For Life and Against Death- A Theology That Takes Sides- Bonino

8/7/2019 For Life and Against Death- A Theology That Takes Sides- Bonino

1/6

For Life and Against Death:

A Theology That Takes SidesTheology comes at the rear guard, as a reflection, as a help to think

and to deepen a commitment already undertaken as an act of obedience.

JOSE MfGUEZ-BONINO I MU S T CONFES S tha t the quest ion of how my

mind has changed is one that has never exercised

me much. The reason may perhaps be that, like most

theologians from the so-called Third World, I have

never set out to develop a theological program

or to articulate an all-encompassing system. Rather

I have spoken or written as questions came up, as

issues were pressed upon me by circumstances or

requests. Consistency or logical development has

never been a conscious objective.

A Necessary Self-Examination

Occasionally, others have called my attention to

changes or developments in my thinking. An Amer

ican doctoral student announced that he identified

three distinct stages in my theological development,

moving from a church-centered to a world-centered

theology. Perhaps he is right! An erstwhile colleague

used to tell me that the decisive break in my thought

occurred in 1968, at the time of the popular uprisings

in Argentina against the military dictatorship of

Onganfa. Even more precisely, he timed it with the

death in Rosario of a student killed by the police.

He contended that my theology had since become

more militant and political, that it had broken away

from th e capti vity of a self-contained theological

universe and had accepted the challenge of histo

ricity. I had never intended to live in a purely theo

logical universe but, again, perhaps he is right!

My wife who is usually righ t tells me that

what I have consistently tried to do is simply to re

read and explain the Bible: "Questions, issues and

challenges have changed," she says, "but at bottom

you remain what you have always been: a preacher

bound to his text." I hope she is right this time!

Only once, in 1974, as I was preparing a series of

evangelis tic talks, I consciously raised for myself thequestion of the consistency of my thinking or, more

deeply, of the uni ty of my life. As I pon der ed for

some hours, this is the conclusion I reached:

When someone turns 50 and begins to view his life

Dr. Miguez-Bonino, currently a visiting professor at Christian Theological Seminary in Indianapolis, is a theologicaleducator from Argentina. He is also active as one of the vice-

presidents of the Permanent Assembly for Human Rights inArgentina.

as something already defined and determined, like awell-traveled road, he begins to ask a question withsome urgency: Can I really consider my life a unity?If I look at it objectively and dispassionately, I mustanswer: "I am not sure that it is like that." Thereare so many disconnections, so many gaps, so manydead-end streets! How many times did I have to tearout the page and start again? My intention of a fewmonths ago to write an article on the developmentof my thought, another request which I finally turneddown, renewed the impression: after 1 revised somethings I had written at least two decades ago, how

many inconsistencies, how many indecisions, howmany starts and stops there were! [Room to Be Peo

ple (Fortress, 1980), p. 25].

It is now again an external stimulus, the request

that I write this article, that forces the perhaps

necessary self-examination which I would hardly

have undertaken otherwise.

Neither Despair Nor Indignation

Obviously, one has to begin with world events,

and more particularly those in Latin America,

which give the background nay, which enter eon-

stituti vely (and this is per haps already a major shift

in my thinking) into theological reflection. Thehorizon has progressively darkened throughout the

worl d in the past decad e. On my con tin ent , fragile

hopes for a peaceful social an d political transfor ma

tion were dashed to pieces in Chile, in Uruguay, in

Argentina and in Bolivia. The brutal regimes in

spired by "national security'' ideology have imposed

their visible police repression and their relentless

economic policies over two-thirds of the continent.

The people of Nicaragua have paid an unbelievable

price for a small and precarious space of freedom.

In Brazil, El Salvador, Argentina, Guatemala and

elsewhere in Latin America the church mourns andcelebrates its martyrs.

I have become more and more convinced that

neither despair nor mere moral indignation is the

right response to this situation. What is happening

before our eyes is a revelation, the "unmasking" of

"the logic of death" in the economic-socio-political

order in which we live. Awareness of this fact came

to me as I was read ing Milt on Fri edma n's "theory

of population" ("the production of human beings is

to be regarded as if it were a deliberative economic

1154 the christian CENTURY


2/6


3/6

How

My

Mind

Has

Changed

Thirteenth in a Series

as an act of obedience. To accept being simply this

kind of theologian and to rejoice in it is the lesson

that some of us have been trying not always suc

cessfullyto learn during these past years.

Methodological Questions

Naturally I was not trained or conditioned for

this kind of reflection. Like most of my fellow pro

fessors of the Third World, I was trained and des

tined to be a second-rate academic theologian (this

is neither an accusation nor a sign of modesty: it is

the simple recognition that we do not have the time,

the infrastructure, the "milieu" or the "market"

even if we had the intelligence and the will to

pursue the rigorous course of the "developed" aca

demic scholar). We found much in the resources of

academic theology that was of value. The rediscovery of the Old Testament's historicity, and partic

ularly of the way in which the old traditions were

reread and reinterpreted for new situations; the

breakthrough in Roman Catholic theology at the

time of Vatican II; the birth of "political theology"

in Europe these and many other developments

were of great help. But we were searching for a new

way of doing theology, one that could begin at the

point where our basic experience lay: with the

struggle of the poor and the commitment of Chris

tians to it.

