Barreto, Raimundo. Facing The Poor in Brazil Tow

Abstract of
“Facing the Poor in Brazil: Towards an EvangSlico Progressive Social Ethics”
by Raimundo C. Barreto Jr.
Advisor: Mark L. Taylor
Progressive Evang&icos have received little attention from those studying
Brazilian Protestantism. By focusing on this branch of Brazilian Protestantism,
this dissertation intends to contribute to the understanding of the socio-political
relevance of the Evang4lico presence in Brazil.
Progressive Evang6lico Christianity, which combines charismatic spirituality
with socio-political progressive action, offers a valuable approach to Christian
social ethics in contemporary Brazil which may lead to substantive transformation
at both individual and social levels.
I suggest that it is important to look at three specific EvangMco responses to
the plight of the poor, coming from three different faces of Brazilian
Protestantism: the Ecumenical face, the Evangelical face and the Pentecostal
face. The guiding argument of this dissertation is that the three faces present
specific responses to realities of suffering, injustice and oppression in Brazil, and
that when they are critically related with one another they complement each other
in ways that are instrumental for the development of a Brazilian progressive
EvangSlico social ethics.
I start by presenting the relational nature of the Brazilian culture, showing that
any Christian social ethics that wants to respond adequately to the current needs
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
of the poor in Brazil must be relational and must result from a face-to-face
encounter with the poor.
Then, I introduce the three different faces of Brazilian Protestantism and their
responses and contributions to empower those who are suffering, paying
attention to how these Evangelico faces have been impacted and transformed by
their face-to-face encounter with the poor.
The work of Richard Shaull is used as an exemplar of the responsible and
dialogical Evangelico theologizing that is proposed here. I suggest that his praxis
can function as an interface which brings the three different faces into
conversation with each other. I conclude by presenting some pervasive
orientations and practical features that bring together the resources coming from
the three faces, providing both a new ethos and some important elements for the
development of a Progressive Evang6lico social ethics in Brazil.
PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
FACING THE POOR IN BRAZIL: TOWARDS AN EVANGELICO
PROGRESSIVE SOCIAL ETHICS
A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY
OF PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
BY
RAIMUNDO C. BARRETO JR.
PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY
APRIL, 2006
UMI N um ber: 3243049
Copyright 2006 by
Barreto, Raimundo C., Jr.
All rights reserved.
INFORMATION TO USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
UMI
UMI Microform 3243049
Copyright 2007 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest Information and Learning Company

300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
© Copyright Raimundo Cesar Barreto Jr. 2006
CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS................................................................................................ vii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS........................................................................................ x
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION....................................................................... 1
Is There a Brazilian Protestant Social Ethics?...........................................1
The Thesis Stated and Explained.............................................................. 9
Theological and Sociological Perspectives............................................... 12
Significance of this Research to the Field................................................ 18
Method and Organization of the Chapters............................................... 19
CHAPTER TWO: ENCOUNTERING THE POOR FACE-TO-FACE, THE
CONTEXT FOR A BRAZILIAN EVANGELICO SOCIAL ETHICS....................... 33
The Relational Nature of Brazilian Culture................................................ 35
From Individualism to Social Responsibility............................................. 45
An Ethics of Response to the Cry of the Poor.......................................... 50
A Contextual-Relational Ethics................................................................. 56
Moral Responsibility and the Appeal of the Other’s Face........................ 63
From Encounter to Conversion................................................................ 77
CHAPTER THREE: RICHARD SHAULL, INTERFACING THE BRAZILIAN
EVANGELICO RESPONSES TO THE POOR....................................................81
Unity and Diversity in the ‘Faces’ of Brazilian Protestantism................... 81
Richard Shaull as Interface: Why Shaull?.................................................85
An Overview of Shaull’s Theology............................................................ 96
iii
Significant Encounters and Conversions................................................ 102
Shaull’s First Conversion............................................................. 102
Shaull’s Second Conversion........................................................ 107
Shaull’s Third Conversion............................................................ 113
New Frontiers of Social Change............................................................. 118
CHAPTER FOUR: THE ECUMENICAL FACE: BRAZILIAN ECUMENICAL
PROTESTANTS MEET THE POOR..................................................................121
The Origins of Brazilian Ecumenical Protestantism: a Brief Sketch 122
The Rise of Latin American Ecumenism................................................ 128
Ecumenism and the Nationalization of Brazilian Protestantism.............135
The Ecumenical Response to Social Injustice in Brazil..........................140
The Confederagao Evangelica do Brasil......................................... 140
The Student Christian Movement.................................................... 145
The Setor de Responsabilidade Social da Igreja.............................159
Ecumenism beyond the Churches......................................................... 170
CHAPTER FIVE: THE EVANGELICAL FACE: PROGRESSIVE EVANGELICAL
RESPONSES TO THE POOR...........................................................................177
New Social Actors: Evangelicals and Social Responsibility...................181
Introducing the Evangelical Face.......................................................... 185
The Roots of the Progressive Evangelical Movement in Brazil.............. 190
Characteristics of the Progressive Evangelical Movement.................... 200
The Evangelical Progressive Movement in Brazil..................................215
iv
CHAPTER SIX: THE PENTECOSTAL FACE: THE CHARISMATIC RESPONSE
TO THE POOR..................................................................................................228
Pentecostalism as a New Topic of Study in Latin America.................... 230
Pentecostal ism as Haven for the Masses.......................................230
Pentecostalism as Symbolic Protest............................................... 234
Diversity and Change in Brazilian Pentecostalism.................................244
Pentecostalism and Brazilian Culture.....................................................257
Neo-Pentecostalism and Brazilian Popular Religiosity.......................... 259
A Call for Progressive Evangelicos to Engage Pentecostalism..............267
CHAPTER SEVEN: INTEGRATING THE THREE FACES: TOWARDS A
PROGRESSIVE EVANGELICO SOCIAL ETHICS IN BRAZIL..........................277
The Ethical Demand of a Socio-historical Location................................ 277
The Public Role of Religion....................................................................279
Putting the Different Evangelico Faces in Dialogue with Each Other 282
Elements for an Evangelico Progressive Social Ethics inBrazil............. 291
Pervasive Orientations for a Brazilian Evangelico Progressive Social
Ethics...................................................................................................... 295
Messianic Orientation................................................................... 295
Communal Orientation..................................................................301
Charismatic Orientation................................................................308
Practical Orientation..................................................................... 314
Practical Features of a Brazilian Evangelico Progressive Social
Ethics............................................................................................315
BIBLIOGRAPHY 323
vi
ABBREVIATIONS
ABU - Alianga Bfblica Universitaria (University Biblical Alliance)
ACAS - Associagao de Cristaos Academicos (Christian Scholars Association)
AD - Assembleias de Deus (Assemblies of God)
AEVB - Associagao Evangelica Brasileira (Brazilian Evangelical Association)
BCC - Brazilian Committee of Cooperation
CBE - Congresso Brasileira de Evangelizagao (Brazilian Evangelization
Congress)
CCLA - Committee of Cooperation for Latin America
CEB - Confederagao Evangelica do Brasil (Brazilian Evangelical Confederation)
CEI - Centro Ecumenico de Informagoes (Ecumenical Information Center)
CELA - Conferencia Evangelica Latinoamericana (Latin American Evangelical
Conference)
CELADEC - Comision Evangelica Latinoamericana de Educacion Cristiana
(Latin American Protestant Committee for Christian Education)
CESE - Coordenadoria Ecumenica de Servigo (Ecumenical Coordination of
Social Service)
CIEF - Confederagao de Igrejas Evangelicas Fundamentalistas do Brasil.
(Brazilian Confederation of the Fundamentalist Evangelical Churches)
CLADE - Congresso Latinoamericano de Evangelizacion (Latin American
v ii
viii
Congress of Evangelization)
CLAI - Conselho Latino-Americano de Igrejas (Latin American Council of
Churches)
CNBB - Conferencia Nacional dos Bispos do Brasil (National Conference of
Brazilian Bishops)
CONELA - Conselho Evangelico Latino-Americano (Latin American Evangelical
Council)
CONIC - Conselho Nacional de Igrejas Cristas (National Council of Christian
Churches)
DOPS - Departamento de Ordem Politica e Social (Department of Political and
Social Order)
ECB - Ecclesial Base Comunities
EPCBC - Evangelical Pentecostal Church ‘Brazil for Christ’
FGC - Foursquare Gospel Church
FIEB - Federagao das Igrejas Evangelicas do Brasil (Brazilian Federation of
Protestant Churches)
FTL - Fraternidad Teologica Latinoamericana (Latin American Theological
Fraternity)
ICC- International Council of Churches
ISAL —Iglesia y Sociedad en America Latina (Church and Society in Latin
America)
IURD - Igreja Universal do Reino de Deus (Universal Church of the Kingdom of
God)
MCAB - Movimento de Cristaos Academicos do Brasil (Brazil’s Christian
Scholars Movement)
MCDC - Movimento Cristao Democratico de Centro (Christian Central
Democratic Movement)
MEC - Movimento de Estudantes Cristaos (Student Christian Movement)
MEP - Movimento Evangelico Progressista (Progressive Evangelical Movement)
MST - Movimento dos Trabalhadores Sem-Terra (Landless Workers Movement)
NGO - Non-Governamental Organization
PL - Peasant Leagues
SCM - Student Christian Movement
SRSI - Setor de Responsabilidade Social da Igreja (Sector of Social
Responsibility of the Church)
UCEB - Uniao Crista de Estudantes do Brasil (Brazil’s Student Christian Union)
UNE - Uniao Nacional dos Estudantes (National Student Union)
VINDE - Visao Nacional de Evangelizagao (National Evangelization Vision)
WCC - World Council of Churches
WSCF - World Student Christian Federation
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
For someone who grew up as a very poor child in Northeastern Brazil,
getting a doctoral degree from a distinguished school such as Princeton
Theological Seminary was not an easy thing to accomplish. Such a dream,
however, is now being fulfilled, and I know that its fulfillment is nothing but a sign
of God’s infinite grace, evident through the help and encouragement of several
people, many of whom I am not even able to name. Without God and without
them I would never be able to reach this point in my life. My sincere thanks to all
of them: to my parents who, in the midst of a continuous struggle for life,
encouraged me since my early childhood to study hard; to my wife, Elia, and my
son, Caio, who have been steady companions throughout my doctoral work,
embracing me and supporting me in the moments when I was discouraged; to
Princeton Theological Seminary, and its faculty, for offering me a doctoral
fellowship without which I would never be able to complete my doctoral studies;
to McAfee School of Theology, for the special grant that complemented the
required budget of my doctoral studies for four years; to the Abraham Kuyper
Institute for awarding me with a doctoral dissertation grant in the final stages of
my dissertation writing; to the Korea Institute for Advanced Theological Studies,
for the honor of a dissertation grant which allowed me to do some traveling and
field research; to the Alliance of Baptists for paying for my trip to my oral defense;
to the Igreja Batista Esperanga, my current employer, for giving me two paid
leaves of absence, which allowed me the time I needed to finish this dissertation;
to my associate pastors, who have done a wonderful job, allowing me to be
absent from my church for more than two months; to all my professors in the
Religion and Society department who have been supportive of my work, and
have significantly contributed to my growth as a scholar and a human being. Dr.
Nancy Duff, Dr. Richard Fenn, and Dr. Max Stackhouse, even not being part of
my dissertation committee, have contributed to my development through their
insights, comments, and teaching. My dissertation advisors, Dr. Mark Taylor, Dr.
Peter Paris, Dr. Luis Rivera-Pagan, and Dr. M. Richard Shaull (in memoriam),
have been wonderful guiders, and constant encouragers of my work. Besides
being intellectual mentors, through their praxis and commitments they have
become sources of inspiration for my life and work. Dr. Taylor, the chair of my
dissertation committee, has been especially available to help me throughout this
process. His critical insights and his encouragement became particularly
important to me as I developed my arguments. Dr. Shaull, through the example
of his academic and pastoral work in Brazil, offered a unique contribution to this
dissertation. Finally, my most profound gratitude to Maria Lancianese and
Devaka Premawardhana who have patiently and kindly proofed most of my
writing, as I have worked in a language that is not my own. Special thanks to
Waldo Cesar, who opened his rich personal archives to me. My sincere
appreciation, then, to all those who directly or indirectly have helped me reach
this stage of my program.
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Is There a Brazilian Protestant Social Ethics?
Paulo de Goes and Rubem Alves, among other scholars, have argued that
Brazilian Protestantism, due to its historical heritage marked by a strong
individualism, has not been able to articulate a social ethics.1 Its ethics has been
much more concerned with rules and norms regarding individual or personal
behavior of the believer than with any Christian participation in and response to
the problems of Brazilian society 2 That does not mean that there has not existed
1Rubem Alves, Protestantismo e Repressao (Sao Paulo, Brazil: Atica, 1979), 216ff;
Paulo de Goes, “Do Individualismo ao Compromisso Social: A Contribuigao da
Confederate Evangelica Brasileira para a Articulagao de uma Etica Social Crista”
(Master of Religious Studies thesis, Institute Metodista de Ensino Superior, Sao
Bernardo dd Campo, Brazil, 1989), 86. Esdras Costa also affirms that [Brazilian
Protestants’] political activities and concern with social problems have been kept within
bounds by a strong pietistic, otherworldly orientation. Their ideals and projects for a
modem society have been marked by a belief that a puritanical personal conduct is
essential as an expression of faith and as a source of social reform, p ro ^ s s and
democracy.” Esdras Borges Costa, “Protestantism, Modernization and OlttâPChange
in Brazil” (Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley,1979), 5.
2A Christian ethics that is based on the love of God cannot be only restricted to
individual concerns. It ought to be predominantly social. It does not exclude individual
behavior, but it pushes the individual toward God’s activities in the world, putting her in
relation with her neighbors and the broader society. Because of the individualism
prevailing among most Brazilian Evangelicos, Brazilian Evangelico ethics was for a long
time limited to blind obedience to moral codes of personal behavior. See Francisco P.
Alves, “Prefacio do Tradutor”, in F6 Biblica e Etica Social, 2ed, by E.C. Gardner,
translated by Francisco P. Alves (Sao Paulo: ASTE, 1982), 9-14. For the idea of
Christian ethics as not being individualist, but social, see Emil Brunner, The Divine
Imperative (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), 189. For the balance between
individual concern and responsibility for the other in a Christian ethics, see Dietrich
Bonhoeffer, “The Structure of Responsible Life,” in Ethics (New York: Touchstone,
1995), 220-250.
1
a Brazilian Protestant ethics, in the sense of a collective moral developed within
a determined ethos3 What I am saying here is that such an ethos produced an
ethics that was reduced to a reflection on moral behavior in a very individualistic
and pietistic fashion. There was no much concern with reflecting on social moral
behavior.
Despite that tendency, since the 1950s one can observe a consciousness
rising among some Brazilian Protestants concerning their involvement in the
social, political and economic problems of Brazilian society. Since then, some
Protestant groups began to take a stand in the struggle against poverty and
social injustice.4
First, the Confederagao Evangelica Brasileira (CEB), through its Department
of Social Responsibility, created in 1955, made a significant contribution to this
awakening of social awareness from an ecumenical perspective. This initiative
3 Clifford Geertz defines ethos as “the tone, character, and quality of their life, its
moral aesthetic style and mood; it is the underlying attitude toward themselves and their
world that life reflects.” See Clifford Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures (New York:
Basic Books, 1973), 127. Max Stackhouse sees it as “the subtle web of values,
meanings, purposes, expectations, obligations, and legitimations that constitutes the
operating norms of a culture in relationship to a social entity.” See Max Stackhouse,
Ethics and the Urban Ethos: An Essay in Social Theory and Theological Reconstruction
(Boston: Beacon Press, 1972), 5.
4 The emergence of a dynamic Christian Student Movement among Brazilian

Protestant students and the foundation of the Sector of Social Responsibility of the
Church played an important role in this move toward a greater Protestant involvement
with the social problems surrounding the Christian communities in Brazil. For more on
this development see Richard Shaull, Surpreendido Pela Graga: Memdrias de Um
Teoldgo (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Record, 2003), 137-183.
3
was profoundly influenced by the theology of an American Presbyterian
missionary named Richard Shaull.5
In 1970, the Fraternidad Teologica Latinoamericana (FTL) was created,
becoming an influential voice calling on Evangelicals for social responsibility in
several Latin American countries 6 The FTL and other evangelical movements
influenced by it, made important contributions to the rise of this social awareness
among some Brazilian Protestants, this time from an evangelical perspective.
Despite the theological differences between the CEB and the FTL, these two
movements made an impact upon Brazilian Protestant church, which is best
known as the Evangelico Church7, and both tried to rescue the prophetic
dimension of the Protestant faith in Brazil.
5 There are numerous testimonies on the profound influence of Richard Shaull’s

theology upon an entire generation of young Brazilian theologians and Christian leaders.
See, for instance, Eduardo G. Faria, Fe e Compromisso: Richard Shaull e a Teologia no
Brasil (Sao Paulo, Brazil: ASTE, 2002); Richard Shaull et al, De Dentro do FuracSo:
Richard Shaull e os Primdrdios da Teologia da Libertaqao (Sao Paulo, Brazil: Editora
Sagarana, CEDI/CLAI, Programa Ecumenico de Pos-Graduapao em Ciencias da
Religiao, 1985); and Rubem Alves, “su cadaver estaba lleno de mundo,” ReligiSo e
Sociedade 23, special issue (2003): 91-94.
6 For more on the circumstances that gave birth to the FTL see Samuel Escobar, “La
Fundacion de la Fraternidad Teologica Latinoamerica,” Boletin Teologico 27/ 59-60
(1995): 7-25); and Luiz Longuini Neto O Novo Rosto da MissSo: Os Movimentos
Ecumenico e Evangelical no Protestantismo Latino-Americano (Vigosa, Brazil: Ultimate,
2002), 168-176.
7 The word Evangdlico in this dissertation follows its common usage in Latin America,
where it is used as identification to all Protestants—from mainstream Protestant
churches to Pentecostals. See Jose Miguez Bonino, Faces of Latin American
Protestantism, translated by Eugene L. Stockwell (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1995), viii. Evangdlico/a—\he Spanish/Portuguese term for
‘evangelical’—is the word used by most Latin American Protestants for self-identification.
As David Stoll notices, ten percent or more of the Latin American population identify
themselves as Evangdlicos, with that percentage going substantively up in Brazil, Chile,
and most of Central America. See David Stoll, “Introduction: Rethinking Protestantism in
4
The 21 years of political repression by the right-wing military dictatorship that
was implanted in Brazil by a coup, in 1964, overshadowed this dawning social
awareness within some Brazilian Protestant movements, bringing to the surface
the most conservative face of Brazilian Protestantism, which welcomed the
coup.8 In the eighties, with the process of re-democratization, the Evangdlicos
returned to the public scene in Brazil. This time, however, there was an
awakening towards the occupancy of the public space, especially in the political
arena. Brazilian Evangelicos, mainly Pentecostals, realized that they were
sufficiently large in numbers to elect their own political representatives in order to
defend the interest of their churches in the public realm. That awakening of a
public awareness brought the Pentecostals to the center of the political life in
Brazil, and led other Brazilian Evangelicos also to seek to occupy the public
realm.9
Latin America,” in Rethinking Protestantism in Latin America, edited by Virginia Garrard-

Burnett and David Stoll (Philadelphia: Temple University, 1993), 2 .1use the word
Evangelical to refer to a group of Protestants who distinguish themselves from
ecumenical Protestantism in Brazil, and who also try to be distinguishable from
Fundamentalism. Pentecostalism co-exists within Latin American Evangelicalism, as its
most popular stream. In the case of Brazil, around 70 percent of the 20 million
Protestants in the country belong to the Pentecostal or Charismatic churches. In Brazil,
evangelicalism tends to be charismatic, having at least some traces of a Pentecostal
influence. See Paul Freston, Evangelicals and Politics in Asia, Africa and Latin America
(New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 11.
8 For more on the behavior of the Brazilian Protestant churches in face of the military
dictatorship, see Leonildo S. Campos, “Evangelicos e o Golpe Militar de 1964”, Tempo e
Presenqa 334 (March/April 2004):23-31; See also Waldo Cesar, “O Contexto Ecumenico
no Brasil: 1964-1975” (Unpublished paper, Rio de Janeiro, n.d.; accessed by author
from Waldo Cesar’s personal archive, on 18 July 2004).
9 See Paul Freston, “Brother Votes for Brother: The New Politics of Protestantism in
Brazil,” in Rethinking Protestantism in Latin America, edited by Virginia Garrard-Bumett
and David Stoll (Philadelphia, PA.: Temple University Press, 1993), 66-110.
5
This new situation calls for a social ethics that can help Brazilian Evangelicos
to reflect on their public role in the construction of a more just society in Brazil. I
am defining ethics here as a “theoretical reflection that analyzes and criticize or
legitimize the fundaments and principles that guide a determined moral system
(practical dimension).”10 In accord to this definition, ethics takes the meaning of a
critical reflection on the established moral. It is only when one overcomes the
vision of an existing reality as something unquestionable and absolute that one
can imagine, dream and think about a different reality and a better order.11
In order to point to such an ethics, it is important to retrieve the contributions
which have already been made by previous Brazilian Protestant movements. The
task of developing an Evangelico social ethics in Brazil that recovers the
prophetic spirit of Protestantism is still before us. Although it is out of the scope of
this work to take this colossal task upon myself here, I want to present some
orientations and features for a Brazilian Evangelico social ethics that takes into
account the contributions of the two previous movements cited above, and which
dialogues with the current Brazilian Evangelico scenario, which is now dominated
by Pentecostalism. This dialogue, in fact, is already taking place, as
Pentecostalism is exercising a strong influence upon non-Pentecostal Brazilian
10Jung Mo Sung & Josue C. da Silva, Conversando Sobre Iztica e Sociedade

(Petropolis, Brazil: Vozes, 2002), 13. [translation is mine]
11 Ibid.
churches; whereas it is also being affected and influenced by contact with
Brazilian mainline Protestantism.12
All these developments within Brazilian Protestantism have taken place in a
country that has historically been known as a Catholic country. Up to 1970, 90
percent of the Brazilian population identified themselves as Catholics.13 This
percentage has decreased in the last three decades. In the 2000 census, the
quantity of those who identified themselves as Catholics in Brazil declined to 73
percent of the Brazilian population.14 The continuous decline of the number of
Catholics in Brazil is part of an irreversible process of transformation of Brazilian
12 Especially in recent years, it has become increasingly difficult to see

Pentecostalism isolated from the other Brazilian Evangelico churches. As Paul Freston
has pointed out, there are two paradoxical tendencies concomitantly taking place within
contemporary Brazilian Protestantism, namely the “historicization” of Pentecostals, and
the “Pentecostalization” of the historical or mainline churches. On the one hand, as the
Pentecostal churches become increasingly institutionalized, they begin to see
themselves as a part of a broader community of Evangelicos that includes their historical
brethren. In Freston’s own words, “greater social and political visibility has led to a
multiplication of projects to unify the Protestant field and address areas of national life
previously distant from Pentecostal concerns.” On the other hand, there is “the diffusion
in historic circles of Pentecostal forms of worship and theological themes, such as
healing, prosperity and 'spiritual warfare.’" Paul Freston, “Between Pentecostalism and
the Crisis of Denominationalism: The Future of the Historic Churches in Brazil,” In the
Power of the Spirit: The Pentecostal Challenge to Historical Churches in Latin America,
edited by Benjamin F. Gutierrez and Dennis A. Smith (Louisville:PCUSA/WMD, 1996),
195-211 (207ff.). Pentecostalism, little by little, seems to be impregnating the historical
churches and vice-versa.
13See Antonio Flavio Pierucci, “Secularizafao e Declinio do Catolicismo,” in

Sociologia da Religiao e Mudanga Social: Catdlicos, Protestantes e Novos Movimentos
Religiosos no Brasil, ed. Beatriz M. De Souza & Luiz Mauro S. Martinho (Sao Paulo,
Brazil: Paulus, 2003), 13-21 (13).
14 Ibid., 16.
7
religiosity, which has moved from the religious monopoly of the Roman Catholic
Church to an increasing situation of religious pluralism.15
Despite that process of diversification of the religious field in Brazil, one
cannot overlook the important place Catholicism continues to have in Brazilian
society. This dissertation, however, focuses on the changes that have taken
place within Brazilian Protestantism and their relationship with the larger Brazilian
society in the past fifty years. These changes point to the increasing public role
Evangelicos are playing in Brazilian society.
Because of that focus, it is beyond the scope of this dissertation to follow the
developments that have taken place in the Catholic field. However, by no means,
this entails neglect or ignorance of the important role Catholicism has played in
the struggle for social justice in Brazil, especially through the development of
liberation theology, since the 1960s. On the contrary, as it will become clear in
the development of my argument, throughout this dissertation I presuppose that
all the developments taking place among Brazilian Evangelicos have as
background a social reality profoundly affected by the contributions coming from
Catholicism, and particularly from liberation theology.16 In fact, my argument
15Ibid., 18-19. Pierucci understands this change in the Brazilian religious picture as
part of the process of modernization and secularization that the country has faced since
the 1950s, which has broken the religious monopoly of Catholicism, and created new
spaces where other religions can mobilize and attract their adepts and clients. See also
Maria Jose Rosado-Nunes, “O Catolicismo Sob o Escrutinio da Modemidade,” in
Sociologia da ReligiSo e Mudanga Social, 22-36; Paulo D. Siepierski, “A Emergencia da
Pluralidade Religiosa (1),” ReflexSo e Fe, 1/1(1999): 59-75;and Candido Procopio F. De
Camargo (ed.), Catdlicos, Protestantes, Espiritas (Petropolis, Brazil: Vozes, 1973).
16 Much has been written on the contributions of the Progressive Catholic Church to
the construction of a more just order in Brazil. For important studies of those
8
throughout this dissertation implies a continuous dialogue with these Catholic
contributions.17
On the one hand, I will show that there were some Protestant antecedents to
liberation theology in Brazil, in the 1950s, despite the fact that Brazilian liberation
theology developed mostly in the Catholic field. I will also point out that there
was an important dialogue between ecumenical Protestants and Catholic
Dominicans that contributed to the development of liberation theology in the
country.
On the other hand, in my presentation of the Evangelical face of Brazilian
Protestantism, I will explain how the social awareness that has taken place
among Brazilian Evangelicals has been directly influenced by the challenges
posed to them by liberation theology. In the end, my hope is that this work can
contribute to increase the dialogue and mutual cooperation between Evangelicos
developments in the Catholic field, see John Burdick, Looking for God in Brazil: The
Progressive Catholic Church in Urban Brazil’s Religious Arena (Berkeley and Los
Angeles: University of California Press, 1993); Manuel A. Vasquez, The Brazilian
Popular Church and the Crisis of Modernity (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University
Press, 1998); Marcello Azevedo, Basic Eclesial Communities in Brazil: The Challenge of
a New Way of Being Church (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1987); T.
Bruneau, The Catholic Church in Brazil: The Politics of Religion (Austin: University of
Texas Press, 1982); Jose Comblin, The Church and the National Security State
(Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1979); and S. Mainwaring, The Catholic Church and
Politics in Brazil, 1916-1985 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1986.
17 Not to mention the fact that Brazilian Protestantism, even in its most conservative
fashion, has always defined itself over against Brazil’s Catholic background. That is the
reason, in fact, for the anti-Catholicism that has prevailed among Brazilian Protestants.
However, that acknowledgment of an undeniable Catholic presence in Brazilian society
can otherwise stimulate dialogue and cooperation as Brazilian Evangelicos become
aware of their role in the struggle for social justice. For more on the origin of the anti-
Catholicism that has characterized many Brazilian Evangelico churches, see Antonio
Gouvea Mendonga O Celeste Porvir. A Insergao do Protestantismo no Brasil (Sao
Paulo, Brazil: ASTE, 1995), 79-94.
9
and Catholics in Brazil, as I show how they depend on one another in their
strive for contributing to the construction of a more just society. Finally, base
ecumenism—which is the new form the ecumenical movement is taking in
Brazil— also shows that the reality of poverty and injustice which both Catholics
and Protestants have met in Brazil, takes their ecumenical efforts to a new level.
It goes beyond ecclesiastical structures and doctrinal quarrels to a greater
participation in the struggles of the Brazilian people for social justice.18
The Thesis Stated and Explained
The major focus of this dissertation, then, is the contemporary development of
a progressive Evangelico movement in Brazil, which combines Charismatic
spirituality, on the one hand, with socio-political progressive action, on the other. I
argue that this kind of movement can offer a valuable approach for Christian
social ethics in contemporary Brazil as it promotes a combination of charismatic
religion and progressive socio-political action which may lead to substantive
transformation at both individual and social levels. By the word charismatic, I
simply mean a kind of Christianity informed by Pentecostal spirituality.
Progressive socio-political action, in this context, is one that entails the following
three criteria: (1) it promotes some reorganization in the life of those who have
been wrecked by the injustices of the social order; (2) it presupposes an
experience of being empowered, a move from a situation of disenfranchisement
18 For a good analysis of the development of base ecumenism in Brazil, see Gerhard
Tiel, Ecumenismo na Perspectiva do Reino de Deus: Uma AnSlise do Movimento
Ecumenico de Base (Sao Leopoldo, Brazil: Editora Sinodal/CEBI, 1998).
10
to some mode of empowerment; (3) it implies active participation in organizing
efforts outside the church to promote social changes in the status quo.
As I stated earlier, Brazilian Protestantism in its origins tended to develop a
kind of pietistic and individualistic spirituality without much concern with the social
structures of Brazilian society. Nevertheless, in its historical relation with a reality
marked by poverty, social injustice, and oppression, some Brazilian Protestants
began to develop a sense of social responsibility and social justice, which has
been manifest in different ways. As Brazilian Protestantism itself is plural and
diverse, it has emerged in different forms, and has presented itself through
different faces to the Brazilian society. Drawing on classifications developed to
study Brazilian Protestantism, I will pay special attention to three faces of
Brazilian Protestantism which represent a considerable amount of Evangelicos in
Brazil: the Ecumenical face, the Evangelical face and the Pentecostal face.19
191draw upon Jose Miguez Bonino’s study of Latin American Protestantism when
I use of the word ‘faces” to describe the different manifestations of Brazilian
Protestantism. However, instead of Bonino’s liberal face, I prefer the term
ecumenical face. Furthermore, I do not use Bonino’s ethnic face in this study, since it
is not relevant for the ethical responses I want to analyze here. The use of the word
‘faces’ to describe the different manifestations of Brazilian Protestantism implies a
certain unity in the midst of diversity, which enables one to speak of the Evangelico
faith, in the singular, even though there are different manifestations of this faith. The
other way I use the word ‘face” in this dissertation refers to Emmanuel Levinas’ use
of the face in his ethics of alterity. See Emmanuel Levinas, Totality and Infinity
(Pittsburg, PA.: Duquesne University Press, 1998), 194ff. It implies that each
Protestant face studied here has produced its own responses to a situation marked
by poverty and injustice. Each one of them exists not in isolation, but in a face-to-
face relation with the poor in Brazil, and responding to the appeal of their faces.
Finally, I use the word ‘poor’ in a broad sense, representing all those who are
oppressed—by all kinds of oppressive structures—or deprived of justice, i.e., of that
which is due to them, be it either dignity, freedom, respect, or basic living resources.
Although acknowledging the conceptual instability of general words such as
oppression and justice [See Alasdair McIntyre, Whose Justice? Whose Rationality?
(Notre Dame, IN.: 1988)], one cannot avoid using them, under the risk of not being
11
From within each of the three Protestant faces mentioned above there
have emerged progressive Evangelico initiatives or movements led by Christians
who have been challenged by their face-to-face encounter with the poor in Brazil
to offer a significant response to the reality of suffering, oppression and injustice
in which most Brazilians live. This dissertation seeks to put these movements
and their responses to this encounter with the poor in the Brazilian milieu in
dialogue with each other. Such dialogue implies some kind of linkage or alliance
which is based on the distinctive contributions of each face to one another, as
well as their dependence upon one another. The guiding argument of this
dissertation is that the three faces present specific responses to realities of
suffering, injustice and oppression, and that when they are critically related with
one another, they complement each other in ways that are instrumental for the
development of a Brazilian progressive Evangelico social ethics, which can be
able to take stands on practical issues that afflict the poor. Latin American liberation
theology has shown us that instead of starting from a set of timeless defined truths,
Christian ethics is called first to challenge practical forms of injustices, which
manifest themselves in the daily lives of the poor. Liberation theology analyzes the
injustices experienced by the oppressed, and defines those injustices using specific
words such as slavery, humiliation, exploitation, and poverty, among others. Once it
has defined in concrete terms those situations of injustice and oppression, liberation
theology sets as its main task to oppose and reject those injustices. Justice can only
be achieved if there is “a negation of the negation,” that is to say, a transcendence
beyond the totality that denies the poor their own existence. See Enrique Dussel,
Ethics and Community (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1988), 231. The poor or
oppressed are those who are victims of systemic violence, which prevents them from
experiencing freedom. In the words of Rubem Alves, that systemic violence denies
the oppressed a future. It is the power that keeps the oppressed “prisoner of the
futureless structures of a futureless world... the power of defuturization, which strives
to close man’s (sic) consciousness to the future and the future to man’s (sic)
consciousness.” See Rubem Alves, A Theology of Human Hope (Washington, D.C.:
Corpus Books, 1969), 111.
12
relevant for the construction of a more just society in Brazil. I do not intend to
develop a full-fledged social ethics or any kind of ethical system here. My
purpose is, by putting those three responses in dialogue with each other, to
provide some orientations and features which form the ethos from which this
ethics will emerge.
Because contemporary Evangelico Christianity in Brazil is for the most part a
Pentecostal Christianity, the Pentecostal face, therefore, is especially pervasive.
Thus, drawing on prior attempts made by Evangelico movements to develop a
Christian social ethics from a Protestant perspective in Brazil, I propose a
dialogical approach which takes into consideration both the charismatic
spirituality that is dominant in Brazilian contemporary Christianity—with its
emphasis on individual transformation and empowerment—and the progressive
social action that calls for the transformation of all oppressive structures in
society and seeks to promote social injustice.
Theological and Sociological Perspectives
The theological perspective underlining this dissertation emphasizes the view
of a God who is particularly present among the outcasts of society, working
among and with them to reverse their fate, and to construct a more just order.
God is also the one who empowers the church for social transformation. This
perspective has been developed in many ways—from the tradition of the biblical
prophets to the social gospel tradition of Walter Rauschenbusch20 to the
numerous liberation theologies around the globe.21 This dissertation will be
especially in conversation with the theological contributions of Richard Shaull.22
The choice for this theological interlocutor is mainly due to Shaull’s impact
upon many progressive Evangelicos in Brazil as well as his progressive socio
political action grounded in a strong Christian commitment. His openness for the
new and the ecumenicity of his thought can be of great significance for a
dialogue with Brazilian progressive Evangelicos, since it can deepen their
understanding of progressive action from a Biblical and theological perspective.
Richard Shaull worked in Brazil and left indelible marks in the socio-political
engagement of Brazilian Evangelicos. He understood that the nature of Christian
faith is such that it inevitably leads to action, which is inspired by God’s presence
and activity in the midst of human life and history. 23 Linder the influence of Paul
20Walter Rauschenbusch, A Theology for the Social Gospel (Nashville: Abingdon,

1981). See especially the chapter “The Church as the Social Factor of Salvation,” 118ff.
21 For a particular work on the Latin American liberationist view of God’s presence
and work in the world, see Gustavo Gutierrez, The God of Life (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis
Books, 1991). See also Jon Sobrino, Christ the Liberator (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books,
2001), 79ff.
22 Much will be said in the following chapters about Richard Shaull and his
contributions to the development of a progressive Evangdlico Christianity in Brazil. For
those interested in a overview of his life and work, see his memoirs in Richard Shaull,
Surpreendido Pela Graga: Memdrias de Um Tedlogo (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Record,
2003). For a good analysis of his work and his influence upon Brazilian Protestantism,
see Eduardo G. Faria, F6 e Compromisso (Sao Paulo, Brazil: ASTE, 2002); for the
influence of his work in the U.S. see Nantawan Boonprasat Lewis (ed.), Revolution of
Spirit: Ecumenical Theology in Global Context. Essays in Honor of Richard Shaull
(Grand Rapids, Ml.: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1998).
23 Reynaldo F. Leao Neto, “Richard Shaull: O Profeta da Revolugao,” Pastoral e

Mistica. Cademos de Pos-Gradua?ao/Ciencias da Religiao XIII/8 (1995):83-110.
14
Lehmann24 and Dietrich Bonhoeffer25 Shaull saw the church as that koinonia
in the world, which is the main locus of the apostolic-prophetic witness as well as
the creative reality of Christ’s presence in the world. In his experience as a
missionary in Colombia and in Brazil, Shaull discovered other kinds of worldly
koinonias where Christ was also being formed. Part of his importance for
Brazilian Protestantism was that, prior to anyone else, he was able to see in the
Brazilian student movement, the labor movements, and other social movements,
manifestations of Christ’s presence in the world, working in solidarity with the
poor and toward transforming the conditions in which they lived.
In the 1990’s, as he visited some Pentecostal churches in Rio de Janeiro,
Shaull realized that the people who were most victimized by the erosion of
human community had found a profound faith capable of awakening in them a
hope for the future, as they experience God’s power in their daily lives.26 With
this faith, they created an oasis of peace amidst a reality of violence. The faith in
24 See Barbara Hall and Richard Shaull, “From Somewhere Along the Road,”
Theology Today 29/1 (1972): 86-111.
25 See especially Richard Shaull, “A Forma da Igreja na Nova Diaspora,” in De

