the catholic church in the nicaraguan ravolution

7/28/2019 The Catholic Church in the Nicaraguan Ravolution

1/14

The Catholic Church in the Nicaraguan Revolution: A Gramscian AnalysisAuthor(s): Dana SawchukSource: Sociology of Religion, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Spring, 1997), pp. 39-51Published by: Association for the Sociology of Religion, Inc.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3712105Accessed: 22/09/2008 23:28

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asr.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the

scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that

promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Association for the Sociology of Religion, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend

access to Sociology of Religion.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3712105?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asrhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asrhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3712105?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/14

Sociologyf Religion997,58:1 39-51

The CatholicChurch n the NicaraguanRevolution:A GramscianAnalysis*Dana SawchukUniversity f Toronto

This essayemploysa Gramscianrameworko analyze he roleof theCatholicChurch n theNicaraguan evolution.Thediffering ositions f thehierarchynd base n the Churchareexplainedin termsof theclassconflict n Nicaraguan ocietyandin termsof theChurch'snstitutionalecessi-ties. Thehierarchy'stancewas botha reflection f thepositionsheldby theNicaraguanbourgeoisieanda resultof thebishops' esire opreserveheChurch'snfluencensociety.As thoseat thebaseofthe Churchbegan o suffer nceasedoppressironndpoverty, heybegan oparticipaten therevolu-tionary truggle.Liberationheologyncouragedndlegitimateduchaction.While hebase's upportof the FSLN threatenedhehierarchy'sourgeois olitical roject ndinterestn self-preservation,tsadoption f liberationheologyhreatenedhereproductionf theChurch'snternal owerstructure.As such,conflictwithin heChurchalsodeveloped.

The Nicaraguanrevolution1 is unique because it was the first revolution inhistorywhich involved the active and continuing participationof largenumbersof Christiansas Christians.While both Catholics and Protestantsplayeda signif-icant role in the revolutionaryprocess,particularly ntriguingare the intricaciesof the Catholic Church'sparticipationboth before and after the triumphof theSandinistasin 1979. Though traditionallymost of the institutionalChurch hadgiven its uncriticalsupportto the country'sdictatorialelites, in the mid-1960sthe sectors challenging the systemof repressiverule began to grow. Through acomplex process,by the time the Sandinistas marchedvictoriousinto Managuaon 19 July 1979, virtuallythe entire Church- fromlaityto the Archbishopappearedbrieflyto be on their side. The developmentof this novel alliance andthe mannerin which it deterioratedthroughoutthe 1980shas fascinatedschol-

Direct orrespondenceo DanaSawchuk, entreortheStudy f Religion,23St. George treet,UniversityfToronto,Ontario,CANADAM5S 2E8.Work nthispaperwassupportedytheSocial ciencesndHumanitiesResearchouncilfCanadanthe orm fadoctoralellowship.1 The revolutionwas led by the FrenteSandinista e Liberacin.NacionalFSLN), which began its armedstrugglein the 1960s. By the late 1970s, the guerillawarhad broadenedinto a massivepopularinsurrectionwhich finallysucceededin ousting the dictatorAnastasioSomozaDebayle.The corruptand repressiveSomozafamilyhad ruledNicaraguawith the supportof monied domesticelites, the military,and the U.S. governmentforover forty years; he Sandinista'sprogramorredressing he widespread overtyanddeep-rooted nequalitiesleft behindwasbasedon a uniqueblend of nationalism, Marxism,andprogressiveCatholicism.

39


3/14

40 SOCIOLOGY FRELIGIONarsever sinceandhas led to the publication f a smallmountain f booksandarticles n the subjectseethe literatureeviewn Brett1993).Forall the detail andsophisticationf manyof thesetreatments, owever,certain rrors nanalysis ndinterpretationrefrequentlymade.Forexample, sGismondi 1986: 13-14) notes,somecommentatorsite the religiousactoras"crucial"r a "movingorce in the overthrow" ithoutadequatelyecognizingthatreligiousorcesdidnot uniformly romotehe Sandinistas.Otherscholars(e.g., Bakhtiari1986;Gilbert 1988), while making he essentialdistinctionbetween he baseand thehierarchyn the Church,ailto searchdeeplyenoughfor the underlyingogicof eachfaction'spositionand hence riskdistorting roversimplifyinghe natureof both Church-Sandinistand intra-Churchela-tions.Thus,someappearo assume hatpost-VaticanIinnovations ndlibera-tion theologywerechieflyresponsibleor the participationf the base in therevolution.Byemphasizing arrowly eligiousactorsat the expenseof broaderpoliticalandeconomicones,theyunrealisticallymply hat a simplecausal on-r.ectioncan bedrawnbetween, orexample, he reading f the Medellindocu-mentsandthe construction f bombs orthe FSLN.On the otherhand,those(suchas Dodson1986)who cast the base-hierarchyndthe Church-Stateon-flictof the 1980schiefly n termsof issuesof"democratization"rtificiallyepa-rate the analysisof "politics"romquestionsof class and religious deology.Though hesevarious erspectivesocontain nsight, he factremains hateachone providesonly a superficial r partialanalysisof the subjectunder nves-tigation.Instead,we need an approachwhichcombinesa recognition f the institu-tionalcomplexity f the CatholicChurchwithan awarenesshat inNicaragua(as elsewiere in LatinAmerica),mattersof religion,class,and politicsareinextricablyinked.I contend hat insightsroma Gramscian-inspiredociologyofreligionprovideuswiththistypeofperspective.At the core of Gramscianheory s the assumptionhat "... the complex,contradictory,nddiscordantnsemble f the superstructuress the reflection fthe ensemble f the socialrelationsof production"Gramsci1971:366). Fromthis it follows hatreligion,hough ocated n the superstructuralealm, emainssocially ituatedandlargelyimitedbythe socio-economictructure f a partic-ularhistoricalperiod.As such,patterns f domination,ubordination,nd con-flictin societyarereproducedn the religiousield(Maduro982).Thisfurtheruggestshatwemustappreciatehecomplexityf theCatholicChurchas an institution.The CatholicChurch n Nicaraguaannotbe treatedas if it constitutedone monolithicwhole; it is betterconceptualized s an"interclassocialspace"n whichcompeting ocialclasses eekreligiousegiti-mationfortheirrespectivepoliticalprojects Villela1979:267). Thus,whileone segmentof the Churchmaysupport uling-classominance,anothercanbecome mportantn the struggleo construct newhegemonyGramsci 971;Maduro 982).It is in relation o thisconceptthatwe can meaningfullydopt he widelyusedcategoriesof "hierarchy"nd "base"o applyto the two mainfactionswithinthe NicaraguanChurch.Thoughstrictlyspeaking hierarchy"efers othe bishops ndarchbishops ithinthe institution,ertainof theclergy analso


