|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
A
Prophet for All Ages
Charles Plock, C. M
Charles
Plock, C. M. is currently a chaplain at
St. John’s University. For the past two years he has been translating the
homilies of Archbishop Romero for the Archdiocese of San Salvador that is
advocating the cause for the canonization of Romero. He worked in the Republic
of Panama for ten years and at St. John the Baptist Parish in Brooklyn before
beginning ministry at the university.
Introduction
During the past two years I
have had the privilege of translating the Sunday homilies of Archbishop Oscar
A. Romero, a charismatic figure in the history of the Church of Latin America,
as well as the universal Church. As
James R. Brockman stated in his book, Romero:
This
was a man who lived his life amid the poverty and injustice of Latin
America. He became a priest before
Vatican II and a bishop after Medellin.
As archbishop of San Salvador, he became the leader of the Church in his
native land. But as archbishop he also
became a man of the poor, their advocate when they had no other voice to demand
justice for them. He suffered and gave
his life on their behalf.1
From a historical
perspective, Romero was the Archbishop of San Salvador during a time when most
of Latin America was guided by the United States’ Doctrine of National
Security. As a result of this policy
most of the nations in Latin America were ruled by military dictatorships that
were backed by the United States government.
Civil wars erupted in Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Guatemala and thousand
upon thousand of people were killed and/or disappeared. The homilies of Archbishop Romero are not
only important theological documents but also historically significant
documents because this is the only place where many of the persons who
“disappeared” are mentioned by name.
In the midst of this
tragic drama of upheaval and civil war and violence, in the midst of the
implementation of new and radical pastoral approaches to the Church’s ministry,
Oscar Arnulfo Romero was installed on February 22, 1977 as the Archbishop of
San Salvador in a simple ceremony in the church of San José de la MontaZa.
He was Archbishop for a little more than three years and his vision of
ministry could be summed up by the words that he spoke during his last
interview, one that he gave to the Mexican newspaper Excelsior just two
week before his death:
I
have been frequently threatened with death.
I must say that, as a Christian, I do not believe in death but in
resurrection. If they kill me, I will
rise again in the people of El Salvador.
I am not boasting; I say it with the greatest humility. As a pastor, I am bound by a divine command
to give my life for those whom I love, and that includes all Salvadorans, even
those who are going to kill me. If they
manage to carry out their threats, I shall be offering my blood for the
redemption and the resurrection of El Salvador.
Martyrdom is a grace from God that I do not believe I have earned. But if God accepts the sacrifice of my life,
then may my blood be the seed of liberty and a sign of the hope that will soon
become a reality. May my death, if it is
accepted by God, be for the liberation of my people and a witness of hope in
what is to come! You can tell them, if
they succeed in killing me that I pardon them and I bless those who may carry
out the killing. But I wish that they
could realize they are wasting their time.
A bishop will die, but the Church of God --- the people --- they will
never die!2
But this is the end of
the story so let us now go back to February 22, 1977.
Appointment
and Installation of Oscar Romero
The nomination of
Romero to assume the position as the Archbishop of San Salvador was backed by
the wealthy, the large land owners and the Salvadoran government. He was viewed as a safe candidate and
his appointment was seen as a great victory for the conservative cause. Romero appeared to be the perfect man to
return the Church to the sheepfold, the priests to the sacristy and Catholic
teaching back to the Council of Trent and Vatican I. For their part, a good number of the clergy
of the Archdiocese received the news of his appointment with dejection and
apprehension. They regarded it as a sign
that Rome seemed more concerned about maintaining good relations with the
government than to serve the needs of the Christian community in El
Salvador. Thus at the time of his
installation, one group of priests supported the Archbishop and participated in
the ceremonies that took place in the small church of San José de la MontaZa while another group of priests held a
vocal protest outside the church and refused to enter and express their
solidarity and allegiance to their new bishop.
All of this would change very quickly.
Father
Rutillo Grande
On March 12, 1977
Father Rutillo Grande and two companions, a boy and an old man, were killed
while they were on their way to celebrate Mass in the village of El Paisnal,
the place where Father Grande was a parish priest and where he had been
born. The assassination of Father Grande
clearly represented more than the elimination of a priest. Since Father Grande had been one of the key
figures in the apostolic renewal of the Archdiocese, a pioneer of the
application of Vatican II and Medellin to the Salvadoran Church and a leader of
Christian work for and with the poor and the oppressed, his assassination was
seen as an attack on the pastoral approach of the Catholic Church --- an
approach that involved a preferential option for those people who were poor and
oppressed. It was an attack against the
identification made by the priests and religious with the hopes and sufferings
of the People of God.