Dentro do FuracSo, 135-154.
26 Richard Shaull and Waldo Cesar spent three years doing empirical research
among the Pentecostals in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro. The result of this work was
published in Portuguese and English. See Richard Shaull and Waldo Cesar,
Pentecostalism and the Future of the Christian Churches (Grand Rapids, Ml.: W.B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2000).
15
the living presence of the Holy Spirit helped many of these victims of a social
order that failed them to be able to reconstruct their lives and relationships.27
Shaull always nurtured a passion for justice, and a faith that God is alive and
active in the world. Nevertheless, it is exactly this belief in the dynamic presence
of God—a presence always acting in new and surprising ways in the world—that
prevented his theology from being crystallized into a final form. Throughout his
life, Shaull was always trying to discern the ways God is acting now, and what
God is calling us to do today. Shaull believed that theology must be creative and
re-creative, and must play its role as a force to transform and re-create our
logics.
In this dialogue with Shaull’s praxis and theology, I will pay attention to both,
the ways Shaull contributed to the development of a Christian social ethics from
an Evangelico perspective in Brazil, and the ways his praxis and thought were
affected and transformed by his contact with the Brazilian social reality.
The sociological perspective guiding this dissertation draws on Jose
Casanova’s understanding of a process of ‘deprivatization’ of religion.
Deprivatization means that religious traditions throughout the world today are
refusing to accept the marginal and privatized role which theories of modernity as
well as theories of secularization had reserved for them.28 One of the results of
271will return to this topic later. For more on the significance of Shaull’s research on
and immersion in the symbolic world of the Pentecostal poor, see Raimundo C. Barreto
Jr., “A Terceira Conversao de Richard Shaull,” Religiao e Sociedade 23/special issue
(2003):83-90.
28 Jose Casanova, Public Religions in the Modem World (Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press, 1994), 5.
16
this process of deprivatization of religion is what Casanova calls “the
renormativization of the public economic and political spheres.”29 This process
reaffirms not only the continuous presence of religion in the world, but also the
fact that religion continues to play important public roles in the ongoing
construction of the contemporary politico-economic order.
In the study of charismatic Protestantism’s boom in Latin America, two
sociologists pioneered the field. Christian Lalive D’Epinay30 held the view that
charismatic Protestantism ultimately keeps its members alienated from the socio
political sphere, leading them to avoid more direct involvement in political and
social struggles. He did not see this charismatic form of Protestantism as a
significant force for social change in Latin America. His contemporary, Emilio
Willems,31 on the other hand, detected some ways in which this kind of popular
Protestantism might be a positive factor for socio-political change. He envisioned
an indirect influence through the shaping of the region’s political culture and the
personal values of the people. Contrasting with Lalive D’Epinay, he saw the rise
of Pentecostalism as a ‘symbolic protest’ that rejected the traditional hierarchical
20 ibid., 6.
30See Christian Lalive D’Epinay, Haven of the Masses: A Study of the Pentecostal
Movement in Chile (London: Lutterworth Press, 1969).
31 Emilio Willems, Followers of the New Faith: Culture Change and the Rise of
Protestantism in Brazil and Chile (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1967).
17
social order which prevailed in Latin American societies, and instilled a more
democratic ethos into new generations of Latin Americans.32
In recent years, however, many Latin American Evangelicos—mostly
Pentecostals—have leaned towards more direct participation in political and
social movements.33 An increasingly progressive tendency among some
charismatic Evangelicos in Brazil shows that a development of closer
relationships between the political left, on the one hand, and some charismatic
evangelicals, on the other, have been taking place in recent years.34 Charismatic
Evangelicalism and left wing militancy no longer seem to be incompatible.
32Similar views are held by British sociologist David Martin, Tongues of Fire: The
Explosion of Protestantism in Latin America (Oxford, UK.: Blackwell, 1990).
33Various documents have shown this greater EvangPlico engagement in the socio
political arena in Brazil. Carlos P. Queiroz, who currently is the executive secretary in
Brazil of the Evangelical organization World Vision, has documented the engagement of
Northeastern Brazilian evangelicals in the socio-political realm under the title
“Testemunhos Evangelicos no Nordeste,” in his book Cristo e a Transformag§o Social
do Brasil: O Compromisso do Povo de Deus com os Pobres (Belo Horizonte, Brazil:
Visao Mundial/Missao Editora, 1991), 55-72. Another collection of testimonies of the
evangelical concern with serving the poor in Latin America can be seen in the essays
collected by Tetsunao Yamamori et al. Servindo com os Pobres na America Latina:
Modelosde Ministerio Integral (Curitiba, Brazil: Editora Descoberta, 1998). Fora
sociological analysis of the greater political engagement of Brazilian Evangelicos in the
recent past see Paul Freston, “Popular Protestants in Brazilian Politics: A Novel Turn in
Sect-State Relations,” Social Compass AMA (1994): 537-70.
34See Paulo Hebmuller, “Terras Prometidas,” Revista Vinde 2/16 (1997): 26-31; see
also Paul Freston, Evangelicals and Politics in Asia, Africa and Latin America, 33.
Freston says that Brazil is unique in Latin America in having an active growing
evangelical left wing. He mentions the example of Benedita da Silva, a Pentecostal
woman who has been able to combine Pentecostalism and successful left-wing
militancy, being today one of the best known EvangSlico politicians in the country. For
more on her story, see Medea Benjamin and Maisa Mendonga, Benedita da Silva: An
Afro-Brazilian Woman’s Story of Politics and Love (Monroe, OR.: Food First Books,
1997).
18
Brazilian Pentecostals are becoming increasingly involved in diverse struggles
for societal transformation. A new social consciousness seems to be emerging,
which can no longer be ignored. 35 Therefore, it is fundamental to know how
these progressive Evangelicos can shape the socio-political scenario in Latin
America.
The choice for Brazil as the focus of this work is mainly due to two reasons.
First, my life-long immersion as an Evangelico within Brazilian society gives me a
privileged perspective to study that reality. Second, if there is one country in Latin
America that can be taken as a relevant test case of what is taking place among
evangelicals in the Southern hemisphere today, that country is Brazil, due to its
size, population and evangelical presence.36
Significance of this Research to the Field
The explosion and impact of the Evangelico faith in Latin America in recent
decades is a subject that has not been explored in its entirety yet. Recent facts
and developments have revealed that several assumptions made about its
nature and social impact need to be revisited. The significance of this dissertation
35See Richard Shaull and Waldo Cesar, Pentecostalism and the Future of the
Christian Churches, 118, 193.
36As Paul Freston states, “Brazil has the largest evangelical community, in absolute
terms, in the Third World and the second largest in the world, behind the United States.
Inasmuch as Third World evangelicalisms have common denominators, Brazil can be
seen as a possible trendsetter, a test case where phenomena peculiar to the new mass
Protestantism of the ‘South’ of the globe may first appear.” Paul Freston, Evangelicals
and Politics in Asia, Africa and Latin America, 11.
19
resides, in part, in the fact that I am revisiting some assumptions that have
been taken for granted in many studies of Protestantism in Latin America.
Furthermore, I am approaching Brazilian Protestantism from a dialogical
perspective, which has received little attention in previous studies—and am
bringing to light numerous first-hand testimonies and previously unknown
documents, found in different archives and personal files during my field
research.
Finally, this study can also be relevant for those living as Brazilian progressive
Evangelicos. Despite the increasing number of Evangelicos who are becoming
more active in the socio-political realm, there have not appeared sufficient
ethical-theological reflections to understand and orient the people as they
experience this phenomenon. Progressive Evangelicos need to know how to
define their newly discovered role within Brazilian society. Many Evangelicos are
taking steps towards progressive socio-political action, but have to live with an
identity crisis, since they lack a theological language that may help them
conciliate their participation in the life of their Evangelico churches with their
action as responsible citizens in the larger socio-political order. This dissertation
will provide some suggestions which not only explain how these Evangelicos got
to where they are now, but also show what possibilities can be pursued next.
Research Method and Organization of the Chapters
In order to study the three referred faces of this broad movement among
Brazilian Evangelicos, which I am naming as progressive Protestantism, I have
20
interviewed a number of pastors, theologians and lay leaders of each of the
faces. I have also participated as observer in meetings, conferences and
religious services, and I have collected a significant amount of personal
documents, ecclesiastical documentation, publications, annals, unpublished
papers, lectures, letters, sermons, dissertations, and essays produced by or
referring to each of the groups studied.
Having collected significant data and testimonies that show that this
combination of social justice and charismatic Christianity is already taking place
in the praxis and lives of many Evangelico Christians in Brazil, I propose an
approach to Christian social ethics that can be, on the one hand, appealing and
understandable to the poor in Brazil—capturing their symbolic world—and, on the
other hand, relevant and prophetic for the work of continuous construction of a
more just society.
I am aware that for the most part Brazilian Protestantism has tended to
develop a conservative, reactionary, and corporatist character in its relation to
the broader society. That being the case, I am also aware that the smaller and
less visible Evangelico progressive initiatives have been almost ignored or simply
dismissed by many scholars writing on Brazilian Protestantism. Therefore, I am
intentionally drawing attention to a progressive branch of Brazilian Protestantism,
which, although minor in numeric terms, has managed to place itself in such a
strategic position before the broader society that it can play an important role in
the construction of a more just reality in Brazil. I claim that progressive
Evangelicos have both played an important role in anticipating important themes
21
that were picked up by liberation theology in the 1960s; and that they are in a
good position to continue and deepen the dialogue with liberation theology,
taking some of its tenets to another level.
Following this introduction, my argument will be presented in six more
chapters:
Chapter 2 offers a basis for the dissertation’s argument by demonstrating that
any Christian social ethics that wants to be relevant to the contemporary reality of
Brazilian society, and which wants to respond adequately to the current needs of
the poor and oppressed in Brazil, must be relational and must result from a face-
to-face encounter with the poor. Such encounter with the poor has the power to
transform also those who enter into contact with them. It can generate a
combination of charismatic religiosity—one informed by a faith based on the vivid
presence of the Spirit among those who suffer—and a socially oriented action—
one which is concerned with the transformation of the social structures that
convey oppression and social injustice. I start chapter two by showing the
relational and hybrid nature of the Brazilian culture, which calls for a relational
ethics, one in which the normative is shaped by relationships.
Drawing upon the anthropology of Roberto da Matta, I seek to show that
Brazilian society, in contrast to “Western” societies, is one marked by mixture
and encounters, having a relational and hybrid character. For most Brazilians,
relationships are more important than dogmas, principles or the articulation of a
22
rational truth 37 Therefore, regardless of the individualistic roots of the
Protestantism that came to Brazil, the relational character of the Brazilian culture
has helped some Evangelicos to reinterpret their faith in light of the reality in
which they live.
I argue in this chapter that a Christian social ethics that wants to speak to the
reality of suffering and oppression in which most Brazilians live must take the
Brazilian context seriously in order to respond to it. It ought to be an ethics of
response—one that engages its surrounding context into dialogue. In this section
I interact with Argentinean theologian Enrique Dussel, who redefines Emmanuel
Levinas’ other as the Latin American poor and oppressed other, challenging Latin
American Christians not only to meet them face-to-face, but also to listen to their
voices.38
This face-to-face encounter with the poor and oppressed other has the power
of bringing with it a conversion—a deep spiritual transformation—to those who
meet them. Richard Shaull, who served as a Euro-American missionary in Latin
America, accepted the challenge not only of meeting the poor face-to-face, but
also of being converted to them.39 According to him, if God is primarily acting
among the poor—as liberation theology has claimed—then it becomes
37 Roberto DaMatta refers to Brazil as a “relational society,” affirming that the best way
to understand this society is by studying its relations. Roberto DaMatta, A Casa & a Rua:
Espago, Cidadania, Mulhere Morte no Brasil, 6ed (Rio de Janeiro, RJ.: Rocco, 2000),
25.
38See Enrique Dussel & Daniel Guillot, Liberacidn Latinoamericana y Emmanuel

Levinas (Buenos Aires: Editorial Bonum, 1975), 32.
39 Richard Shaull, “The Third Conversion,” The Other Side 33/2(1997): 32-34.
23
imperative for all Christians to listen to God’s appeal through the poor, and join
God’s actions among them.
Chapter 3 presents Richard Shaull’s praxis and thinking as providing an
interface that can help to connect the three different responses that comprise
chapters 4, 5, and 6, and their respective contexts. Although this is not a
dissertation on Richard Shaull, I acknowledge that his thought and praxis have
been and remain important for the development of an Evangelico progressive
social ethics in Brazil because all the faces of Brazilian progressive
Protestantism can interface in him and his work. The idea of an interface
envisions providing the grounds for a continuous dialogue among the three
different EvangMco faces and between them and the Brazilian larger society.
Richard Shaull, as an ecumenical Reformed theologian, respected by both
Brazilian ecumenical leaders and progressive evangelical thinkers, engaged also
Pentecostalism into dialogue, actually challenging mainstream Protestantism to
listen to the religious language and symbols of these Pentecostals, and to
interact with them. Starting with his own experience of meeting Pentecostalism
face-to-face, Shaull became aware of the ways this encounter between
progressive Protestantism and Pentecostalism could both deepen the
commitment of Brazilian progressive Evangelicos to the poor and to social
change, and offer theological consistence to Pentecostal social actions among
the poor.
For Shaull, in order for mainstream theologies to have some impact on and be
impacted by the praxis of these Pentecostals, it is necessary to recognize that
24
the latter are the ones today working from the advantage point of the poor—
therefore, they need to be taken seriously and listened to. Shaull’s thought and
praxis provide a unique way to link the ecumenical movement of the 1950s and
the current Pentecostal socio-political developments, to recover the current
significance of the former, and to understand the socio-political relevance of the
latter.
I structure this chapter around three significant encounters that shaped
Shaull’s theological reflection, and which metaphorically pointed to important
turns or conversions in the life of Christianity in Latin America. Shaull himself
becomes an exemplar, since he not only contributed for the theological
development of Brazilian Protestantism, but also explicitly recognized the
contributions that his encounter with young Brazilian Protestants in the 1950s,
and with poor Pentecostals in the 1990s transformed his praxis and thought and
deepened his faith.
The first turn emphasizes ShaulPs Reformed theology, especially the re
elaboration of his Christian faith as he encountered the works of Paul Lehmann,
Emil Brunner, and Josef Hromadka, which shaped his convictions on the
sovereignty of the grace of God as the main reality in human history. This
encounter gave Shaull the basic theological language that shaped his ethics
throughout his life.
The second turn was his encounter with striking poverty in Latin America, and
later with liberation theology. That encounter changed the social locus of his
25
theological thinking and helped him to develop a revolutionary theology of
social transformation in solidarity with the poor.
The third turn took place in the last decade of his life as he encountered the
Pentecostal poor in the shantytowns of Rio de Janeiro. There he learned that the
Spirit is doing something anew in the midst of the poor.40 Although already late in
his life, this encounter with Pentecostalism had a profound impact upon Shaull’s
theology and praxis. As Andre Corten has stated, in his encounter with
Pentecostalism, Shaull “manages to overcome his own theological categories in
search of the religious as it is molded by the poor.”41 Corten goes on to speak
about the relevance the encounter with Pentecostalism has to the entire church.
For him, that encounter provides a new paradigm of faith and Christian life, which
can renew the whole of Christianity.42
Shaull’s challenge for mainstream Christians to emerge in the symbolic world
of the poor—a highly Pentecostal ized world—through an experience of being
converted to them, and listening to God through them, becomes paradigmatic for
those who want to develop an Evangelico social ethics in Brazil as it calls for a
new reading of the Bible and of reality. It also places the Pentecostal experience
and liberationist Christianity in continuity with each other, and in critical
40 See Richard Shaull, “From Academic Research to Spiritual Transformation:

Reflection on a Study of Pentecostalism in Brazil,” Pneuma 20/1 (2001): 71-84.
41Andre Corten, “Prefacio,” in Pentecostalismo e o Future das Igrejas CristSs:

Pmmessas e Desafios, by Waldo Cesar and Richard Shaull (Petropolis, Brazil: Vozes,
1999), 9-15 (10).
42 Ibid.
26
conversation with each other. Both movements can heavily benefit from that
conversation.
Chapter Four offers a description of the first face of Brazilian progressive
Evangelicos: the ecumenical face. It is an overview of the first attempt from a
Protestant viewpoint to develop a Christian social ethics in Brazil, during the
1950s and early 1960s.
In this chapter I show how this movement not only preceded liberation
theology in Latin America, but also dialogued with liberationist thought and
influenced it, as well as other later progressive initiatives among both Catholics
and Protestants in Latin America.43 Richard Shaull was the first significant
organic intellectual who mediated the dialogue between European/North
American theologies and the Latin American theology, which was in the making.
A group of Brazilian and Latin American thinkers who came into contact with
Shaull would play a singular role in the birth of liberation theology, as well as of a
native progressive Protestant thinking in Brazil.44
As I describe the historical development of Brazilian ecumenism, I will pay
particular attention to the birth of a movement called Church and Society, which
43See Alan Neely, “Protestant Antecedents of the Latin American Theology of

Liberation” (Ph.D. Diss., American University, 1977), p. vi.ff,
44Among many cases that could be mentioned, Rubem Alves stands out as, under
the influence of Shaull, he came to Princeton Theological Seminary to do his doctoral
studies, and produced one of the liberation theology’s first treatises. His doctoral
dissertation, which he wrote under Shaull’s guidance, had the title “Towards a Theology
of Liberation: an Exploration of the Encounter between the Languages of Humanistic
Messianism and Messianic Humanism” (Ph.D. Diss., Princeton Theological Seminary,
1968). It is one of the earliest documents written by a Latin American liberation
theologian.
was originally conceived by Richard Shaull and Waldo Cesar. Then, I will move
forward to show the unfolding of this movement, and the emergence of other
movements that established a new relationship between the Evangelico church
and the Brazilian society. Special attention is given to the Northeastern
Conference, which marked the climax and the beginning of the fall of this
movement. My analysis of these initiatives and movements in the 1950s and
early 1960s leads me to believe that despite their failure to establish themselves
within the institutional church, they have had an enduring impact upon the
Brazilian society. Forced by persecution within the institutional church, many
leaders of those initiatives moved into the secular arena and gave birth to
important social movements, thus playing an important role as a force of
resistance during the twenty-one years of military dictatorship in Brazil.
Therefore, although having a short life within the institutional church, this
movement has left indelible marks on the development of Brazilian progressive
Christianity, both Protestant and Catholic.
Chapter Five focuses on the second face which has tried to develop a
Christian social ethics from an Evangelico perspective in Brazil, namely the
Progressive Evangelical face—the theology of which was mainly developed by
the Latin American Theological Fraternity (FTL). This movement, although
starting as a theological conservative response to the challenges of the situation
of oppression and injustice which was denounced first by the ecumenical
movement and later by liberation theology, has played a very significant role in
bringing theologically conservative Protestant churches and individuals to
28
participate more fully in the life of Brazilian society. The significance of this
movement also resides in its capacity, as a moderate movement, to bring
progressive, conservative, and charismatic Christians together in an effort to
become a prophetic voice to Latin American society.
In this chapter, I present the main emphases of the theology of this
Evangelical movement. I argue that the FTL has sought to develop an
Evangelical relational social ethics that brings the biblical texts into dialogue with
the Latin American reality. Particularly in the Northeast of Brazil, one of the
poorest regions of the world, the work of the FTL has taken a specifically
progressive path, and is creating new spaces and possibilities for transformative
social action and dialogue with the various streams of Brazilian Christianity.
I start the chapter by showing the roots and the development of the
progressive Evangelical movement in Brazil. I explain the influences of both the
Ecumenical face and Catholic liberation theology upon the rising of social
awareness among some Brazilian Evangelicals, which faced the challenge of
offering an Evangelical response to the socio-theological issues raised by those
two movements. By doing so, I point to the fact that this progressive Evangelical
movement is marked by a relationality which prompts it to affirm its evangelical
identity in conversation with other partners, and with the surrounding realities of
oppression and injustice.
I draw attention to some recent developments of the progressive evangelical
movement in Brazil, by using primary sources and interviews to show how this
29
movement is becoming an important force for social transformation as it
engages the broader Brazilian society and becomes conscious of the church’s
public role.
The spirituality spread out through this movement emphasizes the role of the
church as the community of the Suffering Servant whose main mission is to
serve God and the world. I end the chapter with a critical summary of the
contributions and limitations of the Evangelical face.
Chapter Six is an analysis of the Pentecostal face that emerges from the form
of Christianity which has by large become the largest group of active Christians
in Brazil, and whose charismatic spirituality has influenced most of Brazilian
Protestantism in the last twenty years. Brazilian Pentecostalism is one of the
most important partners for any discussion of a new approach to Christian social
ethics in Brazil today.
In conversation with sociologists such as Lalive D’Epinay, Emilio Willems,
Jean-Pierre Bastian, David Martin, Paul Freston and Waldo Cesar, I discuss the
identity, characteristics, mutations and potentialities of Brazilian Pentecostalism.
Special attention is given to the charismatic elements that serve to empower the
poor and oppressed, and which provide them with the resources for their daily
struggle for survival. I also show how Pentecostalism has been successful in
engaging both Brazilian culture and popular religion in ways that no other
Evangelico movement has been able to do.
Once again I draw on Richard Shaull’s theological analysis of Brazilian
Pentecostalism to engage Pentecostal spirituality, seeking to learn not only what
Pentecostals have to teach non-Pentecostal Christians today but also what
non-Pentecostals can offer to make this kind of spirituality more engaging and
transformative in the socio-political realm. I argue that while Pentecostal
spirituality offers some elements that can be complementary to the efforts made
by previous Protestant movements to develop a relevant social ethics in Brazil, it
also gains from the contact with non-Pentecostal progressive Christians. Through
a continuous critical dialogue, progressive Christians can help some
Pentecostals to bring the transformative potential of Pentecostal spirituality into
play in the social and public realm. I conclude by calling for a true partnership
between progressive and charismatic Christians to develop a theological
language that combines charismatic fervor with a concern for social
transformation.
Chapter Seven presents some orientations and features that form the ethos
out of which a progressive Christian social ethics can be developed from an
Evangelico perspective in contemporary Brazil. This view of a progressive
Christian social ethics draws on characteristics that have long been present in
Brazilian Christianity, but which can now be better seen in the milieu where
charismatic spirituality and social justice seem to meet. It draws from and builds
upon the responses given by the three different faces of Evangelico
progressivism as they have engaged the Brazilian reality.
Emphasizing the charismatic language of the Spirit, I show the importance of
bringing into dialogue the three different faces and their respective responses to
the situation of oppression and injustice which they face on a daily basis.
31
Drawing on the previous chapters, I bring all the three faces—Ecumenical,
Evangelical and Pentecostal—into conversation in order to redefine the limits and
range of a Brazilian progressive Evangelico social ethics, which is informed by a
Spirit-based Christian spirituality. Respecting the distinctiveness of each face, I
seek the complementarities and a common ground for the development of such a
Christian social ethics. Whereas I do that from an Evangelico perspective, I also
provide elements that may help to expand the conversation with Catholic and
with non-Christian partners.
As I bring the different responses into conversation with each other and also
with their surrounding environment, I propose four major pervasive orientations
and three practical features that are demanded by Brazilian progressive
Evangelicos today, and which become relevant to the construction of a Brazilian
progressive Christian social ethics.
First, I identify some pervasive orientations that can inform a Brazilian
Evangelico progressive social ethics, based on some common elements found in
each of the three faces of Brazilian Protestantism, which include the following: (1)
A Messianic orientation, based on an eschatological hope on the kingdom of
God; (2) A Communal orientation, based on a pneumatic hermeneutics, which
binds the whole of life together; (3) A Charismatic orientation, with its conjuring
culture and its potential to put forth parabolic performances of resistance; (4) and
a Practical orientation, which emphasizes the priority of praxis, and of the
prophetic role of the Christian community.
Then, I identify some practical features of a progressive Evangdlico social
ethics, which show its transformative potential to reorganize the lives of the
wretched at the individual and social levels. A social ethics that combines the
elements provided by the three faces of Brazilian Protestantism is one that
features the following consequences: (1) promotion of an internal reorganization
of the lives of those suffering injustice in the social order; (2) an experience of
empowerment that moves people from a situation of disenfranchisement to one
of having some power over one’s own existence; and (3) an active participation
in organizing efforts outside the church to promote changes in the larger socio
political order.
In conclusion, the social ethics emergent from the dialogue among the three
faces promotes a language of the Spirit, which is all-inclusive, allowing for the
critical engagement of different partners and contexts, as well as for discussions
of issues involving race, gender, class, and environment. The language of the
Spirit brings with it a constant call for openness to the new and the different, as
well as a prophetic challenge for continuous reassessment of all our social
structures and institutions.
CHAPTER TWO
ENCOUNTERING THE POOR FACE-TO-FACE, THE CONTEXT FORA
BRAZILIAN EVANGELICO SOCIAL ETHICS
In this chapter, I want to offer a basis for my argument that any Christian
social ethics that intends to be relevant to the contemporary reality of Brazilian
society, and which wants to respond adequately to the current needs of the poor
and oppressed in Brazil, must be a relational ethics. Moreover, it must entail a
combination of charismatic religiosity—one informed by a faith based on the vivid
presence of the Spirit among those who suffer—-and socially-oriented action—
one which is concerned with the transformation of the social structures that
convey oppression and social injustice.
I start by arguing that the relational nature of Brazilian society calls for a
relational ethics. Drawing particularly upon the anthropology of Roberto
DaMatta, I state that Brazilian society, in contrast to “Western” (European/North-
American) societies, is characterized by mixture, encounters, and relationality.
That being the case, it calls for a relational ethics and theology, one that
prioritizes relationships and dialogue over dogmas and principles.
In the following section, I argue that any Christian social ethics developed
amidst the suffering and oppression in which most Brazilians live must take that
context seriously, and must respond to the needs that are presented to it. It ought
to be an ethics of response—one that engages its surrounding environment in
dialogue. I show how some theologians and philosophers in Latin America have
33
34
engaged the concept of alterity in developing an ethical discourse in
continuous dialogue with the oppressed and excluded other. One of my main
interlocutors in this section is Argentinean theologian and philosopher Enrique
Dussel, who has brought Emmanuel Levinas into conversation with Latin
American philosophy and theology. Dussel reinterprets Levinas’ ‘Other1as the
poor and oppressed ‘Other’, and challenges us not only to meet this oppressed
‘Other’ face-to-face, but to listen to their voices. This motif of a face-to-face
encounter with the poor will guide the development of my thinking throughout this
dissertation.1
I go further, then, to affirm that this encounter with the poor and oppressed
‘Other1has the power of bringing with it a conversion—a deep spiritual
transformation. I turn, then, to Richard Shaull, a North American missionary who
accepted the challenge of not simply meeting the poor face-to-face, but also of
being converted to them. Shaull did that during his two decades of missionary
1This perspective also takes seriously the act of listening to the voices of the poor. A
face-to-face encounter by itself does not always bring good results. For instance, the
encounter between the European colonizers and the Native American peoples led to the
oppression and exploitation of the latter. However, as Juste Gonzales points out, even in
the midst of such tragic encounter, there emerged what he called “voices of
compassion,” or voices of solidarity. Those voices “dared to oppose the most powerful
authorities and structures of their time in order to make their protest heard.” That kind of
prophetic solidarity with the native peoples was bom “out of direct experience and
personal contact” with them. For Gonzales, those voices of compassion spoke as they
did “because they had themselves heard a different Voice...They had heard it in sharing
their lives in solidarity with the oppressed natives of these lands.” Justo Gonzalez,
“Voices of Compassion Yesterday and Today,” in New Face of the Church in Latin
America, edited by Guillermo Cook (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1994), 3-12 (3,12).
Although acknowledging that the Protestant encounter with Brazilian people and culture
was also tragic at times, I will pay attention to those voices of compassion that have
emerged among Brazilian Protestants as a result of a personal contact with the Brazilian
reality and the ability to listen to a different voice, a voice coming from the poor and
oppressed Other.
35
work in Colombia and Brazil. At the end of his life, he realized that this
oppressed Other whom mainline Christians need to meet is now the Pentecostal
Other, since the poor have turned to Pentecostalism. If one wants to make a
preferential option for the poor these days, one needs to understand and listen to
their symbolic and religious worldview. One cannot talk about solidarity with the
poor and oppressed today without being willing to listen to what God has to say
to them through the voice of the poor, which is now mostly a
charismatic/Pentecostal voice.
The ultimate goal of this dissertation is to point to the possibility of
constructing a Brazilian Evangelico Progressive social ethics that takes this
encounter between social justice and charismatic Christianity seriously, and
which by doing so becomes more effective in its transformative potentiality. This
kind of ethics not only complements the ethical contributions of liberation
theology in Latin America, but also points to possibilities that will help liberation
theology overcome its current crisis.2
The Relational Nature of Brazilian Culture
2 With the fall of historical socialism in Eastern Europe, many scholars believe that
liberation theology no longer has a future—for them, it has become irrelevant and
doomed to failure. However, as Pablo Richard points out, the historic rationale for
liberation theology is still in place. “As long as the scandal of poverty and oppression
exists—while there are Christians who live and reflect their faith critically in the struggles
for justice and life—there will be a liberation theology.” Pablo Richard et al, “Challenges
to Liberation Theology in the Decade of the Nineties,” in New Face of the Church in Latin
America, 245-258 (245).
36
Brazilian sociologist Gilberto Freyre was one of the first scholars to develop
a comprehensive study of what makes the singularity of Brazil as a nation.3 He
was concerned with who “we”—the Brazilians—are. In order to respond to that
question, he relied on a foundational myth to explain the Brazilian identity and the
reasons why we, Brazilians, became what we are as a nation.4 For Freyre,
Brazilian society is a result of a singular historical experiment that brought
together three different peoples and cultures, intermingling their traditions,
beliefs, and idiosyncrasies 5 The peculiarity of the Brazilian experiment resides
not in its multi-cultural elements, but in its mestizaje, which produced the
3Among other important books, Casa Grande & Senzala, translated into several
languages, has become an obligatory reading for anyone studying Brazilian culture and
identity. Written originally in the early 1930s, this book continues to be important to the
understanding of Brazilian identity. Gyfberto Freyre, Casa Grande & Senzala: FomnagSo
da Famllia Brasileira Sob o Regime da Economia Patriarcal, 50ed (Sao Paulo, Brazil:
Global Editora, 2005).
4 Paulo D. Siepierski, “Do Sobrado ao Mestrado: a IniciagSo Cientifica de Gilberto”

Freyre. Unpublished paper, presented in the Quarta Jornada de PIBIC/CNPq, at the
Rural State University of Pernambuco, Recife, Brazil, 5 May 2000,1.
5Ibid. This racial and cultural mixture, however, is a process not finished yet, and not
without conflicts. Freyre’s theory of Brazillian society itself has generated its discontents,
especially among African and Amerindian descendants, women, and leftists in general
who think that his theory does not do justice to the suffering and oppression experienced
by many groups under Portuguese patriarchal domination. However, no critic denies the
geniality of Freyre and his ability to unveil the elements that formed present Brazilian
society. One example of a scholar who was at the same time critical of and respectful to
Freyre is Darcy Ribeiro, a respected Brazilian anthropologist and politician. In the
preface of a Spanish edition of one of Freyre’s books, Ribeiro criticizes Freyre for
speaking from the perspective of the oppressor, since his analysis prioritizes the
patriarchal and polygamous pattern of the Portuguese family in Brazil rather than the
view of women, slaves, and natives in that process. Nevertheless, on the same preface
Ribeiro acknowledges that Freyre has provided a very accurate portrait of the formation
of the Brazilian people. Gilberto Freyre, Casa-Grande y Senzala: Introducddn a la
Historia de la Sociedad Patriarcal en el Brasil. Prologo y Cronologia Darcy Ribeiro.
(Caracas: Biblioteca Ayacucho, 1977), ix-xlii.
37
intermediary, the hybrid, the ambiguous, challenging any kind of dualism and
exclusivism.6
A great deal of Freyre’s education took place in Protestant schools.7 At one
point of his life, he was even a Baptist convert. Nevertheless, he gave up the
Protestantism of his youth and became more sympathetic to Catholicism, which
he found to be more fitting to the miscegenation he saw in the construction of a
Brazilian identity. Opposing the tendency of his time—when ethnology and
anthropology were dominated by theories that affirmed European supremacy—
Freyre held a positive view of the Brazilian cultural and racial mixture. In his
opinion, Brazilian miscegenation was only possible because of the plasticity and
flexibility of a Catholic culture that had more capacity of assimilation than a
Protestant culture would ever have.8 Instead of seeing miscegenation as
corruption, Freyre identified it as the solution to the European occupation of the
tropics. According to him, the plasticity of the Iberian Catholic culture allowed the
miscegenation of the Portuguese, the African, and the Amerindian cultures,
which helped to constitute a people that, in his view, were best suited to live in
6 Roberto DaMatta, O Que 6 o Brasil? (Rio de Janeiro: Rocco, 2004), 22,23.
7 He studied at the American Baptist high school, in Recife, and did his
undergraduate studies at Baylor University, in Texas.
8 Paulo Siepierski,, “Do Sobrado ao Mestrado,” 8. It is worth noting that Freyre
emphasized not just the flexibility of any Catholic culture, but specifically of the Iberian
Catholic culture, since he considered that the historical experience of the Portuguese in
contact with Northern Africa and the Islamic world made them more flexible to cultural
and racial interchange. He became attracted by the fact that the Iberian Catholic culture
seemed to be so plastic and absorbing. That plasticity perfectly fitted Freyre’s preference
for an open and embracing Christianity, with no emphases on dogmas or doctrines.
38
the tropics.9 Thus, for Freyre, anything genuinely Brazilian had to blend
elements from these three cultures, and even from other cultures that he also
mentions as participants in the formation of Brazilian society.10 For him, in this
miscegenation of races and cultures resides the uniqueness of Brazilian society.
David Hess, an American anthropologist at Columbia University, has tried to
explain Brazilian society by comparing it to American society. For him, Brazil and
the United States are like “slightly distorted mirror-images of each other.”11
Whereas diversity would characterize American society, mixture is the main
characteristic of Brazil. Hess believes that Brazil may also provide North
Americans and Europeans with a glimpse of their future.12 The way that Western
9 Ibid.
10 Freyre mentions the Portuguese ‘old Christian,’ the Jew, the Spaniard, the Dutch,
the French, the Negro, the Amerindian, and the descendant of the Moors, as the
representatives of widely different cultural heritages that were blended together to form
Brazilian society. His book The Masters and the Slaves analyzes the tropical feudalism
developed by the Portuguese in Brazil as the system that allowed the miscegenation or
union of these different cultures in the tropics. That system, along with the Portuguese
experience of being ailed by the Moors, a dark-skinned race, turned, according to
Freyre, the Portuguese more open to interracial relationships, which made possible the
appearance of this uniquely mixed society. Gilberto Freyre, The Masters and the Slaves:
a Study of the Development of Brazilian Civilization (New York: Alfred A. Knopf,1946),
xiii.
11 David J. Hess, “Introduction,” in The Brazilian Puzzle: Culture in the Borderlands of

the Western World, edited by David J. Hess and Roberto DaMatta (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1995), 1-30 (1).
12Ibid., 2. His vision of the North American future is similar to the ideas exposed by
Virgil Elizondo, a Mexican American Catholic theologian, in a book that speaks of the
disappearance of any cultural border separating Mexican and American cultures in
Santo Antonio, Texas. Elizondo wonders if the frontier between the United States and
Mexico is a border between two nations or the frontier zone of a new human race. He
points to this experience of mestizaje as “the foundation and guiding force of the new
expression of the cosmic race made up of Nordics and Latinos, Europeans and Natives,
Africans and Asiatics—not mere co-existing but together exhibiting the new nostro y
corazdn (countenance and heart) of the new people of the globe.” See Virgil Elizondo,
39
and non-Westem cultures meet each other in Brazil impresses Hess, as one
can see in his words describing Brazilian society.
On the one hand, the upper classes are mostly descendants of

Europeans, and the language, high culture, and formal institutions
are all Western. Brazil is also a Portuguese-speaking Catholic
country with a democratic constitution and a capitalist economy. On
the other hand, Brazil is something else, something different from
the United States, Canada, and the societies of Western Europe. It
is a country where Western culture has mixed and mingled with
non-Western cultures for centuries, and in this sense it may
represent the future for the United States and other countries...The
more one lives in Brazil, the more the Western features of the
country appear as a kind of veneer. Catholics also believe in or
practice African religions; the political and economic institutions
operate through personal relationships as much as general rules;
and the music, food, social relations, and—in general—tastes are
as deeply shaped by Africa and Native America as by Europe.
That, in a sense, is the puzzle: what is this country?... “Diversity” is
really not the best word for describing Brazil and Brazilians;
“mixture” is better. Brazil is a nation of the mixing of races
(miscegenation), religions (syncretism), and cultures (Diasporas,
borderlands).13
Roberto DaMatta, a Brazilian anthropologist who taught for several years at
Notre Dame, has deconstructed the classic opposition between modern and
The Future is Mestizo: Life where Cultures Meet (Bloomington: Meyer-Stone Books,
1988), xii.
13 Ibid. In this description, however, one can see the kind of racism operative in
Brazilian society, as the higher classes are whiter and the lower classes are darker.
Edward Telles has shown a strong correlation between racial inequality and social
mobility in Brazil. For instance, the possibility of black Brazilians, especially women, to
reach the top of the social scale, is significantly lower than that of Portuguese
descendents. For this important analysis of Brazilian racism see Edward Telles,
Racismo it Brasileira: Urm Nova Perspective Socioldgica (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil:
Relume Damara, 2003). For an Afro-Brazilian perspective on the subject see Marcelo J.
P. Paixao, Desenvolvimento Humano e Reiag&es Raciais (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: DP&A,
2003).
40
traditional—known as the theory of the two Brazils14—and interpreted the
complexities of Brazilian society by paying attention to the way Brazilians
understand the social actions in which they engage.15 By seeing social action as
social dramas, DaMatta demonstrates “how both hierarchical/personalistic and
egalitarian/individualistic codes operate simultaneously” in Brazilian society.16
He comes to the conclusion that Brazilians are constantly negotiating between a
modern egalitarian code and a traditional one.17
One important concept for DaMatta’s theory is encompassment, which he
uses to demonstrate how the non-modern ethic of Brazilian culture does actually
encompass its more modern alternative.18 This concept, for DaMatta, entails the
ideas of complement and inclusion. The former means that opposing systems—
such as Western egalitarianism and traditional personalism—may coexist,
whereas the latter refers to “the principle of Catholicism by which everyone is
included in the community, in contrast to the Protestant principle by which society
is organized into mutually exclusive sects.”19 For him the best way to understand
14For more on the theory known as the “two Brazils”, see Jacques Lambert, Os Dois
Brasis (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Companhia Editora National, 1967).
15For an initial approach to DaMatta’s approach to the study of Brazilian identity see
Roberto DaMatta, O Que Faz o Brasil Brasil?, 11ed. (Rio de Janeiro, RJ.: Rocco, 2000),
9ff.
16 David Hess, “Introduction,” 2.
17 Ibid., 10.
18Ibid., 12.
19Roberto DaMatta, “For an Anthropology of the Brazilian Tradition or ‘A Virtude esta

no Meio,’” in The Brazilian Puzzle, 270-291 (285).
41
Brazilian reality is to focus on words like mixture, combination, and others that
designate interstices, simultaneity, or simply relations.20
With an emphasis on the relational over the constituent in his study of
Brazilian traditions, DaMatta understands that every tradition is a fact of
conscience and a selection.
It is a fact of conscience because every tradition tells us what

should be remembered (and almost with what intensity and when)
and what should be forgotten. It is a selection because a tradition
implies distinctions within a sphere of infinite social possibilities and
historical experiences.21
In order to situate his point, DaMatta contrasts the way relations are
conceived in Brazil and in the United States. The common point between Brazil
and United States is that, in both nations, blacks, whites, and native Americans
played important roles in the creation of a national conscience. However, in the
United States social identity was not constituted upon a fable that shows the
three races to be symbolically complementary. America was founded on the
ideology of the white element. Thus, “in order to be American one must be
encompassed by the values and institutions of the ‘Anglo’ world, which retains
hegemony and operates in terms of a bipolar logic founded on exclusion.”22
Yet, the fable of the three races which is seen as the foundational myth of
Brazil produced a radically different mode of conception. Brazilian identity is
based on an encounter among the three races, each occupying differentiated but
20 Ibid., 272.
21 Ibid.
22 Ibid.
42
supposedly equivalent positions in an ideological triangle.23 Therefore, the
relation between blacks, native Brazilians, and Portuguese descendants
according to this myth is defined by a logic of inclusion that is articulated on the
basis of complementary opposition. Mestizaje, in accord with this myth,
becomes, then, a fundamental part of Brazilian national ideology, which contrasts
to the North American national ideology, where mixture and ambiguity are still
seen as negative elements.
The point DaMatta is making here is that the same empirical elements that
permeate the entire history of the Americas are selected, combined and
experienced differently in the process of constructing particular national
identities.24 The way by which these empirical elements relate to each other will
determine the distinctiveness of a given society. For DaMatta, what is startling in
the Brazilian case is the enormous tolerance of the system. The reason for that
tolerance is the mediations that are possible in a system that is based on a
relational logic, instead of on egalitarianism.
Whereas mediations are almost impossible in an egalitarian system, they
become fundamental in a relational system. So, in the Brazilian case, whereas
there are constitutional laws that govern what can be seen as a democratic
system like any other system influenced by Western liberalism, one also needs to
pay attention to the place of favor, patronage, and social relations within that
23 Ibid., 273.
24Ibid. See also Roberto DaMatta, Tocquevilleanas Noticias da America (Rio de

