “New Catholicism,” whose discourse reaffirmed the “civilizing” influence of the Catholic Church throughout Western history. Christianity was synonymous with civilization, and the best possible society was one founded on Christian faith, the practice of religious virtues, and the teaching and guiding presence of the Catholic hierarchy.

3.2 Social Catholicism in Latin America

As in Europe, conservative Catholic circles in Latin America expressed strong commitment to the first manifestations of the “social question.” The formation of workers’ circles, mutual aid associations, and cooperatives were the first actions of the Christian social movement in Latin America. From the 1870s onward, Catholic workers’ circles were established in several Latin American cities. In 1878, Father Ramón Ángel Jara and Abdon Ruiz Cifuentes promoted the foundation of the first Catholic Workers’ Circle in Santiago, Chile, and the model was replicated in other Chilean cities. Also in Santiago, in 1885, the Saint Joseph Workers’ Association was created, driven by the Spanish priest Hilario Fernández and the Vicar General of the Archdiocese of Santiago, Joaquín Larraín Gandarillas. That same year, the first Catholic Workers’ Circle in Montevideo was founded by a group of laypeople from the Franciscan Third Order. In Argentina, the first Workers’ Circle was founded in Buenos Aires in February 1892 by the German Redemptorist priest Federico Grote. In Mexico, the first Union of Catholic Workers’ Circles, or Catholic Workers’ Union, emerged from the Catholic Congress of 1907. In all these cases, the workers’ circles became one of the most prominent proposals to combat the consequences of poverty and instruct workers in Christian social doctrine.

The reception of Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical Rerum Novarum, in May 1891, took on different characteristics in the Latin American Churches, depending on each nation’s economic and social development as well as the hierarchy’s, clergy’s, and laity’s degree of commitment to the “social question.” Its implementation first occurred in Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Brazil, and Mexico, and later in Colombia and Cuba. In general, what Gerard Cholvy called the “minimalist interpretation” of Rerum Novarum prevailed, characteristic of conservative Catholics who viewed some proposals as excessive or concluded that the document was not directed at their societies. In Argentina, the Catholic press widely disseminated the encyclical, but Archbishop Federico Aneiros of Buenos Aires made no public comments. In Chile, the document’s release was accompanied by a pastoral letter from the Archbishop of Santiago, Mariano Casanova, emphasizing the threat posed by the rise of socialism and resentment among social groups. In Mexico, during the regime of Porfirio Díaz, the encyclical was published and spread in various regions by the clergy and Catholic organizations, though bishops maintained a more conciliatory or ambivalent relationship with the government. In Uruguay, the reception was delayed; Mariano Soler, Bishop of Montevideo since 1890, published the Pastoral Letter on the Church and Social Issues six years later, along with a lengthy complementary essay titled The Social Question in the Face of Rationalist Theories and the Catholic Criterion (SARANYANA, 2001, pp.199–255).

4 The Church’s Complex Relationship with Modernity

4.1 The Church’s Attempts at Reconciliation with Modernity

From the mid-19th century through the 20th century, moments of intense controversy arose among Catholics themselves regarding the Church’s relationship with modern freedoms. These discussions focused alternately on political, social, or purely theological issues, and centered on the complex balance between respect for Church doctrine and magisterium, and the need for dialogue and integration within a constantly evolving society.

At the beginning, the crisis of liberal Catholicism, both in Europe and Latin America, centered on new political proposals and Church-State relations. It opposed supporters of the old regime and those who adhered to what would later be called the “autonomy of the temporal”; both positions showed their weaknesses when taken to extremes (AUBERT, 1977, p.45). This episode triggered the first expression of the so-called “conciliation Catholicism” — a return to the sources, with the will to adapt to the times of political democracy, economic liberalism, and cultural freedom. It would be opposed by “rejection Catholicism,” which represented the acceptance by some Church sectors of defensive and even closed stances rooted in tradition (MALLIMACI, 2004, p.27–28). In this sense, the publication of the Syllabus in 1864 caused considerable confusion among modern-minded individuals, including those “within” the Church.