On many occasions
Archbishop Romero would remark that the assassination of Father Grande was the
crucial event in his own conversion experience.
Father Grande had been a great personal friend, a faithful and close
collaborator, a man whose stamina and apostolic clarity he had always
admired. In the homily that he preached
on the occasion of Father Grande’s funeral he said:
I
considered [him] a brother and at important moments in my life, he was very
close to me and I will never forget his gestures of friendship.3
The Archbishop then
turned toward the priests who had gathered to celebrate the funeral rites with
him and stated:
My
dear priests, I am happy that among the fruits of this death that we mourn and
of other difficult circumstances that we confront at this time, the clergy are
united with their Bishop and the faithful understand that there is one faith
that leads us along paths that are quite distinct from other ideologies that
are not of the Church --- paths that offer an alternative to these
ideologies: the cause of love … True
love is the gift that Father Rutilio Grande gives us in his death with the two
campesinos … A priest with his campesinos walking to meet his people, to
identify himself with them, to live with them --- this is an inspiration of
love and not revolution.4
At the conclusion of
the burial rite for Father Grande, Archbishop Romero met with his advisors and
consultors to debate, discuss and analyze what further steps the Archdiocese
could take in order to protest the violent attack on Father Grande which was
also viewed as a direct attack on the whole Archdiocesan Church. As a result of these meetings and
deliberations two immediate actions were decided: first, the Archbishop asked the government to
investigate the events surrounding the assassination of Father Grande and then
stated that he would not participate in any formal governmental event until he
had been informed of the person(s) responsible for this criminal act; second,
it was decided to cancel the celebration of all the parish Masses in the
Archdiocese on Sunday, March 20, 1978 and that only one Mass would be
celebrated in the Cathedral. All the
priests and all the people of the Archdiocese would be invited to participate
in this one Mass. This action was
decided upon to show people that the death of one priest, the death of one
member of the community of the Archdiocese, has consequences on all the women
and men of the Archdiocese.
On Sunday, March 20th,
all the priests of the Archdiocese gathered to concelebrate the one Mass that
was celebrated that day. This was a
stark contrast to the installation celebration that had occurred just four
weeks before when the clergy were divided in their support for the new
Archbishop. Conscious of the change that
had taken place, Archbishop Romero addressed the priests in his homily:
In
light of the unity that has brought us together at this one Mass, I want to
publicly thank all of these beloved priests.
Many of them risk their lives, and like Father Grande offer the greatest
sacrifice … [applause] … That applause ratifies the profound joy that I feel in
my heart as I take possession of this Archdiocese. I also feel that my own weaknesses and my own
inabilities find their complement, their power, and their courage in these
united priests. Beloved priests, remain
united in the authentic truth of the Gospel!
This is another way to say to you, as Christ’s humble successor and
representative here in the archdiocese: THE ONE WHO ATTACKS ONE OF MY PRIESTS,
ATTACKS ME! [applause].5
Although the
Archbishop had been installed on February 22nd, it is interesting
that he spoke about this event as marking the beginning of his ministry as
Archbishop. Later he would speak the
following words that seemed to characterize so much of the Archbishop’s time
during the next three years:
It
was my lot to go on claiming dead bodies --- these day I have to walk the roads
gathering up dead friends, listening to widows and orphans and trying to spread
hope.6
A
Defender of the Poor and the Oppressed
The defense of the
poor and the oppressed was the central focus of the Archbishop’s pastoral
ministry. During the period of
colonization, the bishop was by office “the protector of the Indians.” On the assumption that the Indians would be
marginalized, exploited and decimated, the bishop had the responsibility of
protecting them and defending them from exploitation by either the military or the
colonists. This insight into the role of
the bishop was revived by Romero:
When
we say “for the poor,” we do not take sides with one social class. What we do is invite all social classes, rich
and poor without distinction, to take seriously the cause of the poor as though
it were their own. The cause of the poor
is the cause of Jesus Christ --- “whatever you did to one of these poor ones:
the neglected, the blind, the lame, the deaf, the mute, you did to me.”7
As the campesinos
left their homes in search of work during the harvest season, they turned
toward the Archbishop and sought his assistance in negotiating just work
contracts. Factory workers frequently
sought his help in mediating grievances with management. When the National University became an armed
camp the students asked the Archbishop to intervene on their behalf so that the
University could once again become a safe institution of higher education. Mothers and wives visited him and sent letters
to him begging for his assistance in finding their husbands and children who
had disappeared. So many people and
groups came to him and, as their protector, the Archbishop felt duty bound to
put the full weight of his Episcopal authority at the service of the poor and
the marginalized:
three
men abducted, four victims of a tragic air accident, two campesinos murdered
after a demonstration --- in recent days these are the expressive emblem of
human suffering made more tragic by human wickedness.8
At the same time
Romero took most seriously the Church’s exhortation to make a preferential
option for the poor:
There
aren’t two categories of people. There
aren’t some people who were born to have everything, leaving the rest with
nothing and a majority of people who have nothing and cannot taste the
happiness that God has created for all.