Janeiro, RJ.: Rocco, 2005).
43
social system.25 In opposition to Western civilizations where ideological
contradictions lead to conflict and profound social transformation, in this
discontinuous medium that is Brazilian society,
contradictory ideas can be hierarchically arranged on different

planes, such that for some things I am a liberal and for others I am
paternalist or patronal. The system allows me to use my right hand
or my left hand to do different things and to give different meanings
to the experiences of life.26
DaMatta affirms that when the context is not solemn, personal relations tend
to encompass the law.27 Thus, instead of seeing this logic of Brazilian society as
contradictory, he defines it as complementary and intermediary. For him,
Brazilian society is halfway between liberal individualism and hierarchical holism.
It is a system that has institutionalized the intermediary.28
25 Ibid., 274.
26 Ibid., 275.
27 Ibid., 277.
28 Ibid., 281. For DaMatta, the institutionalization of the intermediary in Brazil means
the institutionalization of the mulatto, the cafuso (a mixture of black and native Brazilian),
and the mameluco (white and native Brazilian) in the racial classifications; of the
despachante (a paralegal professional who sees paperwork through a bureaucracy) in
the bureaucratic system; of the cousin, lover, and boy/girlfriend in the amorous system;
of the saints and purgatory in the religious system; of the prayers, popular music,
serenades and the empty talks and looks that appear in the mediation that permeates
everyday life; of the jeitinho (Brazilian method of corrupting, skewing, and relating the
harsh impersonal hand of the law to the gradations and positions that everyone occupies
in a web of socially determined relations) and pistol6es (well placed connections in
confronting impersonal laws; of the feijoada (black bean and pork stew), peixada (fish
stew), and cozido (stew in general), food that is squarely between the solid and the liquid
in the culinary system; of sacanagem (a form of erotica, infused with pornographic
elements), as a mode of sexual manifestation. For him, all these are fundamental modes
of sociability in Brazil. See also DaMatta, 0 Que 6 o Brasil?, 9-10.
44
DaMatta finds in Dona Flor, a character of one of Jorge Amado’s novels,29
the perfect metaphor for the behavior of Brazilian society. Dona Flor is a woman
who can be seen as having to choose between two men and two ways of marital
life. Vadinho is her first husband who could represent the traditional, the
disordered, the uncertain, the informal and the ambiguous; a man who lived
surrounded by friends, a man who drank and went out frequently, yet who was a
wonderful lover. He dies and Dona Flor marries Teodoro, a man who could
represent the modem: this man is organized, visible, and present, fulfilling all his
duties as a husband. However, Vadinho keeps coming back to see Dona Flor as
a sort of ghost who is invisible for everyone else but her. He comes to sleep with
her and satisfy her fantasies.
From a rational and dualistic perspective, Dona Flor can be seen as the
incarnation of conflict—having to choose only one between the two men.
However, from an intermediary and relational perspective she is in fact affirming
what, in DaMatta’s view, Western society has rejected since Luther, i.e., that the
relation among different social systems is possible. She proposes to remain with
both of her options, choosing not to choose, and tempting us with the possibility
of legitimizing ambiguity.30 In all of this DaMatta is pointing to something that is
crucial to this understanding of Brazilian society. He believes that in Brazil, “the
29Jorge Amado, Dona Flor and Her Two Husbands: A Moral and Amorous Tale.
Translated by Harriet de Onis (New York: NY.: Knopf, 1969).
30 Ibid., 283.
45
characteristics that make up our tradition are less important than the relations
among them.”31
This relational character of Brazilian culture permeates all aspects of Brazilian
life. It makes it peculiar and even promising, since this relational culture, which
refuses to choose between the individualistic and the communitarian, between
the modern and the traditional, may provide us with an ethos which stimulates
the development of a creative ethical synthesis that takes into consideration both
the individual with his or her demands and rights, and the larger society with its
values and necessities.32
In the context of this study, which aims at providing an ethos for a Brazilian
Evangelico progressive social ethics, this relationality of Brazilian culture allows
for the establishment of unusual combinations. One does not have to choose
between being a charismatic, Pentecostal Christian and being a progressive
politically active citizen. One’s religious identity in the Brazilian context does not
need to be formed by dogmas, in isolation from other social identities. It can
instead be formed in relationship with them, and with the immediate context to
which it must respond.
From Individualism to Social Responsibility
Based on this understanding of Brazilian identity as fundamentally relational
and hybrid, one can affirm that the individualism and strictness that has
31 Ibid., 284.
32 DaMatta, 0 Que faz do Brasil Brasil, 121.
46
characterized much of Brazilian Protestantism is a foreign element that was
introduced to Brazilian culture by Protestant missionaries. It is not a surprise,
then, that Protestantism has been regarded by many Brazilians as a foreign
religion, despite the course of almost two hundred years since its first insertion in
Brazil33
As Rubem Alves has shown, the kind of Protestantism that was established in
Brazil was characterized by profound individualism. Therefore, it had little or no
concern at all with developing a social ethics.34 Having developed an ideal
typology to study Brazilian Protestantism, Alves concluded that the predominant
type of Protestantism in Brazil is one he termed as “Protestantism of right
33 Procoro Velasques Filho has shown that for a long time Protestant conversion in
Brazil entailed a rejection of the Brazilian culture and the adoption of Anglo cultural and
moral values, which were regarded as superior to the ones left behind. Brazilian music
and rhythm were regarded as mundane, and anything that referred to the Brazilian
popular culture was condemned as paganism by the missionaries—as time went by, this
came to include carnival and most other popular Brazilian feasts. Rigid disciplinary
norms were developed to separate the sacred from the profane, the heavenly from the
mundane. An exclusivist morality was developed, which emphasized the separation
between those who are in and those who are out. Thus, the convert was forced to go
through a radical rupture not only with the Brazilian culture in which they were raised, but
also with their own “carnal families”, which would now be replaced by the “spiritual
family” of the redeemed. All this led Protestantism to be regarded as strange and foreign
to the Brazilian culture. See Prdcoro Velasques Filho, “Sim a Deus e Nao § Vida:
Conversao e Disciplina no Protestantismo Brasileiro,” in IntrodugSo ao Protestantismo
Brasileiro, by Antdnio Gouvea Mendonga e Procoro Velasques Filho, (Sao Paulo,
Brazil: Edigdes Loyola, 1990), 205ff. Despite the impressive growth of some forms of
Protestantism in Brazil in the recent past, there is still some reluctance today among
many Brazilians to make a home for the Protestant faith. One clear sign of this is the
rejection of the name “Protestant” itself. As I showed earlier, most Protestants in Brazil
refer to themselves as Evang&icos, not Protestants. The word Protestant in Brazil is still
regarded as a foreign word, which refers to a religion which is European and North
American, rather than Brazilian.
34 Rubem Alves, Protestantismo e Repress&o (Sao Paulo, Brazil: Atica, 1979), 216.
doctrine,”35 which is marked by a pietistic spirituality, a literalistic understanding
of the Bible, and an intrinsic individualism. According to Alves, the ethics of this
type of Protestantism “is individual, not social...Social ethics, therefore, is not an
essential part of this Protestant universe. These Protestants can say all that they
have to say without referring even once to the need for social transformation.”36
This Protestant worldview understands society simply as the sum of individuals.
Therefore, to transform society, it is only necessary to transform the individuals
who compose it. Any talk about social change becomes unnecessary.
The predominance of a more individualistic and otherworldly Evang&ico faith
in Brazil overshadows the few contributions that have been made by small
groups of Brazilian EvangMcos for the promotion of social justice and social
transformation in the Brazilian context, starting in the 1950s. These
developments are the focus of my attention in this dissertation.
Based on both the relationality that characterizes Brazilian culture, and the
social developments which will be shown in later chapters, one can affirm that, at
least to some extent, the kind of Protestantism that was brought to Brazil in the
nineteenth century has been subverted by its encounter with Brazilian culture. An
Evang6lico identity formed in dialogue with Brazilian culture is capable of
35 The other two types of Alves’ typology are “Protestantism of the sacrament” and
“Protestantism of the spirit." Nevertheless, he mostly paid attention to one type, the
“Protestantism of righteous doctrine.” His whole book is an analysis of that type, which
despite being an ideal type, was created, according to him, on the basis of what he had
seen mainly in the Brazilian Presbyterian Church. See Rubem Alves, Protestantismo e
RepressSo, 35-37.
36 Ibid., 216 [translation is mine].
48
subverting the individualistic and rigid faith that was implanted in Brazil 150
years ago 37 A Protestant faith that is truly immersed in the relationality of the
Brazilian culture, and which wants to be relevant to the Brazilian people, ought to
be one of a relational nature as well.
Antonio Carlos de M. Magalhaes, one of the most prominent young
theologians in contemporary Brazil, has affirmed that even the seemly
individualistic ethics developed by many Brazilian Evangelical churches is rather
relational than dogmatic.38 Their views on issues such as divorce and other items
of their moral codes that they consider important have visibly changed in the past
two decades. Another example of this rapid change on the positions held by
conservative Evangelical churches in Brazil on some issues can be noticed when
one looks at the issue of the social responsibility of the church. Most Brazilian
37 Here, I refer to Kwame Bediako’s concept of “translability” of Christianity, which

makes it universal and capable of fully incarnating and dressing itself with new cultural
clothes. Bediako expresses that this characteristic of the Christian faith has a subversive
potential. He says, “Behind the Christian doctrine of the substantial equality of the
Scriptures in all languages, there lies the even profounder doctrine of the incarnation, by
which the fullest divine communication has reached beyond the forms of human words
into the human form itself...Translability, therefore, may be said to be in-built into the
nature of the Christian religion and capable of subverting any cultural possessiveness of
the Faith in the process of its transmission.” Kwame Bediako, Christianity in Africa: The
Renewal of a Non-Westem Religion (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1995),
110. It is in that sense that I affirm that the Protestant religion that is still taking form in
Brazil has subverted the original cultural frames that encompassed the missionary
Christianity that was brought to Brazil. If it is translability which produces indigeneity,
then a truly indigenous church should also be a translating church, reaching continually
to the heart of the culture of its context and incarnating the translating Word.
38Antonio Carlos de M. Magalhaes, interview by Denilson Torres, tape recording,

Paripueira, Brazil: 21 April 2004. Magalhaes’ own approach to theology is relational. In
his recent work, he has focused much of his attention on the relation between theology
and literature in Brazil. See AntOnio Carlos de M. Magalhaes, Deus no Espelho das
Paiavras (Sao Paulo, Brazil: Edigdes Paulinas, 2000).
49
Evangelical churches, which in the 1970s believed that their only responsibility
towards the larger society was limited to its evangelization—aiming at the
personal conversion of each member of that society—have taken today some
responsibility for the well-being of Brazilian society as well.39 Why is that? I argue
that this change is a result of two main factors: First, the fact that in spite of all
things, these are Brazilian churches formed by Brazilians who are culturally more
flexible in terms of their dogmas, and whose tendency is to value relations over
fixed principles. Second, this is a result of a continuous contact with a situation of
great social injustice and poverty, which makes a claim upon these churches,
demanding from them some responses and social actions.
39Up to the 1970s, most Brazilian Evangelical churches had an otherworldly

discourse which emphasized the salvation of the soul and the separation from the
mundane realm. By the end of the late 1980s, many of the most conservative churches
had changed their discourse and practice. One good example of this can be noticed
when one looks at the Brazilian Baptist churches, which were supportive of the military
dictatorship and during that period encouraged their members not to get involved with
socio-political issues. Today, however, they have changed their discourse towards the
social, and are now encouraging their churches and ministers to witness to God’s love
by taking up their social responsibility. See, Convengdo Batista Brasileira, “Filosofia de
Agao Social da CBB,” in Livro da 78s Assembldia da CBB (Salvador, Brazil: CBB, 1997),
176-186. Brazilian sociologist Orivaldo P. Lopes Jr. has shown that at the end of the
1980s the Brazilian Baptist Convention had a high percentage of its churches developing
some kind of social work. Most of these social works were too paternalistic, but not all.
So, one could say that after 80’s social concern came into the evangelical discourse and
practice without many of the old fears. Before that, even to talk about the poor or social
justice was a taboo. See Orivaldo P. Lopes Jr., “Protestantism in Brazil and the Cause of
the Poor,” (unpublished paper, Natal, RN.: UFRN, 2000), 5. For an analysis of the
conservative discourse of the Baptist churches in Brazil, see Israel B. Azevedo, “A
Palavra Marcada: Urn Estudo Sobre a Teologia Politica dos Batistas Brasileiros
Segundo o Jomal Batista, de 1901 a 1964” (M. Th. thesis, Seminario Teolbgico Batista
do Sul do Brasil, Rio de Janeiro, 1983). See also, Elter D. Maciel, O Drama da
ConversSo: Andlise da FicgSo Batista (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: ISER, 1983). For a view of
the Brazilian Presbyterian Church and its relations with the right-wing military regime,
see Joao Dias de Araujo, InquisigSo Sam Fogueiras: Vinte Anos de Histdria da Igreja
Presbiteriana do Brasil: 1954-1974 (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: ISER, 1982).
50
Furthermore, there is also a face-to-face meeting of these new Brazilian
Evangelical churches with the movements which preceded their social
awakening, such as Roman Catholic liberation theology and the ecumenical
church and society movement. Even if by opposition, these movements have
challenged Evangelical and Pentecostal Christianity in Brazil to voice its
response of solidarity with the poor.
Carlos P. Queiroz, a Pentecostal pastor of the Igreja de Cristo in Northeastern
Brazil and the current general secretary for the Brazilian World Vision, rightly
affirms that the processes of impoverishment, misery, hunger, socio-economic
marginalization, and violence—in its various forms—which the poor in
Northeastern Brazil are submitted to affront and challenge the churches to act.40
Their responses to these situations, through social action, many times are simply
motivated by what Queiroz calls “human sensitivity in defense of life.”41 In many
cases, these churches have been pushed to act out of human sensitivity and
love, rather than as result of theological convictions or technical knowledge. Their
face-to-face encounter with such scandalous situations has led them to act in
response to those in need.
An Ethics of Response to the Cry of the Poor
40Carlos P. Queiroz, “Responsabilidade Social Na missSo da Igreja” (paper

presented at the First Social Action Forum of the Igreja Batista Esperanga, Salvador,
Brazil, June 4-5, 2005), 1.
41 Ibid.
51
How should a Brazilian Evang6lico progressive social ethics look like? First,
it is important to affirm that any social ethics developed in the Latin American
context is one that is born in the heat of the daily struggle for life. A social ethics
in that kind of context, then, is an ethics that cannot ignore the reality of
tremendous injustice, oppression and suffering that prevails in this part of the
world.42 It seeks to offer the best and most fitting response to what is going on in
the lives of the poor, oppressed, marginalized, and excluded.
Liberation theologians in Latin America have offered an original contribution to
theological ethics by asking how one can talk about God in a context of extreme
poverty and oppression. The issue of the primacy of the poor—the preferential
option for the poor—has become one of major importance to those working in
Latin America.43 In fact, for all those who live in the so-called third world, there is
an inescapable social reality before which all our theologizing must be done. In
that context, theology is to be done face-to-face with the poor, since it is
impossible to look away from the dehumanizing reality of extreme poverty and
42 In Brazil, all Christian ethicists are located in a context marked by extreme poverty
and social injustice. Brazil has one of the worst distributions of wealth in the globe, and
the gap between the “haves” and the “have-nots” has increased in the last three
decades. There are around 50 million Brazilians living under the line of poverty. See
Nilson Lage & Carlos Chemij, “Filhos da Pobreza: Estatisticas Revelam que Apesar da
Queda na Natalidade, a Misdria e a Desigualdade Aumentaram no Brasil,” Isto Z=, 5
March 2003 [online magazine]; available from http://www.terra.com.br/cai-
bin/index frame/istoe/1903/brasil/1903 beira mar.htm: Internet; accessed 6 March
2003.
43This is one of the basic assumptions guiding Gustavo Gutierrez argument in his
major work A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation (Maryknoll, N.Y.,
Orbis Books, 1973).
52
suffering surrounding our lives in the Latin American reality.44 As one lives in
an historical context where one meets scandalous poverty and injustice everyday
one learns to see the world from a different perspective. Thus, those of us doing
theology from Latin America must join Dietrich Bonhoeffer when he says,
We have for once learned to see the great events of world history
from below, from the perspective of the outcast, the suspects, the
maltreated, the powerless, the oppressed, the reviled - in short,
from the perspective of those who suffer.45
This perspective from the underside of history was crucial in the development
of a Latin America liberation theology some decades ago. Leonardo and
Clodovis Boff start an introductory book on liberation theology by describing
some shocking scenes they saw as they met with people dying of hunger in
Northeastern Brazil, one of the most famine-stricken parts of the world.46 They
tell those stories in order to affirm that the starting point of Latin American
theology is exactly “the perception of scandals such as those described... which
44Joerg Rieger refers to this as “that part of contemporary reality that refuses to go
away despite increasing postmodern pluralism and the related political, economical and
theological shifts.” Joerg Rieger, “Introduction: Watch the Money” in Liberating the
Future: God, Mamon and Theology, edited by Joerg Rieger (Minneapolis: Fortress
Press, 1998), 1-13 (12).
45 Dietrich Bonhoeffer, “After Ten Years,” in Dietrich Bonhoeffer Writings Selected

with an introduction, by Robert Coles (New York: Orbis Books, 1998), 114. This is one of
the favorite quotes of Bonhoeffer among Latin American liberation theologians. Gustavo
Gutierrez quotes it in an essay called “The Limitations of Modem Theology: on a Letter
of Dietrich Bonhoeffer." See Gustavo Gutierrez, Essential Writings, edited with an
introduction by James B. Nickoloff (New York: Orbis Books, 1996), 42.
46 Leonardo Boff & Clodovis Boff, Introducing Liberation Theology (Maryknoll, NY.:
Orbis Books, 1987), 1.
53
exist not only in Latin America, but throughout the Third World.”47 They move
on to show that Latin American liberation theology is mainly concerned with
those who are starving in the world, with those who are living in absolute poverty,
with those who do not even have access to the most basic medical care or to
regular water supply, with those who are illiterate.48
This is the reality from which Latin American liberation theologians do their
theologizing. Their starting point is always the reality of “com-passion,” of
“suffering with” the oppressed.49 This is the “vital environment,” the reality that all
Latin American theologians must take into consideration when developing all the
important themes of their theologies.50
One of the most important contributions made by Latin American liberation
theology is the insight that in order to do theology from the perspective of the
poor it is not only necessary to hold a perception of a specific reality of
oppression and poverty, but one must also have a strong and vivid commitment
with that reality. In other words, liberation theology in Latin America calls for “a
living link with a living practice.”51 Methodologically, Latin American liberation
theology teaches us that it is only after one is able to “do liberation” that one can
47 Ibid., 2.
48 Ibid.
49 Ibid.
50 See Jon Sobrino, “Teologia Desde la Realidad,” in O Mar Se Abriu: Trinta Anos de
Teologia na America Latina, edited by Luis Carlos Susin (S. Paulo, Brazil: Edigoes
Loyola, 2000), 153-170.
51 Boff & Boff, Introducing Liberation Theology, 22.
54
“do theology.”52 From that perspective, theology is defined as “critical reflection
on the praxis of liberation.”53 There is a primacy, and urgency for praxis.
Orthopraxis becomes more important than orthodoxy. That is what leads
Clodovis Boff to state, “Faith is first and foremost, although not exclusively,
orthopraxis”54
It is important to notice, however, that liberation theology itself did not
originate this understanding of Christian faith. In fact, it emerged as result of the
encounter between some Christians and poverty in the Latin American context.
Michael Lowy has demonstrated that there is a liberationist Christianity that
precedes liberation theology and which repeatedly requires a refreshed look at
the lives and experiences of those Christians. Those lives and experiences
become the starting point of any relevant theological and ethical reflection in
Latin America.55 Liberation theology emerged from within that liberation
Christianity. It appeared as the theological “expression of a vast movement that
emerged at the beginning of the 1960s, well before the new theological
writings.”56
52 Ibid.
53 Roberto Oliveros, “History of the Theology of Liberation,” in Mysterium Liberationis:

Fundamental Concepts of Liberation Theology, edited by Ignacio Ellacuria and Jon
Sobrino (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1993), 3-32 (12).
54Clodovis Boff, Theology and Praxis: Epistemological Foundations (Maryknoll, NY.:

Orbis Books, 1987), 37.
55See Michael Lowy, The War of Gods: Religion and Politics in Latin America (New
York: Verso, 1996), 34.
56 Ibid., 32. Lowy demonstrates that this liberation Christianity involved significant
sectors of the Catholic Church, lay religious movements, popularly based pastoral
55
The fact that there is a liberation Christianity that precedes the birth of
liberation theology in Latin America, and particularly in Brazil, is important to my
claim that no matter whether liberation theology, in the form it was conceived
during the late 1960s, will continue to play an important role in the social
transformation of Brazilian society or not, the injustices prophetically denounced
by liberation theology are still among us, and still need to be addressed. As
David Tombs states, “Whether a recognizable movement called liberation
theology persists or not, the issues that it dealt with will continue to remain just as
pressing as before. The terminology may vary but Christian theology will need to
keep faith with and build upon the ethical, methodological and epistemological
principles of liberation theology if it is adequately to engage with these issues in
the new millennium.”57
Therefore, even if the language used by liberation theologians during the
sixties and seventies might seem outdated, new forms of liberating social ethics
need to be developed to respond to the new ways these challenges are now
conveyed to us. One of my claims in this dissertation is that different types of
Protestant Christians in Brazil have undertaken some of these issues and that
the way they have responded to them must be taken seriously for the task of
developing a Brazilian Evang6lico social ethics.
networks, the emerging ecclesial base communities, women clubs, neighborhood

associations, peasant or workers’ unions, and other popular organizations.
57 David Tombs, “Latin American Liberation Theology Faces the Future,” in Faith in
the Millennium, edited by Stanley E. Porter, Michael A. Hayes and David Tombs
(Sheffield, UK.: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 32-58 (58).
56
A Contextual-Relational Ethics
According to Roy May, a contextual ethics has to do with relations and
functions more than with norms and rules.58 It is a relational ethics, concerned
with both the individuals and the community, and having its starting point not in
abstract ideas, but in concrete situations, to which it intends to respond."59 It
insists that the concrete realities, i.e., the context itself, are ethically significant.
Norms and rules function only when they contribute to the common well-being,
but lose their meaning when the context or consequences of its applications
make them oppressive.
Christian social ethics is mainly described in Latin America in terms of moral
responsibility, and it takes place in the midst of a number of encounters that
moral agents have throughout their lives with specific people and realities that
surrounds them—and ultimately with God. It is my perspective that this type of
approach to ethics, which takes people and responsibility very seriously, is useful
for those EvangMco communities living in the Brazilian context.
H. Richard Niebuhr, in one of the twentieth century’s richest single essays on
Christian ethics, argued that there are three symbols or metaphors that best
portray the ways people reflect on the moral life.60 First, there are those thinkers
58 Roy H. May. Discernimiento Moral: Una Introduction a la Etica Cristiana (San

Jose, Costa Rica: DEI, 1998), 65.
59 Ibid.
60 H. Richard Niebuhr, The Responsible Self: An Essay in Christian Moral Philosophy

(New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1963).
57
who have thought of human beings primarily as makers. According to this type
of ethics human beings are purposive beings, capable of making themselves for
the sake of some end. This symbol is used to represent all those who take a
teleological approach to ethics: idealists, utilitarians, hedonists, and others. For
these ethicists, ethics must be purposive, emphasizing ends and consequences.
A second group of ethical theorists sees human beings primarily as citizens,
law-makers and law-abiders. For them, our life is like politics more than it is like
art, and politics is the art of the possible, not of the ideal. The symbol of the
citizen is associated with that approach to ethics which is known as
deontological, and which emphasizes laws and principles more than goals and
the common good. According to a deontological view, we come to self-
awareness in the midst of commandments and rules. Life in society then is
considered as both consenting to law and as law giving. Those who consistently
think of human beings as makers subordinate the right to the good. Those,
however, who think of human existence with the aid of the citizen image, seek
equally to subordinate the good to the right.
Niebuhr, however, suggests that the best metaphor to account for a Christian
ethics is that which sees human beings primarily as answerers, as responders to
action.61 He uses the situations of social emergencies and suffering to show the
importance of this symbol as one reflects on the moral responsibilities of human
beings. He proves that in situations such as these a decision is made in
61 Ibid., 56.
58
response to action upon society, and this action is guided by interpretation of
what is going on, rather than by a goal or a law.62
For the ethics of responsibility, it is the fitting action, the one that fits into a
total interaction as response, and as anticipation of further response, that is
alone conductive to the good and alone is right. This responsible ethics is
composed of four elements: The first is the idea of response. All action is
response to action upon us. The second element of this ethics is that it is not only
responsive action but responsive in accordance with our interpretation of the
question to which an answer is being given. The third element is accountability.
All actions are responsible not only insofar as they are reactions to interpreted
actions upon us but also insofar as they are made in anticipation of answers to
our questions. An agent’s action is like a statement in a dialogue. The fourth
element is social solidarity. Our action is responsible when it is a response to
action upon us in a continuing discourse or interaction among beings forming a
continuing society. They are not only responses to actions done upon us, but are
also anticipations which can impact the way others will act in response to them.63
Despite the fact that the complexities of real life make it difficult for moral
agents to use only one of these approaches to reflect ethically on a given issue
or situation, Niebuhr’s typology is still one that can be useful for ethical reflection,
if it is simply taken for pedagogical purposes. If that is the case, the idea of
responsibility is the one that best fits the kind of ethical reflection which is done
62 Ibid. 60.
63 Ibid., 61.
59
from a Brazilian perspective, since all moral reflection which is done in Brazil,
is, first of all, a response to a specific reality and to actions which were previously
done upon that context. This symbol also makes room for a dialogical dynamics
which puts faith and the concrete human situation in continuous conversation
with one another.
The idea of responsibility presupposes two things: relationship and a prior
action to which human beings, as moral agents, respond. This prior action,
according to Emil Brunner, is God’s revelation or self-communication through
love, which requires from us a response in love.64 As Emil Brunner affirms, “the
Biblical revelation in the Old and New Testaments deals with the relation of God
to men (sic) and of men (sic) to God... It contains no doctrine of God apart from
human beings, and no human beings apart from God. It always speaks of God as
the God who approaches human beings and human beings as coming from God.
God ‘steps’ into the world, into relation with humans. God always acts in relation
to them.”65
This divine-human encounter, which Brunner interestingly characterizes as a
face-to-face encounter between God and the human being as God’s creature,66
only happens in the fullest when God’s love is known in humans’ responding
64 Emil Brunner, The Divine-Human Encounter (Philadelphia: Westminster Press,

1943).
65 Ibid., 46-48.
66 Ibid., 65.
60
love 67 It is based on that understanding of the relational character of the
Biblical revelation that Brunner concludes that “a responsible act of man (sic)
must be the response to the Word of God—an act in which the whole person is
summoned and responds in order to receive the self-giving of God.”68
H. Richard Niebuhr acknowledges that the inquiry of faith is conducted in the
company of the “believers”, which are not only in relation with one another, but
also in relation with something beyond them.69 He openly acknowledges that a
primordial element in the structure of faith is the interaction between the self and
other persons which appear in the act of believing the other. He says, “In this act
of believing the I acknowledges the presence of a Thou.”70 So, under the legacy
of Martin Buber, Niebuhr affirms the social character of the self: “it can know itself
only as it confronts another knower who knows the self. T and ‘Thou’ belong
together.”71
From a Latin American perspective, the symbol that portrays humans as
responsible beings needs to be complemented by another symbol, which
emphasizes the continuing conversation in which ethics should occur, by putting
its accent on the event of the encounter with the other. One can see the
67 Ibid., 64.
68 Ibid., 68.
69 H. Richard Niebuhr, “The Structure of Faith,” in Faith on Earth: An Inquiry into the
Structure of Human Faith, edited by Richard R. Niebuhr (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1989), 43-62 (44).
70 Ibid., 46.
71 Ibid., 47.
61
emphasis on the dialogical character of ethics in several thinkers, such as
Martin Buber and especially Emanuel Levinas, for whom ethics itself begins with
a face-to-face encounter with the Other 72
Leonidas Proano, an Ecuadorian bishop who was an important member of the
activist wing of the Catholic Church that flourished in Latin America from the
1950s, emphasized the importance of dialogue as an instrument for
conscientizacidn73 Following Paulo Freire, Proano affirmed that there are some
crucial conditions that favor this attitude of dialogue, and which can overcome the
anti-dialogue forces.74
First, real dialogue can only happen when there is no objectification of any of
the parties involved. Second, a true dialogue between an “I” and a “Thou” is
always searching for the third party, which, for Christians, is Christ. This search
for the third party requires an attitude of openness that allows the “I” to listen to
Christ, the third party, in the other’s voice. Third, dialogue requires intelligibility,
and clarity.75 The limpido one is someone who does not hide her feelings, who is
plain about her intentions; does not lie 76
72 Emmanuel Levinas, Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority (Pittsburgh,

Duquesne University Press, 1969), 81.
73 Leonidas E. Proano, Conscientizacidn, Evangelizacidn, Politica, 3ed (Salamanca:

Ediciones Sigueme, 1975), 70-78.
74 Ibid., 72.
75 Ibid., 73. The word used by Proano here is the Spanish limpidez, which carries the
idea of honesty and openness.
76 Ibid.
Fourth, true dialogue implies an attitude of humbleness before the other.
Here Proafio cites Freire to say that “there is no dialogue if there is no
humbleness.”77 For Proaho there can be neither prejudice nor self-sufficiency
toward the one whom I engage in dialogue. Fifth, true dialogue requires the “I” to
trust the “Other.” Once more, Proaho supports his point by saying that the
dialogical person trusts the other being as they encounter each other face-to-
face.78 The sixth condition for true dialogue to take place is love for the world and
for the neighbor. Those who trust the “other” must love them, as well as the
world, which is the environment where this encounter takes place.
Finally, there has to be hope. There can be no dialogue without hope. In
meeting the other, the person is perfecting herself, but since human beings are
incomplete beings, hope is what makes them move toward the desire to reach
completeness.79 Dialogue, for Proaho is not only between person and person,
but it also takes place between the individual and God, in response to God’s call;
with nature, which is also God’s word, and speaks to us; and with time, because
it is within time that one develops an ongoing conversation with one’s fellow
human beings, with God, and with nature. Proaho shows the amplitude a
responsive/contextual ethics in Latin America has to achieve.
77 Ibid.
78 Ibid., 74. Proaho offers no bibliographical reference to his quotations of Freire.
79 Paulo Freire is quoted as saying, “No hay dialogo, tampoco, sin esperanza. La
esperanza esta en la raiz de la inconclusion del hombre, hacia la cual se mueve en
permanente busqueda del ser mas.” Ibid., 75.
63
Moral Responsibility and the Appeal of the Other’s Face
No one makes this connection between responsibility and dialogue with the
‘other’ better than Martin Buber, for whom all true existence is “meeting”. As Will
Herberg says, “Buber’s ethic is a situational ethic of responsibility.”80 For him,
“genuine responsibility exists only where there is real responding.”81 He claims
that the idea of responsibility needs to be brought back from its abstract use in
the province of specialized ethics to the realm of “lived life.”82 Responsibility is,
ultimately, “readiness to respond in the dialogue with God which takes place in
the ‘lived moment’ of existence. It means hearing the unreduced claim of the
hour and answering it out of the fullness of one’s being.”83
Jacob B. Agus has wonderfully summarized the thought of Martin Buber in the
following assertion:
To be religious is to be ‘actual,’ to live in perpetual conversation

with God—a conversation which, coming from God to us, is
expressed in the needs of the situation as understood by man
(sic)...and which, returning from us to God, is concretized in the
form of deed performed to meet those needs.84
For Buber, “the prophetic reality...is presented [in the Bible] as a divine-
human encounter not in the abstract realm of a ‘sacred-upper history,’ but in the
80Will Herberg, “Introduction,” in The Writings of Martin Buber, edited by Will Herberg
(New York: Meridian Books, 1956), 20.
81 Martin Buber, “Dialogue,” in Between Man and Man (London: Keagan Paul,
1947),16.
82 Ibid.
83Will Herberg, op. cit., 20.
84Jacob B. Agus, Modem Philosophies of Judaism (New York: Behrman’s, 1941),

269, quoted by Will Herberg (ed.), The Writings of Martin Buber, 337.
64
full existential context of life, and that means history.”85 Therefore, “the
existential encounter at the core of the prophetic faith is always
contemporaneous.”86 For Buber, it is the capacity to respond that establishes one
as a person. This attitude of dialogue creates the sphere of authentic existence.
Such an existence takes place in a concrete world, a world that demands action.
Nietzsche’s dictum that “in the end one experiences only oneself is
counterposed by Buber’s view that it is the other through whom I
become fully I: if with my whole being I enter into a relationship with
him. Ivan Karamazov’s outcry, “I accept God but I do not accept his
world,” is opposed by Buber’s conception of the world as the path
to God, and of God’s word as directing man (sic) toward action in
the world. Sartre’s and Camus’ absurd man (sic) and absurd
universe are counteracted by Buber’s tenet of an unceasing,
meaningful dialogue between heaven and earth, I and Thou, call
and response.87
Emmanuel Levinas goes beyond Buber in his understanding of a relational
and dialogical existence. As Silvana Rabinovich has shown, Levinas does not
define philosophy—philo-sophia—in the traditional way as the love of wisdom,
but rather as the wisdom o f love, i.e., priority is given to ethics over ontology; to
love as responsibility for the other over the so-called objective knowledge.88
On the very day of the 500th anniversary of Brazil, a widely read Brazilian
newspaper featured the following headline: “Brazil: after 500 years, we still don’t
85Will Herberg, op. tit., 25.

86 Ibid., 26.
87N. N. Glatzer (ed.), The Way of Response: Martin Buber, Selections from His Writings
(Schoken Books, New York, 1966), 9.
88 Silvana Rabinovich, “Apresentagao,” in Marcio Luis Costa, Levinas: Uma IntrodugSo

(Petropolis: Vozes, 1998),18.
65
know who we are.”89 This conflict of identity, which I see taking place not only
in Brazil but throughout Latin America, points to a crisis originated with the
suppression of the “different” - the Other - by a Western totalizing mentality.
Latin American people are not willing anymore to bear the annihilation of their
own identity and existence. Argentinean philosopher and theologian Enrique
Dussel has said that the existence of the Latin American other has been eclipsed
since the conquest, which he calls “the invention of the Americas.”90 This eclipse
has occurred on several levels of our identity, including our thinking.
For centuries, Latin Americans have just imitated and repeated Western
philosophy and theology, since we were told that the only way to think right and
to exist before the developed world was thinking like them, following the same
patterns of their logic91 Latin Americans want to be partners without being forced
to lose our own identity. For a long time this possibility of participating in a
89 “Brasil Faz 500 Anos Sem Saber o que E: A Nona Economia do Mundo Produziu 300
Milhdes de Misergveis.” Jomal do Brasil [newspaper on-line] (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 22
April 2000); Internet; available from www.ib.com.br., accessed 23 April 2000.
90 Dussel holds that although the gestation of modernity took place within Europe itself, it
just came to birth in the confrontation of Europe with the non-European Other. According
to him, “by controlling, conquering, and violating the Other, Europe defined itself as the
discoverer, conquistador and colonizer of an alterity likewise constitutive of modernity.
Europe never discovered this Other as Other but covered over the Other as part of the
Same.” In other words, “modernity dawned in 1492 and with it the myth of a special kind
of sacrificial violence which eventually eclipsed whatever was non-European.” Enrique
Dussel. The Invention of the Americas: Eclipse of “the Other* and the Myth of Modernity,
translated by Michael D. Barber (New York: Continuum, 1995), 12.
91 Enrique Dussel defines this as being a colonial mercantile philosophy that used to be
exported from Europe to Latin America, Africa, and Asia starting in the sixteenth century
and had a “spirit of pure imitation or repetition in the periphery of the philosophy
prevailing in the imperialist center.” Enrique Dussel, Philosophy of Liberation (Maryknoll:
Orbis Books, 1985),10.
66
partnership and dialogue along with Western philosophy and theology was
impossible for us, since the categories of Western thought did not allow our
existence as ‘others’. Emmanuel Levinas and his philosophy of alterity
represented a breaking point in this situation, and the categories of his thought
began to be used by both philosophers and theologians in Latin America. Of
course, Levinas was not taken without criticism by Latin American thinkers. He
has been reinterpreted and contextualized in Latin America.92
One can say that genuine Latin American philosophy is a recent enterprise.
As Enrique Dussel properly states, during a long period what used to be called
“philosophy” in Latin America was a mere repetition and imitation of Western
philosophy.93 Some Latin American thinkers tried to resist Western imperialism
by appealing to Marx, but even Marxism was embedded in Eurocentric post-
Hegelianism. The universal claim of Hegel’s “idea” obliged every philosopher
after him to define themselves in relation to the totality of his theory, and the only
way not to be merely repetitive of this “universal” philosophy would be repelling
his system as a whole.94 The challenge of post-Hegelian philosophy, then, was to
92 See Juan Carlos Scannone, “Trascendencia, Praxis Liberadora y Lenguaje: Hacia una
Filosofia de la Religion Postmodema y Latinoamericanamente Situada,” in Panorama de
la Teologia Latinoamericana, vol. II, edited by Equipo Seladoc (Salamanca: Ediciones
Sigueme, 1975), 83-115.
93 Dussel mentions the fact that in the Hispanic colonies there were some well known
faculties of philosophy such as those of Mexico and Lima, but they were no more than a
reflection of the neo-scholasticism of Spain. In the case of the English and Portuguese
colonies, there never was even interest by the colonizers to develop philosophical
centers in the periphery. Instead, they opted for forming the colonial elites in London and
Coimbra. See Enrique Dussel, Philosophy of Liberation, 10-12.
94 Lambert Schuurman, “La Influencia de Emmanuel Levinas en la Teologia

Latinoamericana,” in Los Pobres: Encuentro y Compromiso, edited by J. Severino
67
re-encounter the concrete and the possibility of plurality. Some attempts to do
that were made by thinkers like Feuerbach, Marx, and Kierkegaard.
Nevertheless, all these attempts failed to break down the subject-object scheme
of modernity, and so could not escape totalization.95 Husserl’s phenomenology
was another attempt to overcome Hegel, which did not succeed. This new way of
perceiving things through one’s senses seemed to be an attracting alternative to
Hegel’s universal concept of idea, because it opened the doors for the creativity
of interpretation. In phenomenological terms,
Mental conception of a being entails novelty; it is the discovery of

what was not known before. The being was there already, before, a
priori. It is not newly constituted; it is only discovered. Because of
this, its meaning has an aspect of having been there before, but
concealed. Interpretation, in some way, discovers what was
previously concealed: the real.96
However, this attempt faded into failure too, since the “discovery” of senses
was not pure discovery, and the “constitution of meaning” referred to the reality of
other beings as both “things” and “mediations” to satisfy the need of the “I” who
perceived them. Therefore, it reduced the ‘Other1to the totality of one’s
perception 97
Croatto et al (Buenos Aires, Argentina: Editorial La Aurora, 1978), 149-179. Schuurman

points out that Hegelian thinking, with its centrality on the idea, incorporates every reality
in its dialectical system. There is only identity and through the acrobatics of dialectics,
even what seems to be different is converted into something that is part of the idea. In
short, everything is the same.
95 Ibid., 152. For a detailed analysis of these and other attempts to overcome the
totalization of Hegelian philosophy, see Enrique Dussel, Metodo Para una Filosofia de la
Liberacidn (Salamanca: Ediciones Sigueme, 1974).
96 Enrique Dussel, Philosophy of Liberation, 33.
97 Ibid., 34, 35.
68
After Husserl, two other serious attempts to search for philosophical
openness were undertaken by Heidegger and Levinas. Heidegger tries to
anticipate the relation subject-object by focusing on being as the core of
ontology98 He is concerned with the study of the structure of Dasein, which is the
concrete being that brings light over all that really is. He realizes that only by
recognizing the temporality and limits of being, it is possible to be open to the
reality of being, which is the foundation of thought.99 This phenomenologico-
ontological analysis of the basic experience of each human being leads
Heidegger to give ontological value to temporal human experiences such as
death, anguish, anonymity, and preoccupation. All these things are part of the
mystery of existence, of the entity within which human beings exist and move.100
However, in spite of the fact that Heidegger seems to move beyond the modern
metaphysics of the subject through a radical questioning of the transcendence of
thought itself, he is not able to overcome the ontological scope of the sameness
of being and thinking. Although he understands the historicity of human
existence, he does not take seriously the alterity of other beings.101
It is Levinas who overcomes this shortcoming within the entire philosophical
tradition through his emphasis on the face-to-face encounter with the ‘Other’ as
98 Martin Heidegger, Being and Time (New York, NY.: Harper and Row, 1962).
99 L. Schuurman, “La Influencia de Emmanuel Levinas en la Teologia Latinoamericana,”

153.
100 Ibid.
101 Juan Carlos Scannone, “Trascendencia, Praxis Liberadora y Lenguaje,” 95.
69
philosophy’s starting point. Levinas’ focus on the face of the Other, however,
cannot be understood only in phenomenological terms, because the face cannot
be reduced to a mere phenomenon that appears before the “I" and which
depends upon a perception that objectifies it. The face is an ethical entry,
because it cannot be described, nor can it be analyzed as an object. On the
contrary, in its nakedness and vulnerability the face commands us; it compels us
to act and do justice.102 For Levinas, Western philosophy is intrinsically violent,
and its violence is manifested in the reality of war. He affirms that the visage of
being that shows itself in war is fixed in the concept of totality, which dominates
Western philosophy.103 So, Levinas’ critique does not target only Hegel’s
totalizing philosophy nor is it only a critique of the sameness of Heidegger’s
Dasein. It is a critique of Western philosophy since its Greek roots. For him, the
whole philosophical tradition that started with Parmenides and Heraclitus, was
developed by Aristotle, and was brought to its plenitude by Hegel is a cycle of
eternal return of the same.104 Western philosophy as a whole needs to be freed
from the totality within which it is imprisoned.
It is Levinas’s radical critique of Western philosophy that makes Latin
American philosophers such as Dussel and Scannone relate to him and take on
102Jorge Pena Vial “Levinas y el Olvido del Otro,” Scripta Theologica 28/1(1996):
543-565 (552). See also Emmanuel Levinas, Totality and Infinity, 194.
103 E. Levinas, Totality and Infinity, 21. War is the violence of the same against the
Other, is violence against exteriority and difference.
104 Enrique Dussel, “Para una Fundamentacion Filosofica de la Liberacion

Latinoamericana,” in Liberacion LatinoAmericana y Emmanuel Levinas, by Enrique
Dussel and Daniel E. Guillot (Buenos Aires: Editorial Bonum, 1975), 11-46 (16,17).
70
his thinking as a point of reference from which they can develop a Latin
American liberation philosophy. In his thought, “[the] welcoming of the Other is
the ultimate fact.”105 That is the reason why his metaphysics of alterity is so
important for non-European philosophies, such as both the philosophies and
theologies of liberation in Latin America.
Latin American liberation philosophers acknowledge the relevance of Levinas
for their thinking, even though they recognize that they need to go beyond him in
order to implement his mediations in the reality of Latin America.106 Therefore,
Latin American liberation philosophy is embedded with Levinas’s philosophical
categories such as the face, the Other, alterity, and encounter.
Enrique Dussel is one of the most important interpreters of Levinas in Latin
America. Reporting a conversation he had with Levinas in 1971, Dussel says that
in spite of the similarities between their thoughts, he could already at that time
identify a radical difference between the two of them.
[Levinas] told me how the major political experiences of his

generation had been the presence of Stalin and Hitler (two
dehumanizing totalizations, fruit of the European-Hegelian
modernity). However, as I said to him, the most significant
experiences not only of my generation but also of the last five
hundred years [in Latin America] had been the ego of European
modernity, the ego conquistador, the colonizer, imperialist
European culture, which oppressed the people from the periphery. I
realized then that he had never thought that the Other (Autrui)
could be an Indian, an African, an Asian... If on the one hand
Levinas, as a Jewish thinker, could find in his own existential
experience a point of exteriority to criticize the European thinking in
105 Levinas, Totality and Infinity, 77.
106 Dussel, “Palabras Preliminares,” in Liberacidn Latinoamericana y Emmanuel