4/14

THE CATHOLICCHURCH IN THE NICARAGUAN REVOLUTION 41bealliedwith this faction.Moreover,we mustconsiderhehierarchy'sconomicandsocialties to the bourgeoisie. s a resultof the financial upport ndpriv-ilegesbestoweduponthe Churchbythisclassoverthe years forexamples eeWilliams1985:347-48)he hierarchy as become ncorporatedntothe formofeconomic organizationpromotedby the bourgeoisie.In turn, its membershavetendedto functionas the "organicntellectuals"2f the bourgeoisiendassuchhave helpedarticulateand legitimate he dominantpositionof this class inNicaraguanociety(Kirk1992:33-57;Maduro 982:72-74, 122-35).Bycontrast,we can note that the label"base"enerally eferso thosenotincluded n the hierarchyi.e., the laity,religious, ndpriests).Yet "base"lsoindicatesa basicsocialgroup,n termsof the subordinatelasspositionof themajority f the laityand their ocationat the foundation f the socio-economicpyramidLevine1985:298).The clergyandreligiouswhohave beenconvertedto the causeof the poor laityandwho workalongsidehemmaythen becomethe "organicntellectuals"f thisdominated lass.Therefore,wecan takehier-archyand base as conceptswhichexpressboththe institutionalocationandclass affiliationof groupswithinthe Church.I will show in thisessayto whatextent theiractions ntherevolution reconsistentwiththissocial ituation.It shouldbestressed,n addition, hatthisvariable f institutionalocationis not insignificant.The Gramsciannotion of the relativeautonomyof thesuperstructurendicates hatstructures ndconflictson the level of an entiresocietydo not mechanicallyrcompletelynfluence eligious ctions; he insti-tutionalnecessitiesof self-preservationndself-reproductionlsoplaya roleindetermininghe positionsofreligious ctors Gramsci 971:408;Maduro 982:87, 103-05).Therefore,naddition o discussinghe classbasisof the Church'sparticipationn the larger evolutionarytruggle, his essaywill examinethepolitical xpressionsf thehierarchy'sesire o preservehetraditionalnfluenceof the Church n Nicaraguanociety,and of itsgoalto ensure hat the Church'sinternal tructure f religious ower s reproduced. learly, he base's hreattosuchinstitutional eedsalsodeserves onsideration.hrough fullappreciationof historical onditions,political-economiclliances,andreligious-institutionalexigencies,the Gramscianrameworkan affordus a deeperunderstandingfhow the Catholic Churchboth supportedand helpedto delegitimatetheNicaraguanevolution.OBANDOY BRAVOAND THE HIERARCHY3

Accordingo mostobservers,heNicaraguanishops egan o dissolve heirtraditionalalliance with the dictatorship n 1970, the yearMons. Miguel2 In Gramsci(1971: 5-6; see also Maduro 1982:72-74, 122-35), organicintellectualsarefunctionariesof the superstructurewho workto give the class with which they arealignedhomogeneityand an awarenessofits economic, political, andsocialfunction.3 As Lewellen (1989: 22-23 n. 22) notes, referring o "thebishops" s a simplificationas not all bishopssharedhesameviews.Still,mostof thebishopswerealliedwithObando nd hehierarchyidtendto speakwith one officialvoice.