The Christian society that God wants is one in which we share the
goodness that God has given to everyone.9
Thus, during the three
years that he was the Archbishop of San Salvador he became known as the voice
for the voiceless:
Give
the people an opportunity to organize, repeal the unjust laws, grant amnesty to
those who have broken laws that are not for the common good, stop intimidating
the people, especially the rural population.
Set free or arraign in court those who have disappeared after their
arrest or are jailed unjustly. Grant
those who have been expelled or kept from returning for political reasons the
chance to return to the country.10
As a Vincentian this
aspect of his ministry is most attractive and also most challenging. First of all, Romero is clearly imitating
Jesus who spoke of his ministry in terms of bringing Good News to the poor,
liberty to captives, recovery of sight to the blind, and freedom to the
oppressed (Luke 4:18-19).11
Jesus’ vision of ministry inspired Saint Vincent de Paul and Louise de
Marillac (the founders of the Vincentian Community and the Daughters of
Charity) and continues to inspire the followers of Saint Vincent de Paul at
Saint John’s University. In the University’s
mission statement we read:
Saint
John’s is a Vincentian university, inspired by Saint Vincent de Paul’s
compassion and zeal for service. We
strive to provide excellent education for all people, especially those lacking
economic, physical or social advantages … Wherever possible we devote our
intellectual and physical resources to search out the cause of poverty and
social injustice and encourage solutions which are adaptable, effective and
concrete.12
Yes, like Jesus, like
Vincent de Paul and Louise de Marillac, like Archbishop Romero, we, as members
of the Saint John’s University community, are invited to be the voice of the
voiceless.
Conflicts
with the Bishops and the Vatican
After
Vatican II, the bishops of the world formed Episcopal Conferences:
In
these days especially bishops frequently are unable to fulfill their office
effectively and fruitfully unless they develop a common effort involving
constant growth in harmony and closeness of ties with other bishops. Episcopal
conferences already established in many nations have furnished outstanding
proofs of a more fruitful apostolate. Therefore, this sacred synod considers it
to be supremely fitting that everywhere bishops belonging to the same nation or
region form an association which would meet at fixed times. Thus, when the
insights of prudence and experience have been shared and views exchanged, there
will emerge a holy union of energies in the service of the common good of the
churches.13
There were six bishops
in El Salvador: José Eduardo Alvarez
Ramírez, C.M. (Diocese of San Miguel), Benjamin Barrera y Reyes (Diocese of
Santa Ana), Arturo Rivera y Damas (Diocese of Santiago de Maria), Pedro Arnoldo
Aparicio y Quintanilla (Diocese of San Vicente), Marco Rene Revello (Auxiliary
Bishop of San Salvador), and Oscar Romero (Archbishop of San Salvador). During the time that Archbishop Romero was
pastor of the Diocese of San Salvador he was continually criticized by the
other bishops. He had one ally among the
bishops, Bishop Rivera y Damas. In most
of the important decisions that were made by the Episcopal Conference the vote
was 4-2. Often the planning of these
meetings was coordinated among four of the bishops who then presented documents
to Bishop Rivera y Damas and Archbishop Romero as an accomplished fact. An example of this is seen in the discussions
that took place concerning a letter that was sent to the papal representative,
Emanuele Gerada --- a letter that was signed by 200 priests and religious from
El Salvador, criticizing the nuncio for disagreeing with Romero’s policies and
openly supporting a repressive and unjust government. The bishops decided by a vote of 4-1 (Bishop
Rivera y Damas was at a meeting in Guatemala and asked the other bishops to
wait since the topic required a meeting at which all of the bishops would be
present --- this motion was voted down) to publish a harsh response to the
priests. In his diary he wrote:
The
document was approved and I was subjected to many false accusations by the
other bishops. I was told that my
preaching is subversive, that my priests provoke a climate of violence among
the peasants; and that we should not complain about the abuses that the
authorities are committing. The
archdiocese was accused of interfering in the other dioceses, causing division
among priests and pastoral unrest in other dioceses. The archdiocese was accused of sowing
confusion in the seminary … it has been a bitter day because of this event and