Levinas, 7-9 (9).
71
its totality (in especially Husserl, Heidegger, and Hegel), on the other
hand he did not suffer the totality of Europe and continued to have
Europe itself as his point of reference. As for us Latin Americans,
Africans, and Asians, the world of periphery, we have suffered from
Europe and our point of reference is a history exterior to “the
center,” positive in itself, even though the learned world has
considered it barbarian, non-being, unlearned.107 [translation is
mine]
The principal difference between the thought of Levinas and Latin American
liberation philosophy, then, is the difference of the historical contexts where they
were developed. In Latin America, Levinas has to be reinterpreted in a more
concrete way. One example of this necessary reinterpretation is the metaphor of
the face, one of the most powerful symbols in Levinas’s thinking. The face
speaks; it speaks to the “I”. It is an ethical resistance. It demands that I shall not
kill. However, this face of the ‘Other’ that provokes and demands an ethical
action remains completely incomprehensible, foreign, and unreachable for
Levinas. In Latin America, however, the face needs some historicization.
Otherwise, this ‘Other’—who in Latin America is the poor and oppressed—will
still provoke and speak to me in the face-to-face encounter, but will remain poor,
miserable, underpowered, and unable to be liberated.108
107 Ibid., 8.
108 Ibid., 9. See also Levinas, Totality and Infinity, 194-201. To do justice to Levinas
here, it is important to point out that he identifies the poor, the orphan, and the stranger
in the nakedness of the face. He also affirms that the poor and the stranger in their
poverty and exile appeal to my power and present themselves as equal to me. However,
the poor remain essentially poor, without any possibility of being liberated from this
essential poverty.
72
It is in that sense that Latin American liberation philosophy claims to
overcome Levinas. For philosophers such as Dussel, Levinas’s attempt to make
the ‘Other’ absolutely ungraspable by any totality went too far and turned out to
be a mistake that needs to be corrected. The Latin American ‘Other1needs to be
historicized and politicized in order to be empowered and liberated.
Levinas has strongly impacted and influenced Latin American philosophy and
theology, but Latin Americans recognize that his thought is still circumscribed
within a European mindset. So, Latin American thinkers take on categories that
are offered by Levinas without necessarily committing to his entire thought. This
is the same approach that many liberation theologians have taken to Marxism.109
Levinas is crucial to Latin America, but just as a starting point.
Latin America liberation philosophy situates itself over against the imperialism
of European modernity. Therefore, its first task is to uncover the historical logic of
that ontology, described as a self-enclosed totality. In opposition to this logic,
109 In contrast with those who insist in the complete dependence of liberation
theology upon Marxist social analysis, Gustavo Gutierrez asserts that liberation theology
has its starting point in Jesus Christ. He says, “The primordial, and in a certain sense
unique, source of revealed truth is Jesus the Christ. The Christian message must be
proclaimed to persons living in a particular historical and cultural situation, but it takes on
its full meaning only when connected with Jesus, born of Mary and a member of human
history, in whom we recognize the Son who invites us to a lasting, saving incarnation.
The good news is Jesus Christ himself. Any reflection on the truths of Christianity and on
the language needed for communicating them must start from him who is the truth.
Believing in the truth and putting it into practice are two necessary and mutually
implicative aspects of the following of Jesus, which is the obligatory setting of all
theological reflection.” Gustavo Gutierrez, Essential Writings, edited by James B.
Nickoloff, Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1996, 53.
73
liberation philosophers propose, in Levinasian terms, a metaphysics of alterity,
or liberation.110
Like Levinas, Enrique Dussel starts his uncovering of the logic of Western
totality by analyzing the reality of war. He goes back to Heraclitus’ claim that war
is the origin of everything, and to Parmenides’ emphasis on the oneness of the
world, in order to reaffirm what Levinas has already said, i.e., war originates from
totality. However, Dussel goes beyond that to state that prior to war, there is the
assassination of the ‘Other’. That is the origin of all violence.111 For Dussel—as
much as for Levinas—the logic of totality is intrinsic to Greek thought, in all its
stages. So, after analyzing Socrates’ maieutics, Plato, and Aristotle, Dussel
concludes that Greek philosophy generates what he calls “the pedagogy of
domination,” which exalts the same and nullifies the ‘Other1. For him, Greek
philosophy, through its body-soul dualism, offers ethical justification for the
domination of the ‘Other’.112 This ontology of totality reaches its most
sophisticated stage in the rise of modernity.
Dussel says that modernity denied the absolute ‘Other’ as it denied the idea of
God. The emphasis of his critique of modernity, however, is not the denial of the
medieval concept of God, but the institution of the same as totality in the ego
cogito formula.113 In his analysis of modernity, from Descartes to Nietzsche,
110 Dussel, “Para una Fundamentacion,” 13.
111 Ibid., 18.
112 Ibid., 19.
113 Ibid., 20.
Dussel concludes that behind totality there is a “will to power.” This is what kills
the ‘Other’, which is presented not only as the different, but also as the new. The
task of Latin American liberation philosophy, therefore, is to be critical of totality,
and try to escape it by resisting its “will to power.”114
In order to do that, Dussel finds help in Levinas, whose metaphysics of alterity
can be used to unveil the logic of domination that has oppressed Latin America.
Dussel’s philosophy is never abstract philosophy. In his philosophy, abstract
concepts always have to be embodied, incarnated in a specific social reality.
Therefore, totality becomes related to the Latin American experience under
colonial Christianity, and the face of the ‘Other1is incarnated in the face of the
indigenous people, whom Dussel affirms to be “the nothing” of that totality.115
In his attempt to locate the ‘Other1in history Dussel shifts Levinas’ emphasis
on the face into an emphasis on the voice of the ‘Other1. Whereas for Levinas, it
is the naked face of the ‘Other1that shakes my structures and challenges my
freedom, for Dussel the focus is on the voice of the ‘Other’ that needs to be
heard. The ‘Other’ does not emerge simply to be seen, but also to be heard. The
ability to hear the voice of the ‘Other1, according to Dussel, is essential to the
elevation of my relation with the ‘Other’ to a personal level.116 The oppressed
114 Ibid., 21.
115 Ibid., 23.
116 Ibid., 25. See also Levinas, Totality and Infinity, 81,197. Schuurman questions
Dussel’s tendency to see the ‘Other1in Levinas as a silent ‘Other1. In fact, Levinas
dedicates several pages of Totality and Infinity to the question of language. However,
there is no doubt that his emphasis is on the face rather than on the voice. Therefore,
75
‘Other’ needs to be addressed more concretely. Here Dussel suggests a socio
political reading of the poor as the most adequate way to listen to the ‘Other’ in
Latin America.117 For him, the ‘Other1in Latin America is not simply anyone. This
‘Other’ has a concrete history. Each reference to the Latin American ‘Other" must
become an epiphany of a family, a social class, a people concretely situated in
history. Any kind of generalization, then, brings negative results, because it
makes us deal with the ‘Other’ in a non-historical, escapist way.118 Referring to
his first claim that totality was established by the assassination of the ‘Other’,
Dussel proposes the resurrection of the ‘Other’ through the emergence of all the
‘Others’—oppressed people—who have been murdered in the history of totality.
This is the ultimate goal of Latin American philosophy.119
Dussel is right when he insists that the ‘Other1makes herself concretely present when
she speaks and I have to listen to her. It is not only the naked face of the ‘Other* that
resists totalization, but also the fact that the ‘Other1is able to articulate a discourse of her
own. See L. Schuurman, “La Influencia de Emmanuel Levinas en la Teologia
Latinoamericana,” 165.
117 It is worth noting, however, that in spite of his desire to give the ‘Other’ some
socio-political concretization, Dussel never reduces the Other into a mere economically-
based concept of the poor. The ‘Othe’r is always bigger than any specific concept. So,
sometimes he will identify the ‘Other’ as the poor, other times he will identify the ‘Other1
as the Indian, the woman, and so forth. The ‘Other1is anyone who is being oppressed,
silenced, or dominated. At the end of the day, Dussel’s preferencial word to refer to the
‘Other1is “the oppressed people.” See Dussel “Para una Fundamentacion,” 32.
118 L. Schuurman, “La Influencia de Emmanuel Levinas en la Teologia

Latinoamericana,” 166.
119 Dussel, “Para una Fundamentacion,” 26-29. Once more Dussel blends
philosophical and theological languages, speaking of the death or elimination of the
‘Other1as the original sin and referring to the murder of Abel as the example of the “only
human sin,” i. e., to kill one’s brother or sister. He discusses in theological terms the
killing of the ‘Other1, and returns to the lonely modern man, whose ego cogito killed the
idea of an absolute ‘Other1. He also refers to the European colonial enterprise by
mentioning that in totality the heroes are those who kill the ‘Other1. They are honored for
doing that. That is the logic of totality.
76
Latin American liberation philosophy offers a new starting point to Western
thought, i.e., starting from below, from the people. It has already surpassed the
first moment that was the reception and interpretation of Levinas’ concepts of
alterity and transcendence in its own historical context. It has also overcome the
phase of the dependence-liberation dialectic. Philosophy in Latin America is now
stepping towards the mediation of popular culture in its openness to welcome the
‘Other’, the people, the new in academia.120 The ‘Other’—i.e., the Latin
American poor—is becoming the master. By seeking to learn from the people the
meaning of things like popular resistance, popular wisdom, and so forth, Latin
American intellectuals are discovering a new role to play in the alterity of their
own culture; they are serving popular culture as “organic thinkers” who use
reflexive, critical and systematic instruments to follow the rhythm of genuine
popular wisdom, without closing it into concepts. At the same time, they are open
to be criticized by it.121
By using theological language, one can speak about the transformative power
of this kind of encounter with the Latin American ‘Other’ as the power to convert,
to promote deep spiritual transformation in the individuals and groups that dare to
meet the poor and their symbolic world face-to-face. I would like, then, to take
120See J. C. Scannone Nuevo Punto de Partida de la Filosofla Latinoamericana

(Buenos Aires: Editorial Guadalupe, 1990), 15-42.
121 J. C. Scannone, “Para una Filosofia a partirde la Sabiduria Popular,” in Para una
Filosofia desde America Latina, edited by Ignacio Ellacuria and Juan Carlos Scannone
(Santafe de Bogota, Bolivia: Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, 1992), 123-140 (138).
77
this further step and show the potential such responsible and dialogical ethics
of alterity has to promote radical change individually and socially.
From Encounter to Conversion
Once more, I should turn to Buber, for whom, in the dialogue with the Eternal
Thou, human beings are called to respond. Such response is only truthful as
humans turn their whole being to the Thou who addresses them. According to
Herberg, this act of ‘turning’ is of crucial importance in Buber’s entire
interpretation of the biblical faith.122As he puts it, “all of life, individual and
corporate, depends on the ‘turning’—the ‘turning’ and the ‘re-turning’—of
man(sic) to God.”123
The face-to-face encounter with the other, the poor, the oppressed, is only
complete when one turns entirely to them, and to God as they meet the poor.
Very few people have met the Brazilian poor and their reality with such openness
to learn from and listen to them and their claims, as did Richard Shaull.124 In his
encounter with Brazil, Shaull not only profoundly impacted those with whom he
122Will Herberg, The Writings of Martin Buber, 28.
123 Ibid., 29.
124 Rubem Alves says that Shaull related so much to Latin America that he adopted it
as his homeland. See Rubem Alves, “Quase Uma Apresentagao,” in, De Dentro do
Furacao: Richard Shaull e os Primdrdios da Teologia da LibertagSo. Sao Paulo, Brazil:
Editora Sagarana, CEDI/CLAI, Programa Ecumenico de Pos-Graduagao em Ciencias da
Religiao, 1985), 13-14.
78
met,125 but he also let himself be impacted and transformed in a profound way
by those encounters.126
Shaull referred to his encounters with the Brazilian reality as real experiences
of conversion. He referred to his late encounter with Pentecostalism as his “third
conversion,”127 one which has often been overlooked as one assesses his
theological legacy. In fact, he used the term “third conversion” not only to speak
of the impact that his own encounter with the poor Pentecostals in Rio’s
shantytowns had on his faith, or of a personal experience of spiritual
transformation, but also as a metaphor to draw attention to current
transformations taking place in Latin American Christianity. After referring to the
125Among several testimonies about Shaull’s impact on the lives of many Brazilians,
which have been collected and published, Rubem Alves’ is one of the most impressive
ones. He says, “If anyone asks me, ‘What have you learned?’ The answer is simple:
Shaull taught me to think...Shaull used to see what no one else could see. In six
months, he already new more about Brazil than I did.” Rubem Alves, “...Su cadaver
estava lleno de mundo,” Religiao e Sociedade 23,special issue (2003): 91-94 (92).
[translation is mine]
126 In each of those encounters, Shaull underwent a true conversion, being constantly
challenged and transformed as he met the Latin American ‘Other’. The encounter with
the Brazilian reality acquired such a high importance for him that eleven of the nineteen
chapters of his memoirs were dedicated to describe his Brazilian immersion and its
impact on his life and theology. Among the many transformations and turns in his life,
Shaull explicitly points out the profound impact of his decade in Brazil upon his spiritual
and theological formation. Those years prepared him to serve as a Professor at
Princeton Theological Seminary, as he says, “...God was preparing me for what I would
encounter in Brazil. There, the core of my faith and Christian life was developed and
nourished in an extraordinary way. And the response and transformation of this
primordial experience defined the terms of my presence and action in Princeton.”
Richard Shaull, Surpreendido Pela Graqa: Memorias de um Tedlogo (Rio de Janeiro:
Record, 2003), 245-246.
127 He uses this term as title for a short article. See Richard Shaull, “The Third
Conversion,” The Other Side, 33/2 (1997):32-34.
Latin American base communities in the eighties as a second Reformation,128
in the second half of the 1990s Shaull became convinced that Christianity was
now undergoing a third conversion as it encountered global Pentecostalism. For
him, this encounter had the potential of presenting possible alternatives for the
future of the church. That should be a further step in Latin American Christianity’s
process of turning to the poor.
Whereas many scholars have seen the boom of Pentecostalism in Latin
America as a response that displaces the emphasis on structural changes given
by liberation theologians in the previous decades, Shaull understood
Pentecostalism rather as a complement or radicalization of an important tenet of
liberation theology, namely the hermeneutical privilege of the poor. If God is
primarily acting among the poor, then it becomes imperative for all Christians to
listen to God’s appeal through the poor, and join God’s actions among them.129
Shaull approached Pentecostal Christians as someone who was convinced
that the Spirit of God was not only acting among them, but who also wanted to
address other Christians through them.130 Therefore, as he met with them, he felt
that he was stepping on holy ground, in a new frontier where God was doing
something new. In the recent past, many Pentecostals have heard God’s calling
128See Richard Shaull, Heralds of the New Reformation: the Poor of the South and
North America (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1984).
129Richard Shaull, “From Academic Research to Spiritual Transformation: Reflections

on a Study of Pentecostalism in Brazil,” Pneuma 28/1 (1996): 71-84 (75).
130Richard Shaull, “The Pentecostal Appeal to the Poor,” Church and Society 86/3
(1996):49-55.
80
to become more involved in the struggle regarding social issues and solidarity.
This observation gave Shaull the hope that the Pentecostal faith that he
encountered in Rio’s slums could gain significance in the struggle for social
change.
He believed that by meeting the Pentecostal universe face-to-face
mainstream Christians could discover new forms of solidarity and of deepening
their faith. For him, the ‘third conversion’ was the natural outcome for those who
had undergone the ‘second conversion’, i.e., for those who had become sensitive
to the plight of the poor, as well as to the biblical cry for justice. Shaull
understood that these people were now being called to a more radical step, that
of opening themselves to be transformed by the encounter with the symbolic
world of the poor.
Shaull, like Levinas, shows that ethics and theology begin in a face-to-face
encounter with the ‘Other’. In the case of Shaull’s third conversion, the ‘Other’
whose face we should face is the poor/Pentecostal Other.
Conversion is a dear word to Evangelicals and Pentecostals in Brazil. The call
for a conversion of the educated, the powerful and the rich through a face-to-face
encounter with the poor and outcast might have a significant impact in the future
of Brazilian Christianity. Those who once had their existence nullified by totality
might have now the opportunity to have their own voices and their own logics
heard. The combination of charismatic or Pentecostal spirituality with social
justice seems to be an outcome of the encounter between mainstream Christians
and Pentecostalism, which ends up converting both who meet.
CHAPTER THREE
RICHARD SHAULL: INTERFACING THE BRAZILIAN EVANGELICO
RESPONSES TO THE POOR
Unity and Diversity in the ‘Faces’ of Brazilian Protestantism
As much as Brazilian Catholicism—which indeed is not one but several
Catholicisms—Brazilian Protestantism is plural and diverse.1According to
Antonio G. Mendonga, Brazilian Protestantism is so complex in its configuration
that one should rather refer to it in the plural—as “Protestantisms.”2
The different emphases, behavior and beliefs within Brazilian Protestantism have
become more visible, to the point that there are those who assert that some of its
strands have distanced themselves so much from the tenets of the Protestant
Reformation that they should no longer be classified as Protestants.3
1As Brazilian historian Alderi Souza de Matos affirms, Brazilian Protestantism today
is characterized by diversity and complexity rather than by common elements. On the
one hand, there is an immense group divided into classic Pentecostalism and Neo-
Pentecostalism, which continues to increase, mainly by fragmentation. On the other
hand, there are the so-called historical or mainline churches, which are also subdivided
into progressive and conservative. See Alderi Souza de Matos, “O Protestantismo
Brasileiro no Periodo Republicano,” available from
http://www.thirdmill.org/files/portuguese/60307~11_1_01_10-16
52_AM~0_Protestantismo_Brasileiro_no_Per%C3%ADodo_Republicano.html; Internet;
accessed 20 March 2006.
2Antonio G. Mendonga, “Evolucao Historica e Configuracao Atual do Protestantismo

no Brasil,” in Introducao ao Protestantismo no Brasil, by Antonio G. Mendonca and
Procoro Velasques Filho (Sao Paulo: Edigdes Loyola, 1990), 12, 13. See also Zwinglio
M. Dias, “Notas Sobre a Expansao e as Metamorfoses do Protestantismo na America
Latina,” Numen 3/2 (2000): 47-62 (49).
3This is the case, for instance, with some Neo-Pentecostal churches such as the
Igreja Universal do Reino de Deus (IURD), which, according to historian Paulo Siepierski,
have distanced themselves not only from the theological tenets of the Protestant
Reformation, but even from those of classical Pentecostalism. For Siepierski, those
81
82
On the other hand, there is some unity, which can be recognized in the very
fact that all of these different Protestant groups identify themselves as
Evangelicos. Evangelico is a name that serves as an umbrella which covers the
spectrum from liberal to fundamentalist Protestants, from mainstream to
Pentecostal churches. In a country that was basically Catholic for centuries, all
Christians that are not Catholics have been identified as Evangelicos. Attempts
have been made since the beginning of the twentieth century to formally unify the
Protestant field. None of them, however, has been successful.
In 1934, six Protestant churches created the Confederagao Evangeiica do
Brasil (CEB), which existed for several decades, and became Brazil’s main
Protestant voice during the 1950s and early 1960s. Despite its success in
promoting important conferences that gathered representatives from many
different Protestant denominations, the CEB never reached the unity it intended
to. In fact, it was exactly the divisions and conflicts within its own structures that
determined its fate in the 1960s.4
More recently, in the late 1980s, a new attempt was made to unify the
Protestant field through the creation of the Associagao Evangeiica Brasileira
(AEVB). The AEVB emerged on the Brazilian scene during the period of re
democratization, when many Evangelicos awakened to the opportunity to occupy
churches should rather be classified as Post-Pentecostals, a term that would emphasize

the discontinuity between them and the classical Protestant churches. Paulo Siepierski,
“Pos-Pentecostalismo e Politica no Brasil,” Estudos Teologicos 37/1 (1997):47-61.
4 See Waldo Cesar, “Church and Society or Society and Church?” in Revolution of
Spirit: Ecumenical Theology in Global Context, edited by Nantawan B. Lewis (Grand
Rapid, Ml.: W. B. Eerdmans, 1998): 133-148 (138).
83
public spaces in Brazilian society. Two assumptions guided the formation of
the AEVB.5 First, many Evangelico leaders thought that one of the causes of the
disadvantageous position the Evangelicos held before government agencies
when compared to the Catholic Church was the fact that the Protestant field was
too fragmented. There was no common voice among them, whereas the Catholic
Church had a powerful voice to speak to Brazilian society through the
Conferencia National dos Bispos do Brasil (CNBB). These Evangelico leaders
felt the need for a unified Evangelico voice that would allow them to be heard in
the public sphere.
The second reason for the formation of the AEVB was the fact that scandals
began to take place upon the election of many Neo-Pentecostal representatives
to the Brazilian congress.6 After many years of no significant participation in the
political life of the country, the Evangelicos—mostly Pentecostals—decided to
occupy the public space in the Brazilian society. Many of these Evangelicos
ended up accused of corruption and misuse of public funds. Thus, many
Evangelicos felt that they needed to come together to voice their ethical
concerns, disassociating at least part of the Brazilian Evangelico community from
an image linked by the media to corruption. The AEVB intended to be the voice
of ethically concerned Evangelico Christians. However, it was never able to
5 Ibid., 144. The story of the emergence and development of the AEVB will be
discussed in chapter five.
6 See Paul Freston, Evangelicos na Politica Brasileira: Histdria Ambigua e Desafio

Etico (Curitiba, Brazil: Encontrao Editora, 1994), 69.
speak on behalf of all Evangelicos, especially of Neo-Pentecostal pastors and
churches who did not feel represented by the voice of the AEVB.
A third attempt to come together has taken place among the ecumenically-
oriented churches with the creation of the Conselho Nacional de Igrejas Cristas
(CONIC), which is composed of almost all the same mainstream Protestant
churches that created the CEB in the 1930s, with the addition of the Roman
Catholic Church. However, the CONIC only represents a small amount of
Brazilian Evangelicos7
Despite those unsuccessful attempts, Brazilian Protestantism is also marked
by some unity. The metaphor of the faces, which I borrow from Jose Miguez
Bonino,8 helps to show that despite being different from one another, these faces
represent one same family.9 They have similarities, which should enable them to
find some common ground upon which to act.10
7According to sociologist Edin Abumanssur, the ecumenical movement in Brazil has

become a “tribe”, where the term “ecumenical” functions as an identity trait, defining
those who are in and those who are out. For him, in Brazil, the ecumenical movement
ended up limiting itself to a homogenous group of Christians, instead of representing
diversity and inclusion. Edin S. Abumanssur, “A Tribo Ecumenica: Urn Estudo do
Ecumenismo no Brasil nos Anos 60 e 70” (Master of Social Sciences Thesis, Pontiflcia
Universidade Catolica de Sao Paulo, 1991), 58.
8 Jose Miguez Bonino, Faces of Latin American Protestantism (Grand Rapids:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995).
9Jose Miguez Bonino, “El Rostra Liberal del Protestantismo Latinoamericano,” in
Unidad y Diversidad del Protestantism Latinoamericano: El Testmimonio Evangelico
Hacia el Tercer Milenio: Palabra, Espiritu y Misidn, edited by Jose Miguez Bonino, Juan
Sepulveda and Rigoberto Galvez (Buenos Aires: Kairos Ediciones, 2002), 9-22 (10).
10In this regard, Abumanssur points to the fact that, in Brazil, the ecumenical
movement proposes more than the unity of the churches. It goes further to propose that
this unity focuses on social change as a necessary common goal. The ultimate goal of
85
By using the metaphor of the different faces of Brazilian Protestantism—
and by choosing the word Evangelico to refer to Brazilian Protestants—I intend to
demonstrate the dialogical character of Brazilian Protestantism, one that
preserves both its diversity and its unity. The faces refer to the different
manifestations of a phenomenon that keeps some unity under the umbrella of the
name Evangelico.
Furthermore, this dissertation focuses on specific responses coming from
each of these three faces to the poor in Brazil. I call attention to three specific
responses, which had their climaxes in different moments in history, and which
involve groups that are not always in intentional conversation with each other.
These three different faces of Brazilian Protestantism—as they encountered the
poor face-to-face—produced their own responses to that encounter, generating
their own “voices of compassion.”11 Part of my argument throughout the
dissertation is that it is important to look at these different responses through a
relational perspective, i.e., by seeing one in relation to the other. For me, these
responses are complementary to each other. Together, they can offer an
important contribution to the development of a social ethics that is more apt to
adequately respond to the needs and demands of the poor in contemporary
Brazil.
Richard Shaull as Interface: Why Shaull?
interdenominational cooperation is to make ecclesial unity the sustainer of a political

strategic vision of social action. Edin Abumanssur, “A Tribo Ecumenica,” 59.
11See Justo Gonzalez, “Voices of Compassion Yesterday and Today,” in New Face of
the Church in Latin America, edited by Guillermo Cook (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books,
1994), 3-12. See footnote 1 in chapter two.
86
The purpose of this chapter is to identify an interface, which can connect all
the three faces and their responses to the plight of the poor in Brazil. The three
Evangelico faces and their responses need to find a common ground, a point of
contact that will enable them for a common praxis. The dialogue among the faces
aims at providing some forms of cooperative action.
Of course, none of the three Evangelico responses I present here has
emerged in isolation. As I will show later, there has been, for instance, some
continuity between the religion and society ecumenical movement of the 1950s
and the progressive evangelical movement of the 1970s, despite the
discontinuities and differences between them. However, how can one connect,
for example, the ecumenical movement of the 1950s and the current Pentecostal
movement? Where can one find a theological interface which would offer a
common ground for the three faces and their responses to produce new forms of
social action in cooperation with each other?
This question is not easy to answer, especially when one takes into account
the youthfulness of Brazilian Protestantism, and the fact that only in the second
half of the twentieth century one can see some signs of an emerging Brazilian
Protestant theology. As I will show later, up to the 1950s, despite its numerical
growth, Brazilian Protestantism had not made any significant contribution to a
contextualized Brazilian Christianity in the theological field. Under foreign
influence, the Protestant theology preached from the Brazilian pulpits and taught
in Brazilian seminaries until the first half of the twentieth century was more
87
concerned with the “right doctrine” and individual moral codes with no
relevance to the concrete reality in which Brazilian Protestants lived.12
At that time, Brazil experienced a period of radical transition from a rural and
agricultural economy to an industrialized and urban one. The contradictory social
effects of this period of development—marked by the growth of the gap between
developed and underdeveloped nations and by the increasing indebtedness of
the developing countries—led to a nationalist reaction, and gave birth to
revolutionary fervor.13 In these circumstances, there was an increasing need for
theological orientation that could make the Protestant faith more relevant to
changing social conditions.
Ironically, during this time of increasing nationalist sentiment, a young North
American missionary, offered one of the most significant collaborations of that
time to the development of a Brazilian Protestant theology.14 Richard Shaull
arrived in Brazil in 1952 and caused a revolution in the way theology was taught
in Brazil up to that point. The kind of theology taught at the Brazilian seminaries
12 Eduardo Galasso Faria, Fe e Compromisso: Richard Shaull e a Teologia no

Brasil(Sao Paulo: SP.: ASTE, 2002), 86. According to Clara Mafra, the theological
training at the Campinas Presbyterian Theological Seminary, in the 1950s, was
caricatural, based on doctrine manuals summarized by unqualified teachers. See Clara
Mafra, “Urn Cavalheiro Entre Dois Mundos,” ReligiSo e Sociedade, 23/special issue
(2003): 99-103 (102).
13Ibid., 72ff.
14 Reynaldo F. Leao Neto affirms that the work and action of Richard Shaull
represented a watershed for Brazilian Protestant theology. For him, Shaull was clearly a
precursor of the kind of theological labor that would later be known as liberation theology
as he represented the openness of Brazilian Protestantism to the concrete situation in
which the Latin American people lived. Reynaldo F. Leao Neto, “Richard Shaull: O
Profeta da Revolugao,” Pastoral e Mlstica. Cademos de Pos-Graduagao/Ciencias da
Religiao 13/8: (1995) 83-110 (85, 106).
88
at that time was orthodox and dated. Up to that point, there was no room for a
local or contextual theology in Brazilian Protestantism. Richard Shaull was the
first Protestant thinker in Brazil to strive for the development of a contextual
theology and ethics that took seriously the socio-historical location of those doing
theology in Brazil.
Jovelino Ramos, one of Shaull’s first students at the Campinas Presbyterian
Seminary, in 1953, speaks about the impact that Shaull’s teaching made on him
and his colleagues:
Shaull represented a radical challenge to our way of seeing things

and reacting to what we saw. In the beginning, our response to him
came near to be one of revolt. We had come to the seminary to
receive and accumulate knowledge. We saw the professors as
venerable sages, in charge of passing on to us the wisdom they
had received from other sages from the great theological past...The
good student was that one who possessed a good memory, and
who was able to repeat [what they had read in] books and texts.
The seminary was popularly perceived as the place of training for
preachers. Then, Shaull comes with the opposite. For him, learning
was not the same as assimilating knowledge, but rather questioning
knowledge. “I am much more interested in your questions than in
the answers to them.” “What do the words you just said mean for
those who are not used to sermonic language?” “What does this
have to do with the real situation in which Brazilians live?”... Now
we had to read a number of books of living authors—Karl Barth,
Emil Brunner, Rudolph Bultmann, C. H. Dodd, D. T. Niles, Reinhold
Niebuhr, Richard Niebuhr, Miguez Bonino, Gutierrez Marin, not to
mention the work of the martyr [Dietrich] Bonhoeffer, two books of
[Franz] Kafka, and numerous essays of Catholic theologians. More
than read, now we had to digest, analyze, understand, question,
and write essays without copying the authors. “I am not interested
in your version of Jacques Maritain. W hat I really want to know is
how do you describe the relevance of Maritain to the concrete
situation in which people live and work in Campinas.”15 [translation
is mine]
15Jovelino Ramos, “Voce Nao Conhece o Shaull,” in De Dentro do Furacao: Richard

Shaull e os Phmordios da Teologia da Libertaqao, Richard Shaull (Sao Paulo, SP.: Ed.
Saragana, 1985), 25-32 (27). It was Richard Shaull who introduced the thinking of most
Ramos’s testimony is not an isolated case. An entire generation—in fact, an
extraordinary generation of Brazilian Protestant students—would be strongly
influenced by the work of Richard Shaull. His work affected not only seminarians,
but also Christians, in general, who were involved in the Christian Student
Movement.16
of the authors mentioned by Ramos to Brazilian Protestantism, and who first taught a
“mundane” theology in Brazil—a theology concerned with the Brazilian people and the
reality in which they lived. Among all those names, Bonhoeffer stands out as the most
influential, not only to those Brazilian students who would become leaders of the most
progressive movement among Brazilian Protestants in the 1950s and 1960s, but also to
many other Christian leaders in Latin America. As I will show in the next chapter, the
religion and society movement started by Shaull and a group of young Brazilians in the
1950s would become the bedrock for a much larger movement, the Iglesia y Sociedad
en America Latina, known as ISAL. Introduced by Shaull, the life and work of Dietrich
Bonhoeffer became a common point of reference for those related to that movement,
which included the renowned Rubem Alves and Miguez Bonino among its members.
The readings of Bonhoeffer became so decisive to the development of that movement
that no other Western theologian influenced the ISAL’s discussions as deeply as him.
See Julio de Santa Ana, “The Influence of Bonhoeffer on the Theology of Liberation,”
Ecumenical Review 28 (1976): 188-197(189); see also Clarke Chapman, “Bonhoeffer
and Liberation Theology,” in Ethical Responsibility: Bonhoeffer’s Legacy to the Churches,
eds., John Godsey et al (Toronto: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1981), 147-95 (160).
16Two collections of essays on and by Richard Shaull have been published in Brazil.
Most of the essays on these collections that are not Shaull’s own, are testimonies from
Brazilian and Latin American Christian leaders who were directly influenced by ShauM,
and who became important figures in the construction of Brazilian and Latin American
ecumenical Christianity. Some of these names include Rubem Alves—whose thought
and theological contribution cannot be properly understood apart from Shaull’s work and
teaching—Julio de Santa Ana, Waldo Cesar, Jovelino Ramos, Eduardo Galasso Faria,
Esdras Borges Costa, Rubem Cesar Fernandes, Aureo Bispo dos Santos, Claude
Emmanuel Labruine, Joao Dias de Araujo, Derval Dasilio, Joaquim Beato, Jacy
Maraschin, Jether Pereira Ramalho and Mozart Noronha, among others. This pioneering
generation of Brazilian Protestant ecumenical thinkers and theologians, who became
itself an important referential for Brazilian Protestantism in Brazil and abroad, had in
Shaull a fundamental referential to orient their action and help them understand the
important issues of their time. These essays are published on the book De Dentro do
Furacao: Richard Shaull e os Primdrdios da Teologia da Libertagao (1985), op. cit., and
on a special issue of the journal Religiao e Sociedade (23/special issue, 2003), op. cit.
The case of Shaull’s influence upon Brazilian Protestant theology—in fact, it was not
only upon Protestant theology, although I am circumscribing my research to
90
A renowned Latin American ecumenical theologian in the second half of the
twentieth century, Julio de Santa Ana first met Shaull as a student at the
Faculdad Evangelica de Teologia de Buenos Aires, during a Latin American
conference of the World Student Christian Federation, in Sao Paulo, in 1952.
Santa Ana’s comments about the impact Shaull made upon his life shows us that
more than twenty years prior to the boom of liberation theology, Shaull was
already affirming the “primacy of praxis” in the theological task.
Shaull was a master in showing us that to do theology means to

take part in the struggles of our days, to participate in history, since,
it is only in and from history that one can meet God and, above all,
create the conditions to hear God’s voice...At that time (as well as
nowadays) the majority of the Latin American Protestant community
thought that to witness Jesus Christ required, among other things,
to take a distance from the events of the “world”. It did not come to
our minds that Christian witness must take place in the context of
daily history; that the most important thing for one to understand
God’s action, and to follow it faithfully, is to be existentially involved
in the contemporary activities...Shaull insisted that priority should
be given to practice.17 [translation is mine]
Another aspect of Shaull’s impact upon a generation of Brazilian students
resides exactly in the practical dimension. Ramos recalls that during his third
year of seminary, he and some fellow students decided to accept Shaull’s
invitation to put his ideas to the test. Shaull divided the students into groups and
sent them to work in factories, or in the poor neighborhoods of Campinas. The
Protestantism—still has a lot to be analyzed and discussed. There is a renewed interest

in Shaull’s work and thinking taking place in Brazil right now.
17Julio de Santa Ana, “A Richard Shaull: Teologo e Pioneiro Ecumenico—Um

Testemunho Reconhecido,” in De Dentro do FuracSo, 33-39 (37).
91
purpose of this experience was “to explore the atmosphere of the workers’
world as a new frontier to the ministry of the church.”18
A similar experiment led by Shaull gave birth to the “Comunidade de Vila
Anastacio,” in Sao Paulo. A group of six people—one pastor and his wife,
another Christian couple, a worker’s union leader and seminarian Jovelino
Ramos—rented a place, which served as their home and the headquarters of a
Christian congregation. Following the model of the French worker-priests, they
worked in factories, seeking to share the workers’ anxieties and expectations,
and together work on solving their problems. According to Ramos, the result of
this experiment was that in two years this community became an information
center for the workers, helping to make them aware of their working rights, and
encouraging them to get involved in the workers’ union.19
Although there is no direct historical connection between these experiments
and the Christian base communities that would emerge in Brazil in the 1960s—
after Shaull left Brazil—they show how much Shaull anticipated the Latin
American liberation theology that was just underway.20 Shaull, in Rubem Alves’
words, “was, without knowing, sowing the seeds of liberation theology.”21 Carl-
Henric Grenholm is right when he says that despite being a North American
18Jovelino Ramos, “Voce Nao Conhece o Shaull,” 29.
19Ibid., 30.
20See Jovelino Ramos, “Caminhando com Richard Shaull,” Religiio e Sociedade

23/special issue (2003): 71-74 (73).
21 Rubem Alves, “...Su Cadaver Estava Lleno de Mundo,” ReiigiSo e Sociedade, vol.
33 (2003): 91-94(93).
92
theologian, Shaull “can be regarded as a representative of a more radical Latin
American Protestantism.”22
Shaull, no doubt, was a foreigner: a North-American missionary in the lands of
Brazil during a time when nationalist sentiments were increasing within the
Brazilian society. The irony, however, is that, as Ramos affirms, during that time
of the most radical affirmation of Brazilian nationalism, “there he was, a blond,
blue-eyed North American, being listened to with admiration (almost veneration)
and respect by the most intolerant student leadership [of the time].”23 He goes
on to say, “to this day it is difficult to understand this. Anyway, we decided that he
also belonged to us.”24
22Carl-Henric Grenholm, Christian Social Ethics in a Revolutionary Age: An Analysis

of the Social Ethics of John C. Bennett, Heinz-Dietrich Wendland and Richard Shaull
(Upsala: Verbum, 1973), 210.
23 Ibid., 31. [translation is mine] Shaull was not seen by his Brazilian peers and pupils
as a North-American; he was seen as being “ours”. Instead of the imperialistic image
that most of Shaull’s Brazilian students and friends would associate with a typical North
American missionary, they saw in Shaull someone who, like them themselves, rejected
the denominationalism, the cultural racism, the Puritanism, the Imperialism, and the
fundamentalism that were associated with the North American missionary presence in
Brazil. Shaull, without denying his cultural values and identity, had humbly been able to
immerse into the Brazilian culture, valuing it, learning from it, many times adopting it, and
always dialoguing with it That is the reason why he was seen from another perspective
by his Brazilian peers. Reynaldo Neto says, “Among the North American missionaries
that arrived in Brazil since the century of the missions, there has been no one greater
than Richard Shaull. With his apparent simplicity, that was rather a testimony of his
humility than of weakness, he represented the possibility of historical Protestantism’s
openness to the concrete situation of the Latin American, and specially, Brazilian
peoples.” See Reynaldo F. Leao Neto, “Richard Shaull,” 83
24 Ibid. Ramos recalls an international conference organized by the World Christian

Student Federation, in Strasburg, France, in 1960. The highest point of the conference
was an open conversation with Karl Barth. However, Ramos proudly remembers that the
“opening speech belonged to us, Brazilians, in the voice of Richard Shaull.” He goes on
to say, “For us it was a historical moment, not only because our prophet was being
listened to with great interest by an assembly of such breadth, but also because we were
93
The role Shaull played to influence through his dynamic action and sharp
theological thinking the social reality of the Brazilian society; the fact that he was
the intellectual mentor of the first generation of Brazilian Protestant theologians
to develop a theology based on the Brazilian social reality; and the dialogical
character of his theology and ethics: all this contributed to my choice for Richard
Shaull as my main interlocutor to dialogue with the responses that have been
given to the Brazilian social reality by the three EvangGlico faces.
Despite the fact that he was not Brazilian-born, Shaull was perceived as an
organic intellectual by a generation of Brazilian Protestants who, for the first time,
felt that the theology they were learning and developing together had relevance
to the concrete social reality in which they lived. Shaull helped a generation of
Brazilian students and theologians to break free from established ecclesiastical
structures and organize social movements, which questioned the status quo.25
Shaull was the first Protestant theologian to make that kind of organic impact in
Brazil. Brazilian Protestantism was too young to have produced an organic
theologian of its own before Shaull appeared to play this role. Moreover, even
after him, few other Protestant theologians have played that role again.26
speaking to the world through him. All of us, members of the Brazilian Christian Student
Union, had taken part in the production of that speech.” Ibid. [translation is mine]
25 Reynaldo F. Leao Neto, “Richard Shaull: O Profeta da Revolugao,” 102. The social
movements developed under Shaull’s influence and inspiration will be discussed in the
next chapter.
261follow Cornel West’s usage of the Gramscian expression “organic intellectual,”

referring to someone who is able to link “the life of the mind to social change” with “moral
persuasiveness and political effectiveness.” See Cornel West, “Prophetic Christian as
Organic Intellectual: Martin Luther King, Jr.,” in The Cornel West Reader, edited by
94
On the other hand, Shaull let himself be profoundly impacted by the
Brazilian reality and allowed it to reshape his own theology 27 He came to age as
a mature theologian during his years in Brazil28 and allowed the Latin American
social context to inform his theology and ethics in unique ways, to the point that
he became able to incorporate a Latin American flavor into his theological
thinking even after he left Brazil to teach at Princeton.29 That, once again, makes
Cornel West (New York, NY.: Basic Civitas Books, 1999), 425-434 (426). In that sense
there have not been many other Brazilian Protestant theologians with such ability to link
her intellectual work to social change and to appeal to the people’s moral courage in
order to implement political changes as Shaull did. In the Catholic realm, Leonardo Boff
and Dorn Helder Camara, have played that role, not to mention Paulo Freire. The anti-
Catholicism within many Evang&ico circles has limited the impact of these Catholic
thinkers upon Evang&ico theology and ethics. Nowadays, however, Boff is making a
significant impact on the development of Evang&ico theological and ethical thinking in
Brazil. Freire and Boff have both played a very significant role in the development of
Latin American Liberationist theology, and that theology, as I will show later, directly or
indirectly has affected the way as Brazilian Evang&icos relate to the social environment
surrounding them. Nevertheless, for the purpose of bringing the different responses
coming from the three Evang&ico faces into conversation with each other, Shaull seems
to be the most adequate theologian to serve as an interface to them. For two influential
works by Freire and Boff see Paulo Freire, The Pedagogy of the Oppressed, new
revised edition (New York: Continuum, 1993) and Leonardo Boff, Jesus Cristo Libertador,
9ed (Petropolis, RJ.: Vozes, 1983). It is worth noting that when Paulo Freire was exiled,
during the military dictatorship in Brazil, Shaull asked Myra Bergman Ramos to translate
the manuscript of Freire’s book into English and helped publish it in the United States.
He also wrote the preface for the English version of the Pedagogy of the Oppressed.
See Myra Bergman Ramos, “Muito Obrigada, Shaull,” Religiao e Sociedade 23/special
issue (2003): 81-82.
27See Richard Shaull, Surpreendido Pela Graga (Rio de Janeiro: Record, 2003), 243.
28 Shaull himself affirms that the process of his spiritual and theological formation that
started at Princeton, as a seminarian, and continued during his Colombian experience,
and his graduate studies with Paul Lehmann, was deepened and transformed during the
decade of experience and reflection in Brazil. He says, “[in Brazil] the heart of my faith
and Christian life was developed in extraordinary ways.” See Richard Shaull,
Surpreendido Pela Graga, 245.
29 For him, the response to and the transformation he suffered through his experience
in Brazil (which he calls a primordial experience), defined the terms of his presence and
action as a professor at Princeton Theological Seminary, in the years that followed his
return to the United States. Ibid., 246.
95
him a good partner for the development of a dialogical and responsible manner
of doing Christian ethics in Brazil as one brings the three Evang6lico responses
to the struggle of the poor into conversation with each other.
Because Shaull is not the main subject of my dissertation, I will limit the
information on his life and work to those aspects that interface the three
Evang6lico responses to the plight of the poor in Brazil.30 My goal here is simply
to show how Shaull can help connecting the three responses so that they can
contribute to cooperative Christian social action, and to a more inclusive and
effective Christian social ethics, which can meet the demands and anxieties of
those struggling for survival in Brazil.
There was no often intentional dialogue between Ecumenicals, Evangelicals
and Pentecostals in Brazil in the past. The Latin American Council of Churches,
as an ecumenical organism, and the Latin American Theological Fraternity,
representing some Evangelicals, have initiated a conversation, which is still
embryonic, but which is also promising. The two organisms have also sought to
include some Pentecostal voices in this conversation.31 With the help of Shaull’s
work and thinking, I hope I can help to provide ways to break down the existing
30 Although I feel that much has still to be known and discussed with regard to
Shaull’s life and theology vis-a-vis his Brazilian experience, I leave this task for a future
work.
31A good collection of essays which include Ecumenical, Evangelical and
Pentecostal voices was put together by Guillermo Cook. Guillermo Cook (ed.), New
Face of the Church in Latin America: Between Tradition and Change (Maryknoll, NY.:
Orbis Books, 1994).
96
barriers among these groups, so that they can together expand their moral
communities, leaving their parochial moral standards to include one another.32
An Overview of Shaull’s Theology
Shaull never systematized his theological thinking into a new theology,
although he pointed to new forms of doing theology.33 His main contributions to
the development of a Brazilian theology and ethics can be seen in the way he
responded to the new challenges brought to him by the historical situation in
which he was immersed. That way of responding theologically to the reality
around him became a reference to the young Protestants who were getting
involved in the new social movements emerging in Brazil during the 1950s.
Shaull contrasted the church-centeredness of the kind of Protestantism that
was predominant in Brazil at that point with an openness to look for the meaning
32 Peter Paris, “Expanding and Enhancing Moral Communities: The Task of Christian
Social Ethics,” in Issues of Justice: Social Sources and Religious Meanings, edited by
Roger D. Hatch and Warren R. Copeland (Macon, GA.: Mercer University Press, 1988),
111-124 (121-2).
33 Rubens M. Bueno argues that Shaull never developed a systematic theology, first
because he was always concerned with responding to the next challenge—and how it
will alter our thinking—and, second, because, a la Bonhoeffer, he understood that ours
is a position of insecurity and uncertainty. For Shaull, the starting point for theological
reflection is the inescapable involvement, as Christians, in the struggles of daily human
life. The challenges of concrete historical situations lead us to deal with questions to
which there are not firm answers. All this made Shaull always open to change. Bueno
recalls an encounter with Shaull, when he told his beloved teacher that he was taking his
thinking to the Bible School classes of a Pentecostal church in the neighborhood. Shaull,
then, turned to him and asked: ‘What thinking?” That would at most be what he had
thought at one time in his life. Shaull was always looking around to the new challenges
and asking, “Then, what now? What are we to do before this situation?” He did that all
the way through the end. See Rubens M. Bueno, “Ah, Ah! Bern, E Entao?... Como, a Ver,
Richard Shaull Pensava e Agia,” Religiao e Sociedade 23/special issue (2003): 95-96.
97
of God’s action in the world, in the midst of complex historical events. In
addition, he understood that the ecumenical movement should strive for the unity
of all peoples, instead of the unity of the church alone.34 Therefore, he was aware
of the fact that dialogue with other cultures and between the church and the
larger society was crucial to the ecumenical movement in both Brazil and
elsewhere. As Esdras Costas puts it, Shaull was “always in dialogue.”35
Shaull was able, thus, to overcome the artificial divisions between church and
society. According to Rubem Cesar Fernandes, sociologist and leader of social
movements in Rio de Janeiro, Shaull was someone who paid close attention to
what was going on around him, and was always open to a face-to-face dialogue
with the people of every group he engaged.36 Because of this constant openness
and profound dialogue with the reality he was immersed in, Shaull was able to
understand the Brazilian point of view and produce theological knowledge from
that socio-historical location.37
Although there are many who admire his thought and legacy in Latin America,
there is no a ‘Shaullian’ theological school. What one can find are some topics
34 For Shaull, “the ecumenical movement cannot be restricted to its institutional,

formal and theoretical facet. In the complexity of history, God has been speaking to all
from within the diversity of cultures and through the many forms of believing.” See Jether
P. Ramalho, “Buscando Novidades no Trabalho do Espirito,” Religiao e Sociedade,
23/special issue (2003): 69-70). Shaull was a precursor of what has been called base
ecumenism in Latin America, in contrast with institutional ecumenism.
35 Esdras Borges Costa, “Relembrando Richard Shaull,” ReligiSo e Sociedade,

23/special issue (2003): 67-68.
36 Undated interview quoted by Eduardo G. Farias in F6 e Compromisso, 145.
37 Ibid., 146.
98
that pervaded his theologizing. Some people have identified him as “liberation
theology’s grandfather;”38 others as the “prophet of revolution.”39 However,
neither liberation nor revolution encompasses his theological thinking. These
were themes he engaged in a determined point of his journey. As he moved on
and found new realities and new challenges, he was able to change his language
and continue his theologizing. Throughout his life, he dialogued with many
different social realities and peoples, and it was in the midst of these dialogues
that Shaull theologized. His theology, then, is dialogical. The only constant
element in the theological development of Shaull throughout his life was a
continuous openness to understand what the Spirit of God was saying and doing
among the poor peoples of the world. For him, the Christian call is to join God’s
action in the frontiers of social change. 40
The main conversation partners of Shaull during his life and ministry were the
poor, whose appeal demanded from him a praxis of revolution and liberation.
From his first encounter with the Latin American poor, in Colombia, in 1942, to
the end of his life, he privileged the poor as the main bearers of God’s word to
38Waldo Cesar, interview by author, tape recording, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 18 July
2003.
39 Reynaldo Leao Neto, “Richard Shaull,” 83.