For me it was very important to realize of course,

we all knew it all the time, but seldom thought about

it that modern academic theology, with its par

ticular methods, was just one of the ways in which

the church had thought through its faith. There was

the "episcopal theology" which began with the

burning issues in the life of the church in the early

centuries; there was the spiritual theology of the

mystics; there was free meditation commenting on

Scripture in early medieval theology. This aware

ness brought about a great freedom to profit grate

fully from the great riches of modern academic the

ology but to look at it as a timebound product of an

age, a place and a social class which need not be

taken as universally normative.

T o be sure, the questions still remained. Latin

American theological production has been con

cerned largely with methodological questions dur

ing the past decade. As social sciences took the place

of philosophy as the privileged method for interpret

ing human experience, new questions emerged:

How should we use these sciences? Were they "auxil

iary" or "constitutive" in theology? How did theyaffect our hermeneutics both of Scripture and of

history? How were we to choose between differing

and conflicting interpretations? How was the ques

tion of "ideology" to be faced?

Although no one would claim that these questions

have been sufficiently answered, I have no doubt

that the joint work of a number of Catholic and

Protestant theologians (here I must bear witness to

the joy, the deep fellowship, the mutual support

which has characterized our work, often in difficult

situations) has helped to clarify some issues. This is

not the place to enter into a detailed discussion of

these questions. But I would like simply to indicate

some of the main convictions and perspectives which

I have begun to articulate during the past ten years

or so.

Reflecting on Basic Motifs

In the first place, I am more and more convinced,

after the first explorations and uncertainties, that

theology must remain theology through and through.

It will best fulfill its vocation in the struggle for

liberation by retaining its specificity and refusing

to dissolve its fundamental epistemological principle

it is a knowledge of faith rooted in God's self-revelation, centered and fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

Moreover, this basis must be explored and articu

lated in its full trinitarian dimension. The living

triune God is the only reality from which we can

face the complex social, political and economic is

sues which a theology of liberation must address if

it wants to be meaningful for the life and witness

of the churches and Christians in our time and

situation. This is the service which we can render

and our only justification as theologians.

How, then, shall we articulate this relation? Is

there a theologically responsible way of rereadingthe biblical testimony from within our present situ

ation? How can the theologian bring out this "re

serve of meaning" (as my colleague Croatto calls it)

in the biblical stories without arbitrarily reading in

to them one's own ideology? Catholic theologians,

relying on an old tradition, emphasize the "sensus

fidelium" and, as one listens to the living response

to the text in the Bible study of the "basis" or "pop

ular ecclesial communities" (reflected, for instance

in Ernesto Cardenal's Gospel in Solentiname), one

becomes convinced of the truth that Jesus himself

celebrated: "I thank you, Father . . . because you



4/6

have hidden these things from the learned and powerful, and have revealed them to the little ones."

At the same time, as a Protestant, I look for other"intrinsic" controls. And I have come to the conclusion that the articulation of the biblical witness interms of our situation has to be mediated by a deepconsideration of basic biblical themes or "motifs,"such as peace (shalom), justice, love, hope and solidarity. I am aware of the danger of falling back into an idealistic ethics. We must be on our guard,to be sure, but I don't think that this is for us agreat temptation. If we keep the reflection on thesebasic motifs closely bound with the story of God'sacts and with our concrete situation, I think it canenrich and give orientation to our commitment.

Sharpening the Tools

Then there is the use of socioanalytical tools. Ifind it difficult to understand that theologians in atradition which oozes philosophy through all itspores feel free to warn us solemnly of the "ideological" danger in the use of the social sciences! For

many of us it has been a painful and at times frustrating exercise to go "back to school" and sit at thefeet of the social scientists, trying to understandtheir categories of analysis, to evaluate the results,to distinguish the different orientations, and to tryto relate this knowledge with integrity to our theological work. But it has been a fruitful exercise inwhich a true and open fellowship has emerged. Interdisciplinary work born in a common commitmentand carried out in mutual respect is now a realityfor Latin American theology. We theologians shouldnot forget that, after all, it was the social scientists'reflection on "dependence and liberation" whichawakened us to a basic biblical motif!

There are two points in relation to the questionof "social analysis" which we have had to face. Onehas to do with "theoretical thinking." Not seldomis it pointed out that some of our work moves at alevel of "abstraction." For most of us this is an existential question because we are engaged at the sametime in pastoral and "academic" work (jacks of alltrades!) and would not be ready to withdraw fromeither.

For my part, I am convinced that theology has tofind expression in different forms and styles, all of

them necessary but no one absolutely normative:the impassioned word of the prophet (witness manyof the episcopal letters in our continent); the spontaneous, concrete response of the basis-community;the spiritual meditation of the mystic (Ernesto Car-denal's poems or Arturo Paoli's meditations on theGospels), and the rigorous "theoretical" work ofthe academic. We are concerned with the unity ofall of this, not with a reduction.