5/14

42 SOCIOLOGY FRELIGIONObandoy BravowasappointedArchbishopfManagua. s thestorygoes,whenSomoza avetheArchbishop Mercedes-Benzs a gift,Obandoold the carandgavethe money o the poor.Thisact, interpretersftencomment,"symbolized"Obando'soncern ortheoppressednd his breakwith SomozaWilliams1985:352).However,we mustconsiderhatinfact Obandounabashedlysed he luxuryvehicle until anti-Somoza atholics urned t intoa source f embarrassment-andthat he thenonly reluctantly isposed f the car(Reding1985:307-08). Inretrospect,we can see thatthe tale of ObandoandtheBenzhintsat someof thefactors t workbehind hehierarchy'sositionshroughouthe 1970sand1980s.Not only does this story intimatethat the hierarchicalChurch'slinks toNicaragua'sliteswerenot so easilybroken, he fact that Obando'subsequent"charity" asbroadlypublicized nd laudedalso implies hat the Churchwasawareof the benefitsofappearingo sidewith the poor.Finally,Obando'sven-tual reaction o thegift(acharitablecttowardshe poorwithouta challenge othe structt,resunderlying heir poverty)symbolizesa social justicestrategybasedon philanthropyand reform,not revolution.Indeed, the statements of the hierarchyduringthe early 1970s supportedsuch an interpretation. Though the pastoral letters of 1971 and 1972 urgedChristians to construct a more just political and social orderand stressed theimportanceof human rights,the hierarchystopped short of criticizing Somozadirectlyand did not call forhis resignation(Williams 1985:352-53). Moreover,as Berryman 1984: 63) comments,the bishopsalso issueda clearwarningthat,unless the political systemweregiven greater lexibility,other undesirable orces(such as the FSLN) would benefit. Whatever anti-dictatorial sentiments theletters expressed, they also indicated the bishops' opposition to the FSLN'srevolutionaryoption.The hierarchy's reaction to the 1972 earthquake in Managua is alsorevealing.Immediatelyafter the quake,while Somozaseizedtotal political powerand beganto siphon off much of the internationalhumanitarianaid for his ownbenefit, the bishopswereremarkably uiet (Berryman1984:65-66). In fact, thehierarchy's irstpubliccriticismof the regimedid not come forone year.By thistime, though, the bourgeoisiehad already begun to organizeagainst Somoza,since it had been madeclear to them that the landspeculationandthe monopo-lization of the reconstructionboom by Somozaand his friendsthreatened theirown businessinterests(Foroohar1989:88-94; Kirk1992:62-63). The hierarchycame to oppose Somozaopenly only after the bourgeoisiethemselves began toact on their realizationthat Somoza'sgreedwas leadingto their own socio-eco-nomic marginalization.After this point and until shortlybeforethe revolutionin 1979, the hierarchy'sstatements reflected the positionsof the bourgeois-ledanti-Somozamovement,particularlyn their calls for a new, morally ust societyand a morehumane capitalism(Foroohar1989:96-98, 189-97; Gismondi 1986:27).As the strength of the FSLN grew throughout the 1970s, moreover, thisopposition became increasingly concerned that the Sandinistas would seizepoweronce Somozawasgone. Since the revolutionaryprojectof the Sandinistascontradictedtheir own reformistagenda,the bishopsand the opposition united


6/14

THECATHOLIC HURCH N THENICARAGUANREVOLUTION 43in two basicobjectives:"toget rid of Somoza,and to ensurethat the FSLNwouldnot lead he newgovernment"Williams1985:358).All of the hierarchy'scollaboration"ith the Sandinistasmustbe seen inlightof these considerations.n the end, the bishopsandthe bourgeois ppo-sition entered nto their"strategiclliance"withthe FSLNonlyafter he fulfil-mentof theirobjectives ecamempossiblen the faceof Somoza'sefusalo stepdown and the Sandinista's opularity nd inevitablevictory(Williams1985:358). As Williams pp.361-62) argues,he bishopshadlittlechoice but to sup-portthe FSLNofficially;f theydidnot, theywouldriskalienatinghe majorityof the (largelyCatholic)populationwhichdidsupporthe Sandinistas,ndtheywouldjeopardizehe possibility f a cordialrelationshipwiththe Sandinistasonce they took power.The bishops'decisionto supporthe Sandinistaswasapragmaticne.The hierarchymaintainedheir showof publicsolidarityoralmosta year,butby May1980the bishopsbegan o moveintoopenoppositiono the FSLN.It is telling that the hierarchyirstbeganto criticize he governmentmme-diately after Violeta Chamorroand wealthy businessmanAlfonso Robeloresignedrom he revolutionaryunta n April1980(i.e., whenpoliticalpowerwas no longer shared with representativesof the bourgeoisie) (NuzziO'ShaughnessyndSerra1986:15). From hat pointon, the positionof thetraditionalChurchhierarchy onvergedalmostcompletelywith that of thepoliticalfaction led by the ConsejoSuperiore la Empresa rivadaCOSEP,aprivate ectorumbrella rganization hichincluded he chambers f industry,commerce, ndagriculture). ater,whenmuchof the powerofCOSEPandthebusiness lasshadbeenweakened ythegovernment,hehierarchyssumedheleadof theoppositiono the FSLN Lewellen1989).Ofall thebishops'ounter-revolutionaryctionsduring his time (forexamples ee Serra1985:160-63),mostdamagingwastheirsidingwiththe contrasagainst he governmentandtheirhelpinsecuringurtherUS aidforthesecounter-revolutionaryorces Kirk1992:203;Mulligan1991:194-98).Thoughbythe late1980s hehierarchy adsoftened its stance towardthe governmentsomewhat, he bishopsdid notsupport he Sandinistas'1990 bid for reelectionand werepleasedwith thevictoryofVioletaChamorro'soalition.The bishops' dentificationwith the bourgeoisiewasnot the only factorbehindthe hierarchy'snti-Sandinistaosition.The bishops' esire o preservethe traditionalnfluenceof the Church n Nicaraguanocietyalsofuelled heiropposition o the FSLN.Clearly,n SandinistaNicaraguahe bishopsdid notenjoythe samestatureand privileges hey had in earliertimes.Underpriorregimes,Church epresentativeseredesperatelyeeded o provide egitimationfora repressiventi-democratictateandso were reated ccordingly:heyweregrantedavours ndgivengiftsofmoneyandland, heChurchwasgivenalmosttotalcontrolof the education ystem,and so forth.The Sandinistas, owever,did not have to buy Churchfiguresfor their side - certain high profileSandinistaswerealsopriests.nanycase,the revolutionaryovernmentequiredfar less symbolicjustificationoverall-its legitimationalso came throughimprovementsn the lives of the majoritysprovided ythe revolutionaryro-cess itself (Mulligan1991:230-35). In short,the Sandinistaswerenot com-