40 Revolution was not a strict category for Shaull. It was the category he needed to be
able to dialogue with the needs, challenges and ideologies of a certain ideology, in a
certain period of history. See Richard Shaull, Surpreendido Pela Graga, 196.
99
the rest of the world, and sought to listen to what God was saying to him
through the poor.41
In Brazil, he was the first Protestant to engage seriously a group of Roman
Catholics in continuous and serious conversation 42 He also engaged
communism, adopting their dearest word—revolution—into his own vocabulary,
and giving it theological meaning.43 Shaull also engaged the Christian Base
Communities that emerged in Latin America during the 1970s and 1980s.44
Finally, at the end of his life, he engaged Pentecostalism, recognizing that
through the Pentecostal poor God was speaking to the historical churches.45
Shaull is a good exemplar, and a good partner of dialogue for the three faces
of Brazilian Protestantism, which are also daily facing the poor in Brazil. For the
Ecumenical face, Shaull is a natural conversation partner, since he was an
41 Shaull’s was a theology that “engages in a dialogue with the context in which it
participates, be they religious, cultural, sociopolitical, or economic aspects.” Nantawan B.
Lewis, “Introduction,” in Revolution of Spirit, 1-4 (4).
42See Richard Shaull, Surpreendido Pela Graga, 171. In a context marked by a

strong anti-Cathoiic feeling as that of Brazilian Protestantism, it was revolutionary to
establish conversations and collaboration with Dominicans. Waldo Cesar affirms that the
anti-Catholicism among Brazilian EvangMcos was so strong that in none of the
preparatory consultations for the Northeastern Conference promoted by the Sector of
Social Responsibility of the Church had the CEB—the ecumenical Protestant organism
of the time—permitted the presence of Roman Catholics. As he says, “Marxists, yes;
Catholics, no.” See Waldo Cesar, “Church and Society—Or Society and Church?” In
Revolution of Spirit: Ecumenical Theology in Global Context. Essays in Honor of Richard
Shaull, ed. Nantawan B. Lewis (Grand Rapids, Ml.: W. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
1998), 133-148 (138).
43 Ibid., 196.
44 Richard Shaull, “The Christian Base Communities and the Ecclesia Reformata
Semper Reformanda,” Princeton Seminary Bulletin , 12/2 (1991), 201-213.
45See Richard Shaull, “The Pentecostal Appeal to the Poor,” Church and Society 86
(March-April 1996): 49-55.
100
important actor of this movement in the 1950s and early 1960s. For the
Pentecostal face, he also becomes a natural conversational partner, due to the
work he did in the last part of his life and ministry among the poor Pentecostals in
Rio de Janeiro.
Shaull is also a conversation partner for the Evangelical face for two main
reasons. First, the progressive Evangelical movement emerged as a response to
the challenges made by both the Ecumenical and the liberationist movement in
Brazil, in the early 1960s.46 From a reactionary beginning, the Evangelical face
has moved into a more consistent dialogue with other movements in the last two
decades,47 and has adopted some of their terminology into its own vocabulary.48
If one takes into consideration that Shaull’s theology and ethics was influential in
the beginning of both the Ecumenical and the liberationist movements that
46See Samuel Escobar, Changing Tides: Latin America & World Mission Today
(Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 2002), 112.
47 In the last Latin American Congress of Evangelization, which took place in 2000, in
Quito, Ecuador, this dialogue was made more explicit, as members of the Latin
American Council of Churches, from a more ecumenical inclination, were invited to
contribute with papers for the congress, and to dialogue with more evangelical
theologians from the FTL. See, for instance, the important work that came out of these
efforts, Unidad y Diversidad del Protestantismo Latinoamericano: El Testimonio
Evang6lico Hacia el Tercer Milenio: Palabra, Espiritu y Misidn edited by Jose Miguez
Bonino (Buenos Aires: Kairos, 2002).
48An emphasis on social justice, social transformation, a theological emphasis on the

Kingdom of God as the basis for the struggle for justice, is present in several writings of
this movement. See, for instance, Orlando Costas, The Church and Its Mission: A
Shattering Critique from the Third World (Wheaton, II.: Tyndale House Publishers, 1976)
In several of his writings, Costas, one of the main theologians of the FTL, makes
numerous references to Rubem Alves, and some times direct references to Shaull (See
especially Orlando Costas, Theology of the Crossroads in Contemporary Latin America:
Missiologyin Mainline Protestantism, 1969-1974 (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1976). One can
deduce, then, that this evangelical theological movement in Latin America was in
conversation with Shaull, or with those who Shaull directly inspired and influenced.
101
provoked an Evangelical response, one can conclude that Shaull might also
be a good conversational partner for the Evangelical face of Brazilian
Protestantism.
Furthermore, Shaull never gave up entirely the evangelical faith in which he
was nurtured both during his childhood and during his youth.49 Although, giving
different meanings to old words, Shaull kept using important words for the
Evangelical movement in his theological language to the end of his life. For
instance, Shaull always emphasized the need for a Biblical faith, and appealed to
“biblical authority,” without being any close to a fundamentalist understanding of
that term. Shaull also spoke of “discipleship”50 as an important component of
being a Christian—another dear word for many Evangelicals in Brazil. Finally,
throughout his life, and more emphatically at the end of his life, Shaull used the
word “conversion” very often, to speak of spiritual transformations he underwent
throughout his life, as well as of spiritual transformations that Christianity should
experience to be relevant to the contemporary world.51
49 During this period, Shaull affirms that his experience of reading the Bible led him to
conclude that he could be a disciple of Christ only if he offered to Him all his life and
energies. The intensity of this experience in his adolescence strongly affected Shaull’s
way to deal with all difficulties he faced in his life. The kind of vocabulary used by Shaull
to speak of this experience is of evangelical nature, being close to what in evangelical
churches one calls a personal testimony. Richard Shaull, Surpreendido Pela Graga, 22.
50 Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s short books The Cost of Discipleship and Life Together made
an indelible impression on him, offering to him a spiritual language to respond to the
need of what meant to be a faithful Christian in the social context he found in Latin
America. As Shaull recognized, these books occupied a central place in his spiritual
journey, and offered a crucial contribution to the development of his spiritual life. See
Richard Shaull, Surpreendido Pela Graga, 88.
51 See, for instance, Richard Shaull, “The Third Conversion,” The Other Side 33/2
(1997):32-34.
102
In order to offer some organization to Shaull’s theological thinking without
violating his unsystematic theologizing—a characteristic that is also common to
Latin American theologians— I will focus on change, organizing his theological
trajectory in terms of three main turns, which he referred to as conversions.
Significant Encounters and Conversions
Henceforth, I will point out three significant encounters that shaped ShaulPs
theological reflection, and which represent metaphorically important turns of the
Evang&ico church in Latin America. In his latest writings, Shaull referred to
these encounters as conversions or spiritual transformations that deepened his
faith. I will pay special attention to his encounter with Pentecostalism, a turn that
he called “the third conversion.”
Shaull’s First Conversion
Although Shaull never offered many details about what should be called
the first conversion, it is logical to assume that by that Shaull was talking about
his first encounter with God, as well as with the Protestant faith. Shaull’s life was
profoundly marked from beginning to end by a strong belief in the sovereignty of
a God who is the only absolute, and who judges all other circumstances of life—
religious, social, political, ecclesiastical, and ideological, for example—as relative
before this Absolute.52 Following what Paul Tillich called the Protestant principle,
52 Reynaldo F. Leao Neto, “Richard Shaull: O Profeta da Revolugao,” 104.
103
Shaull believed that because God is sovereign, everything else should be
submitted to critique and protest, including the Protestant church itself.53 It is
possible, then, to understand all the experiences that contributed to the
development of this Protestant aspect of ShaulPs theology as constituents of this
first conversion to the Protestant or prophetic principle.
From the time of his youth, Shaull lived a religious life in which each
experience and each encounter with new realities was understood as an
encounter with God. Shaull’s encounter with his parents’ Calvinism gave him the
initial basis for the cultivation of a faith in the sovereignty of God, mentioned
above. His own encounter with the Bible, in the beginning of his adolescence,
produced in him a deep understanding of Jesus’ radical call to discipleship - that
is, Jesus’ teachings which contrasted a life of love with a self-centered life of
greed and egoism.54 Shaull’s encounter with some material deprivation in his
childhood opened his eyes to the reality of poverty in the world, and challenged
him to dedicate his whole life to transforming the structures that created social
injustice. His encounter in college with the Brethren and the Mennonites taught
him about the importance of conceiving the church as a community rather than
as an institution. Also during these years, Shaull was influenced by the study of
53 For Reynaldo F. Leao Neto, what is behind Shaull’s entire thought and action is his
absolute faithfulness to the “Protestant principle,” also called “prophetic principle.”
Because of God’s sovereignty, all things else are subject to critique and protest. Ibid.,
107.
54 Richard Shaull, Surpreendido Pela Graga, 18.
104
sociology, which would help him later to appreciate and analyze the economic,
political and social structures of life.
At the age of eighteen, as a student at Princeton Theological Seminary,
Shaull’s Protestant faith was significantly transformed and deepened as he
encountered three thinkers whose life and work would become profoundly
influential to him, namely John Mackay—the President of the Seminary and a
former missionary to Latin America— Emil Brunner, and Josef Hromadka.55 From
Mackay, Shaull learned that his intellectual and spiritual journeys could not exist
apart from each other. Mackay also helped him to understand that the nature of
Christian faith is such that it inevitably leads to action.56
As he encountered with the already famous Swiss theologian Emil Brunner,
Shaull was able to re-elaborate the Reformed faith of his youth rather than give it
up in light of new intellectual challenges. Brunner’s theology reinforced Shaull’s
conviction that the supreme reality at the heart of the universe is the Grace of
God, .i.e., God’s presence and activity in the midst of human life and history.57
That conviction would lead Shaull to see human actions as being actions in
response to the loving actions of God in human history.
Nevertheless, no one was more influential to him during that time than Czech
theologian Josef Hromadka. Hromadka’s theology offered Shaull the tools he
55 Ibid., 28, 29.
56 Ibid., 31.
57 Ibid., 29.
105
needed to understand the crisis of Western civilization as well as to engage
theologically the emergent philosophical and social forces of the time.
However, the most profound mark of Hromadka’s influence upon Shaull can
be seen in his understanding of the central place of eschatology in Biblical and
theological thought. From Hromadka Shaull learned that one could better
understand the struggles of life in the tension with “what is going to be.” We can
act more responsibly in the world when guided by a vision of the things that can
most contribute to its future transformation.58
This eschatological emphasis became one of the primary marks of ShaulPs
theology and thinking throughout his life. It allowed Shaull to understand that the
presence and action of God’s redemptive nature in historical situations compel us
to perceive it and respond to the immediate surrounding situations. Because of
this emphasis, some people referred to Shall as “the prophet of the future.”59
Rubem Alves wrote the following words, as he remembered Shaull soon after his
death:
Prophets are not like clairvoyants who announce the future that is
going to happen. Prophets are like poets, who picture the future
that may happen. Prophets suggest a road. Richard Shaull spoke
of futures that we had never dreamed of. He was able to see what
no one else was seeing at that time.60 [translation is mine]
58 Ibid., 30.
59 Reynaldo F. L. Neto, “Richard Shaull,” 105.
60 Rubem Alves, “Su Cadaver Estaba Lleno,” 92.
106
Towards the end of his life Shaull continued to see the Gospel of Jesus
Christ as “the good news of tomorrow.”61 It was this feature of his theology that
made it sound subversive and dangerous. As Alves affirms, Shaull challenged all
of our certainties and prohibitions.62 To see the world eschatologically meant for
Shaull that, even in the midst of all kinds of problems there is never a dead-end.
There are always new possibilities of life.63
The centrality of eschatology in Shaull’s thought was deepened even more by
the theological language he later acquired as he interacted with Paul Lehmann,
under whom he studied between 1950 and 1952.64 Shaull affirmed that Lehmann
made him understand that the neo-orthodox theology that he learned at seminary
could become a powerful tool to analyze social changes that were happening,
and to participate in these changes. “For [Lehmann], the Bible offers a messianic
vision of a world in transformation. Therefore, theology must be done vis-a-vis
the coming of God’s Kingdom.”65 In an open letter written to Lehmann, Richard
Shall and Barbara Hall, who also served as a missionary in Brazil, say:
61 Richard Shaull, “Responding to the Challenge: Renewal and Re-Creation,” in

Freedom and Discipleship: Liberation Theology in an Anabaptist Perspective, edited by
Daniel S. Schipani (New York: Orbis Book, 1989), 147-158 (150).
62 Rubem Alves, “Su Cadaver Estaba Lleno...,” 91.
63 Eduardo G. Faria, Fe e Compromisso, 91.
65 Richard Shaull, “Entre Jesus e Marx: Reflexoes Sobre os Anos que Passei no
Brasil,” in De Dentro do FuracSo, 183-210 (188).
107
Especially in the Brazilian context, but not only there, your
eschatological perspective helped us to look for order and
synthesis on the other side of change and confusion. It was
possible for us to search without fear or defensiveness for
opportunities to witness and contribute something positive in a
highly uncertain situation, because we believe with you that God
was taking us somewhere. We were able to accept risks, make
mistakes, and above all sit loose in the chaotic state of things
primarily because the eschatological dimension of faith was opened
up to us by you.66
Thus, under Lehmann’s influence, Shaull began to see the church as that
koinonia in the world where Christ is being formed. Lehmann was able to show
him that this koinonia is the main locus of the apostolic-prophetic witness as well
as the creative reality of Christ’s presence in the world.67 In his experience as a
missionary in Colombia, and later in Brazil, Shaull often did not find this
apostolic-prophetic witness in the “ecclesia”—meaning the ecclesiastical
structures. So he began to look for other kinds of worldly koinonias where Christ
was also being formed. He found them in the Brazilian student movement, in the
labor movements, and in other social movements that he identified with “the
church in the modern Diaspora.”68
Shaull’s Second Conversion
66 Barbara Hall & Richard Shaull, From Somewhere Along the Road,” Theology
Today 29/1: 86-111 (88).
67 Ibid.
68 Richard Shaull, “The Form of the Church in the Modem Diaspora,” The Princeton
Theological Bulletin 57/1(1963): 3-18 (3).
108
Shaull’s “second conversion” was related to this awakening to the nature
of the church as existing in what he called the modern Diaspora. In 1942, when
he first arrived in Colombia, Shaull had his first dramatic encounter with extreme
poverty and oppression. On his first night in Colombia, as he walked to his hotel,
he passed by numerous children sleeping on the streets who were using old
newspapers to protect themselves from the cold of the night.69 This was a
dramatic experience and began an encounter with poverty and deprivation that
affected the rest of his life. By becoming fully immersed in the Latin American
reality, Shaull could get a close-up view of the people’s suffering -suffering
which was the result of social injustice and exploitation. In his encounter with that
reality his ears were open anew to the Scriptures’ passionate cry for justice.
Shaull referred to this encounter as a “second conversion,” which he
described as a “conversion to solidarity with the poor.”70 This conversion
transformed his theology. It was the first great Latin American contribution to his
theological and spiritual development. It led him to pay special attention to this
context of injustice and oppression in which he was now immersed, thus
deepening and reinterpreting some of the things he had learned in his prior
encounters.71
69 Eduardo G. Faria, Fe e Compromisso, 51.
70 Richard Shaull, “The Third Conversion,” 32.
71 Richard Shaull, “Latin American Theology of Liberation,” unpublished lecture, 1986.

(Accessed in December 2003, Princeton Theological Seminary, Special Collections,
Richard Shaull’s archives, box 5).
109
Although the time Shaull spent in Colombia was very significant, it was
during his encounter with the Brazilian students in the 1950s that Shaull was able
to play the role not only of a prophet, but also of a theologian who would become
influential to an entire generation of young Brazilian thinkers. During that period
Shaull became the main organic intellectual of a Protestant movement
progressive and ecumenical in character, a movement being formed primarily
among young university students and seminarians.
This movement flourished until it was harshly suppressed in the early 1960's
by both the military rulers in Brazil and by conservative elements within the
Protestant churches. In these groups of students Shaull envisioned a new form
for Christian communities operating along a new frontier—the frontier of social
transformation.72 Shaull understood that as the Student Christian Movement
developed alternative koinonias in Brazil, it risked the possibility of becoming the
“church of tomorrow.”73
As time went by, Shaull expanded his field of action by creating interactions
and developing new dialogues with different groups. His theology of social
change was now being developed in dialogue with Christians and non-Christians.
In so doing, he was acting in accord with his early belief that Christians are called
to follow God’s actions in the frontiers of social change. His Reformed heritage,
nevertheless, enabled him to be critical in his interaction with all kinds of
73 Ibid., 146. See also Richard Shaull, “Nossa Tarefa Imediata em Face da Crise
Iminente,” in De Dentro do Furacao, 167-173.
110
movements and ideologies. He emphasized the need for a constant dialogue
between theology and political ideologies, but never desired a conflation of the
two.74
A good example of this position can be seen in the way Shaull used the term
revolution, a key concept in his theology. Shaull used this word as a theological
category, understanding it in light of his eschatological emphasis as well as in the
light of the radical transcendence of God, an emphasis which characterized his
entire thought. By using the word ‘revolution’ within this theological framework,
he found a common theme that facilitated the connection of the Christian faith
with the historical situation that Christians were experiencing in the particular
context of the struggle for structural transformation in Latin America.75
In this way, Christians could get involved with secular movements struggling
for social change, offering some contribution in their own terms, instead of
passively accepting the original logic and orientation of Marxist ideologies and
strategies. By conceiving of political involvement along these lines, Shaull
believed that “we did not have to lose our Christian identity, nor had we to accept
their plans for action; we were rather forced to deepen our knowledge and
develop a more critical perception of what we were doing.”76
In that effervescent period in Brazilian history, Shaull’s contributions to Latin
American theology can be perceived as daring anticipations of themes that would
74 Ibid., 204.
75 Ibid., 197.
76 Ibid., 201.
Ill
become central to the agenda of the field of Latin American theology many
years later. Because of his constant emphasis on the eschatological burst of
God’s kingdom and action in our lives and history, Shaull viewed the nature of
theology “as being a kind of dynamic thought in permanent process of re-creation,
looking for a response to the God who comes to us from the future.”77
This vision kept him open-minded throughout his life to the creative action of
the Holy Spirit in human history. As the ecclesiastical structures seemed unable
to move as fast as was needed, Shaull started to affirm that the Church was in
need of experiencing resurrection, and that would happen in the form of
Diaspora.78 Pressed by the plots against him in the most conservative sectors of
the Brazilian Presbyterian church, Shaull was forced to return to the U.S. in 1962.
He took a position at Princeton Theological Seminary, and was prohibited by the
new U.S.-backed right-wing military government in Brazil from returning to that
country for twenty years. So, only in the 1980's did Shaull have his first face-to-
face encounter with the Brazilian base communities, which had spread
throughout the continent during the two previous decades. He understood those
new communities that flourished out of liberation theology as a new reformation
taking place in the Church—as the harbingers of a new theology giving birth to a
new church.79 Shaull also referred to his encounter with these poor base
77 Ibid., 193.
78 Richard Shaull, “The form of the Church in the Modem Diaspora,” Princeton
Seminary Bulletin, 57/3 (1964): 3-18.
79 Richard Shaull, Heralds of a New Reformation (New York: Orbis Books, 1984), 119.
112
communities as a second conversion. In an evaluation of Latin American
liberation theology he wrote:
I cannot escape the fact that the theology I am examining confronts

me and calls me into question. Because of its message, I have
been compelled to read the Bible in a new way and hear a word I
had not heard before. My eyes have been opened to see new
dimensions of the Gospel message about God’s concern for the
poor and Christ’s proclamation of the advent of a kingdom in which
the poor and marginal will have a new life and a special place. My
relationship with God has been enriched and transformed, and I
have been forced to hear a new call to obedience. 80
Shaull used to refer to the base communities as a new expression of the
Protestant Reformation’s motto, ecclesia reformats semper reformanda. He
affirmed that his Calvinist heritage led him “to believe that the church, in order to
be faithful to this calling, must always be open to renewal and willing to respond
time and again, in new ways, to the guidance of the Holy Spirit in new historical
situations.”81
Therefore, for Shaull, the church is being called over and over again to read
the signs of the times. From his first encounter with the Latin American poor, in
the 1940's and 1950's, to his encounter with the poor base communities in the
1980’s, Shaull experienced a progressive conversion to the poor. He moved from
a solidarity with the poor, in the 1940's, to a continuous struggle for social justice
in the years that followed, to a realization regarding the hermeneutical privilege of
the poor—which became mature in the 1970's and 1980's—that made him
believe that the poor were the main theological actors to whom the professional
80 Richard Shaull, “Responding to the Challenge,”148.
81 Richard Shaull, “The Christian Base Communities,” op. cit., 201.
113
theologians should listen. The encounter with the Latin American poor made
a major impact upon Shaull’s thought and life. The transformation that came from
that encounter allowed him to reshape his theological thinking in new and
creative ways.
Shaull’s Third Conversion
While the emphases that characterize Shaull’s first two ‘conversions’ are well
known, the later experiences that coalesced in what he called the ‘third
conversion’ have been largely ignored. As one reads Shaull’s writings from the
mid-1990s to the time of his death, it becomes clear that one last encounter was
very significant to him, his encounter with Pentecostalism. Whereas many
scholars have seen the boom of Pentecostalism in Latin America as a response
that replaces the emphases given by liberation theologians in the previous
decades, Shaull, on the contrary, understood Pentecostalism as a complement
or radicalization of an important tenet of liberation theology, namely the
hermeneutical privilege of the poor.82
In 1996, Shaull wrote an article in which he affirmed that liberation theology
was alive and well in Latin America.83 On the other hand, he recognized that it
was going through a process of renewal, which asked for more participation of
82 Richard Shaull, “Social Scientists and Theologians Look at Pentecostalism in Latin

America,” Lecture at the University of Florida (February, 1994, accessed by the author in
December 2003, Shaull Archives, Special Collections, Luce Library, Princeton
Theological Seminary, Box 6), 10.
83 Richard Shaull, “New Voices, New Visions: Liberation Theology is Alive and Well,”
The Other Side 32/1:48-50.
114
those traditionally marginalized and excluded from theological elaborations.
According to him, a new generation of liberation theologians in Latin America did
not want simply to be with the poor and do theology for them. Instead, they
wanted theology to rise from the poor themselves. Looking at this situation,
Shaull noticed that new theological voices were arising in Latin America: the
voices of women, peasants, indigenous peoples, and Pentecostals.84
Shaull’s earlier encounters with the Christian base communities had definitely
convinced him of the hermeneutical advantage of the perspective of the poor,
and now he wanted to carry this principle to its ultimate consequences.85 His
encounter with the base communities struck him because here he saw in those
poor and almost illiterate people an amazing capacity to understand the depth of
the Biblical message. Shaull decided that it was indispensable for him to meet
with those poor communities regularly so that he could really understand what
God was doing and how God was trying to address him through those
communities. He expected that these encounters would deepen his faith and
teach him the real meaning of Christ’s discipleship.86
Later on, during two years of field research among Pentecostal churches in
the shantytowns of Rio de Janeiro, Shaull approached these Pentecostal
84 ibid., 48.
85 Richard Shaull & Waldo C6sar, Pentecostalism and the Future of the Christian
Churches: Promises, Limitations, Challenges (Grand Rapids, Ml.: W. B. Eerdmans,
2000), 129.
86 Richard Shaull, “Renewed by the Spirit,” The Other Side, 34 [journal on-line]
(November/December 1998), 75. Internet; available from
www.theotherside.org/archive/nov-dec98/shaull.html.. accessed 3 September 2003.
115
churches and people as someone who was convinced not only that the Spirit
of God was acting among them, but also that God wanted to address other
Christians through them as w e ll87 As he met with them, he felt that he was
stepping on a holy ground, in a new frontier where God was doing something
new.
That does not mean, however, that his approach was uncritical. He realized
that the things he was seeing among these churches were part of a new
expression of Christian faith that was significantly different from Christian faith as
it had been defined by the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century.
However, “if developed in faithfulness to the biblical witness, this vision and
experience of Christian faith...could offer a compelling response to the present
crisis of civilization, especially to the vast numbers of poor and excluded people
87 During an interview with Brazilian Pentecostal pastor Carlos Boucinha, of the Igreja
Assembleia de Deus Betesda, in Fortaleza, he told me he had met Richard Shaull in
Costa Rica, during a Symposium on Pentecostalism. Boucinha recalled that Shaull was
already ill when they met, and he, as a Pentecostal pastor, asked permission to pray for
him. Shaull kneeled, closed his eyes, and Boucinha made a healing prayer, which was
followed devotedly by Shaull, who from time to time whispered ‘amen!’ ( Carlos Queiroz
and Carlos Boucinha, interview by the author, tape recording, Fortaleza, Brazil 31July
2002). Waldo Cesar, Shaull’s research partner and co-writer, also told me that he was
impressed with Shaull’s immersion in the Pentecostal services they attended during their
research on Pentecostalism, in Rio de Janeiro. According to Cesar, besides doing
interviews, they used the participant-observer method and attended several Pentecostal
services. However, he noticed that Shaull had a greater degree of involvement and
participation in those services than he himself, as a Lutheran, could have. ( Waldo Cesar,
interview by author, tape recording, 18 July 2002).These two stories support the several
statements in which Shaull affirms the need for non-Pentecostal Christians to engage
the experience and life of Pentecostals, “allowing ourselves to be called into question by
their witness and thus transformed.” See Richard Shaull and Waldo Cesar,
Pentecostalism and the Future, 121. He was serious about this openness to the
Pentecostal Other.
116
victimized by it.”88 Thus, he challenged the historical churches to engage
Pentecostalism in an open dialogue. The terms of that dialogue would be the
same he used to determine the character of his earlier conversations with
Marxism, during the 1950's and 1960's. In other words, there should be sufficient
openness and humbleness to learn from the Pentecostals as well as to discern
what God wants to say to non-Pentecostals through them. On the other hand,
there should be enough critical reflection to allow for re-orientation, re-creation,
and even protest, when necessary. For him, “the future of the older Protestant
churches may depend upon their ability to relate creatively to these [Pentecostal]
developments.”89 Shaull continued to be faithful to the Protestant principle,
amidst all his encounters and conversions.
In his contacts with Brazilian Pentecostals, Shaull realized that Pentecostals
had managed to touch the lives of the poor in a deeper way than the base
communities, because they spoke a language known by those living in that
context, and offered them a sense of dignity that they had never experienced
before. Instead of stressing a preferential option for the poor, Pentecostals often
speak about rejecting poverty.90
In contrast with the Evangelical churches, they are not so concerned with the
right doctrine, but focus instead upon a living and dynamic relationship with the
88 Richard Shaull, “Renewed by the Spirit,” 71.
89 Richard Shaull, “Latin America: Three Responses to a New Historical Situation,”

Interpretation 46/3 (1992): 261-270 (270).
90 Richard Shaull and Waldo Cesar, Pentecostalism, 129.
117
Holy Spirit, which makes the power of God visible to them in daily lives.
Shaull was aware that despite the almost fifty years of struggle against social
injustice and poverty in Latin America, more and more people continued to be
victimized by harsh living conditions, unemployment, homelessness, and lack of
decent health care, security and even food. He understood that human suffering
and social injustice had escalated to such a degree that “our future may depend
upon nothing less than the reconstruction of human life and community at the
most basic level.”91
In the Pentecostal churches he visited in Rio de Janeiro, Shaull realized that
the people who were most victimized by this erosion of human community had
found a profound faith capable of awakening in them a hope for the future, as
they experienced God’s power in their daily lives. Although they believe that the
world is inhabited by demons which cause the evils that they face, these
Pentecostals believe also that they are safely protected by the hand of God. With
this faith, they become able to create an oasis of peace amidst a reality full of
violence. The faith in the living presence of the Holy Spirit has helped many of
these victims of a social order that failed them to reconstruct their lives and
relationships.92
Shaull invites non-Pentecostal Christians to open themselves to Pentecostal
spirituality in a way that would allow them to connect with the symbolic world of
the poorer classes, which is impregnated with Pentecostal symbolism and

921will return to this topic in chapter 6.
118
expressions. If they do this, they might discover new ways of building
solidarity with the needy and of deepening their own faith. Shaull felt that
mainstream Christians are being challenged to let themselves be “surprised by
discoveries of how the Holy Spirit works when an old order is breaking down and
a new order has not yet emerged.”93 On the other hand, Shaull was also
convinced that in this Pentecostal/non-Pentecostal encounter, the non-
Pentecostals could contribute new theological ways of framing the experience of
empowerment by the Spirit lived out in these Pentecostal communities. The call
for a ‘third conversion,’ then, is at heart an invitation to an encounter with the
‘Other”. The ‘Other’ whose face mainline Protestants should now recognize is the
Pentecostal Other.
New Frontiers of Social Change
As I have demonstrated, from beginning to end Shaull sought to discern the
ways God is acting now, and what God is calling us to do today. It is in this
context that one finds him speaking of ‘conversions’ as an analogy for the diverse
transforming encounters that he had throughout his journey. Richard Shaull left,
as part of his legacy, a challenge to nurture this capacity for allowing oneself be
converted by one’s constant encounters with a God that is manifest in the faces,
actions, practices and beliefs of those who live on the underside of history.
Throughout his life, he always engaged the ‘Other’ in a serious and active way.
Shaull, however, never gave in to a simplistic adhesion to, or integration with, the
119
‘Other’. On the contrary, because he respected the Other’s otherness, and
the Divine presence in the ‘Other’, he engaged all others he encountered with an
open and critical mind, never passively.
That is one point that has exposed Shaull to criticism. His openness, for
instance, to develop such an intense conversation with socialist revolutionaries in
Brazil led many to think of him as giving in to Marxist ideology. Shaull, however,
although recognizing the need for Christians to learn from the challenges posed
by Marxist thought, never accepted it uncritically. In his last writings, Shaull
risked to be misunderstood, as inviting all Christians to become Pentecostals.
The fact that he began to use Pentecostal categories and that he began to
appreciate Pentecostal liturgies and language did no mean that he was
becoming a Pentecostal himself. He just understood that Pentecostals are in the
new frontiers of social change, where God is acting today, and if one wants to
learn what God is doing among the poor these days, one needs to listen to them.
Shaull’s theological thinking provides an interface for the three Evang&ico
faces that I will present next, because of his openness to critical dialogue with
different partners, and his capacity of learning from them, and being transformed
by those learning experiences. The three conversions experienced by Shaull
provide important points of contact not only for the three faces, but also between
them and the developments taking place within Brazilian progressive Catholicism
in the past four decades.
Shaull’s ecumenical mind, his vision of a base ecumenism (turned to the
world), his openness to new forms of divine action in the world (as irruptions of
the Kingdom in the world), and his radical commitment to the hermeneutical
privilege of the poor; all this makes Shaull a good exemplar and conversational
partner for the three Evangelico faces and their responses to the plight of the
poor. His learning and transformative experiences in his encounter with
Pentecostalism challenge non-Pentecostal Christians in Brazil to seek for new
levels of dialogue and engagement with the Pentecostal poor.
By using Shaull as an interface, I hope to provide ways for bringing the three
faces into a dialogue which will offer some key elements for the development of
an Evangelico progressive social ethics in Brazil. I will continue to disclose the
impact of Shaull’s thinking for Brazilian Evangelicos, as I present the three
Evangelico responses to the plight of the poor in Brazil.
CHAPTER FOUR
THE ECUMENICAL FACE: BRAZILIAN ECUMENICAL PROTESTANTS MEET
THE POOR
This chapter offers a description of the first face of Brazilian Protestantism,
the ecumenical face, and its response to the encounter with poverty and injustice
in Brazil. It is an overview of the first attempt from a Protestant perspective to
develop a Christian social ethics in Brazil, during the 1950s and early 1960s.
As I describe the historical development of the Ecumenical face of Brazilian
Protestantism, I pay special attention to the birth of a movement called Church
and Society, which spread throughout Latin America in the early 1960s. Then, I
show the accomplishments of this movement, showing how it established a new
relationship between Protestantism and the Brazilian society. I follow the
development of the Church and Society movement up to the Northeastern
Conference, in 1963, which marked the climax and the beginning of the fall of
this movement. My analysis of this movement in the 1950s and early 1960s leads
me to affirm that despite its failure to establish itself within the institutional
churches, it has had an enduring impact upon both Brazilian Christianity and
society.
Forced by persecution within the institutional church as well as from the
military rulers, many leaders of the church and society movement moved into the
secular arena helping to found social movements of resistance during Brazil’s 21
121
122
years of military dictatorship.1Therefore, although short-lived within the
institutional church, this movement has left indelible marks on the development of
Brazilian progressive Christianity, both Protestant and Catholic.
As Agemir Dias has noticed, there is an unjustifiable void in the study of the
Ecumenical movement and its.relation with Brazilian Protestantism that needs to
be filled out.2 The ecumenical movement gathered some of the most important
theologians and Christian leaders ever produced in Brazil and offered a relevant
contribution to the construction of contemporary Brazilian society.3
The Origins of Brazilian Ecumenical Protestantism: a Brief Sketch
The Portuguese arrived on the Brazilian coast in 1500 C.E. Along with them
came Christianity, in the form of Roman Catholicism—the religion which was
imposed on those natives who survived the invasion of their lands, and which
held the religious monopoly of the country for almost four hundred years.4
1James N. Green, “Clerics, Exiles and Academics: Opposition to the Brazilian Military
Dictatorship in the United States,” Latin American Politics and Society, 45/1 (2003):87-
117 (93ff).
2Agemir de Carvalho Dias, “O Ecumenismo: Uma 6tica Protestante,” lecture

delivered at the I Simposio Intemacional de Religiao, Religiosidades e Cultura, (Campo
Grande, MS, Brazil: Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso do Sul, 2003), 1.
3 It is worth noting that this is not an in-depth analysis of the ecumenical movement in
Brazil from a Protestant perspective. Such a study could be the topic of an entire
doctoral dissertation. My concern here is simply to present the movement, focusing on
its responses to the situation of social injustice and poverty which it had to deal with in
Brazil.
4Jether P. Ramalho, Pr&tica Educativa e Sociedade: Urn Estudo de Sociologia da

EducagSo (Rio de Janeiro, RJ.: ZAHAR Editores, 1976), 52.
123
Since the sixteenth century, however, some attempts were made to
establish Protestantism in Brazil. The first took place in 1555, as a French
expedition under the command of Nicolau Durand de Villegaignon disembarked
on an island in the Bay of Guanabara to establish a French colony.5 Although the
main motivation of this expedition was economic, Villegaignon convinced his
friend Admiral Coligny, leader of the Huguenots in France, to persuade King
Henry II to finance the expedition, on the grounds that this potential colony, which
they called Antarctic France, would be a place for the Protestants to live and
practice their faith far from the persecution they suffered at home.6 Thus, the first
Protestant worship service in Brazilian lands was held by French Huguenots in
1557; However, that attempt to establish Protestantism in Brazil failed along with
the French colony, which was dismantled by the Portuguese, without leaving
permanent marks of its presence in Brazil.7
The Dutch, who tried to establish colonies in the Northeastern coast, made a
second attempt, on the same lines as the French.8 Also guided by economic
interests, the Dutch organized the First Reformed Church in Brazilian soil by
1625, translated the New Testament into an indigenous language, and published
5Antonio G. Mendonga, O Celeste Porvin A Insergao do Protestantismo no Brasil,

2ed (Sao Paulo, Brazil: ASTE, 1995) 23ff. See also Sandra de F. K. Gusso, “O Inicio do
Protestantismo Historico no Brasil,” Via Teoldgica 1/3 (2001): 73-89 (75).
6Antonio G. Mendonâ, “A History of Christianity in Brazil: An Interpretative Essay,”

International Review of Mission, 85/338 (1996): 366-386 (377).
7See Amy Glassner Gordon, “The First Protestant Missionary Effort: Why Did It Fail?”
International Bulletin of Missionary Research 8/1 (1984):12-18.
8Antonio G. Mendonfa, 0 Celeste Porvir, 24-25.
124
a catechism in Dutch, Portuguese and Tupinamba, one of the local
languages.9 This project failed too, as the joint forces of Portugal and Spain
expelled the Dutch from the Northeastern Brazilian coast, where they had
managed to stay for twenty-four years.10 In both projects, political and economic
interests of the colonizers were accompanied by the ideal of implanting the
Protestant faith in Brazilian lands. After these two attempts, there would be no
Protestant incursion in Brazil for the next 150 years.
Catholicism’s dominance was further cemented when, in 1720, the
Portuguese crown banned anyone who was not at the service of the Catholic
Church or of the Portuguese crown from entering the Brazilian lands.11 Brazil
became completely isolated from the non-Portuguese and non-Catholic world.
The ban on the entrance of Protestants in Brazil ended in 1808, when the
Portuguese royal family led by king D. Jo3o VI, moved to Rio de Janeiro in
search of refuge from the Napoleonic wars.12
During that period, the Portuguese empire temporarily moved its capital to Rio
de Janeiro, and that fact, paradoxically, opened the way for Brazil’s
independence, in 1822. D. Pedro, son of the Portuguese king, became Brazil’s
first emperor, and promoted the immigration of German and Swiss farmers to
solve the problem of the shortage of agricultural labor and the occupation of the
9 Ibid., 25.
10 Ibid.
11 Sandra de F. K. Gusso, “O Inicio do Protestantismo,” 75.
12Antonio G. Mendonpa, “A History of Christianity in Brazil,” 382.
125
empty and unused parts of Brazil’s territory.13 Most of these immigrants were
Lutherans, and helped to develop ethnic-religious communities, which did not
blend with the Brazilian people for centuries. This was the beginning of Brazilian
Lutheranism, and the first permanent establishment of a Protestant church in
Brazilian territory, albeit one restricted to the immigrant community.
In the second half of the nineteenth century, American Protestantism migrated
to Latin America along with the American ‘manifest destiny.’14This ideology
became part of an orchestrated effort to intensify the entrance of ‘enlightened
modernity’ into South America.15 Immigration and the modern education of the
elites were some of the strategies used to achieve this goal.16
13 Ibid.
14For Brazilian Protestant historian Antonio G. Mendonga, the American missions
that established themselves in Brazil had basically two motives: “first, they were
genuinely concerned with evangelization, beginning with the salvation of the individual;
second, they brought with them the ideology of manifest destiny, with its democratic and
republican principles as part of the messianic convictions of the North American nation.”
See Antonio G. Mendonga, “A History of Christianity in Brazil,” 383.
15Waldo Cesar states that the Protestant faith established itself in Brazil as part of a
foreign invasion, with the acquiescence of the Brazilian elites. It brought with it the marks
of sectarianism and individualism that characterized many of the “mother” churches in
the United States, which were sending the missionaries. See Waldo Cesar, “Situagao
Social e Crescimento do Protestantismo na America Latina,” in Protestantismo e
Imperialismo na America Latina, edited by Waldo Cesar (Petropolis, Brazil: Vozes, 1968),
7-36 (12).
16 In Brazil, the immigration of Protestants was encouraged by the Empire, since the
1820s. However, by the 1870s, this encouragement had become part of a twofold
process that aimed not only at bringing the Enlightenment and modernity to the Brazilian
elites, but also at “whitening” the Brazilian population, in order to make a “better
impression” before its European commercial partners. See Thomas Skidmore, Uma
Histdria do Brasil, 4ed (Sao Paulo, Brazil: Paz e Terra, 2003), 112.
126
Although I agree with Miguez Bonino when he affirms that the substratum
of the missionary Protestantism that was brought to Brazil is evangelical piety,17 I
believe that it is necessary to recognize also the presence and impact of
American liberal Protestantism upon Brazilian society. In Brazil, as in most other
Latin American countries, American liberal Protestantism allied itself with the
sectors of the society that impelled the struggle for liberal modernization through
the formation of free associations of various kinds.18 However, the liberal ideal of
transforming Latin American societies through the creation of schools for the
elites ended up failing.19 Instead of liberating the masses, this kind of
Protestantism encouraged Latin Americans to emulate the North-American way
of life. As Rubem Alves has said, “North American Protestantism represents the
implicit utopia of Brazilian Protestantism.”20
According to Camargo, the Protestant religion assumed, during its historical
development in Brazil, the contradictory roles of modernization and conservation
of the status quo.21 For him, the adepts of the Protestant religion have tended to
both support the establishment and play new roles that modify the internal
structures of important institutions such as family and education.
17Jose Miguez Bonino, Faces of Latin American Protestantism, 40. In the next
chapter, I will return to a discussion of Evangelical Protestantism.
18 Ibid., 18.
19Ibid., 17.
20Rubem Alves, Protestantismo e Repressao (Sao Paulo, Brazil: Editora Atica, 1979),
237.
21 Candido Procopio F. de Camargo et al, Catdlicos, Protestantes, Espiritas

(Petropolis, Brazil: Vozes, 1973), 134.
127
Rubem Alves has also suggested that one can interpret Latin American
Protestantism in two different ways: either as a utopian project of liberation and
subversion of the established order or as a covert ideological legitimization of the
status quo.22 That has been the tension experienced even by ecumenical
Protestantism in Brazil.
The latter is the kind of Protestantism that has prevailed in Brazil23 Alves
concluded that the predominant type of Protestantism in Brazil is characterized
by a pietistic spirituality, a literalistic understanding of the Bible, and an intrinsic
individualism.24 According to him, the ethics of this type of Protestantism “is
individual, not social... Social ethics, therefore, is not an essential part of this
Protestant universe.25
In spite of the predominant individualism in the establishment of Brazilian
Protestantism, there was an expectation that the Protestant faith would have a
social impact upon the Brazilian society. Brazilian society was slowly emerging
from its colonial and traditional past, seeking integration in the modern world. In
that context, the arrival of Protestantism meant “a call to change, to
22 Rubem Alves, “Funcion Ideologies y Possibilidades Utopicas del Protestantism

Latinoamericano,” in De La Iglesia y la Sociedad, Rubem Alves et al (Montevideo: Terra
Nueva, 1971), 1-6.
23See Rubem Alves, Protestantismo e Repressao, 216.