Now the academic work has a subordinate place:it depends on and draws from the praxis and experience of the community, and aims at serving it

through the analysis of this experience and praxis.It is at this point that the theologian must try tosharpen the critical (socioanalytical and hermeneu-tical) instruments of the trade. Theory is one's business! Sloppy and careless talk and alienated andirrelevant theory are the Scylla and Charybdis between which one has to walk.

Christians and Marxists

During these years I have had to face many misunderstandingssome genuine, some contrivedconcerning the relation of liberation theology toMarxism. In Latin America, moreover, more thanacademic status is at stake in this issue. I have triedto clarify some aspects of this relation (see Christians

and Marxists [Eerdmans, 1976]).Let me try to express in a few sentences not the

substantive question but my personal attitude. Ihave never felt attracted to Marxism as a system;neither have I felt inclined to enroll in any anti-Marxist crusade. Since my youth (in which I wasattracted to the Argentine socialist non-Marxist

party) I have believed that certain elements of theMarxist economic and social analysis were correct.I have never experienced the Entdeckungsfreude(joy of discovery) that my friend and colleague Jiir-gen Moltmann thought he had spotted in some ofus. I have more and more come to think in terms ofa long humanist-socialist tradition, with early Chris-

Poor peasants selling firewood in front of a church inChichicastenango, a mountain town in Guatemala.

November 26,1980 1157


5/6

tian and Hellenic roots, which has developed in the

modern world, in which Marx has played an impor

tant even decisive part, but which he has neither

created nor fulfilled.

In this sense I firmly believe that we must now

with Moltmann's words "demythologize" the Marx

question. On this basis I have found it possible to

work together with Marxists and others on ques

tions of human rights, for instance with clarity and

mutual respect.I must say it directly: this socialist option as

Gustavo Gutierrez defines it, the social appropria

tion of the means of production, of the political de-

+ RECENTLY I had a physical examination. As a

consequence my physician and I agreed that my

clothes would fit better and I might live longer and

have more energy if I lost ten pounds. So I have

commenced a 40-day diet worked out on a careful

calculation of calorie intake. I have designed a

"time line" which charts dates and weights for "re

view and evaluation" every ten days; it is posted

above the scales in the bathroom for daily check

ups. I have a calorie counter and a small scale in

the kitchen. I carry a note pad to record all intake.

The "measurable and achievable objective" of two

and one-half pounds every ten days, if met, would

bring me to the "desired goal" on the projected

date. It is a pristine example of Management by

Objective with all the predictable and built-in

pleasures of achievement and the discouragements

of measurable failure.

Caught as I am in a current personal planningand goal-setting activity by means of which I an

ticipate the future with hope, I am in tune with the

dominant theme of almost every meeting of every

conference, association and synod of almost every

Protestant denomination in the United States and

Canada. These various "instrumentalities" of the

church are all preparing for or recovering from

some meeting, large or small, concerned with estab-

Dr. Barr is dean of San Francisco Theological Seminaryin San Anselmo, California.

cision, and of human freedom is the immediate

context of my theological work. It is not an absolute,

not an object of faith, but simply a sociopolitical de

cision (a lucid one, I hope) which concretely defines

my Christian obedience in the world at this time.

Theologically, I think it is a historical project par

tially and ambiguously but really and intrinsically

related to God's Kingdom, and therefore to my

Christian hope. The gospel does not stand or fall

with the correctness of this view. But my theologydoes. After all, if the Century authorizes us to

change our minds every ten years, why should we

claim any greater permanence for our theology!

lishing, reviewing, renewing or moving toward ob

jectives and goals of the church.

This is an altogether appropriate and essential

activity for the synods, boards, committees and ju

dicatories of the church which have a task-orienta

tion and are charged with the accomplishment of

goals. Goals and objectives: for the instrumentalities,

Yes! For the church, the church in its primary and

elemental form, in its fundamental manifestation,

No! For the church as persons gathered together

voluntarily in Christ's name, No! Indeed, such con

centration on goal-setting and achievement of ob

jectives may be the most dangerous and destructive

mind-set and operational assumption in mainline

American Protestantism today as it seeks to be faith

ful to Jesus Christ in the '80s. The danger is that we

will see the church as an organization which exists

in order "to do" rather than "to be."

A Southern Presbyterian bureaucrat, Richard G.Hutcheson, Jr., has written persuasively in this re

gard. In Wheel Within the Wheel (John Knox,

1979) he reminds us that all the

classical confessional statements accepted within theReformed tradition . . . include declarations aboutthe church. They deal with its foundation, its composition, its holiness, its catholicity, its relationshipto God in the headship of Christ and the presenceof the Holy Spirit, its governance, its discipline, itssacraments, the marks of a "true church/' and thecommunion which exists within it. But not one of

Name Tags and the

Theocentric FocusHave we not been so overlaid by the achievement-orientation

of our culture that we have come to see the local church,

the community of faith, as organized to do rather than to be?

BROWNE BARR



6/6

^ s

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use

according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as

otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the

copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,

reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a

violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permissionfrom the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal

typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,

for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.

Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specificwork for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered

by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the

copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS

collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the AmericanTheological Library Association.

Documents

For Life and Against Death- A Theology That Takes Sides- Bonino