7/14

44 SOCIOLOGY FRELIGIONpelled to court the bishopsto ensuretheir verysurvivaland the hierarchysuffered concomitantossofprivilege.The hierarchy lso witnessed he loss of someof its mostablepersonneloSandinistaprograms.incethe mid-1970smanyof the Church'sbestpreparedpastoraleadershadneglectedor left their layduties as theybeganto devotemoreenergy o Sandinista rganizations.hough hesepeople hemselvesmayhave defined theirparticipationn FSLNprogramss partof theirChristianduty, he shiftof primaryoyaltieso revolutionaryrganizationsasoftencon-sidered lossbythe officialChurch DodsonandMontgomery982:178;Jerez1984:21). This recognition f the competitionbetweenthe Churchandstateforlay eaders lsounderlayhehostilityofbishopsowardheFSLN.Finally, he bishops'often virulentanti-communismlso reinforcedheiroppositiono the Sandinistas.t is crucial o note,however, hat thisanti-com-munismwas ensconcedin the broaderheologicalpositionfrom which theofficialChurchoperated.Since this theologicalstance is best understoodncontrasto the base'sheology f liberation nd in relation o thepositionof thebishopsvis-a-vis he basewithinthe Church,we next turnto examine he roleof thebase tself ntherevolution.THEBASE OR THE"POPULARCHURCH"

Many aityat the baseof the Church nNicaraguawerealsosituated t thebaseof Nicaraguanociety.As such,they paidthe highesthumancostsduringthe development f dependent apitalismn Nicaragua ndthey latersufferedthe most under tscrisisduring he 1970s.Unfortunately,owever,a commonbeliefamongpoorCatholicswas that their social and economicmiserywasinevitable nd ordained yGod.Theyoftenexpressedhisattitudewithexpres-sionssuchas"Christwaspoor.Hecame o teachus to suffer,"r,"Godhasmadeus poorand we don't have to change" Foroohar1989: 153). Further, uchpassivity ndfatalismwereoftenengenderedrreinforcedythe social eachingsof the traditionalChurch NuzziO'ShaughnessyndSerra1986:56-57).These teachings,however,beganto change in the mid-1960swith theSecondVaticanCouncilandlater he Medellinconferenceof LatinAmericanbishopsn 1968.At theseeventstheChurchofficially oncernedtselfwith theproblemsf the modernworldandproclaimedtselfto be in favorof socialandeconomicchange.At Medellin, he povertyof LatinAmericanswasanalyzedusingthe socialscientificdependencyheoryandLatinAmerican ocietywasdiagnosed s beingrentbyviolenceandinjustice. n the faceof such"sinful"conditions,the bishopsproclaimedt a Christianresponsibilityo denouncematerial overty,o live insolidaritywiththeoppressed,ndto supporthe roleof thepoorasagentsof change n society.An important artof this"optionorthe poor"wasalsothe callforfar-reaching,venrevolutionary,ransformationsof social structures.Crucially,by their demandfor spiritualand political"liberation,"he bishopsat Medellinbeganto weakenthe CatholicChurch'scenturies-oldlliancewithLatinAmerica'slites(SecondGeneralConference1973).Around he same ime,thesethemesbegan o appearn the writings fthefirst iberationheologianse.g.,Gutierrez973).