24 Ibid., 35-37.
25 Ibid., 216 [translation is mine].
128
transformation, centered in the religious realm, but with repercussions in the
totality of life and society.”26
The Rise of Latin American Ecumenism
Liberal Protestantism saw its own success as the only way for Latin America
to gain true freedom.27 Liberal Protestant missionaries, and some young Latin
American Protestant leaders in the 1930s, “saw Protestantism as the avant-
garde of true democracy, socially progressive, modernizing, and
participatory...The emphasis of the Social Gospel on social redemption and of
the Protestants on personal transformation seemed thus to find their unity.”28
Erasmo Braga (1877-1932) became one of the most important Brazilian
Protestant thinkers and leaders in the first half of the twentieth century.29 Born
26Jose Miguez Bonino, “Historia y Mision,” in Protestantismo y Liberalismo en

America Latina, Jose Miguez Bonino et al (San Jose, Costa Rica: Departamento
Ecumenico de Investigaciones/Seminario Biblico Latinoamericano, 1983), 15-36 (21).
27 This kind of Protestantism is also called historical Protestantism, in Latin America.

See Pablo A. Deiros, “Protestant Fundamentalism in Latin America,” in
Fundamentalisms Observed, edited by Martin E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby (Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press, 1994), 142-196 (149).
26Faces of Latin American, 18.
29 See Julio Andrade Ferreira, O Profeta da Unidade: Erasmo Braga, Uma Vida a
Descoberto (Petropolis, Brazil: Vozes, 1975). Up to the beginning of the twentieth
century, Brazilian Protestantism was in fact led by North American missionaries. Few
Brazilians had played any role of leadership. Even the former Catholic priest Jose
Manoel da Conceigao—the first Brazilian to be ordained as a Presbyterian minister—had
been relegated to the margins by Protestant missionaries at the end of his life. See
Boanerges Ribeiro, O Padre Protestante (Sao Paulo, Brazil: Casa Editora Presbiteriana,
1979). Only in the beginning of the twentieth century, did there emerge a Brazilian
leadership in some Brazilian Protestant churches. The most notorious denominational
national movement at the time took place within the Brazilian Presbyterian church.
Diverging about the leadership role of the missionaries in the Presbyterian Church, and
129
into a Presbyterian family, Braga was a pivotal figure in the ecumenical
movement in Latin America. He was one of the few Brazilian delegates to the
Congress of Panama, which was seminal to the development of Latin American
Protestantism.30
The main purpose of this congress was to motivate Protestant missionaries to
do all in their power to evangelize the intellectual elites in Latin America. There
about the presence of free masons in the church, a group led by Brazilian pastor Carlos
E. Pereira left the Brazilian Presbyterian church to found the Independent Presbyterian
church. Pereira, as most Brazilian Protestants at the time, had a strong anti-Catholic
point of view and was also anti-Masonic. Pereira’s apologetic style contrasted with
Braga’s tolerance towards Catholics and his search for interdenominational cooperation.
Braga raised to the occasion as the most significant ecumenical voice of Brazilian
Protestantism in the first half of the twentieth century. See Julio Andrade Ferreira,
Historia da igreja Presbiteriana do Brasil em Comemoragao ao Seu Primeiro Centenario
(Sao Paulo, Brazil: Casa Editora Presbiteriana, 1959).
30The Congress of Panama was a response to the World Conference of Missions, in

Edinburgh, 1910, as that conference declared Latin America to be a Christian continent
without, therefore, a need for missionary work there. Several North American
missionaries to Latin America, and the Brazilian Presbyterian pastor Alvaro Reis, the
only Latin American present in Edinburgh, as observer, formed a committee and wrote a
manifesto to the churches in the U.S. complaining about their exclusion in the Edinburgh
Conference. Three years later, during the North American Conference of Foreign
Missions, held in New York,. Robert Speer, the secretary for the Presbyterian Foreign
Missions Board, created the Committee of Cooperation to Latin America, which gave
birth to a series of conferences in Latin America that intended to study the identity of
Latin American Protestantism. The first of these meetings was known as the Congress
of Panama, in 1916. The Panama Congress represented a milestone for Latin American
Protestantism in the sense that it instigated the search for a Latin American Protestant
identity and pointed out the need for better knowledge of the Latin American situation.
However, the Latin American portrait that came out of that Congress was distorted and
prejudicial. This was a congress still completely dominated by North American
missionaries and their agencies—only 21 Latin American natives participated as
delegates in the Congress. The official language of the Congress was English. See
Dafne S. Plou, Caminos de Unidad: Itinerario del Dtelogo Ecum&nico en America Latina
1916-1991 (Quito: CLAI, 1994), 7ff; J. Kessler & W. M. Nelson, “Panama 1916 y Su
Impacto Sobre el Protestantismo Latinoamericano,” in Oaxtepec 1978: Unidad y Misidn
en America Latina, edited by CLAI (San Jose, Costa Rica: CLAI, 1980), 11-30; Luiz
Longuini Neto, O Novo Rosto da Missao, op. cit. 92ff; and Luiz Longuini Neto,
“Conferencias Anteriores a Salvador: Dados Historicos,” Tempo e Presenga no. 289
(September/October, 1996), 7-33.
130
was a social interest in this kind of message, but it never took the poor as its
starting point.31 The documents issued in the Congress of Panama portrayed the
Latin American countries as illiterate and ignorant. Underneath, there was the
understanding that the cause of this situation was the Roman Catholic Church,
and that the solution lied in a Protestant education.32
In that context, Braga’s main concerns related to the nature of Brazilian
Protestantism and the foundations of Protestant education in Brazil. For him, the
Protestant faith should be able to combine its elements with some Latin
American ideals in order to become a pivotal agent of social change and a
perpetrator of moral and political progress.33 Therefore, a Protestant formation
was essential, since it would assist people in the development of moral
responsibility in both the individual and social realms. One of Braga’s important
contributions to the development of Brazilian Protestantism was his awareness
that both the individualism and the sectarianism that characterized most of the
Brazilian Protestant churches at the time were problematic for their relation with
the larger Brazilian society, and needed to be overcome. He called the church to
relate to the Brazilian society in all its dimensions:
The tendency to church-centeredness raises a hedge around the

evangelical communities, and this will inevitably result in their
segregation from the national life. Sharing in service to the
31 Waldo Cesar affirms that the activities promoted by the Protestant missions in Latin
America constituted, in fact, a “form of flight from the cultural and social reality of the
continent.” See Waldo Cesar, “Situagao Social e Crescimento do Protestantismo,” 22.
32Luiz Longuini Neto, 0 Novo Rosto da MissSo (Sao Paulo, Brazil: Ultimata, 2002), 96.
33See Julio A. Ferreira, O Profeta da Unidade, 103-106.
131
community is a splendid means of witnessing to Christ in both private
and public life.34
Braga was interested in evangelizing the Brazilian elites, and knew that the
sectarianism that characterized both missionaries and nationals was a hindrance
for the “proclamation of the Gospel.”35 He was critical of the North-American
church models planted in Brazil, believing that they were insufficient to reach out
to the intellectuals of Brazilian society. Therefore, instead of the North American
model, he argued that the intellectualism of the French Protestant churches
would better suit the needs of the Brazilian intellectuals, whose education was
strongly influenced by French enlightenment.36
Because of his elitism and of his ideal of a Protestant enlightenment, following
the model of French Protestantism, Braga was not able to develop a Brazilian
spirituality and theology with its own traits. Nevertheless, he made an important
contribution to the development of Brazilian ecumenism and to the relation of the
Brazilian Evangelico churches to the larger society, criticizing the excessive
provincialism that characterized the leadership of the Brazilian churches at the
time.
Braga’s solution to the provincialism he saw in Brazilian Protestantism was
cooperation among the churches for the Evangelization or Christianization of the
34Erasmo Braga and Kenneth Grubb, The Republic of Brazil: A Survey of Hie
Religious Situation (London: World Dominion Press, 1932), 130.
35 Ibid., 118.
36 Ibid., 114.
132
Brazilian society 37 His contribution to Brazilian Protestantism, then, focused
on two tactics: education, through which the Christian values could be imprinted
upon the Brazilian society, and could transform it; and interdenominational
cooperation, through instruments such as the Committee of Cooperation for Latin
America (CCLA), created under the influence of the Congress in Panama.38
The CCLA, however, was still run by North American missionaries.
Accentuating the need for a Pan-American Protestantism, it worked in close
cooperation with the U.S. Department of State, whose policies toward Latin
America at the time emphasized the Monroe ideal of Pan-Americanism.39
However, the merits of the Panama Congress as well as of the CCLA for the
formation of Brazilian ecumenism reside in the consequent meetings that took
place in Latin America as a result of that mobilization, especially those in
Montevideo (1925) and Havana (1929).40 The significance of these two
congresses for Latin American Protestantism can be noticed in the words of
sociologist Jean-Pierre Bastian:
The Latin-American Protestant leaders that emerged throughout

the continent, and who made the missionary societies proud of
them, were [in fact] expressions of these [Pan-American] policies
37Julio Andrade Ferreira, O Profeta da Unidade, 138. Here once can see the
influence of the social gospel upon Braga’s thinking.
38 Ibid., 106.
39Jean-Pierre Bastian, Breve Histdria do Protestantismo en America Latina (Mexico
City: Casa Unida de Publicaciones, 1986), 116.
40 For more information on these two Congresses, see Dafne S. Plou, Caminos de
Unidad, 10ff. See also CCLA, Christian Work in South America: Official Report of the
Congress on Christian Work in South America, at Montevideo, Uruguay, April, 1925
(New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1925).
133
as their privileged interpreters. However, the economic crisis of 1929,
and the constant attacks coming from workers unions and
nationalist governments against the North American hegemony put
before this generation of Evang&icos the issue of their identity. The
two congresses that happened during this period were concerned
with this consciousness-raising concerning the need to articulate a
Latin American Evangelico response to the crisis.41 [translation is
mine]
Erasmo Braga presided at the Montevideo Congress, in 1925, which despite
the North American predominance, had Spanish as its official language. Among
the topics discussed in this congress, some attention was paid to the relation
between church and community. Once again, education, unity, cooperation and
evangelism—including that of the Indigenous people—were part of the agenda 42
The Congress in Havana, 1929, made significant advances in relation to
Montevideo.43 This meeting was completely organized by Latin Americans.
Presided over by Gonzalo Baez-Camargo, a young Mexican professor who had
participated in the Mexican revolution, 118 of the meeting’s 200 delegates were
Latin Americans.44 Although most Latin American leaders attending this meeting
41 Jean-Pierre Bastian, Breve Historia do Protestantismo, 11. That Bastian was right
in his view of the role played by the young leaders being formed in Latin America in
terms of voicing the Pan-American views of the North American missionary agencies in
Latin America can be noticed in Braga’s report on the Congress of Panama, published in
Portuguese by a North American missionary agency. See Erasmo Braga, Pan-
Americanismo: Aspecto Religioso (New York: Sociedade de Preparo Missionario, 1916).
42See Longuini Neto, O Novo Rosto da Missao, 98ff. Longuini Neto highlights the
realization of the Educational Conference during the meeting in Montevideo, which
launched the seeds for the development of the Comision Evangelica Latinoamericana de
Education Cristiana (CELADEC), organized only in 1961.
43See Wilton M. Nelson, “En Busca de un Protestantismo Latinoamericano: De

Montevideo 1925 a La Habana 1929,” in Oaxtepec 1978, 31-44.
44 Dafne S. Plou, Caminos de Unidad, 14ff.
134
were from Central America, Erasmo Braga was made its president of honor.
Four topics were central for the congress: evangelical solidarity, education, social
action and literature.45 For the first time, there was a clear concern among the
Latin American Protestant leaders for the need to a “latinization” of Protestantism
in the continent.46 They had noticed the dangers brought by the North American
control of the Latin American churches. Furthermore, for the first time, the topic
of social action was made central to the discussions of Latin American
Protestantism.47
The most pressing issue addressed during this congress was the autonomy of
the Latin American churches. One can say that the Congress of Havana gave
birth to a new process48 in Latin American Protestantism, which would be
45See W. M. Nelson, “En Busca de un Protestantismo Latinoamericano,” 39.
46The leaders of Latin American Protestantism began to be bothered by their

dependence upon North American missionaries. Furthermore, they became suspicious
of those missionaries, because of their ties with the “Imperialist America.” Nevertheless,
there was no Xenophobia in the attitude of the nationals. The meeting was marked by
mutual respect between the missionaries present there and the nationals. According to
Nelson, the missionaries understood the message; they needed to trust the young Latin
American churches. Ibid., 40.
47Longuini Neto, O Novo Rosto da Missao, 104. Some of the papers presented in
Havana discussed the attitude of the church towards the larger community, the rural and
industrial problems of Latin American society, missionary medical work, and the role of
women in the Evangelico work.
48This process initiated in Havana represented a rupture with the North American
hegemony upon part of Latin American Protestantism, and the search for autonomy.
Ibid., 105. See also W. M. Nelson, “En Busca de un Protestantismo Latinoamericano,”
40.
strengthened by national movements that followed it.49 In Brazil, the
consequences of these advances soon began to be noticed.
Ecumenism and the Nationalization of Brazilian Protestantism
Brazilian Protestantism began a process of nationalization in the beginning of
the twentieth century. In the first half of the nineteenth century, Protestantism
was a foreign faith in Brazil, professed by a few foreigners that lived in the
country.
In the second half of the nineteenth century Brazil became a missionary field
for the North American missionary agencies, and the main historic Protestant
denominations established themselves in the country from 1855—
Congregationals—to 1889—Episcopalians. The first initiative of non-
denominational cooperation among Brazilian Protestants took place in Sao
Paulo, in 1890, when some Presbyterians led the formation of an Evang&ico
Society for the creation of a non-denominational hospital.50 Also in 1890, a group
of Brazilian Protestants founded the Liga Evangelica, whose goal was to protect
49At the continental level, these discussions would be expanded through the
Conferencias Evangelicas Latinoamericanas (CELA), starting in 1949. For a good
analysis of the first conference see Jose Miguez Bonino, “Hacia un Protestantismo
Ecumenico: Notas Para una Evaluacion Historica del Protestantismo entre la I y la II
CELA (1949-1960),” in Oaxtepec 1978, 65-80.
50This was the first of the many Hospitais Evangelicos that would be founded in
Brazil. The Hospital Evangelico do Rio de Janeiro, another important hospital, was
founded in 1912. See Vicente Themudo Lessa, Annaes da Primeira Egreja
Presbyteriana de SSo Paulo (1863-1903) (Sao Paulo: Primeira Egreja Presbyteriana
Independente de Sao Paulo, 1938), 358.
136
the religious rights of Protestants, which had been secured by the Republican
Constitution, but which were frequently threatened.51
In 1902, the Manga Evangelica de Sao Paulo formed, presided by North
American Methodist missionary Hugh T. Tucker. This alliance had the goal of
promoting Christian witness and cooperation among the Brazilian EvangSlico
churches for evangelization.52 In 1913, fifteen churches founded the Alianga das
Igrejas Evangelicas Interdenominacionais, which also did not have a long life.53
After the Congress of Panama, a Regional Conference was organized by
Erasmo Braga, in Rio de Janeiro, in 1916, to discuss a general plan for Brazilian
Protestantism. The agenda of that conference included the organization of
Protestant schools, financial support for the national churches, the creation of a
university to reach out to the more educated classes,54 and the formation of a
non-denominational seminary, the Seminario Unido.55
51 There are reports of abuses by Catholic authorities such as the violation of freedom
to worship and the impediment of Protestant burials in cemeteries that indeed had been
secularized by the new Republic. Ibid., 359.
52 Ibid., 654.
53Waldo Cesar, “Urn Ecumenismo Voltado Para o Mundo: Esbogo Para uma Historia
do Movimento Ecumenico no Brasil,” Contexto Pastoral 26 (May/June 1995): 3-8 (4).
54The option for educating the higher classes reflected an elitist view of the
Protestant faith that had come to Brazil, and which was equated to progress and
education, it resulted in the neglecting of educating the lower classes, and showed that
Brazilian Protestantism made an alliance with the ascendant commercial oligarchies in
the country, which many would regret later. See Gerhard Tiel, Ecumenismo na
Perspectiva do Reino de Deus: Uma An&lise do Movimento Ecum§nico de Base (Sao
Leopoldo, Brazil: Editora Sinodal, 1998), 42-43; see also Juan Kessler & Wilton M
Nelson, “Panama 1916,” 12.
55See Duncan A. Reily, Histdria Documental do Protestantismo no Brasil, 3ed (Sao
Paulo, Brazil: ASTE, 2003), 250-251.
137
The Regional Conference in Rio de Janeiro emphasized the need for
cooperation, suggesting the creation of a Brazilian Committee of Cooperation in
the style of the CCLA, and even the adoption of a single name for all Protestant
churches in Brazil: Igreja Evangelica no Brasil.56 Like all the previous attempts,
this plan of cooperation and unity did not succeed. However, two years later
Erasmo Braga created the Brazilian Committee of Cooperation (BCC), which
initiated its activities in 1920 57 Braga presided at the BCC until his premature
death, in 1932. The new entity gathered 19 ecclesiastical bodies, including
churches, missionary societies and other Evangelico organizations.58
In 1931, another federation was created: the Federagao das Igrejas
Evangelicas do Brasil (FIEB), with the goal of opposing a new attempt of the
Catholic Church to become the State’s official church. When President Getulio
Vargas implemented religious classes in public schools, the EvangMcos feared
that this was just the first step to end the separation of church and state so dear
to the Brazilian Protestant churches.59 Now, there were three Protestant national
organizations, the BCC, the FIEB, and the Conselho Evang6lico de Educagao
56 Ibid. See also Gerhard Tiel, Ecumenismo na Perspectiva do Reino de Deus, 43.
57 Ibid., 254.
58Only five denominations, however, were represented in the BCC. Gerhard Tiel,
Ecumenismo, 44. The BCC produced literature for Sunday Bible Schools, developed
missionary projects among indigenous peoples, established relationships with social
movements, founded the Seminario Unido, published books, and sent Erasmo Carlos as
its representative to the World Council of Churches Missionary Conference in Jerusalem,
in 1928. See an abridged version of Erasmo Braga’ 1927-28 report on Duncan A. Reily,
Histdria Documental do Protestantismo no Brasil, 254ff.
59Gerhard Tiel, Ecumenismo, 45.
138
Religiosa no Brasil, created by the BCC to coordinate the educational
activities of the Protestant churches. From the fusion of these three organisms,
there emerged the Confederagao Evangelica do Brasil (CEB), which would
become the main institution of Brazilian Protestantism for several decades, and
would represent the apex of the ideas of cooperation among Evangdlico
churches in the country.60
Despite all the contributions that ecumenical Protestants such as Braga made
to Brazilian education and development, until the beginning of the 1950s
Brazilian Protestantism was “the product of imported theology, church polity, and
social ethics.”61 For the most part, there was no political activity, except when it
became necessary to defend issues such as religious freedom and other church
interests.
It is worth noting, however, that there always was some local resistance to the
patronizing attitude of North American missionaries toward the Brazilian converts,
whom the former considered to be uneducated and with little understanding of
the Biblical doctrines.62 One example of this resistance among native believers
can be noticed in the rupture that took place within the First Brazilian Baptist
60 Duncan A. Reily, Histdria Documental, 257ff.
61 Alan Neely, “Protestant Antecedents of the Latin American Liberation Theology”

(Ph.D. diss., The American University, 1977), 143.
62 Elizete da Silva, “Protestantismo e Representa?6es Politicas,” in Histdria das

Religioes no Brasil, vol. II, edited by Sylvana Brandao (Refice, Brazil: CEHILA; Editora
Universitaria-UFPE, 2001), 585-608.
139
Church, in Salvador, in the beginning of the twentieth century, when a group
of Brazilian converts left the church and founded the Independent Baptist
Mission.63
According to historian Elizabete da Silva, some of these independent
Protestants seemed to be seriously concerned with the political and social
problems of their time. In contrast with the predominant theology of the time, they
addressed the socio-political problems of the Brazilian society as being caused
by an unjust structure and ill government.64
Nevertheless, in general, only issues of religious liberty were sufficiently
strong to mobilize most Brazilian Evangelicos to criticize the government. For the
most part, up to the middle of the twentieth century, most Brazilian Evang&icos
continued to emulate the nations considered Protestant, such as England and
the United States, as paradigms to be followed.65 Independent groups, however,
which emerged during this period, became increasingly critical of foreign
hegemony.66
63 Ibid., 594. Other cases of resistance by nationals to the missionary dominance

upon the Brazilian churches have been reported. The most notorious one happened in
the very beginning of Brazilian Presbyterianism, when Father Jose Manoel da
Concei?ao, developed a kind of autonomous itinerant ministry, which upset the
denominationally oriented missionaries. See Boanerges Ribeiro, O Padre Protestante,
op. cit. However, the foundation of the Independent Baptist Mission and, and of the
Presbyterian Independent Church, in the first decade of the twentieth century are clear
signs of the growing dissatisfaction of the nationals toward the north American
missionaries.
64 Ibid., 596, 597.
65 Ibid., 601.
66 Ibid.
140
The Ecumenical Response to the Social Injustices in Brazil
From within this ecumenical face of Brazilian Protestantism, a group of young
Christians would raise their voices in protest, calling for a more just society. It
was the first time in Brazil that a Protestant voice raised the banner of social
justice. The beginning of this progressive Protestant movement goes back to the
creation of the Setorde Responsabilidade Social da Igreja (SRSI) in 1955, and to
the development of the Student Christian Movement in Brazil, in the 1940s.
Some young Christian leaders began to call for active militancy in social and
political left-wing movements and, along with Catholic partners, created the ethos
in which liberation theology was born in the late 1960s.67 Political and social
involvement began to be advanced in some Protestant quarters as an
inescapable Christian duty. This was the period when for the first time a group of
Protestants in Brazil immerged in the Brazilian social reality and sought to
establish a real dialogue between the Brazilian Protestant church and the larger
society 68
The Confederagao Evangelica do Brasil (CEB)
67See Alan Neely, Protestant Antecedents of the Latin American Theology of

Liberation, vi.
68This movement would be displaced by the military coup d’etat in 1964, but even
dispersed it would play a very important role in resisting the right-wing military
dictatorship that ruled Brazil for 21 years. See, for instance, James N. Green "Clergy,
Exiles, and Academics: Opposition to tH# Brazilian Military Dictatorship in the United
States, 1964-1974," Latin American Pdllils and Society, 45:1, (February 2003): 87-117.
141
The ConfederagSo Evang6lica do Brasil was created in 1934, two years
after Erasmo Braga’s death, but as a clear result of his efforts. Born as a result of
the fusion of the three organisms previously mentioned, the CEB created three
departments that would seek to work in continuity with each of those institutions
that had come together to found it: the department of churches, the department
of cooperation, and the department of religious education 69 The CEB intended
to testify to the unity of the Protestant church in Brazil and to represent the
Evangelico voice before the Brazilian society.70
Like the previous entities, the CEB had as one of its main concerns the
protection of the Evang6lico interests in a country predominantly Catholic.71
However, in a much more explicit way than ever before, the CEB also showed
concerns toward the pressing social issues that troubled the country. It proposed,
for instance, the establishment of partnerships with government agencies to work
69Other departments would be created later. See CEB, Relatdrios: Bienio 1934-1936
(Rio de Janeiro, RJ.: CEB, 1936), 3. It is worth noting that only four denominations
became officially members of the CEB in its beginning: The two Presbyterian churches,
the Methodist Church, and the Episcopalian Church. The Lutheran Church in Brazil
would become a member of the CEB only in 1959. Two Pentecostal churches—The
Foursquare Pentecostal Church and the Brazil for Christ Pentecostal Church—would
affiliate themselves to the CEB in the 1960s. The Baptist churches never affiliated
themselves with the CEB. See Gerhard Tiel, Ecumenismo na Perspectiva do Reino, 45,
46.
70The first article of the CEB’s constitution affirmed that the CEB represented
churches, missions, and Evangelico associations, having as its goal to “express and
encourage the substantial unity of [Brazilian] Protestantism, coordinate its forces in joint
action, and maintain relationship with the Church of Christ around the world.” Ibid., 37.
71 See Gerhard Tiel, Ecumenismo na Perspectiva do Reino, 46.
142
“in benefit of the Brazilian people.”72 It wrote circular letters on issues such as
agrarian reform, social projects, education, and beneficence campaigns in
situations of emergence.73 Furthermore, it supported the World Council of
Churches’ campaign to receive and assist war refugees psychologically,
spiritually and socially—seeking to provide jobs and ways for the refugees to
survive in the new country.74
However, internal conflicts started to weaken the spirit of unity and
cooperation proposed in the origins of the CEB. The first conflict had external
causes. The Creation of the World Council of Churches (WCC), in 1948, and of
its fundamentalist rival, the International Council of Churches (ICC) imported to
Brazil the conflict between fundamentalist and liberals, which, according to
Erasmo Braga, had not agitated the Brazilian churches in the beginning of the
century.75 In the post-World War II period, however, under the spirit of the cold
72This phrase is taken from an original document of foundation of the CEB by Paulo
de Goes, “Do Individualismo ao Compromisso Social: A Contribuigao da Confederagao
Evangelica do Brasil Para a Articulagao de Uma Etica Social Crista”(Master of Religious
Sciences’ thesis, Institute Metodista de Ensino Superior,1989), 123.
73Gerhard Tiel, Ecumenismo na Perspectiva do Reino, 46.
74 Paulo de Goes, “Do Individualismo ao Compromisso Social,” 124-125.
75Erasmo Braga & Kenneth Grubb, The Republic of Brazil, 120-121. Braga affirms
that although most of the Brazilian Evangelico leaders could be classed as
fundamentalists, very few belonged to any extreme group. He goes on to say, “There
have been some heresy hunters, but there are few heretics to be caught. Evangelism is
the centre of interest in Brazilian church life and not doctrinal controversy.” There is a
certain naivete in Braga’s statement, which was also repeated by Richard Shaull later,
when he underestimated the power of fundamentalism in Brazilian Protestantism. It was
exactly that fundamentalist presence within Brazilian Protestantism that crashed down
on the church and society movement, and forced Shaull to return to the United States.
See Paul E. Pierson, A Younger Church in Search of Maturity:Presbyterianism in Brazil
from 1910 to 1959 (San Antonio: Trinity University Press, 1974), 222.
143
war, ecumenism had been associated not only with liberalism, but also with
communism; in the eyes of North American fundamentalists, it was a threat to
their mission fields 76
Reacting to the close relationship established between the CEB and the
recently founded WCC, the ICC funded the creation of a rival federation of
churches in Brazil, called Confederagao de Igrejas Evang&icas
Fundamentalistas do Brasil (C.I.E.F.)77 Despite being small, this group
championed the anti-communist cause, and accusing any socio-political
statement or action not strictly beneficent made by the churches of being
infiltrated by communist ideology.78 The attacks from the fundamentalist lines
76 In 1965, a book published by the Missao Blblica Presbiteriana do Brasil, brought an

alarming warning against those churches that were associated with the CEB. Robert S.
Rapp, its author, wrote, “This book was written because those who find themselves in
the Brazilian Evangelico churches need to hear, honestly and frankly, what is going on in
their churches. It is our conviction that the leaders of these churches—those which are
part of the Confederagao Evangelica do Brasil—are not informing the believers that
Satan is taking control of their churches because these same leaders are in covenant
with the powers of iniquity and unbelief. Somebody, then, from within or outside these
churches, needs to let them know this.” [translation is mine], Robert S. Rapp, A
Confederagao Evangelica do Brasil e o Evangelho Social (Sao Paulo, Brazil: Missao
Blblica Presbiteriana do Brasil, 1965), 3. Later on, the author warns, “Liberalism has
arrived in Brazil. It has managed to have a well defined penetration in the Evangelico
churches which form the Confederagao Evangelica do Brasil.” (Ibid., 8). At another place,
he accuses the leaders of the CEB of being sympathetic to Romanism, the Social
Gospel, and the worldwide movement for the unity of the churches. (Ibid., 13)
77 Ibid., 19. This was recognizably a small federation, formed by the Conservative
Presbyterian Church in Brazil, and some groups of Baptist and Congregational
background. However, it caused some damage to mainstream Brazilian churches. For
one example, see Paul E. Pierson, A Younger Church in Search of Maturity, 211.
78The Setor of Responsabilidade Social da Igreja, created by the CEB was the main
target of this kind of attack. Ibid., 20ff.
144
challenged the CEB, making some churches and many people suspicious of
the CEB’s literature and influence upon their churches.
If the situation of conflict and crisis limited the actions of the CEB among the
Protestant churches in Brazil, other parallel initiatives, in the form of social
movements, were making significant progress concerning the engagement of the
larger Brazilian society and its challenges by the ecumenical movement. Two of
these movements were the Comissao de Igreja e Sociedade—which later
became the Setorde Responsabilidade Social da Igreja (SRSI)—created by
Waldo Cesar and Richard Shaull, and incorporated into the CEB, in 1955, and
the Student Christian Movement (SCM), started in the 1940s.
Both the SRSI and the SCM played a very important role in the development
of a progressive social ethics that anticipated much of the claims laid on later by
liberation theology. These two movements were also among the most important
factors that contributed to the formation of a continent-wide movement called
Church and Society in Latin America, known by the initials ISAL.79 The Brazilian
section of the Christian Student Movement, known as the Uniao Crista de
Estudantes do Brasil (UCEB), was one of the first Christian organizations to
engage the revolutionary situation of their time, making explicit their commitment
to radical changes in the basic social structures as the indispensable and
inevitable condition for the humanization of Brazilian life.80
79 ISAL stands for Iglesia y Sociedad en America Latina. See Richard Shaull,
Surpreendido Pela Graga: Memorias de um Teologo, Estados Unidos, America Latina,
Brasil (Rio de Janeiro, RJ.: Record, 2003), 184.
80See Alan Neely, Protestant Antecedents, 163.
145
The formation of the CEB was an important step to the establishment of an
ecumenical movement in Brazil and to its commitment to the Brazilian social
reality. However, such commitment was still superficial, and limited by the
conflicts that emerged among the different members of the CEB. It was, then,
among the young Protestant movements within the CEB, and in the student
Christian movement in the beginning of the 1950s, that the theme of social
responsibility and social change came to the agenda of Brazilian Protestantism.
Led mostly by young lay Christians, and without much support from the clergy,
they were considered a threat to the established order within their own
denominations.81
The Student Christian Movement82
In the development of Latin American ecumenism, there was always a
dialogue between the churches—meaning denominational institutions and their
structures and bureaucracy—on the one hand, and movements—meaning more
flexible groups, which considered themselves more apt to face the social
changes of the times, and more open to the renovation of ideas and
organizations.83 This dialogue was not without its tensions. However, the
81Waldo C6sar, interview by author, tape recording, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 18 July
2003.
82The Student Christian Movement was known in Brazil by its Portuguese initials
MEC, for Movimento de Estudantes Cristaos.
83 Roberto E. Rios, “Iglesias y Movimientos Ecumenicos,” Cristianismo y Sociedad

17/61-62 (1979): 67-72 (68).
146
ecumenical movement was not only an attempt to bring ecclesiastical
structures together. Parallel to all the efforts made to generate an ecumenical
spirit within the existing ecclesiastical structures, there was the emergence of
ecumenical movements, which, in Latin America, were more successful than the
institutional ecumenical efforts in reaching out to the larger society and its needs.
The MEC was one of these movements, which became particularly important
to the development of the ecumenical response to the problems posed by the
Brazilian social reality. As part of an international ecumenical federation of
Christian students, born in the 1850s, this movement strove to approach the
issues of the Christian life both intellectually and spiritually.
The first Latin American students to affiliate with the World Student Christian
Federation (WSCF) were Brazilians and Puerto Ricans. However, there were
representatives of this movement in fourteen other countries in Latin America,
who “received and distributed the literature, planned and conducted conferences
and seminars, and arranged for students to attend international meetings of the
federation.”84 They ended up forming vigorous national student organizations in
several of these countries. These groups “acted as ideological incubators for the
production of young Protestant Christians who were sensitive to the social and
political implications of the Christian Gospel and who subsequently became the
foremost spokesmen for the ISAL movement in the 1960s.”85
84Jorge Cesar Mota, “A Federagao Mundial Crista de Estudantes,” Testimonium 2

(December, 1954): 145-146, quoted by Alan Neely, Protestant Antecedents, 155.
“ Alan Neely, Protestant Antecedents, 156.
147
According to Neely, a decade prior to the organization of ISAL this student
movement was already functioning as “a Protestant ecumenical force of no mean
proportion and a veritable pipeline for dispersing throughout Latin America the
sociopolitical emphases, insights, perspectives, and concepts of the World
Council of Churches.”86 Therefore, the importance of the preparatory work of the
Protestant ecumenical student organizations can hardly be overemphasized.
Students related to this movement were exposed to political and social
questions, became aware of the Christian’s responsibility concerning political
problems, and were encouraged to become involved in the resolution of those
problems. As Neely puts it,
A continental congress for MEC meeting in Cuba in 1954 declared:

(1) the Church as an institution should not be involved in politics but
should educate its members to witness to their faith as a part of
their political activity; (2) the principal political objective for
Christians is to discover solutions to social problems; (3) Christians
should participate in whatever political party they believe offers the
best program for resolving social problems in the most just manner.
The Cuban declaration did, however, recognize that those political
movements which are totalitarian and which are led by men who
reject Christian moral principles create for the Christian a very
complex ethical situation. At the same time, given the urgency of
the social crisis, a Christian cannot risk remaining aloof from
political and social issues.87
The Brazilian section of this movement, known as the UCEB, was the first
autonomous Evangelico organization in the country with a proposal of theological
and ecclesiastical renewal. This organization, compounded by students of
86 Ibid.
87 Ibid., 161.
148
Protestant background, provided the human resources for the ecumenical
movement in the following decades.88
The Student movement in Brazil was originally organized in 1926, among high
school students, and took the name Uniao de Estudantes para o Trabalho de
Cristo.89 It first developed its groups in Evangelico schools with the goal of
recruiting and training national missionaries. After establishing contact with the
World Student Christian Federation (WSCF), they developed an interest in
reaching out to non-Protestant schools in order to witness Christ in that
environment.90 In 1940, the movement took the name of UCEB, and, in 1942, it
became officially affiliated with the WSCF. In 1940, another student movement
was formed in Brazil, under the name Movimento de Cristaos Acad§micos do
Brasil (MCAB). This movement had its focus on college students, and was also
influenced by the WSCF. In 1945, the two movements fused into one, under the
name of UCEB.91
In 1952, two important facts laid the foundation not only for a period of
extraordinary growth of Student Christian Movements in the region but also for
the dynamic participation of Protestant students in social and political struggles
88 Edin Sued Abumanssur, “A Tribo Ecumenica: Um Estudo do Ecumenismo no

Brasil nos Anos 60 e 70” (Master of Social Sciences thesis, Pontifica Universidade
Catolica de Sao Paulo, 1991), 47.
89 UCEB, “Pequena Historia da UCEB,” in Cademos da UCEB (n.d. manuscript
accessed by the author from the Richard Shaull archives, Luce Library, Princeton
Theological Seminary, December 2003), 1.
90 Ibid.
91 Ibid. Nevertheless, the local groups kept the name ACAS (Associagao de Cristaos
Academicos), by which they were already well known.
149
and for some creative theological developments: (1) the appointment of Valdo
Galland as the first Secretary of the WSCF for Latin America; and (2) the
organization of the First Latin American Study Conference, in Sitio das Figueiras,
near Sao Paulo.92
Due to the social and political ferment of the 1950s in universities throughout
Latin America, students who had previously been intellectually oriented toward
Western Europe were now becoming more aware of, and turning their attention
toward, the life, culture and history of their own countries and people. This
brought with it a greater awareness of social and political realities—of the
poverty, injustice and exploitation around them—as well as of the need for
fundamental structural changes in that reality. During the 1950s, students
became one of the most dynamic sectors in the political life of many Latin
American countries.93
At that time, a considerable number of second and third generation Brazilian
Protestants was attending universities all over the country. Many of them were
not prepared to deal with the strong secular orientation of the Brazilian
universities. There was some concern with social and political problems, but little
preparation for participation in the struggles going on around them. The student
movements in the Brazilian universities were led by non-religious people, some
92 Richard Shaull, “Theological Developments in Brazilian SCM, 1952,” unpublished

manuscript accessed by the author in the Richard Shaull archives, at Luce Library,
Princeton Theological Seminary, November 2003), 1.
93 Ibid.
150
of whom saw the church as source of alienation rather than a force for
change.94 In that context, the UMEC became an important source for Christian
students, which sought to respond to their interests and needs, providing also a
theological basis for their witness in the university.95
In 1944,96 the UCEB named its first general secretary, the Reverend Jorge
Cesar Mota, whose job was to travel around the country visiting the ACAS with
the goal of strengthening the faith of the students, guiding them concerning their
professional career choices, and seek solutions to social, moral and spiritual
problems of society. During that period, the main concerns of the UCEB had to
do with the rediscovery of the Bible, evangelization, spiritual retreats, personal
witness at school, and some interest in the political situation.97 The
understanding of Christian witness in the university was still centered on
individual issues such as having a pure moral life, not cheating, avoiding vicious
practices and working hard and scrupulously.
The Latin American Conference, in 1952, in fact, became a turning point, as it
redirected the priorities of the UCEB and reoriented the meaning of witnessing
Christ’s presence in the university. The main topic of the conference was “The
94 Ibid., 2.
95The basis for that witness was the belief that “Jesus is Lord, and He calls his
followers to witness his presence in love among other fellow humans, wherever they are.
In other words, it is the specific mission of the Christian student that places her to the
midst of her companions in school. The UCEB exists to call Evangelico students to fulfill
and incarnate this mission.” [translation is mine] Caio Toledo, “O Que e a UCEB,”
Boletim das ACAS 1 (November 1962):1.
96 Eduardo G. Faria, F6 e Compromisso, 107.
97 Ibid.
151
Christian Vocation.” The speakers were Richard Shaull, Walter Schutzer,
Henrique Maurer and Leticia de Barros 98
The significance of that conference in Sao Paulo resided in the new questions
that were raised by the students making up that movement. For the first time, for
example, the problem of communism was raised as an issue to be considered
theologically. 99 The presence of Richard Shaull, a theologian who for some
years had been working on the issues raised to Christian theology by Marxist
thought, at Princeton, stimulated the discussion. The dialogue with him was
elucidative to many of the students present in that event, who needed
clarification about the possible relations between Christianity and Marxism.100
That conference gave a new impulse to the student movement as those who
participated in it returned to their communities with a new vision and
determination to share their experience with other students. As a more
elaborated response to the issues rose during that conference, Shaull published
a small book that became extremely important as a theological guide to the
student movement as well as to Brazilian Protestantism, in general: 0
Chstianismo e a Revolugao Socialm
98 Ibid., 109.
99 Paulo Grisolli, “Acampamento da ACAs do Rio, Sao Paulo e Campinas,