I lament that the division among the bishops will be worsened by this step,
which seems to me not to be very wise.14
At the same time
reports were sent to Rome denouncing his pastoral plan and his preaching. He was called a subversive, a communist,
Marxist. The situation had become so
filled with tension that Romero traveled to Rome in June, 1978 to meet with
Pope Paul VI. On Wednesday, June 21,
1978 he and Bishop Rivera had a private audience with the Pope. This audience was summarized in his homily
that he gave in the Cathedral upon his return to El Salvador:
I
will never forget the beautiful moment when the Pope, after receiving the
information from all his advisors who had composed a synthesis of what he would
say to the Bishops who had arrived there for their Ad Limina visitation, spoke
some words of encouragement and comfort and strength that made us feel as
though we were one with the heart of the Pastor. It was as though we had received the same
gift that God had given to Peter and his successors: Affirm your people! My dear sisters and brothers, this is what I
bring you at this time: an affirmation, a ratification, a word of encouragement
and goodness and understanding of the one who is Christ on earth: the Pope.
The
Pope stretched out his hands with the warmth and the strength of one who supports
all the Pastors and the whole Universal Church.
He counseled me and helped me to continue to be faithful in this
ministry of service to the people. He
spoke many kind words that I would like to communicate to you, but the emotion
of the moment makes me forget his exact words.
But in substance he told me that since he had worked in the Secretariat
of State some fifty years before becoming Pontiff, he knew of the vitality,
hard work and the problems of the people of El Salvador. He told me:
These people demand that their rights be respected and seek for a more
just situation. You must help and love
these people. Be patient and strong and
help them! Tell them that the Pope loves
them and cares for them and is aware of their suffering. Tell them to never seek for a solution to
their problems in irrational violence.
Tell them to never allow themselves to be caught up in the currents of
hatred. Rather work together to build
unity, peace, and justice upon a foundation of love. I was very pleased to be able to tell
him: Holy Father, this is what I have
preached. I have never preached hatred
even though those who slander me are convinced that I preach violence, but I
have never done that. Your message that
you communicated on the first of January has been central to my preaching: No to violence, yes to peace. The Pope smiled and blessed the people of El
Salvador whom he wants to remain faithful to the paths of the Gospel.15
It is clear that
Romero felt that the Pope had affirmed him personally and also approved his
pastoral plan for the Archdiocese. The
Pope seemed to understand the conflict that he had to endure because the other
bishops of El Salvador simply did not understand this new approach to ministry. Romero, however, would have a different
reaction after a similar meeting with Johm Paul II whom he would meet one year
later. After a private audience with
Pope John Paul II he wrote in his diary:
I
left, pleased by the meeting but worried to see how much the negative reports
of my pastoral work had influenced him, although deep down I remembered that he
had recommended “courage and boldness, but, at the same time, tempered with the
necessary prudence and balance.”
Although I did not feel completely satisfied with the meeting, I think
that the audience and our conversation were very useful because he was very
frank. I have learned that one cannot
expect to get complete approval and that it is more useful to hear criticism
that can be used to improve my work.16
This meeting with the
Pope took place at a time when there was much discussion about naming an
Apostolic Administrator, that is, Romero would continue as the Archbishop but
all authority would be given to another person named to administer the
Archdiocese. While he was in Rome he met
with Cardinal Baggio who felt that it was not a very practical solution because
he did not see that any one of the present bishops who could be the apostolic
administrator would be able to work well with Romero. To bring in someone from outside the country
also seemed an absurd idea, given the situation of El Salvador. The cardinal mentioned that this action would
still be studied and there are many people who wonder if Archbishop Romero had
not been assassinated would Rome have intervened and given the decision making
authority to someone else.