8/14

THECATHOLICCHURCH N THENICARAGUANREVOLUTION 45Inspiredby such principles,manyCatholic students,religiousworkers,andpriestsbegan o optforthepoor hemselves ygoing o livein thepoorbarriosfthecities orby goingto work n the rural reaswithprogramsuchas theJesuit-runComiteEvangelicoe PromociongrariaCEPA)or the CapuchinFathers'Delegadose la Palabra.Othersdiscussedhe Bible with the poorin bothruraland urban comunidadesclesialesde base(CEBs).This is not to imply,however,that thesegroupsbecame nstantaneouslyransformednto revolutionaryellsforthe FSLN.Despite he revolutionarymplicationsf liberationheologyandMedellin,as Girardi1989:96) pointsout,theseoriginalmanifestationsf theoptionforthe poorhad moralandsocial,butnot political, eatures.Thus,mostof theseearlyprogramsadcharitablendreformistvertones stheyfocused nself-help and technical training (CEPA), or on pastoral initiatives such as

authorizingaypeopleo performertain acramentalunctionstheDelegados).Furtherconcientizacion as still neededand, significantly, his was not to be aone-wayor linearprocess.When progressive aityand clergywent to live in thebarrios rthe rural reas, heywerepersonallyonfrontedwiththe extreme uf-feringof the poorand they saw the facesbehind the sociologicalanalysisofMedellfnandliberationheology.Thisencounter,n whichthe pooreducatedthe progressives, asvital in expandinghe understandingnddeepening hecommitment of the progressives.It wasalsothroughhisencountern whichtheclergy, he religious,ndlayleaders egan o act as theorganicntellectualsf thepoor.As such, heyhelpedtransformhe religiosity f the people(Serra1985:154). In biblicalreflectionandpastoralmeetings, hey encouraged eopleto recognizehat theirpovertywasagainstGod'swilland thatthestruggleorchangecouldbejustified ytheirfaith.Theyalsobegan o incorporateoncepts romMarxist nalysisntotheirdiscussions.Eventually,hey ledtheirgroupso developa revitalizedChristianpraxisbasedon liberationheology:membersameto understandhe complexrealityof povertyandoppression,ameto discoverhe structuralactorsunder-lyingtheseconditions,andcameto acknowledgeheneedto workagainsthesefactorsas a principleof faith.Thusthesegroupsbecame ncreasinglyctivepolitically.Bythe early1970ssome grassroots oliticalorganization ad begunin the ruralareasand thestudent-based evolutionary hristianMovementhadbegun o organizetrikesand occupy churches in the cities to protest human rights violations and thehigh price of basic goods. Importantly,during the church occupations certainpriests upportedhe studentsandthusbecame he firstclergy o openlycon-front he Somoza egimeWilliams1985:351).The 1972 earthquake,however,served as a pivotalcatalystforbroader,moreintensepoliticalactionbyChurchbasemembers. he poor,especiallyhoseinManagua,were heoneshardest it from hequake.As thesepeople alongwiththe clergy, he religious, ndstudentsworkingwiththem)sawthe directcon-nection betweentheir increaseduffering ndSomoza's ctions,they becameincreasingly adicalized nd politicallyactive. Fromthis point on the CEBsbecameoneof thefocalpointsofactivismn thecities.In the countryside,politicalagitationhad alwaysbeen met with brutalrepressionythe NationalGuard ndwhenCEPA, heDelegados,ndtheCEBs


9/14

46 SOCIOLOGY FRELIGIONbecamemore involved in the struggleor changethey were not spared romruthlesspersecution.Those witnessing uch repressionubsequently ecamemoreradicalizedhemselves, ndsomepriests ndreligiousbegan o documentandpublicizehe atrocious cts of the Guard.As time wenton, moreandmorepeoplefromthe baseof the Churchbecame nvolved in the struggleagainstSomocismo nd they continued to use liberation heologyto encourageandlegitimateheiractions.Importantly, uchof thispoliticalactivismwascarried ut in collaborationwith,or insupport f, the FSLN.TheFSLNhadbegun o initiatecontactswithleaders f the popularChurch n the late 1960sandfrom hatpointcommuni-cationbetween he Sandinistasndtheprogressivelergygrew teadily.As earlyas 1972students rom he RevolutionaryhristianMovementoined he Frenteas combatants; y the mid-1970s, he first clericalbase leaders ErnestoandFernandoCardenal) ad been"converted"o the FSLNand werecollaboratingin itsstruggleGonzalezGary1986:159-62).From heirexperiences f povertyandrepression,ndthroughheirrelevant eligiousonsciousnessndrealizationthat structuralhangewasneeded n Nicaragua,heyhad come to believethatthe Sandinistasepresentedhe mostpromisinglternativeorrestructuringheirsocietyalongmorejustandChristianines (Kirk1992:74;see also the testi-monies nRandall1983).After1977,whenthe paceof events and the insurrectionickedup,manymoreCatholics ameto workwith the Sandinistas.omepriests,uch as FatherGasparGarcfaLaviana,publiclyannounced heirdecision o jointhe FSLNassoldiers ndmanymoreof the laitymade he samechoice. OtherChurchmem-bersshowed their supportby participatingn strikesanddemonstrations, ymakingbombsandtransportingrms,orby allowing heirhomesandchurchesto be usedto storesupplies rto hidecombatantshemselves.Even LosDoce,apro-FSLN olitical ront, ncluded wopriests ndotheractivelaypeople mongits twelvecoremembers.ThusCatholics romall sectorsof the base- laity,religious,and clergy - came to contributeto the 1979 triumphof theSandinistas.Though he directandlogisticalupport f Catholicsn the guerilla trugglewasvital to the Sandinista'success,an equally mportant spectof the base'scontributionwasspecificallydeologicaln nature.We havealreadynotedhowaftertheir ownconcientizaci6nanyCatholicactivistscameto act as organicintellectuals f the poor aity.However,heyalsobegan o functionas organicintellectuals f the entireSandinista evolution.When theseCatholics oinedthe ranksof the FSLN, orexample,heymaintainedhe religious imension ftheir pro-revolution tatementsbut they also broadened heir discourse oaddress allNicaraguans"r"thepeople" s a whole(Girardi 989:36-38). AsGismondi 1986:29-30) pointsout,becauseof the pervasivenessf Christiansymbolsand values in Nicaraguan ulture, hese intellectuals' eligiousargu-mentslegitimatedhe actionsof the faithfuland ent themselveso the overallstruggle.The largenumber f theseactivistsgivenpositionsn the government fterthe triumph lsoindicates hatthesepeoplehadbecomeacceptedas leaders fthe entirepopularmovement.Fourpriestsbecamegovernmentministersand


