By Charles Lane
Religion News Service
Asuncion, Paraguay – Bishop Fernando Lugo gathered his flock on a cold Saturday morning, and they came — more than 600 mostly poor peasants — to the rural city of Horqueta. Unlike many rallies in this impoverished country, it didn’t take threats or bribes of food and alcohol to get them there.
In a country steeped in corruption and political puppeteering, they traveled as far as 50 miles to hear the “Bishop of the Poor” speak.
After a notice went out on the radio, entire towns packed themselves on the backs of flatbed trucks to make the frigid journey.
He’s not a particularly passionate speaker. Clutching a notebook as if it were a Bible, he often sounds more like the pastor he once was than the politician he might become — as the first bishop ever elected president of a country.
“We have hope for him,” said one woman, Vera Aguello, “hope that he can get us out of this crisis.”
There’s just one problem: It’s unclear whether Lugo even qualifies as a candidate.
The country’s constitution does not allow religious officials to hold office, and neither does the Vatican. Lugo, 56, says he resigned as bishop in 2006. The Vatican, meanwhile, says he cannot simply resign his job — “a service accepted freely and forever.”
And so Lugo’s campaign goes on, stuck in a sort of ecclesiastical and political limbo ahead of the April 2008 elections.
Paraguay has struggled with democracy ever since the end of dictator Alfredo Stroessner’s bloody regime in 1989. Most people here have little confidence in secret ballots, and the best way to ensure financial security is to join the well-oiled political machine of the Colorado party, which has ruled longer than any other political party in the country’s history.
Lugo the politician was born out of these struggles. Beginning in 2004, while he was still bishop of rural San Pedro, peasant groups launched widespread uprisings to protest unequal land distribution and the encroachment of industrial farming.
“The peasant organizations were fighting for their land, they were fighting for social revindication,” Lugo said in an interview. “As part of the church, we walked through this with them in a legal fashion.”
While in San Pedro, Lugo worked closely with many of the peasants.
He nurtured thousands of “Christian base communities,” he said, “that met weekly to reflect on the word of God and the reality.”
Lugo considers himself a practical representative of liberation theology, a theology that was popular throughout South America until Pope John Paul II clamped down in the 1980s. His successor, Benedict XVI, has also lashed out against liberation theology, calling it “a fundamental threat to the faith of the church.”
“When the pope speaks against liberation theology, he speaks against the exaggerations of this theology only, not against the actual theology,” Lugo said. “Particularly regarding the Marxist message of interpreting reality. But he also accepts that there is a part of it which is accepted by the official church.”
In recent years, the Vatican has adamantly opposed members of the clergy holding political office. Accordingly, it has demanded that Lugo cease all political activities. Lugo, for his part, says he resigned from the church and is no longer subject to its laws.
“Real structural change — social revindication — goes through politics, not the church,” he said. Faith and charity, he added, are not enough. “Pope Pius XI said politics is the sublime expression of love, and a love that transforms through politics.”
According to his colleagues, Lugo is above all a compassionate leader who believes very much in helping his countrymen.
“He was never into politics until the land invasions happened,” said the Rev. Silvio Flaitas, a student and friend of Lugo’s. “He always incited other priests to visit his diocese and visit with the poor.”
At times, his critics see this compassion as a fault, citing Lugo’s liberal sympathies with the country’s poor that have raised comparisons between him and Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez.
“Looking at his background, I am worried,” said Hector Cristaldo, who runs Paraguay’s 22,000-strong agribusiness association. Cristaldo blames Lugo for provoking the 2004 land invasions. “I believe his style of leadership is conflict. He is not a person who holds people together.”
Politically, Lugo has stumbled in recent weeks. His opposition coalition fell apart at the prospect of another candidate, former Gen.
Lino Oviedo, joining the race. Lugo formed a new coalition minus the Oviedo supporters.
Pedro Fadul, another Lugo political opponent, sees Lugo’s political inexperience as a liability, and doubts Lugo has the skills to govern a country.
“He is a priest, and (being) the priest has its characteristics. He knows how to listen, but he has some difficulties taking decisions day after day in real life, not in heaven,” Fadul said. “People come with problems that need to be solved today. It’s not enough to bless them and send them to pray.”
Copyright 2007 Religion News Service. All rights reserved. No part of this transmission may be distributed or reproduced without written permission.
Beliefnet
Advertisement
posted October 11, 2007 at 5:59 pm
NO! THEOCRACY! THEOCRACY!