I previously mentioned
the fact that José Eduardo Alvarez was one of the bishops in El Salvador. I should say a little more about him since he
was a Vincentian, a member of the Central American Province of the Congregation
of the Mission. He was often referred to
as “the colonel from San Miguel” because he held that rank in the Salvadorian
army and was also the military chaplain.
He attracted international attention in 1981 for his blessing of new war
planes that had just arrived at Ilopango Air Force Base outside of San
Salvador. He was a vehement opponent of
Archbishop Romero and with the other bishops sent letters to Rome denouncing
the Archbishop as a communist and a Marxist.
Though I am not proud of this fact nor the position that he took during
the time of his episcopacy in San Miguel, I felt that it was also important to
be frank and include this fact here.
Romero
as an Evangelizer of All the People of El Salvador
As Romero visited the
communities of the Archdiocese he took time to meet with the various groups
that worked and ministered in the parishes.
His visits to these communities were not photo opportunities but a time
to encourage and strengthen the work of evangelization. His evangelization of the whole of El
Salvador meant that he tried to proclaim the Good News to everyone, regardless
of their political or social situation.
Romero was very well aware of the fact that the population was divided
into distinct groups. So he undertook
his mission in a different way. In
ministering to the masses he took into account the need to purify and reinforce
popular religion. In dealing with
politically committed Christians he encouraged them in their work on behalf of
justice and human rights and in his work with Christians in positions of
economic or political power he encouraged these people to change their way.
It was this approach
to ministry that led to his martyrdom on March 24th, 1980. The previous day, after he recounted at
length the violence of the past week he concluded his homily — a homily that
lasted for more than two hours — with the following words:
I
would like to appeal in a special way to the army’s enlisted men, and in
particular to the ranks of the Guardia Nacional and the police --- those in the
barracks. Brothers: you are a part of
our own people. You kill your own
campesino brothers and sisters. Before
an order to kill that a man may give, God’s law must prevail: Thou shalt not kill! No soldier is obliged to obey an order against
the law of God. No one has to fulfill an
immoral law. It is time to take back
your consciences and to obey your consciences rather than the orders of sin. The Church, defender of the rights of God, of
the law of God, of human dignity, of the person, cannot remain silent before
such abominations. We want the
government to understand seriously that reforms are worth nothing if they are
stained with so much blood. In the name
of God, and in the name of this suffering people, whose laments rise to heaven
each day more tumultuous, I beg you, I beseech you, I order you in the name of
God: Stop the repression!17
Many have said that
these words were like placing the final nail in his coffin. The following evening he celebrated Mass on
the anniversary of the death of a mother of a friend. As he concluded the homily, a single shot
rang out and the Archbishop died a few minutes later in the emergency room of
the hospital. In death Romero is one
with the oppressed and persecuted, and that oneness is recognized by the
continual visits to his tomb by the people of El Salvador. After the assassination of Father Rafael
Palacios he said:
It
would be sad, if in a country where murder is being committed so horribly, we
were not to find priests also among the victims. They are the testimony of a Church that is
incarnated in the problems of its people.18
How
fitting that in death the blood of the Archbishop should be mingled and shared
with the countless people who had been assassinated and murdered and
“disappeared” before him. Indeed, in
death Romero is one with the oppressed and the persecuted and that oneness is
recognized by the continual visits to his tomb in the Cathedral. Yet as he himself said: a bishop will die, but the Church of God
--- the people --- they will never die!19
Notes
1. Brockman, Romero, (Orbis
Books:Maryknoll, New York, 1989), p. ix
2. Interview, March 1980
3.
Homily, March 14, 1977.
4.
Homily, March 14, 1977
5.
Homily, March 20, 1977
6.
Homily, May 12, 1977
7.
Homily, September 9, 1979
8.
Newspaper column written by Romero, May 26, 1978
9.
Homily, December 16. 1979
10.
Homily, August 6, 1978
11.
Luke 4:18-19
12.
Approved by Board of Trustees, March 15, 1999
13.
Christus Dominus, #37
14.
Romero, A Shepherd’s Diary, entry for April 3, 1978, p. 24
15.
Homily, July 2, 1978
16.
Romero, A Shepherd’s Diary, entry for May 7, 1979, p. 215
17.
Homily, March 23, 1980
18.
Homily, June 21, 1979
19. Interview, March, 1980