In the first two decades of the 20th century, the second moment of sharp controversy arose with the so-called “modernist crisis,” marked by its intellectual character. Its protagonists attempted to open dialogue between Catholic culture and modern streams of thought in the scientific, historical, and critical fields. Efforts to connect faith and history and to deepen and compare the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth with those of the Church required well-grounded and consistent work, as well as guides and mentors—something not always achieved. This new attempt at “reconciliation” provoked a new “rejection.” In 1907, Pope Pius X’s encyclical Pascendi condemned biblical exegesis efforts as anti-Catholic initiatives and labeled the “modernists” as “internal enemies.” The consequences were complex: on one hand, a fundamentalist trend took hold, resistant to societal modernization and internal Church changes, even through deplorable works such as La Sapinière; on the other hand, biblical studies and the history of religions advanced steadily — through the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome, the École Biblique in Jerusalem — all under Roman supervision and the creation of the Pontifical Biblical Commission.

A third moment emerged from the late 1940s onward, with the reappearance of “conciliation Catholicism” and “rejection Catholicism” based on the innovative theological works developed by Dominicans at Le Saulchoir (Étiolles-sur-Seine, France) and Jesuits at Fourvière (Lyon, France). This Nouvelle Théologie opposed scholastic intellectualism, deepened the study of the Church Fathers, and questioned the gap between theology and modern culture. It also prompted the censures initiated by Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Humani Generis in 1950, and the purges of Fourvière and Le Saulchoir a few years later. Less than fifteen years later, several censured theologians would serve as experts at the Second Vatican Council. Jean Daniélou, SJ, Yves Congar, OP, and Henri de Lubac, SJ, would be named cardinals.

4.2 Second Vatican Council and Latin American Episcopal Conferences

The process of reunifying the Latin American Churches had just begun with the First General Conference of Latin American Bishops in Rio de Janeiro in 1955 — from which CELAM would emerge — when preparations for the Second Vatican Council began in 1959, driven by Pope John XXIII.

According to Alberto Methol Ferré, the Second Vatican Council represented the Church’s first transcendence of modernity. “For this aggiornamento, the Church had to re-engage with the entirety of modernity, from which it had defended itself during the disintegration of the medieval and baroque Christendom” (METHOL and METALLI, 2006, p.64). Not without difficulty, the Church managed at Vatican II to respond to the challenges posed by the Protestant Reformation and secular Enlightenment, taking on their challenges and assimilating the best of both movements.

Nevertheless, the Second Vatican Council, which would open a new era in the history of the Catholic Church, was experienced only faintly by the Latin American Churches. “The Churches of Latin America recreated the Council once it had concluded,” says Methol. Indeed, by the late 1960s, “the logic of the Council” entered Latin America through the Apostolic Constitution Gaudium et Spes of December 1965, the encyclical Populorum Progressio of March 1967, and the Second General Conference of Latin American Bishops in Medellín in mid-1968 (METHOL and METALLI, 2006, p.62).

Three years after the conclusion of the Council, the Medellín Conference took place, which brought about an unprecedented transformation in Latin American churches and societies. Through a renewed emphasis on the humanistic—yet no less transcendent—dimension of Christianity, the Medellín Conference contributed to a heightened concern for justice and a renewed focus on politics as a form of service. “The concern was not the ‘defense of the faith,’ as in Rio de Janeiro, but rather the radical solidarity of the Church with the poor and oppressed of Latin America, and in the biblical sense of the irruption of the liberating God in history” (METHOL, 1986).

Throughout the following decade, the Latin American Church underwent a process marked by risks and valuable definitions. The results of Latin American theological reflection and development were expressed at the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate in Puebla in 1979. Strongly inspired by the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi, the Puebla Conference focused on the theme of continental evangelization and concluded with a reaffirmation of the Church’s need for conversion to a preferential option for the poor, aiming at their complete liberation.