But in all seriousness, I doubt the bishop can win—from the sound of it he’s a smallish candidate, he’s fighting a corrupt system and even if he somehow won, he probably wouldn’t be able to hold office. While I understand the Church’s rationale in forbidding clergy to take power, I wonder if they could do some sort of weird, special, one-time-thing kind of “firing” of him (which would presumably also bypass Paraguay’s law, if the Vatican officially disowned him.
God bless.
posted October 11, 2007 at 6:46 pm
No, he can’t be fired. Once a Bishop, always a Bishop. He can be forbidden from performing the sacraments and have his abilities restricted by the church, but once he was ordained he was ordained for life. He has an “indeliable mark on his soul”.
posted October 11, 2007 at 6:50 pm
I expect the “Bishop” will have to be defrocked in order to meet all the legal matters. As to his ability to wins – stanger things have happened I only hope he is not manipulated by some of the more snake like characters that lurk in fields like this (no offense to actual snakes)
I agree – NO THEOCRACY. But I think he seems wise enough to avoid most of the snares.
posted October 11, 2007 at 7:34 pm
First, I think it is great that he “resigned” from the church even though Benny says he can’t. (what job is for a life time? None that I know of…they let priests out, and he was a priest).
Second, I think it is great that he was preaching a “liberation theology, even though the church said it isn’t allowed..both JP2 and Benny 16.
As to his chances of being elected? Who knows, but he is trying. As was said previously, stranger things have happened.
posted October 11, 2007 at 8:39 pm
I’m not up on this subject or South Americas problems, but it sounds as though this Priest that has rejected being one out of love for his people will always be a Priest in his heart and soul. He has helped them so much so far; that would have to change if he were accepted and became the President. He should find a person who would make a sympathic President for the poor and help him win, and stay the great priest he is.
posted October 11, 2007 at 10:10 pm
It sounds like this guy is part of the bright side of Catholicism, the side the hierarchy has tried to stamp out.
And while the RCC may consider him a bishop forever, if he says he quit and promises never to claim the job again it seems like he has the right as a person to not be considered a bishop.
I like his ideas on helping the poor. I wonder how well he would administrate, but having your heart in the right place is a good start. I also fear what may well be his ideas on reproductive rights and maybe even the rights of women, but I don’t know he’ll have carried them over from his former job.
posted October 11, 2007 at 10:39 pm
It’s not just “Benny” who’s saying the man cannot resign from being a bishop, it’s straight from the canons of the ecumenical councils–it’s an idea that has been part of Christianity as long as things like the Trinity and the hypostatic union of Christ.
Also, Lugo’s exactly right when he says this: “When the pope speaks against liberation theology, he speaks against the exaggerations of this theology only, not against the actual theology.” The Vatican is NOT against the message of liberation; the main thing it’s against (besides occasional doctrinal errors that liberationists, like all kinds of theologians, develop) is the tendency in the Latin American theology to assume Marxist social theory as being an objective truth that doctrine needs to be built around. John Paull II spent a lot of time and effort combatting Marxism in Eastern Europe, so why would he just sit back and allow it free reign in Latin America, and why would his successor? There are actually several Catholic liberation-oriented thinkers who pretty critical of Marxism, and these people aren’t falling under attack from by the Vatican.
posted October 12, 2007 at 12:29 am
Well there are a variety of things here upon which I’m no expert, but it seems to me a Catholic could accept some of the social theories of Marxism without accepting the atheism. Although, of course, if they did accept the atheism it would be an improvement.
Seems to me it’s rather perverse to see Marxism when you could be seeing someone helping a lot of people who need help.
posted October 12, 2007 at 11:55 am
nnmns
I am with you there! No “-ism” ever truly helped anyone in need. For the most part “-isms” are smokescreens and mirrors – either hiding nefarious or meaningless deeds or simply reflecting the image of the “-ism”er.
posted October 12, 2007 at 5:27 pm
Um, last I checked, it was the Vatican that’s warning agains the “ism,” dialectical materialism particularly. A social justice-themed theology needn’t assume Marxism as its foundation, as John Paul II himeself provides evidence of. There are some serious theological reactions to liberation theology out there by people who are focused on justice, and there are works by Catholic theologians that aim at liberation with the Marxism and without the tendency to advocate violence. D. Stephen Long’s _Divine Economy_, Daniel Bell’s _Liberation Theology After the End of History_, and William Cavanaugh’s _Torture and Eucharist_ are all excellent books that deal with these issues, take aim at oppressive politics and economics, are critical of more radical wing of liberation theology, and don’t fall into the doctrinal problems liberation theology falls into.
It isn’t the job of the Church to lend its support to any theology that comes along; it’s job is not to let its members spread Marxism and call it Catholic theology.