10/14

THECATHOLIC HURCH N THENICARAGUANREVOLUTION 47almostall of the leadersof the Revolutionary hristianMovementalsofilledhighpositions.Manyotherclergyandreligiousook on officialresponsibilitiesandmostlayleadersbecamecadresof the state,the massorganizations,rtheFSLN Serra1985:155).The ideological legitimationof the revolutionaryprocesscontinued not onlythrough he presenceof these religious igures n the government,but alsothroughheirstatementsn whichthey frequentlyntegrated eligious ndrevo-lutionaryconcepts.In addition,religious"thinktanks," uch as the CentroAntonioValdivieso nd the InstitutoHistoricoCentroamericano,eld conferencesand trainingseminarsand publishedbooks,magazines, ewspapers,nd bul-letins. The politicalanalysesof such events and documentswere basedonliberationheologyandweresupportive f the FSLN-led evolution Lewellen1989:22;Serra1985:156-57).Moreover,he base of the Churchprovidedmuch of the laborpower orprojectsof nationalreconstruction,s thousands f laityandsupportivelergyparticipatedn programsuch as the LiteracyCrusade ndtheVoluntaryWorkCampaigns. s members f the revolutionaryrmyandreserves,aypeoplewerealsoheavily nvolved n defendinghe country gainsthecontras.ustas it hadbeen in the years eadingup to 1979, the popularChurchonce againwasasourceof both theological ustification ndphysicalparticipationn the rev-olution.

Giventhis, it is not surprisinghatopenconflicteruptedbetween he baseand the hierarchywithin the Churchas soon as the hierarchytselfpubliclybrokewiththe revolution.The base's upport f the Sandinista evolutionwasin directcontradictiono the bishops' eformistoliticalproject.Therefore hebishops,edbyObando,began o persecutehe progressivesithinthe Church(Kirk1992:116-26).Theycriticizedhe priests n the government ndcalledfortheirresignations. ventuallyheymanagedo havetheseclergyexpelledorsuspendedromtheir orders.Otherpro-revolutionlergyand religiousweretransferredway rom heircommunities rrelocated ut of the country.Thoseat the base, ortheirpart,maintainedheirsupportorthegovernmentndcriti-cizedthe anti-revolutionandlaterpro-contra)tanceof the hierarchy.t wasobvious hatthe politicalpolarizationccurringn the largerocietywasrepro-ducedwithin heChurch.Crucially, this conflict was also expressed in theological terms, as eachfactionsoughtreligiousegitimationorits ownpoliticalproject Girardi 989).The theologyof the hierarchywascentered on a non-conflictive spirituality hatemphasizednityanduniversalityntheChurch ndsociety.The reality fclassconflictwasdeniedandclassstruggleondemned socialproblemswere o beresolvedbygoodwill andethicalattempts o builda harmoniouselationshipamong various social groups. The political struggle against communism wasnecessary, owever,because t wasaboveall a moralbattleagainstatheism.No"Marxist"nalysisor programsouldbe tolerated,as they were inextricablylinkedto the "atheisticmaterialism"hat represseshe Christianspirit.Theproperocietywas nsteadbasedon the "neo-Christendom"odel,a "thirdway"betweencapitalismndcommunismn whichthespiritual nduniversal isionof the Churchmagisteriumictatedwhatwasbestforall. In this view, there