Testimonium 1/3 (1953): 47.
100Ibid.
101 Richard Shaull, O Cristianismo e a Revolugao Social (Sao Paulo, Brazil: UCEB,
1953). This was a short collection of essays in which Shaull analyzed what he named as
“the revolutionary situation” in which Latin American students found themselves during
the 1950s. His emphasis was on the Christian involvement in this struggle having as a
starting point their faith in Jesus Christ. For Shaull, Christ calls on Christians to respond
152
After that first encounter, Shaull moved to Brazil in order to work with
those students whose faith and commitment had impressed him so highly. That
encounter had affected not only the sixty students from several different
countries who attended the conference, but also Shaull himself. He later
mentioned how that encounter influenced his own theological thought.102
From that point on, Shaull became a sort of organic theologian for that
movement.103 Jovelino Ramos, one of the leaders of that movement, recalls the
role played by Shaull in it.
The field of Shaull’s work which most attracted me was his work
with the UniSo Crista de Estudantes do Brasil. In the second half of
the 1950s and throughout the 1960s, the students comprised one
of the most dynamic sectors of the political life in Brazil. The UCEB
was inserted on that dynamics. As such, it organized and provided
to the needs of their neighbors, especially those who are hungry, marginalized, and
destitute, in intolerable poverty. Therefore, those who want to follow Christ must be
involved in the human struggle for life, like Jesus himself was. Shaull also presented the
Marxist responses to that situation, showing the need for the Christian students to
understand it as an ideological system and its appeal to the people in Latin America.
This book became a reference for those who wanted to make sense of their faith in the
struggles they saw in the university world. This book sketched the theological basis of
Shaull’s work in Brazil. His use of the word “revolution” envisioned providing a different
foundation for a spiritual renewal that could contribute to the transformation of society in
Latin America, and a language that could create common ground between Christian and
non-Christian students. See Eduardo G. Faria, Fee Compromisso, 110.
102 Richard Shaull, “Entre Jesus e Marx: Reflexoes Sobre os Anos que Passei no
Brasil,” in De Dentro do Furacao: Richard Shaull e os Primdrdios da Teologia da
LibertagSo, by Richard Shaull (Sao Paulo: Editora Sagarana; CEDI/CLAI, 1985), 183-
212 (198).
103Shaull became the theologian of the student movement not by self-imposition, but
due to the affinities that existed between his perspectives and the longing of those
students. Speaking of Shaull’s style of leadership, Waldo Cesar says, “Shaull began to
be called ‘the new master1, in contrast with the ‘old master, Jose Mota. He was very
careful to avoid imposing his leadership. One of his extraordinary characteristics was
that he never said, ‘I said this, it has to be this way.’ Then, that affinity between him and
us grew naturally.” Waldo Cesar, Interview by the author, tape recording, Rio de Janeiro
18 July 2003.
153
a supportive environment for the young students from Protestant
background. UCEB’s most relevant contribution was the
seriousness with which those students, through the instrumentality
of the UCEB, related to each other in order to search together—
through reflection and action—the best way to express their faith
commitment as active participants in the larger student struggles.
Throughout that period Shaull was the prophet, inspirer, companion
and (why not say?) the patriarch of the movement, [translation is
mine]
To be sure, the UCEB was already a vanguard movement before Shaull’s
arrival in Brazil. However, he played an important role in the reformulation that
the movement underwent in the 1950s. According to Esdras Borges Costa,105
Between the 1940s and early 1960s the UCEB was a sort of culture
movement, which attracted the interest of Christian students with a
more ecumenical perspective. Even before Shaull, and before the
WSCF, it was an organization that went far beyond the churches,
being in contact with people from different faith backgrounds in the
universities. Then, Shaull arrived in 1953, and during that period
there was a reformulation. The work of the UCEB continued.
However, the emphases on biblical studies, doctrines and theology
was oriented towards a more participative vision of the world,
including in the political realm. That was Shaull’s influence. But
Shaull found an open field here in Brazil. There were many
Protestant students and other people longing for changes in the
church; many people unhappy wanted to have a project, a more
104Jovelino Ramos, “Voce Nao Conhece o Shaull,” in De Derttro do FuracSo, op. cit.,
25-32 (31). Whereas the young students saw Shaull as a prophet, the older leaders
came to regard him with mounting suspicion. The reason for that was that Shaull’s
message about the church and its action in the world went far beyond that of traditional
Brazilian Protestantism. So, whereas it fulfilled the longings of the youth, providing new
theological and ethical ideas for which they had been longing, Shaull’s thought and his
wide ecumenical contacts seemed threatening to the ecclesiastical leaders. See Paul. E.
Pierson, A Younger Church in Search of Maturity, op. cit., 220.
105 Esdras Borges Costas is a sociologist who works for the Getulio Vargas
Foundation, in Sao Paulo, and is a member of the Brazilian Presbyterian Church. He
was one of the leaders of the UCEB during the 1950s. See Esdras Borges Costa,
Interview by the author, tape recording, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 22 July 2003.
154
participant and more alive theology that could contrast with the gospel
we knew, which was boring.106 [translation is mine]
The decade of the 1950s saw the spreading and strengthening of the UCEB, with
the formation of new small groups (ACAS) in different locations, giving a national
character to the movement. For Shaull, one of the greatest contributions of this
movement was that “as small teams of lay persons and trained theologians
worked together on the issues facing them in a revolutionary situation, they found
themselves dealing with new questions and seeking new approaches. And they
began to articulate theological and ethical positions that went beyond what they
found in the books and study materials they were using.”107 Although the heat of
the struggles did not allow them to go very far in developing these new
perspectives, they succeeded, however, in equipping themselves to engage the
Roman Catholic Left, Marxism, and other secular ideologies in their attempt to
offer a Christian perspective on the struggle for a more just society.
That involvement also led them to raise critical questions about the theological
foundations of their Christian commitment, and to reread the Bible with new eyes.
As Shaull puts it,
In the UCEB, students were encouraged to approach the Bible, not

as a source of abstract, sterile doctrines, but as the story of God’s
presence and action in human life and in concrete historical events
in the world across the centuries. This led them to reflect on their
own historical situation in the light of this special history of God’s
action in the world, and as they did so, they discovered that they
were being addressed. The text of the Bible was no longer a dead
106 Esdras Borges Costa, Interview by the author, tape recording, Sao Paulo, Brazil,
22 July 2003.
107 Richard Shaull, “Theological Developments in the Brazilian SCM, 1952-1964.,” 8.
155
letter, a collection of correct ideas and abstract doctrines. Rather,
those who were studying it with open minds and hearts often found
themselves responding to a word they could not ignore, a word that
opened doors to new life for them and led to transformation.108
The Christian Student Movement was a key player in launching the
foundations for a new theological and ethical approach to the pressing issues
that challenged Brazilian Christianity during an important period marked by rapid
social changes and political effervescence in the life of the country. It offered the
basis for the development of a new way of doing theology in Brazil, which
emphasized God’s presence and action in the world, and called upon Christians
to join God in the struggle for life and justice, wherever they were. That new
approach opened possibilities for a generation of young Evang&icos to engage
and dialogue with other groups who were also trying to respond to a situation of
disenchantment, provoked by the undelivered promises of the so-called decade
of development.109
108 Ibid., 9-10.
109 In the 1950s, the situation in Latin America was characterized by a great optimism
with regard to the possibilities of the continent to achieve self-sustained economic
development. As Gustavo Gutierrez points out, that was the decade of
developmentalism. Due to the frustration of those aspirations, the term development fell
into disgrace among Latin Americans in the next decade. The word development was
turned into a pejorative term in Latin America due both to the deficiencies of the
development policies proposed to the poor countries to lead them out of their
underdevelopment and also to the lack of concrete achievements of the interested
governments. Latin Americans realized that developmentalism was nothing more than a
synonym of timid measures of societal reform and modernization, which were really
ineffective in the long run, and insufficient to achieving real transformation. At the same
time, they also began to realize that part of their underdevelopment was a byproduct of
their relations with the richer countries. All this created the environment for the
liberationist movements that would emerge in the 1960s. See Gustavo Gutierrez, A
Theology of Liberation (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1973), 26ff,
156
The fact that the UCEB encouraged the identification of the Christian
students with the larger student movement, including affiliation of Evangelico
students in the Uniao Nacional dos Estudantes (UNE)110—the national student
organization in Brazil, which was one of the most significant progressive
movements in the country during the 1960s—raised concerns among Evangelico
church leaders who feared that such an involvement would put their Christian
faith and identity at risk of being lost. The movement itself was aware of the risks
it was taking, although they were convinced that there was no other position for
them to stand for before their Christian commitment to life and justice.111
In 1961, upon the resignation of populist president Janio Quadras, and the
intensification of the crisis in the Brazilian political scenario, the UCEB decided to
focus its studies on deepening its knowledge of that reality. They knew that the
national student movement was in the midst of all changes taking place in the
Brazilian political scenario. Therefore, they wanted to discern their role as
Christians in that context.
Understanding that the new challenges of the time, and the rapid social
changes taking place in Brazilian society required new theological responses, the
110Caio Toledo, one of the leaders of the movement affirms that, in 1962, they felt the
need to deepen their identification with the aspirations for justice by strengthening their
relationship with the national student movement. See Caio Toledo, “O Que e UCEB?”
op.cit.,1. Elsewhere Toledo says, “There is a desperate search for social justice, and
that is the common mark of all those groups which militate in the left...The UNE
incarnates the anxieties of this non-conformed , courageous, struggling and, most of all,
hopeful youth—not of a romantic hope, but of a hope that grows out of a deep
conviction that we are participating in a sacred struggle.” [translation is mine] Caio
Toledo, “Movimento Estudantil,” Boletim das ACAS 1 (November 1962): 3.
111 Here, the influence of Bonhoeffer writings, which Richard Shaull had introduced to
the movement, is clear. See Richard Shaull, “Theological Developments,” 18.
157
UCEB took advantage of the presence of Paul Lehmann in Brazil to spend
several days in dialogue with his theology, trying to discern God’s action in that
revolutionary scenario. Lehmann’s understanding of God’s transformative action
in history, based on the “prophetic-apostolic witness” mediated through the
koinonia,112 as well as his messianic vision of a redemptive God who is moving
toward the creation of a new order—the kingdom of God—equipped many
students in the development of their own theological stances as they became
more involved with the larger student movement in Brazil.113
Other students already involved in this dynamic historical process, however,
found that theological language in general was no longer helpful for them.
Instead of using any theological conceptualization, these students were rather
inclined towards trying to integrate their own experiences in the midst of the
concrete historical realities in which they struggled.114 The UCEB was exactly in
the midst of a process of struggling for developing new theological paradigms
when the right-wing military coup d’etat took place in Brazil, in 1964.
Like other ecumenical movements of the time, the UCEB did not survive the
military coup. However, many of its members integrated themselves into other
religious and non-religious movements that became the vanguard of resistance
112 Lehmann’s word for the community of those attempting to keep up with this divine
movement toward the future. It is that sense that Lehman says that “Christian ethics is
oriented toward revelation rather than toward morality.” See Paul Lehmann, Ethics in a
Christian Context (Eugene, OR.: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1998), 54.
113 Richard Shaull, “Theological Developments,” 20.
114 Ibid., 23-24.
158
against the abuses of the dictatorship that was instituted in Brazil from 1964
through 1985.115 Thus, although not being able to elaborate further their
theological responses to the challenges experienced by a generation of Brazilian
Christian students, the Christian student movement set the tone for the kind of
theological ethics that could become relevant to the Brazilian reality. It went
beyond the ecclesiastical structures—in the form of a movement—and began an
ongoing conversation with the Brazilian reality, as well as with other movements
which also aimed at building a more just society. It did not want to be simply a
116Caio Toledo offers a list with the names of the main leaders of UCEB, in 1962,
showing how several of them were already occupying strategic positions not only with
UNE, but also with other political and social movements in the country. For instance,
Rubem Bueno became vice-president of the Uniao Estadual de Estudantes de Sao
Paulo; Rubem Cesar Fernandes was going to become an important sociologist in Rio de
Janeiro, and the president of the social movement Viva Rio, which has combated urban
violence; Edir Cardoso was general secretary for the Student Christian Movement in
Uruguay for two years; Marco Antonio G. Moreira became assessor for UNE. Caio
Toledo, “Noticias,” Boletim das ACAS, op. cit., 5. Some of those students would be
forced later to leave the country as exiles, and others would become politicians. The
most impressive case is that of Paulo Wright, who was elected to the Brazilian congress
as a representative of the state of Santa Catarina. After the coup, and the closing of the
congress by the dictatorship, Wright became involved with the Brazilian revolutionary
movement. As a consequence of his fights for liberty and justice, he was imprisoned,
tortured and killed by the military rulers. He became one of the many who “disappeared”
during the dictatorship. For more on his story see Delora Jan Wright, O Coronel Tem um
Segredo: Paulo Wright NSo Esta em Cuba (Petropolis, Brazil: Vozes, 1993). A prove of
the influence of the UCEB’s theological developments upon Paulo Wright is found in the
words he wrote in 1959: “Our commitment is to discern the work God is doing, testifying
God’s redemptive action, experiencing complete freedom to take sides, suffering with
those who are suffering, crying with those who are crying...feeding those who are
hungry...Our attitude for sure cannot conserve the enormous and scary imbalances that
exist in our society. Our missionary and political witness is to be always on the side of
the disinherited, spiritually or materially so, because God loved the world to the point of
sending God’s son, who became the most impoverished of all human beings so that we
could find in him the meaning of life, which is abundance.” (27-28).
159
distinctive or exclusive Christian movement. On the contrary, it understood its
role as “a Christian community within the larger community of students.”116
The Setor de Responsabilidade Social da Igreja (SRSI)
Another movement that offered a relevant contribution to the development
of a social Christian ethics from an Evangelico perspective in Brazil was the
Setor de Responsabilidade Social da Igreja (SRSI), of the CEB. This sector was
created in 1955—first as an autonomous committee, then as a department of the
CEB—mainly by young leaders also related to the Student Christian Movement.
Waldo Cesar describes the creation of the SRCI as follows:
Early, in 1955, on the initiative of Richard Shaull, then a professor

at the Seminary of the Presbyterian Church of Brazil, and myself, a
“Commission on Church and Society1’ was created in Rio de
Janeiro. The ecumenical composition of this group was quite
representative of the theological and ideological differences that
characterized the diverse branches of Brazilian Protestantism. In
the Commission that was organized, there was, however, a general
agreement that the churches should establish criteria for, as forms
of, action in the face of Brazilian reality, although there was no
unanimity as regards the scope and the nature of the work to be
developed. Autonomous when first organized, this Commission,
during its first year of existence, became a part of the Evangelical
Confederation of Brazil (CEB), an organ of interdenominational
cooperation made up of the six principal historical evangelical
churches in the country, and was given the name, “Sector of Social
Responsibility of the Church.”117
116Richard Shaull, “The Challenge of Student Work in Brazil,” International Review of

Missions 44 (1955): 323-328 (325).
117Waldo Cesar, “Church and Society—Or Society and Church?” in Revolution of

Spirit, op. cit., 135. In Cesar’s text all the Portuguese names are either translated or
transliterated into English. The problem with that is, for example, that where Cesar wrote
Evangelico on his Portuguese manuscript, the translator wrote Evangelical, in English.
And, as I have noticed in the introduction of this dissertation, these two words do not
mean the same thing in Latin America. I would also choose ‘committee’ over
‘commission’ to translate the Portuguese ‘comissao’. Because of this kind of problem,
160
The idea of creating this Committee on Church and Society took form upon
the return of a group of Brazilians who had attended the Second Assembly of the
World Council of Churches, in Evanston. Waldo Cesar was one of the young
Brazilians who attended that conference:
When I returned, I talked with Shaull about the assembly and told
him that I had been named for the Church and Society Committee.
We began to chat about this when he came up with the idea of
creating a Committee on Church and Society in Brazil...We raised
the funds for the creation of that Committee—this happened in
February. In November of the same year, we organized the first
national meeting, [translation is mine]118
The entrance to the CEB was seen as a strategy to infiltrate the
ecclesiastical structures with “these new concepts of church mission and
evangelization.”119
One of the goals of the SRSI was to promote national meetings to study
relevant topics for the Brazilian society.120 The SRSI sponsored four of these
which also happens with other words, I have preferred to keep using the word
Evangelico throughout the dissertation, while maintaining the Portuguese names of
Brazilian organizations such as the CEB.
118Waldo Cesar, Interview by the author, tape recording, Rio de Janeiro, 18 July
2003.
119Waldo Cesar, Interview by Edin Abumanssur, in Edin Abunmanssur, “A Tribo

Ecumenica,” 46.
120The biennial report of the CEB (1955-1956) documents the creation of the new
committee as follows: “Criation of Departments and Committees...Comissao de Estudo
da Responsabilidade Social da Igreja. Subordinated to the Departamento de Estudo e
Documentagao, but with the main goal of focus on the social responsibility of the church
and study the Evangelico Christian civic obligations and the Christian engagement not
only in the general life of the country, but also in its government...it was organized a
committee which well represents Brazilian evangelism—whose president is the Rev.
Bejanmim Morais and the general secretary is Mr. Waldo Cesar.” See CEB, Relatdrios,
11°BiGnio—1955-1956 (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: CEB, 1958), 21.
161
consultations between 1955 and 1962. The thematic evolution of these
consultations “expresses a process of commitment which grew as the national
crisis grew.”121
The first one took place in November of 1955, and dealt, in general terms,
with the “Social Responsibility of the Church” as a program of study and
action.122 Its basic concern, as an initial step, was “to study the biblical and
theological foundations of the Christian responsibility in socio-political realm.”123
The studies presented in the consultation revealed the need for the committee to
emphasize to the churches represented in the CEB that, as Christians, “we need
to witness our faith within these areas that today constitute the centers of
influence and socio-political power.”124 They came to the conclusion that such
understanding would require a new language and criteria in their form of
evangelization.
The second consultation took place in Campinas, Sao Paulo, in 1957. The
theme of this consultation was more specific: “The Church and the Rapid Social
Changes in Brazil.”125 The main concern was to understand the social processes
taking place in Brazil and in the world in order to involve the church in those
121 Waldo Cesar, “Church and Society,” 135.
122 Ibid.
123Waldo Cesar, “Comissao de Igreja e Sociedade,” in Relatdrios, 11° Bienio—1955-

1956, 77-90 (77).
124 Ibid.
125Waldo Cesar, “Comissao de Igreja e Sociedade,” 86.
162
processes. The danger, in moments such as this, was the lack of participation
of the community of faith which left the process of change without any theological
guidance. Benjamim Morais, president of the Church and Society Committee,
Richard Shaull, and Jacques Maury, a visitor from the French Reformed Church,
delivered speeches at the conference126
In 1960, the SRSI promoted a third consultation to study the theme “The
Presence of the Church in the Evolution of Nationality.”127 In that year, Brasilia,
the new metropolis that was designed to be the new capital city of Brazil, was
inaugurated, symbolizing the emergence of a promising era. After previous
periods of pessimism, the years of Juscelino Kubitschek’s presidency (1956-
1959) had brought an environment of optimism to the nation.128 However, there
were problems in the rapid process of urbanization and industrialization which
was taking place in Brazil. The Brazilian people oscillated between enthusiasm
126 Waldo Cesar, “Comissao de Igreja e Sociedade,” 86.
127Waldo Cesar, “Church and Society,” 136. This meeting was larger than the other
two, with the attendance of 61 people representing 13 different churches, four
ecclesiastical bodies, and 8 different countries. The presence of representatives of other
Latin American countries was important for the preparation of the First Latin American
Consultation on Church and Society, which would happen in Huampani, Peru, in 1961.
On that occasion, the organism known as Iglesia y Sociedad en America Latina (ISAL)
would be constituted. See Paulo de Goes, “Do Individualismo ao Compromisso
Social,”198.
128See Miriam L. Cardoso, Ideologia do Desenvolvimento (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil:

Paz e Terra, 1977). Kubitschek’s administration had been marked by development and
economic expansion. The predominant ideological force of that time emphasized two
main axes: nationalism and development. See Caio de Toledo, ISEB: FSbrica de
Ideologias Sao Paulo, Brazil: Atica, 1977).
163
and frustration.129 And the church needed to Know the problems of the
country—its socio-political reality—at the same time that it needed to basis its
praxis on theological and biblical foundations.
This consultation was, again, a Christian call to participation in and solidarity
with the multiple configurations—social, cultural, economic, and political—that
were taking place in Brazil, as the country struggled to affirm itself and gain more
autonomy as a nation. Brazilian Protestantism could not stand apart from this
process of development of nationality. Without illusions, there should be a
conscious participation in the struggles of the Brazilian society—a struggle, at the
end of the day, for social justice.130 Such involvement should take place in a spirit
of obedience and humbleness. The call was for Christian participation, never for
a Christian takeover. The formation of a Christian political party, for instance, was
strongly rejected as a possibility. For Shaull, it would be a theological mistake,
since they would be identifying the Kingdom of God with a political movement.131
Among the four consultations promoted by the SRSI, the fourth one was the
most important and the most polemic of them. This meeting became known as
the Conferencia do Nordeste,132 since, in contrast with the others, which had
129A. Sapsezian, “Presenga da Igreja na Evolugao da Nacionalidade,” in Estudos

Sobre a Responsabilidade Social da Igreja, edited by CEB (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: CEB,
1960), 35.
130 Paulo de Goes, “Do Individualismo,” 210.
131 Richard Shaull, O Cristianismo e a Revolugao Social, 86. See also Waldo Cesar
(ed.), Presenga da Igreja na EvolugSo da Nacionalidade (Rio de Janeiro, RJ.: CEB,
1960), 49-50. Alliances with existing political parties, and the candidacy of pastors were
also discouraged, for the same reasons.
132The Northeastern Conference.
164
taken place in the South, this one happened in the city of Recife, in the
Northeast. The theme of this consultation was “Christ and the Brazilian
Revolutionary Process.”133
This topic had a double purpose. First, the optimism of the era of development
had passed. The social structures of the Brazilian society had been shattered,
and the country was now struggling with underdevelopment and poverty.134 The
oppressed groups, conscious that an alternative needed to be found, articulated
themselves in the attempt to reach basic changes. There was only one thing
missing; i.e., the presence of the Evang&ico church.135 Therefore, the choice for
this topic was a way to express “the realism and boldness of the encounter of the
Christian message with the concrete situation of the Brazilian society at that
moment.”136
133Waldo Cesar, “Church and Society,” 136. This conference was attended by 160
delegates of 17 different states, and 16 Protestant denominations. Some of the most
notable economists and sociologists of the country—such as Gilberto Freyre, Paulo
Singer and Celso Furtado—participated in it to discuss the appealing topic. See Eduardo
G. Faria, Fe e Compromisso, 123.
134In the search to understand the revolutionary situation that Brazil was undergoing
at the time, the Rev. Almir dos Santos, president of the SRSI responded, “It is a
generalized revolt against the current situation and the struggle to escape
underdevelopment. Certain expressions come out when this issue is raised: self-
determination, nationalism , and social revolution.” Quoted in Waldo Cesar (ed.) A
Conferencia do Nordeste: Cristo e o Processo Revolucionario Brasileim, vol. I (Recife,
Brazil: CEB, 1962), 42.
135The Catholic Church, especially through the radicalization of the movement known
as Agao Catdlica, had already many of its sectors mobilized to respond to the grave
problems of the social order. The Evang6lico, churches, however, needed to be
challenged to offer its contribution to the solution of that crisis. For more on this subject
see Marcio Moreira Alves, A Igreja e A Polftica no Brasil (Sao Paulo, Brazil: Editora
Brasiliense, 1979), 121ff.
136 Paulo de Goes, “Do Individualismo,” 230.
165
The geographical location of the conference was also important. Recife
was located in the Northeastern part of Brazil—the poorest region, where the
scandal of the social injustice reigning in the country was more visible.137 As
Waldo Cesar says, this change of location was intentional.
The previous meetings had taken place in the Rio-Sao Paulo axis,
until that time the political and cultural center of greatest influence
in the country. But this meeting occurred in 1962, a time of growing
tension in the face of the advance of social reforms and popular
movements, among which the Peasant Leagues (Ligas
Camponesas) stood out. The Northeast of the country, with one
third of the population of Brazil, was the symbol as well as the
reality of the struggle between the past and a possible future in
which the ownership of the land would not be in the hand of a few
landlords...Thus the city of Recife, capital of Pernambuco, in the
heart of the Northeast, was chosen to be the site of the fourth
national consultation.138
Significant advances were made between the third and the fourth
consultations. This consultation decided to take the movement to another level of
involvement and participation in the struggles taking place in the country. First, it
was not enough to speak about solidarity and participation. The organizers of this
consultation wanted its participants to go and, in fact, meet face-to-face, one of
the most scandalous realities of the country. The simple change of location was a
137Almir dos Santos, president of the conference, asked the question, “Why the
Northeast?” His own response was, “First, because the Northeast became the center of
national and international concerns...Second, because the Northeast presents the most
critical point of the Brazilian crisis... Recife... has been called ‘the little Brazilian
Moscow;’ the Northeast has been called ‘the Brazilian Cuba’...Third, for the desire to
integrate the Northeastern churches into the CEB...” [translation is mine] Almir dos
Santos, “De Como se Interpretaria a Conferencia do Nordeste,” in A Conferencia do
Nordeste: Cristo e o Processo Revolucionario Brasiieiro, vol. I, 25.
138Waldo Cesar, “Church and Society,” 136-137.
166
gesture of incarnation.139 Recife not only represented a place of concrete
encounter with the “daily struggle of people for survival” in the urban chaotic
situation in which a significant amount of Brazilians lived, but also the encounter
with the struggles taking place in the rural areas, usually forgotten or even
unknown to many of those living in the Southeastern urban centers. The SRSI
was aware of the work of the Peasant Leagues (PL) in the rural areas of the
Northeast,140 and of the difficult relations between the PL and the EvangMco
churches.141 Therefore, it was important for the Evang&icos attending that
conference, to get to know that situation better.
139One of the preparatory pamphlets distributed with the Conference attendees had
the title “Incarnation,” and read as follows: “It is because God desires to create
communion that God incarnates. When God dives into abysms of human misery, God is
looking to the realization of God’s eternal purpose of love. It is interesting to show that all
knowledge that we have of God shows us God always in this movement of incarnation,
i.e., a movement in the direction of lost humanity. That means that our God is always
encountered in the concreteness of the human situations. There is not, in the biblical
thought, a doctrine of God in God’s self. All what one knows about God is derived from
this incarnation, i.e., from this indissoluble union with human destiny.” Waldo Cesar (ed.)
A Conferencia do Nordeste, 33.
140For an introduction to the work of the Peasant Leagues and to his main leader,
Francisco Juliao, see F. Novaes Sodre, Quem e Francisco Juliao? Retrato de um
movimento Popular (Sao Paulo, Brazil: F. Novaes Sodre, 1963); see also Fernando A.
Azevedo, As Ligas Camponesas (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Paz e Terra, 1982). This
movement is the best antecedent in Brazilian history of the contemporary Landless
Workers Movement, known as the MST. The MST, however, is much more structured as
a movement, which has gained national proportions and has become one of the most
active popular movements at the turn of this century. For more on the MST see Roseli S.
Caldart, Pedagogia do Movimento Sem Terra, 3ed (Sao Paulo, Brazil: Expressao
Popular, 2004).
141 Reginaldo Jose da Silva, a Baptist pastor working in the rural areas of
Pernambuco, has documented with several personal testimonies that there was a
significant number of Evang&iico peasants, mainly from Baptist and Pentecostal
background, which were active integrants of the Leagues. However, they did not have
the support of their churches or pastors, some times facing even excommunication for
their involvement with the Leagues, and for the struggle for their rights as rural workers.
Reginaldo Jose da Silva, “Batistas e Pentecostais nas Ligas Camponesas,”
167
As, one participant of the Conference said to Waldo Cesar, one important
characteristic of the Conferencia do Nordeste was dialogue.
The way to make things happen is through dialogue, or encounter,

among us and with the world. If we fear this, we will end up
speaking to ourselves; or, at most, to a static congregation.
Monologue accentuates authoritarianism; dialogue cultivates
power. 2
In terms of Brazilian Protestantism, the Conferencia do Nordeste offered a
level of dialogue with the Brazilian society never reached before.143 Brazilian
Protestantism had historically had enormous difficulty integrating itself with the
Brazilian reality. The movement towards greater involvement and participation in
the problems of Brazilian society took place in a long and cautious journey, which
(unpublished paper, Seminario Teologico Batista do Norte do Brasil, Recife, Brazil,

2003).
142This was a corridor conversation narrated by Waldo Cesar on his diaries of the
Conference. See Waldo Cesar (ed.) A Conferencia do Nordeste, vol. I, 79.
143Once again, the approximation of the Brazilian social reality by that Protestant
movement took place slowly, in an evolutionary movement within the SRSI. If in the first
consultation, the studies revolved around the theological bases for the Christian social
responsibility, the second one began to exam the so-called realidade brasileira, which, in
1957, wanted to escape the epithet of underdeveloped. In the third conference one can
see, even if in a timid manner, the falling of some barriers separating sacred and profane,
religious and secular. The emphasis was on discovering God’s action in the Brazilian
reality. The fourth consultation revealed that the Brazilian church was immersed in a
situation that impelled it towards revolution. What should be the response of the church
to that situation? The encounters promoted by the Conferencia do Nordeste between
church representatives and the Brazilian society revealed that the church needed to
bridge the gap between its mission and the regular person, struggling for survival, for
whom the language of the church was unintelligible and irrelevant. Brazilian
Protestantism needed to know the reality of that person and find a new language to
translate its symbols of faith to them. At the time, the language of revolution seemed to
be the most appropriate and significant for them. For a detailed analysis of this evolution
within the SRSI see Joanildo Burity, “Os Protestantes e a Revolugao Brasileira, 1961-
1964: A Conferencia do Nordeste” (Master of Political Science thesis, Universidade
Federal de Pernambuco, Recife, 1989), 262ff.
168
was advanced by the creation of the Religion and Society Committee, in
1955. But even in the previous consultations, the conversations had taken place
behind close doors, as small groups of Protestant theologians and church
leaders were discussing the social responsibility of the church, trying to
understand the transformations taking place in Brazilian society, and discern the
church’s participation in that national reality.
In the Conferencia do Nordeste, however, these Protestants invited the
Brazilian society for a conversation. First, they moved the location of their
meeting to the place where the social reforms and popular movements seemed
to be most effervescent. Then they invited some of the most renowned Brazilian
thinkers—some of the best sociologists and economists in the country—to join
the discussion. Waldo Cesar explains this in the chronicles of the Conference.
The Conferencia do Nordeste means that all efforts on the part of

the Church must demonstrate the evidence of God’s actions in the
world. [Therefore] We accept the technicians and we need them to
understand better the facts; we share and we dialogue—without
fears or syndromes—with the forces themselves that deny the
lordship of Jesus Christ. However, we do that as Church, under the
spectrum and the mystery of the Incarnation—supreme and
definitive event of History. In obedience we know that our efforts
have meaning and place in the contemporary history of Brazil, and
in the international moment we are undergoing.144 [italics and
translation are mine]
144Waldo Cesar, “Introdugao” in A Conferencia do Nordeste: Cristo e o Processo

Revolucionario Brasileiro, vol. II, edited by Waldo Cesar (Recife, Brazil: Setor de
Responsabilidade Social da Igreja/CEB, 1962), xi-xiii (xii). Half of the speakers at the
Conferencia do Nordeste were not Protestants, many of them were not Christians.
Instead, some were renowned Marxist thinkers in Brazil. The lectures of Gilberto Freyre
(sociologist), Celso Furtado (Marxist economist), Paul Singer (economist) and Juarez
Lopes (sociologist) are part of the second volume of the collection gathered by Waldo
Cesar and published in the aftermaths of the Conference. These speeches were
technical analyses of the Brazilian revolutionary situation. Theologians such as Joaquim
Beato, Joao Dias de Araujo and Curt Kleeman presented papers discussing the role of
169
Finally, there was an ample and open dialogue with the Brazilian society. The
Conference gave a visibility to Brazilian Protestants that they had never had
before. The Conference made the headlines of newspapers in Recife, Sao Paulo
and Rio de Janeiro. The Governor of Pernambuco attended some meetings, and
even the President of Brazil, Joao Goulart, sent a representative to Recife.145
However, that was “the beginning of the end of the Church and Society
program.”146 The Conferencia do Nordeste represented the climax of a process
experienced by the most progressive sectors of Brazilian Protestantism in the
twentieth century. It was the climax both for being the most acute moment of the
reflections and work on the issues regarding the social commitment of the
Evangelico churches and for being the last of the study meetings promoted by
the SRSI.147
Pressures coming from both the State and the Church would contribute to the
end of the SRSI. First, Brazil was experiencing a situation of social convulsion,
which would culminate in the military coup of 1964. In the years prior to the coup,
the Department of Political and Social Order, known as DOPS, had already been
observing the actions taken by the SRSI. Already in 1960, Waldo Cesar reports
the church in that situation. Of course, there was some resistance to that and some
limitation too. As Waldo Cesar points out, the CEB leaders did not permit him to invite
Catholic leaders to speak at the Conference. See Waldo Cesar, “Church and Society,"
138.
145See Waldo Cesar, “Church and Society,”137.

146 Ibid.
147See Edin Abumanssur, “A Tribo Ecumenica,” 46.
170
to have received a visit from a DOPS agent who asked several questions
about the theme of the consultation.148 In 1963, an army colonel paid a visit to
the headquarters of the CEB to ask questions regarding the Conferencia do
Nordeste.'49 By the same time, the CEB decided to suspend the SRSI activities,
and fired four of its secretaries, including Waldo Cesar and Jether Ramalho.150
The dismantling of the SRSI resulted also in the weakening of the CEB, which
agonized for a few more years before ceasing its activities.151
Ecumenism beyond the Churches
148See Waldo Cesar, “Church and Society,” 138.
149See Waldo Cesar, “O setor de Responsabilidade Social da Igreja e a Crise da

CEB” (n. d., unpublished paper accessed by author from Waldo Cesar’s personal
archives on 18 July 2003). Later on, the DOPS would imprison some of the young
leaders of the SRSI, such as Waldo Cesar, Jether Ramalho and Anivaldo Padilha. Many
of the people involved in that movement had to flee the country. See Anivaldo Padilha,
“A Juventude Evangelica dos Anos 60 e 70 e Sua Contribuigao para o Ecumenismo,” (n.
d., unpublished paper emailed to author on 16 December 2005).
150 Ibid.; see also Waldo Cesar, “Letter to Confederagao Evangelica do Brasil,” (Rio
de Janeiro, December 4,1965, accessed by author from Waldo Cesar’s personal files
on July 18, 2003). It is worth noticing that few years earlier, Richard Shaull had been
asked to give up his chair at the Presbyterian Seminary, and had returned to the United
States. See Richard Shaull, Surpreendido Pela Graqa, 245. For Cesar, the conservative
coup with the church anticipated the military coup d’etat. Prior to the military repression
the progressive Evang&icos had to face the religious repression. See Waldo Cesar, “Urn
Ecumenismo Voltado para o Mundo,” 6.
151 For Cesar, the conflict within the CEB had international repercussions. After firing
the young secretaries and closing down the SRSI, the CEB lost credibility with its
international partners and some funding that used to come from the WCC. Many people
left the CEB and it ended up ceasing its activities. In the 1980s, there was an attempt,
with the help of the Brazilian government, to reactivate the CEB, now as a reactionary
federation. It did not last long, however. See Waldo Cesar, Interview by author, tape
recording, Rio de Janeiro, 18 July 2003.
171
The end of these two movements presented in this chapter did not mean
the death of their ideas and theological developments. For almost one decade—
through its work, studies and publications—the SRSI had opened new
possibilities for a reorientation of Brazilian Protestantism regarding its
engagement in the Brazilian culture and society.
The theological evolution experienced by this movement promoted a dynamic
presence of Protestant individuals and communities in the frontiers of the social
changes taking place in the country. The basis for a new kind of theological
reflection was launched, and a new language of faith began to be articulated.152
If, on the one hand, there was a violent interruption, an abortion, of a movement
that had not come to age yet,153 on the other hand, its influence endured.
The achievements of those progressive EvangMcos in Brazil became a
reference for other Protestants in different parts of the continent, and even
beyond Latin America.154 Many of the people involved in the SRSI played an
important role in the creation of the ISAL, an organism which functioned as the
vanguard in the attempt to relate social responsibility and Christian theology in
Latin America.155 Also, some of those progressive Evang6licos—jointly with a
152 See Richard Shaull, Surpneendido Pela Graga, 189; see also Alan Neely,
Protestant Antecedents, 166-167.
153 Cesar refers to that movement of the 1950s and 1960s as the “igreja que seria,
mas nao foi,” a reference to the fact that it was cut off before it could even mature.
Waldo Cesar, Interview by author, tape recording, Rio de Janeiro, 18 July 2003.
154See Richard Shaull, Surpneendido Pela Graga, 189ff.
155 Ibid., 184. See also Alan Neely, Protestant Antecedents, 166 -167. Shaull makes
the following statement: “I am convinced that the main factor in the formation and
development of ISAL was the result of the contribution of Brazilians, especially in the
group of Catholics—created the Publishing House Paz e Terra, which opened
a new space for collaboration of Christian and non-Christian intellectuals.156
Another important accomplishment was the creation of the Centro Ecum§nico de
Informagoes (CEI), which published monthly “a small bulletin providing national
and international news that could encourage the network of persons and
institutions dissatisfied with the authoritarianism in church and society.”157
Then, there emerged, during the 1970s and 1980s, a plurality of ecumenical
institutions in Brazil: Coordenadoria Ecumenica de Servigo—CESE (1973);
DIACONIA (1975); Conselho Nacional de Igrejas Cristas—CONIC (1982); and
others.158 Many of the people who participated in both the UCEB and the SRSI
have become active members of the new ecumenical organizations. Others,
however, have left the ecclesiastical movements altogether, and have joined
initial years.” He thinks that this factor has been overlooked by those studying Latin
American Protestantism. On the other hand, Brazilian sociologist Jose Bittencourt Filho,
emphasized the important role played by Shaull in ISAL. For him, “Shaull was
responsible for the courageous task, proposed by ISAL...of promoting theological
knowledge from Latin America, without abandoning the marks of the [classic] Protestant
theology...” [translation is mine] See Jose Bittencourt Filho, “Por Uma Eclesia Militante:
ISAL Como Nascedouro de uma Nova Eclesiologia para a America Latina” (M. Th.
Thesis, Institute Metodista de Ensino Superior, Sao Bernardo do Campo, Brazil, 1988),
55.
156Many books and an homonymous journal were published, promoting what became
known as a kind of “secular ecumenism;” i.e., a new “fraternity based on justice and
love as elements of unity and commitment.” Waldo Cesar, “Ecumenismo Voltado Para
Fora,” 8. Cesar complains that the secular world responded better to the proposal of
social responsibility than the church, where they had tried to live out the Christian
witness to the world.
157Waldo Cesar, “Church and Society,” 142.