4.3 The necessary dialogue with historical times

The Church’s relationship with the changing tides of history reveals the complexity of ecclesiastical definitions. The Catholic Church is undoubtedly one in its faith in Jesus Christ, its doctrinal truths, and its adherence to the magisterium; yet it is also diverse, as it must integrate within constantly evolving historical and cultural circumstances and engage in dialogue with them.

In this context, the commitment to unity and plurality involves inherent risks. A perspective focused solely on unity may lead to fundamentalist attitudes and the rejection of any manifestation of “conciliation Catholicism.” Conversely, a perspective that emphasizes only diversity may drift toward relativism, since conciliation is not always feasible.

“To dialogue with the world requires us to be perfectly bilingual—that is, to carry the revelation of Jesus Christ in our very flesh and to understand the contemporary languages of humanity” (POUPARD, 2005, p.26), declared Cardinal Poupard in 2004, urging fidelity to the faith while also being open and innovative.

Susana Monreal, Catholic University of Uruguay. Original text in Spanish.

5 Bibliographic References

AUBERT, R. The Catholic Church from the Crisis of 1848 to the First World War. In: AUBERT, R. and others (Ed.). New History of the Church. Volume V. Madrid: Cristiandad, 1977. pp.13–204.

DI STÉFANO, R. What Do We Mean When We Say “Church”? Reflections on the Historiographical Use of a Polysemic Term. Ariadna histórica. Languages, concepts, metaphors, no.1, pp.197–222, 2012. Available at: www.ehu.eus/ojs/index.php/Ariadna/issue/view/476. Accessed: Oct. 20, 2015.

DI STÉFANO, R. For a History of Secularization and Laicity in Argentina. Quinto Sol, vol.15, no.1, 2011. Available at: http://ojs.fchst.unlpam.edu.ar/ojs/index.php/quintosol/article/viewFile/116/94. Accessed: Oct. 20, 2015.

DOBBELAERE, K. Secularization: an analysis at three levels. Brussels: P.I.E.-Peter Lang, 2002.

GUERRA, F.-X. Modernity and Independence. Essays on the Hispanic Revolutions. Madrid: Encuentro, 2009.

LYNCH, J. The Catholic Church in Latin America, 1830–1930. In: BETHELL, L. (Ed.). History of Latin America. Vol. 8. Latin America: Culture and Society, 1830–1930. Barcelona: Crítica, 2000. pp.65–122.

MALLIMACI, F. Catholicism and Liberalism: Stages of the Struggle for the Definition of Religious Modernity in Latin America. In: BASTIAN, R. (Coord.) Religious Modernity. Latin Europe and Latin America in Comparative Perspective. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2004. pp.19–44.

MERCIER, D. Modernism, Its Position Regarding Science, Its Condemnation by Pope Pius X. Brussels: L’Action Catholique, 1907.

METHOL FERRÉ, A. The Church in Latin America. Nexo Journal, vol.4, no.10, Dec. 1986. Available at: http://www.ili-metholferre.com/detalle_de_pagina.php?entidad=articulo&pagina=88. Accessed: Feb. 3, 2016.

METHOL FERRÉ, A.; METALLI, A. Latin America in the 21st Century. Buenos Aires: Edhasa, 2006.

POUPARD, P. The Identity of Cultural Centers and Young People in Search of Captivating Beauty. In: Meeting of Catholic Cultural Center Leaders of the Southern Cone. Documents. Salta: Pontifical Council for Culture, Archdiocese of Salta, 2005. pp.17–32.

Further Reading

CLARK, Christopher; KAISER, Wolfram. Culture Wars: secular-catholic conflict in Nineteenth-Century Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

FOUILLOUX, E. A Church in Search of Freedom. French Catholic Thought between Modernism and Vatican II (1914–1962). Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1998.

LAMBERTS, E. (ed.) The Black International. L’Internationale noire (1870–1878). Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2002.

MICELI, Sérgio. The Brazilian Ecclesiastical Elite. Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil, 1988.

RODRIGUES, Cândido; ZANOTTO, Gizele; CALDEIRA, Rodrigo Coppe (eds.). Expressions of Catholic Thought in South America. São Paulo: Fonte Editorial, 2015.