11/14

48 SOCIOLOGYFRELIGIONcould be no "option or the poor"which did not also incorporatehe rich.Overall, hesereligious iews wereidentical o thoseheldby the VaticanandCELAMduring he 1970sand 1980s(e.g., ThirdGeneralConference1979;CatholicChurch1984;CatholicChurch1986).In contrast,we have already ndicated hat the basecoulddrawon theprinciplesf liberationheologyo supporttspoliticaloption.UsingthetoolsofMarxist nalysiso examineclasssociety, iberationheologypronounceduchsocietiesto be sinful,unjust,and permeatedwith conflict. Since social andecclesiasticalnitywas mpossiblender heseconditions,he Churchwascalledby the gospelto sidewith the poorand to supportheirstrugglesorjustice.Necessarily,hisoption orthepooralsoinvolvedanoptionagainst hecapital-istsystemand the classwhichsupportedt. As a result,many iberationheolo-giansexplicitlypromotedheestablishmentf a socialistpoliticalorder thebestknownexpressionf these views sfound nGutierrez973).The linksbetweenthistheological erspectivendthe base'spoliticalpositionareclear.Finally, heseopposing heologiessupportedmorethanjustcontradictorypoliticaloptionsandclassperspectives. heyalsoimplied wodifferentmodelsforthe Church tself.In thehierarchy'sheology e.g.,PopeJohnPaulII 1983),Churchunitywasassuredboveallbyobedienceo thebishops ndpopeandbysubmissiono the one authentic eachingwhichtheyespoused.This ecclesias-ticalauthoritarianismndemphasis n orthodoxywaschallengedbyliberationtheology'sallforthereinvention f the Churchas"thePeopleof God." nthisreinventedChurch, or which the CEBswerethe models,sacredpowerwasdemocratized nd the productionof religiousknowledgedecentralizedBoff1985). Thus,the base'sorganizationnto CEBsand its adoptionof liberationtheology hreatenedhe reproductionf the Church'snternalpowerstructurefromwhichthe bishopshadhistorically enefitted.Giventhis,andin lightofthe threatthat the basesupportof the revolutionposedto the hierarchy'sreformistoliticalproject,hedevelopmentfbase-hierarchyonflictwithintheChurchwas nevitable.CONCLUSION

Overall, then, determiningthe role of the Catholic Church in theNicaraguan evolutions not a straightforwardatter.Considerationmustbegivento the complexitiesf class,politics,andreligionbothin theirideologicaland nstitutionalxpressionsuring particularistorical eriod.TheGramsciananalysisdevelopedthroughout his essaybringsus to conclude that in theNicaraguanase,religiondidnot"cause"he revolution nd the Churchdidnot"lead"t. However, t thatspecifichistorical onjuncture characterizedyastructuralrisis of dependentcapitalism xacerbated y naturaldisaster, heincreasinglyntolerable epressionf a regimewhichhadlost all semblanceoflegitimacy,he splitof the ruling lassesamong hemselves, ndthe emergenceof a revolutionarymovementable to mobilizeoppositionandpresenta viablepoliticalalternative religionandChurchrepresentativesid playa criticalrole.


12/14

THE CATHOLICCHURCH IN THE NICARAGUAN REVOLUTION 49

During the revolution, each of the two main factions in the NicaraguanChurch acted in a mannerconsistent with their political-economic alliances inthe larger society and their institutional interests within the Church. Thehierarchyusedreligionboth to legitimatethe split with Somozaand to promotethe political programof the bourgeoisopposition with which the bishopswerealigned. The bishops' fear of losing the privileges and stature traditionallyaccorded to the Church in Nicaraguansociety furtherreinforcedtheir alliancewith the anti-Sandinista faction. Meanwhile, those at the base of the Church,after appropriatingand reformulating he same Catholic faith, employed it insupportof their own option forthe Sandinistas.After the triumph n 1979, theseopposinginterpretationsof religioncontinuedto be wielded in the Church-Stateand intra-Church battles which themselves had not only religious, but alsoimportant political and economic dimensions. The struggle over liberationtheology, forexample,was also simultaneouslya conflict over the organizationofpowerwithin the Church, the nature of capitalistsociety, and the desirabilityofsocialistrevolution.Still, furtherquestions remain.Chief among them is relatedto the seriousdecline in the strengthand membershipof the popularChurch since the 1980s.As we noted, many lay leaders eft their specifically pastoralroles in the Churchto assumepositions of responsibilitywithin Sandinistaorganizations.The hier-archy'srelocation campaign against progressiveChurch leadersalso weakenedthe baseby physicallyseparating ts members romtheir leaders.Moreover,manybase Church activists were kidnapped or assassinatedduring the contra war.Finally, since the FSLN'selectoral defeat in 1990 the popularChurch has nolongerhad the supportof the nationalgovernment.However, I think even broaderelements now serve to underminethe revo-lutionary Church in Nicaragua. The most serious of these, even beyond theVatican's continuing anti-liberationist stance, is the growingconservatism ofliberation theology itself.4 Yet, if even liberationtheology can be used to pro-mote political options more consistent with the interests of the bourgeoisierather than the base, other questions arise: Does the Church or Christianityalwaysend upcontradictingthe class interestsof the poor?Is a truecollaborationbetween Christiansand Marxistspossible,or does the institutionalnatureof theChurch preclude this? What are the prospectsthat the Catholic faith will bereappropriated o support revolutionarystruggleon such a large scale again?Though such questions lead us into the worldhistoryof the Church and intocomplex theoretical debates about the natureand relationshipof Christianityand Marxism,a consideration of the unique Nicaraguansituation must alwaysremainpartof ouranswers.

4 Forexample, see the abandonment of dependency theory and class analysis, the retraction of thesupportfor socialism,the softeningof the option for the poor,and the generalconvergence with the Vaticanposition in the laterworkof Gutierrez 1988).


13/14

50 SOCIOLOGYOF RELIGIONREFERENCES

Bakhtiari,B. 1986. Revolution and the Church in Nicaraguaand El Salvador.Journalof ChurchandState 28: 15-42.Berryman,P. 1984. The Religiousrootsof rebelion: Christians n CentralAmericanrevolutions.

Maryknoll,NY: OrbisBooks.Boff,L. 1985. Church:Charisma ndpower.Liberationheology nd the nstitutional hurch, ranslatedby J.W. Diercksmeier.New York:Crossroad.Brett, E. T. 1993. The impact of religion in Central America: A bibliographical essay. TheAmericas 9: 297-341.Catholic Church. SacredCongregationfor the Doctrine of the Faith. 1984. Instruction n certainaspects f the"TheologyfLiberation".Washington,DC: United StatesCatholic Conference.. Congregationfor the Doctrine of the Faith. 1986. Instruction n Christian reedomandliberation.Washington,DC: United States Catholic Conference.Dodson, M. 1986. The politics of religion in revolutionaryNicaragua.Annals of the AmericanAcademyof Political ndSocialScience483: 36-49.Dodson, M., and T. S. Montgomery. 1982. The churches in the Nicaraguan revolution. InNicaraguanrevolution,dited by T. W. Walker, 161-80. New York:PraegerPublishers.Dodson, M., andL.NuzziO'Shaughnessy.1990. Nicaragua's ther evolution:Religiousaithandpolit-icalstruggle.Chapel Hill and London:Universityof North CarolinaPress.Foroohar,M. 1989. TheCatholicChurchandsocialchangenNicaragua.New York:State Universityof New YorkPress.

Gilbert, D. 1988. Sandinistas: hepartyand therevolution.New York:BasilBlackwell.Girardi,G. 1989. Faithandrevolutionn Nicaragua:Convergence ndcontradictions,ranslated andwith an Introductionby P. Berryman.Maryknoll,NY:OrbisBooks.Gismondi, M. 1986. Transformationsn the Holy:Religiousresistanceandhegemonic struggles nthe Nicaraguanrevolution.LatinAmericanPerspectives3: 13-36.Gonzilez, G. 0. 1986. Iglesiacat6lica y revoluci6n en Nicaragua.Ciudad de Mexico: ClavesLatinoamericanas.Gramsci,A. 1971. Selectionsromtheprisonnotebooks f AntonioGramsci, ranslatedand edited byQ. Hoareand G. N. Smith. New York: nternationalPublishers.Gutierrez,G. 1973. A theology f liberation:History,politics,andsalvation,ranslatedand edited bySister C. Inda andJ. Eagleson.Maryknoll,NY:OrbisBooks.. 1988. A theology f liberation:History,politics,andsalvation,revisededition with a newIntroduction,translatedand edited by Sister C. Indaand J. Eagleson.Maryknoll,NY: OrbisBooks.Jerez, C. 1984. The Church and the Nicaraguan revolution. London: Catholic Institute forInternationalRelations.Kirk,J. M. 1992. Politicsand the CatholicChurch n Nicaragua.Gainesville: University PressofFlorida.Levine, D. H. 1985. Continuities in Colombia.Journal fLatinAmerican tudies17:295-317.Lewellen, T. C. 1989. Holy and unholy alliances: The politics of Catholicism in revolutionaryNicaragua.Joural ofChurch ndState31: 15-33.Maduro,0. 1982. Religion ndsocialconflicts,with an Introductionby M. A. Neal, translatedby R.R. Barr.Maryknoll,NY:OrbisBooks.Mulligan,J. E. 1991. TheNicaraguanChurch ndtherevolution.KansasCity, MO:Sheed & Ward.NuzziO'Shaughnessy,L.,and L.Serra.1986. TheChurch ndrevolutionnNicaragua.Athens: OhioUniversity Press.Pope John Paul II. 1983. Unity of the Church: Homily in Managua,Nicaragua.The Pope Speaks28: 206-10.


14/14

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN THE NICARAGUAN REVOLUTION 51Randall, M. 1983. Christiansn theNicaraguan evolution, ranslatedby M. Valverde. Vancouver:New Star Books.Reding, A. 1985. Under the red hat: Getting to know Managua'snew cardinal.ChristianityandCrisis45: 307-10.Second GeneralConference of Latin AmericanBishops.1973. The Churchn thepresent-dayrans-

formation f LatinAmerican lightof theCouncil,Vol. 2, Conclusions, nd ed. Washington, DC:Catholic ConferenceDivisionfor Latin America.Serra,L. 1985. Ideology,religion,andclassstruggle n the Nicaraguanrevolution.In Nicaragua:Arevolution nder iege,edited byR. L. HarrisandC. M. Vilas, 151-74. London:ZedBooksLtd.ThirdGeneralConference of Latin AmericanBishops.1979. Puebla:Evangelizationtpresent ndinthefutureof LatinAmerica,conclusions.Washington, DC: National Conference of Catholic

Bishops.Villela, H. 1979. The Churchand the processof democratizationn Latin America. SocialCompass26: 261-83.Williams, P. J. 1985. The Catholic hierarchy in the Nicaraguan revolution. Journalof LatinAmericanStudies17:341-69.1989. TheCatholicChurch ndpoliticsnNicaragua ndCostaRica.London:Macmillan.

the catholic church in the nicaraguan ravolution

Documents