158Gerhard Tiel, Ecumenismo na Perspectiva do Reino, 48ff.
173
non-religious social movements, even if out of an originally religious
motivation, as in the cases of Rubem Cesar Fernandes and Paulo Wright,
mentioned earlier.
After the fall of the CEB, there was a kind of interlude in the ecumenical
movement in Brazil. Then, in the meanwhile, Brazilian ecumenism underwent a
profound transformation as the Catholic Church, after Vatican II, opened up to
participate in the ecumenical movement.159 In fact, in Latin America, the first
country where the Catholic Church officially participated in the National Council
of Churches was Brazil. Furthermore, ecclesiastical ecumenism began to lose
space to base ecumenism, which was more concerned with socio-political
actions than with ecclesiastical unity.160 This move is still a challenge to Brazilian
ecumenical Christians, since, from its beginning, the Ecumenical movement in
Brazil has had an elitist tendency, which has prevented it from reaching out more
effectively to the lower and uneducated classes.
Despite its plurality and potential, the ecumenical movement has never again
affected the Brazilian society and church as it did in the late 1950s and early
1960s. Particularly, it has lost its appeal to most Evangelico Christians, especially
because of its lack of ability to develop a theological language that could be
meaningful to the evangelical and Pentecostal Christians which comprise most of
the Evang6lico churches in Brazil today. They need to be as creative today as
the ecumenical movements I described earlier were—as they struggled to find a
159 Ibid.
160 Ibid.
174
theological language that was meaningful to the secularized environment in
which they were inserted.161
The ecumenical movement of the 1950s and early 1960s was still a
movement in the making. It did not have time to reach its maturity. It did not deal
with religious pluralism, which was not noticed yet as being part of the Brazilian
reality. It did not emphasize the problem of racism, nor the exploitation of women,
nor the issues relating to homosexuality.162 In short, what this ecumenical
movement did at that point in history was to challenge the Evang6lico churches
to open their minds and look around themselves; to learn about the Brazilian
social reality and seek to respond to its challenges, by engaging it in dialogue.
Its theology was not sufficiently developed. The movement was not able, for
example, to avoid the tendency of those concerned with structural changes to
forget existential and personal needs of the individuals involved in the struggle
for life.163 The same problem would happen with liberation theology in its
beginnings.
161 If in the 1950s and 1960s the challenge of the ecumenical movement was to find a
theological language that was meaningful to the secular environment of the political
parties and universities, today its challenge is to rediscover a religious language that can
make sense to Pentecostals and other religious groups that are playing central roles in
the Brazilian public scenario.
162 Still taking the initial steps to join those who were simply struggling to survive,
these movements did not exist long enough to deal with other pressing issues that would
emerge as important issues for the ecumenical movement in posterior decades.
163 In his memoirs, Shaull acknowledges that at that time he did not pay attention to
this issue, although, in his own theology and faith, he valued the search for spiritual and
personal growth. He even says that had he stayed longer in Brazil, and had the SCM
continued longer, they would have noticed those limitations and would have overcome
them, since for him cultivating a personal spirituality was part of the Christian witness
175
The fact that this movement was aborted as it was still in the making led to
different consequences. On the one hand, because of its failure to perpetuate
itself, this movement and its contributions have been neglected. The
contributions made by the religion and society movement need to be retrieved.
Despite the influence it had in the development of liberation theology, there are
particular nuances of the theology of this movement that were not explored
further in the development of liberation theology. Today, as liberation theology
also undergoes its own crisis, perhaps it is time for us to look back and retrieve
the forgotten contributions of the religion and society movement.
I do not think we can—or we should—try to resuscitate the ecumenical
movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Nor should we despise the important
contributions that have been made in ecumenical circles since then. What I
propose is the recovery of the spirit of critical dialogue and obedient response
that was key to the impact that that movement had on Brazilian society at the
time. By retrieving that spirit, we might be able to create a new language that will
enable the contemporary ecumenical movement to reach out again to those
Evang6lico Christians who need today theological orientation for their
engagement in the problems of Brazilian society.
Despite all this neglect, there are some signs indicating that some of the
emphases of that movement have been picked up by progressive evangelicals in
that led them to commit to structural changes. See Richard Shaull, Surpreendido Pela
Graga, 168-69.
Brazil and elsewhere.164 In the next chapter, I will argue that the work of
progressive evangelicals in trying to respond responsibly to the social problems
of the Latin American countries has benefited—directly or indirectly—from the
impact of the Religion and Society movement that we just described in this
chapter.
164See Alan Neely, “Protestant Antecedents,” 166, 167; see also C. Rene Padilla
(ed.), Fe Cristiana y LatinoamGrica Hoy (Buenos Aires: Ediciones Certeza, 1974).
CHAPTER FIVE
THE EVANGELICAL FACE: PROGRESSIVE EVANGELICALS RESPOND TO
THE CHALLENGE OF THE POOR
In the last chapter, I showed that prior to the development of liberation
theology in Latin America there was a Protestant movement that anticipated
several of its themes, and even influenced the formation of the liberationist
movement.1 This chapter focuses on a movement that emerged as an
evangelical response to both liberation theology and the ecumenical
Protestantism that generated movements such as Iglesia y Sociedad en America
Latina (ISAL), the Setor de Responsabilidade Social da Igreja (SRSI), and the
Student Christian Movement (SCM). Although I will briefly describe the
development of the evangelical movement in Latin America, greater attention will
be given to the recent developments of this progressive evangelicalism in Brazil,
and its potential to be a contemporary social actor in the Brazilian society.
The ecumenical Protestant movement was able to put Protestant and
Catholics in conversation under the theme of the Christian social activism. The
Evangelical progressive movement emerged also in conversation with the
Brazilian social reality and the Protestant and Catholic partners that were striving
1From another perspective, and focusing more on ISAL and the WCC conferences
rather than on the developments of the Religion and Society movement in Brazil, Alan P.
Neely also made this point in his doctoral dissertation. See Alan P. Neely, “Protestant
Antecedents of the Latin American Liberation Theology” (Ph. D. diss., The American
University, 1977), 57ff.
177
178
to create a more just society.2 The particular group of Latin American
evangelicals that I will present here, did want to differentiate themselves from the
fundamentalist reactions to the socially engaged gospel taught by both the
Religion and Society Movement and liberation theology. In contrast with the
fundamentalist reaction, which simply discredited and demonized all the
ecumenical initiatives, these evangelicals took seriously the challenge to respond
to the demands brought by the historical, political and social contexts in which
they were inserted.3
It is my intention to show how this Latin American evangelical movement has
responded to the challenges posed by the context in which they lived, and how it
2As I have mentioned before, the name Evang&ico in Latin America refers to all
Protestants. Thus, some scholars have used the world ‘Evangelical,’ in Portuguese and
Spanish, to refer to theologically conservative Evangelicos, in distinction from the more
progressive or liberal, who are called mainline Protestants in the U.S. John Stott, one of
the best-known Evangelical theologians in the world today, has devised six types of
Evangelicals in his study of Protestant missions in the world: (1) neo-evangelicals, such
as Billy Graham, which want to unify all Evangelicals; (2) Separatist Evangelicals, such
as Carl Mclntire and the International Council of Christian Churches; (3) Confessional
Evangelicals, such as Peter Beyerhaus; (4) Charismatic and Pentecostal Evangelicals;
(5) Ecumenical Evangelicals, such as John Stott, Festo Kivengere and Arthur Glasser;
and (6) Radical Evangelicals, where he puts people such as Samuel Escobar, Ren§
Padilla and Orlando Costas. See John Stott, Evangelical Tmth: A Personal Plea for
Unity, Integrity & Faithfulness (Downers Grove, IL.: Intervarsity Press, 1999), 22. The
progressive Evangelicalism to which I refer in this chapter can be related to Stott’s sixth
type, which I will also refer as contextual evangelicals.
3John Stott has strongly rejected the identification of evangelicalism with

fundamentalism. He claims that these two movements have a different history and a
different connotation. Affirming that, at least in Europe, “the great majority of evangelical
Christians repudiate the ‘fundamentalist’ label,” he stresses ten areas of difference
between evangelicals and fundamentalists, which include a different view on human
thought, the nature of the Bible, the ecumenical movement, the world, race, and
Christian hope, among others. Concerning ecumenism, Stott affirms that
fundamentalists tend to go beyond suspicion to “a blanket, uncritical, even vociferous
rejection of ecumenism,” whereas evangelicals, according to him, “have tried to be
discerning, affirming in ecumenism what seems to them to have biblical support, while
claiming the freedom to reject what has not.” (Ibid., 17-21).
179
relates to the previous developments led by the Religion and Society
movement, particularly in the Brazilian context. This movement, although
originating from a congress organized by conservative North American
missionaries and evangelists, gained an identity of its own and became a Latin
American and—in the specific context which I am studying—a Brazilian response
that has contributed to the development of an Evangelico social ethics. Because
of its language and emphases, this movement has been able to impact directly
and indirectly a greater number of Evangelical and Pentecostal churches in Brazil
than the ecumenical response did. One characteristic of this movement has been
its ability to combine individual and social transformation, spirituality and social
justice, evangelization and social action.
As Ren6 Padilla has pointed out, one thing that characterized evangelicalism
for a long time in Latin America was an anti-intellectualism, which led many
evangelical leaders to distrust theology entirely. Padilla diagnosed this situation
in Latin American evangelicalism as being the problem of “a church without a
theology.”4 For Padilla, Latin American Evangelicalism has failed in regard to its
responsibility to “reflect, from the perspective of God’s revelation, on the meaning
that this revelation has here and now, vis-£-vis the obedience to Jesus Christ as
Lord in this situation.”5 Brazilian Evangelicalism, which formed in the second half
of the nineteenth century with the arrival of North American missionaries, seems
4See C. Rene Padilla, MissSo Integral: Ensaios Sobre o Reino e a Igreja (S3o Paulo,
Brazil: FTL-B, 1992), 104. [translation is mine]
5 Ibid., 103-104.
180
to suffer from this same problem. Before the formation of the Fratemidad
Teoldgica Latinoamericana, in 1970, it never developed any theology of its own.
This theological gap, according to Padilla, has mainly two causes: (1) Latin
American evangelicalism has historically identified itself not as an heir of the
Reformation, but instead as an heir of the great revivals of the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries. Therefore, its thrust is evangelization rather than theology
—this reductionism of the evangelistic task reflects the missionary movement
that reached the continent; (2) there has been an exaggerated emphasis on
quantitative rather than qualitative growth among Latin American evangelicals.
Such emphasis has hindered the development of an autochthon Latin American
evangelical theology. The interest in numerical results leads to the copying of
canned formulas and techniques that help to produce new converts.6
Because of this lack of interest in theological reflection, many Latin American
Evangelical churches have been rendered unable to contextualize their message
into the native cultures of the continent, a contextual ization that would allow for a
“new reading of the Gospel from a concrete historical situation under the
6 Ibid., 107-108. During my field research, I observed that most books read by both
Brazilian evangelical pastors and regular church members are imported from U.S.
evangelicalism and translated into Portuguese. Speaking about this tendency of
Brazilian evangelicalism to consume North American literature, Brazilian Pentecostal
sociologist Gedeon Alencar states, "One of the most basic characteristics of the
Brazilian culture is emulation. Brazilians love to follow foreign trends, especially that
which comes from the United States. Contemporary Brazilian evangelicalism, in regard
to both its literature and its music, is an imitation of what people do in the U.S... We can
say that we have a Brazilian church with an American face.” [translation is mine]
Gedeon Alencar, “O Protestantismo Brasileira 6 Sincr§tico,” interview by Marcos Stefano,
Ecfcsia115 [magazine on-line] (Sdo Paulo, Brazil, 1 Abril 2006); Internet; available from
http://www.eclesia.com.br/revistadet1 ,asp?cod artigos=445#: accessed 1 April 2006.
181
direction of the Holy Spirit.”7 Because of this incapacity to reflect theologically
from its own historical situation there might be a loss of second and third
evangelical generations, especially those who reach the university.8
In order to face that situation, contextual evangelicalism proposes the renewal
of the evangelical theological task in Latin America, with its own theological
agenda, which is based on three pillars: (1) The foundation of theology is the
Word of God; (2) The context of theology is a concrete historical situation; and
(3) The purpose of theology is obedience to the Lordship of Jesus Christ.9 With
this evangelical and incarnational spirit, some Latin American Evangelicals have
experienced an awakening concerning their responsibility towards the
surrounding society.
New Social Actors: Evangelicals and Social Responsibility
The military repression, along with the conservative turn in most Protestant
denominations in Brazil10 created a vacuum concerning the Christian struggle for
7 Ibid., 111.
8 Ibid., 112.
9 Ibid., 113-114.
10As Waldo Cesar has demonstrated, even before the military coup d’etat the
internal tensions between the CEB and the religion and society movement amounted to
levels that became unbearable. This tension led the CEB leadership to dose down the
SRSI after the Conferencia do Nordeste. Regarding that period, C6sar affirms, The
goals of the SRSI strongly contrasted with the purposes of the institution which sheltered
it, which were limited to an ‘interdenominational cooperation’ and to ‘a public
representation’ of national evangelism, in this case—and only so—when the freedom to
worship was being threatened or in the case of any official favoring to the Roman
Catholic Church...The tensions increased with the development of the national
consultations, whose topics became increasingly challenging not only to the CEB, but
182
social justice in the late 1960s, which was only filled by the advances that
continued to be made among Catholics.11 In the aftermath of the Conferencia do
Nordeste, with the dismantling of the progressive initiatives developed by
ecumenical Protestants in Brazil, the lead on the struggle for social justice was
taken by the emergent liberation theology, which was gladly embraced by many
of those who had been actively participating in the Religion and Society
movement.
The other front of resistance was ISAL. Once there were no spaces within
Brazilian Protestantism for those who had led the religion and society movement,
those leaders occupied new spaces, and expanded their actions to the rest of the
continent, through the instrumentality of ISAL.12 Despite all odds of living under a
repressive situation, the conservative takeover of most denominations and the
reactionary environment created in the country under the right-wing military
also in relation to the security systems of the country.” [translation is mine] See Waldo
Cesar, “Igreja e Sociedade: Uma Experiencia Ecumenica, Tempo e Presenga 26/334
(2004): 7-14 (9).
11 It is beyond the scope of this dissertation to cover the developments which have
taken place within Brazilian Catholicism since the 1960s. However, a good summary of
the theological developments taking place in Latin American Catholicism in the last
decades can be found in Enrique Dussel, “Historia Recente da Teologia na America
Latina,” in Historia Uberationis: 500 Anos de Histdria da igteja Na Amdrica Latina, edited
by Enrique Dussel (SSo Paulo, Brazil: CEHILA/Edigoes Paulinas, 1992), 546-562.
12 Waldo Cesar refers to the events that followed the closing of the SRSI as a
“providential disaster.” Expulsed from the CEB, Cesar and his companions were free to
expand their initiatives. He affirms that this situation opened new possibilities for them to
relate to progressive Catholics, and to expand their actions to other parts of Latin
America. It was in this context that a group of progressive Evangdlicos and Catholics
created Paz e Terra, an ecumenical publishing house, with its own journal, whose first
print sold 10,000 copies. See Waldo Cesar, interview by author, tape recording, Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil, 18 July 2003.
183
dictatorship were not sufficient to erase the marks of the religion and society
movement.
While the Religion and Society movement was dismantling, a Catholic
liberationist Christianity was rapidly advancing, and a new theology was in the
making.13 Since this new movement was mainly associated with the Roman
Catholic Church, the problem previously diagnosed by the SRSI persisted: Under
the repression of the military regime, the country continued to experience a social
ebullition; students resisted the regime through the work of UNE; industrial
workers began to organize in workers’ unions; and the progressive strand of the
Catholic Church was becoming an important voice resisting the oppression of the
military rulers. There was only one thing missing: the presence of the
Evangdlicos in that struggle.
The few Evangdlicos participating in the resistance were associated with the
Catholic liberationist Christianity, and became almost invisible to the public eyes.
On the other hand, Evangdlicos, in general, began to be associated with the
regime, and close relationships were established between the generals of the
military regime and many Evangdlico leaders.14 It is in the midst of that context
that a new evangelical movement emerged in Latin America.
13See Michael Lowy, The War of Gods: Religion and Politics in Latin America
(London, UK.: Verso, 1996), 81ff. L6wy stresses that the Brazilian Catholic Church was
a unique case in Latin America, since it was the only Church on the continent where
liberation theology and its pastoral followers won a decisive influence.
14For more on the subject of the relation between Brazilian Evangdlicos and the
military dictatorship, see Joao Dias de Araujo, Inquisigdes Sem Fogueiras (Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil: ISER, 1982). Antonila da Franga Cardoso, an Evangelical Christian of
Baptist background, who studied at the Baptist Seminary in Recife during the period of
184
In order to understand how this more progressive evangelical movement
emerged from within that situation, I will briefly describe the development of Latin
American contextual evangelicalism, which will explain why and how some
Brazilian evangelicals became concerned with social responsibility and political
participation during the 1970s and 1980s. This interest was a response not only
to the socio-political demands of the time, but also to the theological initiatives of
both the religion and society movement, and liberation theology, which
the military takeover in Brazil, told me the following episode, which typifies the generally
sympathetic position taken by most Brazilian Protestant churches towards the military
regime. “When the military government elected communist students as its main target,
the evangelical churches did not hesitate to support the regime. In addition, to avoid any
doubt of their support, these churches began to participate in public marches and rallies
of adhesion to the army forces. Pastors began to expurgate from the churches first those
who were political prisoners, later those who were likely to become political prisoners,
and then all university students. The situation came to the point when some pastors
forbade their church members from visiting the penitentiaries. All this was done in the
name of preserving the image and good name of the church, which pretended to be
immaculate. In 1965, the Brazilian Baptist Convention created questionnaires to identify
possible communist sympathizers in the Baptist seminaries. These questionnaires
received the epithet of ‘Inquisition Questionnaires’. Depending on how one answered it,
one would be labeled a communist, and that would be sufficient for the Seminary to send
him or her out. In that same year, the Convention shut down the Committee for Social
Action, created two years earlier.” [translation is mine] Antonila da Franga Cardoso,
interview by author, tape recording, Salvador, Brazil, 23 March 2004. This is one among
many testimonies that can be collected from Protestants who lived under the military
regime—to the best of my knowledge, no research covering this period from the
perspective of the regular members of Protestant churches has been made up to this
point. Another interesting testimony comes from an article by Roberto Barbosa published
in the Christian Century. Barbosa attests the stubborn confusion between ecumenists
and communists made by most Brazilian Evangelical leaders. He says, “Nine out of ten
leaders of Brazil’s churches—including the five denominations which are members of the
WCC—continue to equate ecumenism with communism. A recent issue of Jomal de
Hoje carried an interview with the venerable Presbyterian leader Seth Ferraz upon his
completion of 50 years in the ministry. His views on ecumenism are typical: ‘Ecumenism
thinks all religions are good and that there are no differences. It is the camouflage used
by Marxism to destroy the church.’ In an article transcribed in Brasil Pnesbiteriano,
Baptist Ebeneser Cavalcanti contends that ‘ecumenism and communism walk together.’”
See Roberto Barbosa, “Innovation in Brazil: Ecumenical Structure for Social Problems,”
in Christian Century 90/18 (1973): 516-517 (516).
185
challenged some evangelicals to articulate their own responses to the
problem of social injustice in Brazil.
Introducing the Evangelical Face
The evangelicalism brought by American missionaries to Latin America had
been influenced by the two great awakenings. Among the characteristics of the
second great awakening was a concern with social reformation.15 The British
evangelists of the second awakening “took upon themselves, along with the
moral improvement of society, the cause of abolition of slavery and the struggle
against poverty.”16 However, this emphasis seems to have been reverted later in
the North American Evangelicalism that predominantly came to Latin America.17
It is worth recalling that, as Miguez Bonino points out, “toward 1916 Latin
American missionary Protestantism was basically ‘evangelical’ in accord with the
15See Charles H. Hopkins, The Rise of the Social Gospel in American Protestantism
1865~1915(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1967), 20.
16Jose Miguez Bonino, Faces of Latin American Protestantism (Grand Rapids, Ml.:
W. B. Eerdmans, 1997), 29.
17See Antfinio G. Mendonga, O Celeste Ponrin A InsergSo do Protestarrtismo no

Brasil (SSo Paulo, Brazil: ASTE, 1995), 58-59. Commenting on the change that had
taken place in the social stands of the American Protestantism that was brought to Brazil,
Mendonga affirms, “It seems that the discussions on slavery were slowly becoming
dangerous to the tranquility of the churches, ft is in this context that a theological trend
emerges to prevent the church from engaging the social issue of slavery. It does that by
separating between spiritual and temporal. This tendency appears in the conservative
strand of the so-called Presbyterian ‘Old School’, which had greater influence on the
South and even defended the social system of slavery as being a civil institution,
therefore, out of the sphere of competence of the Church’s direct interest The Scripture,
seen as the constitution of the Church, established the principle of ‘give to Caesar what
belongs to Caesar, and to God what belongs to God.’ Issues of jurisprudence and
politics belonged to Caesar; thus, [only] ‘spiritual’ issues such as conversion and
conduct, constituted the real preoccupations of the Church.” [translation is mine]
186
model of American evangelicalism: i.e., “individualistic and Christological-
soteriological in a basically subjective key, with [great] emphasis on
sanctification.”18 Even among the mainline churches that came together in 1934
to found the CEB, evangelicalism was the predominant trend.
Despite its inherited individualism, in the twentieth century Brazilian
evangelicalism became a vehicle of social participation for the marginal groups
that came into sight in Brazil as a result of the modernizing changes occurring
within that society.19 The simplicity of its message appealed to the working
classes in ways that the intellectualism of the ecumenical movement, much more
concerned with the evangelization of the Brazilian elites, did not.
One thing, however, rendered Evangelicalism incapable of promoting any
significant structural change in the Brazilian society. Because of its exaggerated
focus on individual conduct, the Evangelicalism that spread in Brazilian territory
for the most part of the twentieth century never developed the means to
understand the Brazilian social reality; that was not part of its concern and
mission.20 In short, Evangelicalism was incapable of understanding structural
18Miguez Bonino, Faces of Latin American, 40.
19Ronald Glen Frase, “A Sociological Analysis of the Development of Brazilian

Protestantism: A Study in Social Change” (Ph.D. Diss., Princeton Theological Seminary,
1975), 248.
20According to Rubem Alves, because of its doctrine of “sacred inspiration of the

Holy Scriptures,” this kind of Protestantism abolished all kinds of human mediations. It
believed that through the reading of Scriptures, one could have direct access to the will
of God, and that was all the light they needed to guide their conduct. There was no
interest at all, for instance, in using the social instruments available to understand the
Brazilian social reality. See Rubem Alves, Pmtestantismo e RepressSo (Sao Paulo,
Brazil: Atica, 1979), 98.
187
violence as well as of participating in the process to transform it. Because of
its rigid dogmatism, it was not interested in overcoming social problems such as
class exploitation and racism, which afflicted the Brazilian grassroots. Brazilian
Evangelicalism, then, was supportive of the status quo throughout the twentieth
century, only reacting when religious freedom was at stake.
Brazilian Evangelicals are usually conservative in doctrine and firmly
committed to zealous proselytism in the name of the gospel.21 Brazilian
sociologist Velasquez Filho defines evangelicalism as “the theological movement
that accentuates the experience of conversion or new birth as the starting point
of the Christian life, as well as a return to the Bible as the only rule of faith and
conduct.”22 His definition is very close to J. Christopher Soper’s definition of
North American evangelicalism. He says, “Evangelicals are Protestant Christians
who emphasize salvation by faith in the atoning death of Jesus Christ through
personal conversion and the authority of the scripture in matters of faith and
Christian practice.”23
George Marsden, renowned for his studies of evangelicalism and
fundamentalism, offers a more comprehensive definition for the term
21Elizete da Silva, “CidadSos de Outra Patria: Anglicanos e Batistas na Bahia.” (Ph.D.

Diss., Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo (USP), S3o Paulo, Brazil, 1996), 601.
22 Procoro Velasques Filho, “Deus Como EmogSo: Origens Historicas e Teoldgicas

do Protestantismo Evangelical,” in IntrodugSo ao Protestantismo no Brasil, by Antdnio G.
Mendonga and Procoro Velasques Filho (Sdo Paulo, Brazil: Edigdes Loyola, 1990), 80,
81. [translation is mine]
23J. Christopher Soper, Evangelical Christianity in the United States and Great
Britain: Religious Beliefs, Political Choices (New York: New York University Press, 1994),
38.
188
Evangelicalism. For him, in its broad usage, Evangelicalism can be seen as a
conceptual unity, which typically emphasizes: “(1) the Reformation doctrine of the
final authority of Scripture; (2) the real, historical character of God’s saving work
recorded in Scripture; (3) eternal salvation only through personal trust in Christ;
(4) the importance of evangelism and missions; and (5) the importance of a
spiritually transformed life.”24
All these characteristics comprise the puritan-pietistic nature of the
evangelical ethos that generated in Latin America a spirituality marked by “a
legalistic morality, a fervid and exclusionary emotionalism, and of more recent
origin, a pronounced sympathy for political candidates and positions on the right
wing of the Latin American spectrum,”25 which rather reinforced the status quo. In
the Brazilian situation, most evangelical churches became part of a conservative
political force, which gave religious legitimacy to the right-wing military
dictatorship that ruled the country between 1964 and 1985.26
24See George Marsden, “The Evangelical Denomination,” in Piety and Politics:

Evangelical and Fundamentalists Confront the World, edited by Richard J. Neuhaus &
Michael Cromartie (Washington, D.C.: Ethics and Public Policy Center, 1987), 55-68
(59).
25 Pablo Deiros, “Protestant Fundamentalism in Latin America,” in Fundamentalisms

Observed, edited by Martin E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby (Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press, 1994),152.
26Sociologist Leonildo S. Campos has documented the specific case of the

Independent Presbyterian Church in Brazil, showing its alliance with the military regime,
and how it functioned as the regime’s instalment of ideological legitimization. See
Leonildo S. Campos, “Protestantes e Politics no Brasil: Atos e Retorica da igreja
Presbiteriana Independente na Primeira Fase do Regime Militar Brasileiro (1964-1969),”
(unpublished paper, S§o Paulo, UMESP, 2002, acessed by author from Campos’s
personal files on 23 July 2003). A similar study, this time on the relations of the Brazilian
Presbyterian Church to the military regime, can be found in Valdir Gonzales Paixio
Junior, “A Era do Trovao: Poder e RepressSo na Igreja Presbiteriana do Brasil na Epoca
189
This worldview also generated an indiscriminate indifference among
Brazilian Evangelicals towards any kind of action, whether social or political, that
may come out of their religious beliefs. They learned to live as citizens of two
worlds: “one is secular, where they exercise their economic activities; the other,
is the close 'family of faith’, the sphere in which they live out their faith.”27 For
these evangelicals, these two worlds do not mix. Therefore, in general, this kind
of Christian faith has not prompted the believers to social action 28 Furthermore,
because of their general parochial mentality, most Brazilian evangelicals have
never been able to make a synthesis that could adequately integrate them into
the Brazilian cultural environment. Their attitudes towards society have tended to
be defensive.29
However, in the midst of this predominant conservatism, a group of Brazilian
evangelicals more open to see the reality surrounding their lives gave birth to a
progressive Evangelical movement, which has developed its own responses to
the cry of the oppressed in Latin America.
da Ditadura Militar (1966-1978)” (M. Th. thesis, Universidade Metodista de SSo Paulo,
Sao Bernardo do Campo, Brazil, 2000). For an analysis of the Baptist behavior during
the same period see Jose M. Aguilera, “Um Povo Chamado Batista: Um Jomal (OJB) a
Servigo da Formagio de uma Mentalidade Religiosa” (M. Th. thesis, Institute Metodista
de Ensino Superior, Sao Bernardo do Campo, Brazil, 1988).
27Antonio G. Mendonga, “A History of Christianity in Brazil: An Interpretative Essay,”

International Review of Mission, 85/338 (1996): 366-386 (384).
28 Ibid., 385.
29 Brazilian sociologist Waldo Cesar affirms that the Protestantism established in

Brazil brought with it the marks of sectarianism and individualism. This resulted in a
difficult acculturation, which has not been able to establish connections with the
historical formation of the Latin American peoples. See Waldo Cesar, “Situagao Social e
Crescimento do Protestantismo na America Latina,” in Protestantismo e Imperialismo na
America Latina, edited by Waldo Cesar (Petropolis, Brazil: Vozes, 1968), 7-36 (12).
190
The Roots of the Progressive Evangelical Movement in Brazil
Whereas the ecumenical Protestant movement generated several organisms
that made it more visible to the rest of society, it was criticized by most
evangelicals for minimizing Protestantism’s evangelistic impetus. As I mentioned
previously, the efforts made by the ecumenical movement did not succeed in
influencing the vast majority of the Protestant churches in Latin America,
comprised of the lower classes. However, the ecumenical mobilization in the
1950s provoked a significant social impact, especially among the youth, and that
situation demanded an evangelical response. Reacting to the two Latin American
Evang4lico Conferences (CELAI and II),30 some Latin American Evangelical
30CELA I took place in Buenos Aires, in 1949. Its topic was EvangSlico Christianity in
Latin America, and despite all the mobilization around the meeting, it gathered only 103
people, with only 56 as official representatives of 15 Latin American countries. CELA I
reinforced the need for cooperation and Christian unity, and alluded the Human Rights
Universal declaration, to say that such rights have been defended by the Latin American
Evang6lico churches. CELA II (Lima, 1961) had as its theme “Christ, the Hope for Latin
America.” This congress affirmed the Evang6lico conscience of its new understanding of
its responsibility before a world undergoing rapid transformations. It showed sympathy
towards the revolutionary processes taking place in the continent, and tried to analyze
the social problems in light of the socio-economic structures which generate them. CELA
III, which was expected to take place in Brazil, in 1965, was postponed and ended up
happening four years later, in Argentina, in1969. For the first time the Catholic Church
was invited to participate and sent two observers. CELA III emphasized the church’s
public responsibility vis-a-vis the social, economic and political changes in Latin America.
It reaffirmed the conflictive reality and the revolutionary processes in Latin America,
pointing to the possibility of a Christian revolutionary commitment. For extended views
and interpretative analyses of these conferences see, Jose Miguez Bonino, “Hacia un
Protestantismo Ecumenico: Notas para una Evaluacion Historica del Protestantismo
entre la I y la II CELA (1949-1960), in Oaxtepec 1978: Unidad y Misidn an America
Latina, edited by CLAI (San Jose, Costa Rica: CLAI, 1980), 65-80; Dafne S. Plou,
Caminos de Unidad: Itinerario del Diilogo Ecumenico en America Latina 1916-1999
(Quito, Ecuador CLAI, 1994), 67ff; see also Luiz Lomguini Neto, O Novo Rosto da
MissSo: Os movimentos Ecum&nico e Evangelical no Protestantismo Latino-Americano
(Sao Paulo, Brazil.: Editora Ultimato, 2002), 109 ff.
191
leaders felt that they needed to launch their own Evangelical meetings, where
emphasis would be put on the evangelization of Latin America.
In fact, prior to organizing their own congress, a group of Evangelicals and
Pentecostals planned on being massively represented at CELA III to show their
dissatisfaction, especially with the lack of evangelistic zeal that typically had
characterized those conferences; for these evangelicals, evangelism in the
ecumenical circles had been reduced to social reform. In order to prepare for that
massive invasion, these leaders required the postponement of the meeting,
scheduled to take place in Brazil, in 1965.31 Despite succeeding in postponing
CELA III for four years, the evangelical massive “invasion” of that conference did
not take place. Those evangelicals who did not feel represented in the theology
guiding CELA III opted for organizing their own evangelical congress.
The first Latin American Congress of Evangelization, known as CLADE I, took
place in Bogota, Colombia, in 1969.32 That meeting gave birth to the elaboration
of an evangelical response to the Latin American situation.33 This congress was
31 See Orlando Costas, “Una Nueva Consciencia Protestante: la III CELA,” in

OAXTEPEC 1978, 81-118 (92). For Costas, however, the postponement of CELA III also
had ideological causes, since the CEB leaders feared that the conference could provoke
“subversive infiltration” in the country. For more on this see also Orlando Costas,
Theology of the Crossroads in Contemporary Latin America: Missiology in Mainline
Protestantism 1969-1974 (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1976), 86ff.
32 CLADE refers to the Spanish initials for Congresso Latinoamericano de
Evangelizacidn. There have been three more congresses of evangelization following that
first one: CLADE II (Lima, 1979), CLADE III (Quito, 1992), and CLADE IV(Quito, 2000).
33The Latin American Evangelical Christians saw the ecumenical progressive

Protestantism represented by ISAL, and liberation theology, converging into a single
movement, and felt that they had to offer an alternative, from an Evangelical perspective.
See Alderi Souza de Matos, “Samuel Escobar e a Missao Integral da Igreja: Uma
Perspectiva Latino-Americana,” Vox Scripturae 8/1 (July 1998): 95-111.
192
the bedrock of the Latin American Theological Fellowship (FTL), which would
develop a contextual evangelical theology in Latin America.34
One of the main Latin American evangelical theologians addressing CLADE I
was Samuel Escobar, a Peruvian missionary and scholar, who had spent some
years in Brazil35 working among evangelical students. Among the 28 papers read
at that congress, his address on the Social Responsibility of the Church received
the most enthusiastic attention from the participants36 He argued passionately
that both evangelization and social action are necessary for the Christian witness
to the world.
There is sufficient basis in the history of the Church and in the

teaching of the Word of God for us to categorically affirm that the
concern with the social aspect of the Christian witness in the world
does not imply the abandonment of the fundamental truths of the
Gospel; on the contrary, it means to take to the last consequences
the teachings regarding God, Jesus Christ, human existence, and
the world, which form the basis of this Gospel... We sustain that an
evangelization that does not take account of the social problems
and that does not announce the salvation and sovereignty of Christ
within the context in which those who listen to it live, is a defective
34According to Oscar Campos, the result of this attempt to respond to the challenges
posed by liberation theology—with its emphasis on socio-political liberation—and also to
contextual issues which evangelicals could no longer afford to ignore, was the
emergence of a “contextual evangelicalism,” proposing a more contemporary
evangelical theology of the mission of the church, a theology of holistic mission. See
Orlando A. Campos, “The Mission of the Church and the Kingdom of God in Latin
America” (Ph.D. diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, Dalas, TX, 2000), 3.
35 For more on Escobar’s work in Brazil and his relationship with the Alian9a Biblica
Universitaria (ABU) see Samuel Escobar, Desafios da Igreja na America Latina: Histdria,
Estratdgia e Teologia de Missdes (Vigosa, Brazil: Editora Ultimata, 1997), 11.
36 Escobar’s paper was published in Brazil in the form of a booklet. See Samuel
Escobar, A Responsabilidade Social da Igreja, Topicos do Momenta 3 (Sao Paulo,
Brazil: Vida Nova, 1970).
193
evangelization, which betrays the biblical teaching and does not follow
the model purposed by Jesus Christ, who sends the evangelist.37
CLADE I was organized by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, under
the impulse of the World Congress of Evangelization (Berlin, 1966). Despite its
external origins, CLADE I created the opportunity for those Latin American
Evangelical leaders who were concerned with the relationship between the
Evangelical faith and the Latin American social reality to come together and
share their inquietudes. Thus, as David Stoll affirms, CLADE I was not a
complete success for its North American organizers, since the Latin American
Evangelical leaders “discovered that they were all tired of North Americans telling
them how to think.”38 It issued “a call for Evangelicals to meet their social
responsibilities, by contextualizing their faith in the Latin American context of
oppression.”39
One year later, a group of Latin American Evangelical leaders founded the
Latin American Theological Fraternity (FTL), choosing Samuel Escobar as its first
president.40 The purpose of these politically progressive Evangelical thinkers was
37 Ibid., 7-8.
38 David Stoll, Is Latin America Turning Protestant? The Politics of Evangelical

Growth (Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1990), 131.
39 Ibid.
40The inaugural meeting of the Fratemidad Teologica Latinoamericana (FTL) took

place in Cochabamba, Bolivia, in December of 1970. According to Samuel Escobar the
group which founded the FTL included pastors, seminary professors, lay leaders and
missionaries. Samuel Escobar, “La Fundacion de la Fratemidad Teologica
Latinoamericana: Breve Ensayo Historico,” Boletin Teologico 27/59-60 (1995): 7-26 (7).
For a text containing the “Declaracion de Cochabamba,” see Pedro Savage (ed.) El
194
to create a forum where they could encourage a contextualized theological
reflection in Latin America from a biblical and mission-oriented perspective. That
kind of reflection was an attempt from those Latin American Evangelicals—
theologically conservative, but politically progressive—to respond to the
challenges posed by the Latin American reality of poverty and injustice.
Understanding that social responsibility and evangelization were both part of
the mission of the Christian church in Latin America, they developed a neo-
Evangelical theology named teologia de la misidn integral (theology of the
holistic mission). Pledging to be both biblical and distinctively Latin American,
they declared their intention “to pursue social issues without abandoning
evangelism, deal with oppressive structures without endorsing violence, and
bring left- and right-wing Protestants back together again.”41
Whereas embracing much from what had been proposed by both liberation
theology and ecumenical Protestantism concerning the social responsibility of the
church, these radical evangelicals were critical of both. In order to distinguish
themselves from those two movements, they opted for the paradigm of
contextualization instead of the paradigm of liberation to speak about their
theological action 42
Debate Contempor£neo Sobre fa Bfblia (Barcelona: Ediciones Evangelicas Europeas,

1972), 225-228.
41 David Stoll, Is Latin America Turning Protestant?, 131.
42According to J. Andrew Kirk, “Contextualization recognizes the reciprocal influence

of culture and socio-economic life. In relating Gospel to culture, therefore, it tends to take
a more critical (or prophetic) stance towards culture. The concept first came to
prominence in the early 1970s in the arena of theological education. It is intended to be
195
Orlando Costas, one of the founding members of FTL, strongly criticized
the conservative theologies produced in the U.S. and uncritically ingested by
Latin American Evangelicals.43 Along with Samuel Escobar, J. Andrew Kirk, and
Rene Padilla, Costas would be influential in the inclusion of social responsibility
as a crucial issue to be discussed in the 1974 Lausanne Congress on World
Evangelization, as well as in the Lausanne Covenant.44
As Costas seems to suggest, CLADE I should be seen as a counterpoint to
CELA III,45 and, I would add, to the second consultation on Religion and Society
led by ISAL.46 CLADE I was organized and led by North Americans; no leader of
ISAL was invited to participate, and even evangelical theologians who were
considered more radical, such as Rene Padilla and Plutarco Bonilla, were left off
taken seriously as a theological method which entails particular ideological commitments

to transform situations of social injustice, political alienation and the abuses of human
rights.” See J. Andrew Kirk, What is Mission? Theological Explorations (Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 2000), 91.
43 Orlando Costas, The Church and Its Mission: A Shattering Critique from the Third
World (Wheaton, IL.: Tyndale House Publishers, 1976), 221ff.
44Sherron K. George, “Brazil: An ‘Evangelized’ Giant Calling for Liberating

Evangelism, International Bulletin of Missionary Research, (2001): 104-109.
Erroneously, many people refer to this radical evangelical movement in Latin America as
a result of the Congress in Lausanne. However, it would be more accurate to say that
the emphasis on social responsibility in the Lausanne movement is a consequence of
the active participation of its Latin American participants. Carlos Queiroz, one of the
leaders of the FTL in the Northern part of Brazil, has said that the point of departure of
the FTL in Brazil is not Lausanne, but rather the Conferencia do Nordeste. For him, the
FTL has made many more advances in its understanding of the social responsibility of
the church than the Lausanne Movement. Carlos Queiroz, interview by author, tape
recording, Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil, 31 July 2002.
45Orlando Costas, “Una nueva Consciencia Protestante,” 101ff.
46 This consultation took place in Montevideo, Uruguay, in 1966. Its main texts are
collected in the following book. ISAL, America Hoy: Accidn de Dios y Responsabilidad
del Hombre (Montevideo, Uruguay: ISAL, 1966).
196
the program.47 The word ‘revolution’, so important in the theology developed
within the ISAL, was used only once, and just to refer to the ‘spiritual’ revolution
within the individual.48 All the problems of the continent were still understood in
terms of a spiritual and religious crisis, which could be solved only through the
preaching of the Gospel.
The strong influence of the Department of Missiology of Fuller Theological
Seminary upon the congress was clear. A text written by Fuller missiologist Peter
Wagner, under the title “Latin American Theology: left-wing or evangelical?’ was
distributed during the congress. The text, in an apologetic manner, sought to
polarize the ecclesiastical scenario in Latin America between ecumenical and
conservatives.49 The way it was distributed—and its tone as well— irritated some
participants in the congress, and generated negative reactions. A group of
theologians, critics of the document, began to worry about the fact that the Latin
American evangelical community had not yet developed its own theological
expression. From that conversation, they decided to create the FTL, as a forum
for a contextualized evangelical theological reflection in Latin America.50
47Orlando Costas, “Una Nueva Consciencia Protestante,” 107.
48Carlos Eduardo Brandao Calvani, “O Movimento Evangelical: Consideragdes

Historicas e Teologicas” (Master of Religious Sciences, Instituto Metodista de Ensino
Superior, Sao Bernardo do Campo, Brazil, 1993), 116.
49 Ibid., 117.
50Ibid. See also Longuini Neto, O Novo Rosto da MissSo, 159. According to Longuini
Neto, Wagner’s text tried to discredit the missiological proposal of the religion and
society movement, by accusing it of denying the doctrine of personal salvation. Instead
of convincing the Latin American leaders attending the congress, this attitude generated
among them a desire to develop a dialogue through which they could elaborate a
The posterior Congresses of Evangelization in Latin America that
happened later would have a greater Latin American flavor. Organized by Latin
Americans, they would have a different nature. CLADE II (1979), as I will show
later, had a strong impact on the development of Brazilian contextual
evangelicalism and its organisms. CLADE III (1992) had among its participants
and speakers, representatives of liberation and ecumenical movements.
Jose Miguez Bonino was a key-speaker at CLADE III, and other
representatives from the ecumenical Latin American Council of Churches offered
seminars, in the attempt to promote greater dialogue.51 CLADE IV (2000) would
deepen this understanding of the pluralism of Latin American Protestantism, by
emphasizing concomitantly its unity and diversity.52 Concerned with the
proposal of their own, which would not be influenced by North American fundamentalists,
being also distinct from that of ISAL.
51 The theme of the unity of the church was discussed in CLADE III. Jose Miguez
Bonino, participant of both the ecumenical and the liberationist movements, was invited
to speak at the event. For all the speeches of the congress, see FTL, CLADE: Tercer
Congreso Latinoamericano de Evangelizacidn (Quito, Ecuador: FTL, 1992). It is worth
noting, however, that by the time CLADE I happened, even evangelical theologians
considered to be more radical like Rene Padilla, had strongly criticized ISAL and Richard
Shaull’s theology of revolution, which guided it, calling it “another gospel that reduces
God’s purpose in history to mere humanization, loosing sight of the ultimate cause of
injustice, which resides within us.” According to Padilla, ISAL’s view of human nature
coincided with that of Marxism instead with that of Christianity. See C. Rene Padilla,
“Mensaje Biblico y Revolution,” Certeza 39 (1970): 200. So, from CLADE I to CLADE III
there has been a maturing journey, which has allowed for an increasing conversation
between evangelical and ecumenical Protestants in the continent.
52This time, among the texts produced for the congress, there were expressions of
the liberal, Pentecostal and Neo-Pentecostal faces of Latin American Protestantism
represented in the congress. See Jose Miguez Bonino, Juan Sepulveda, and Rigoberto
Galvez, Unidad y Diversidad del Protestantismo Latinoamericano: El Testimonio
Evangelico Hacia el Tercer Milenio: Palabra, Espiritu y Mission (Buenos Aires,
Argentina: Kairos, 2002).
198
Evang6lico testimony in the new millennium, CLADE IV portrayed the
different faces of Latin American Protestantism, calling the Evang&ico
community to be an agent of transformation in a society marked by violence,
corruption, poverty, and injustice.53
The FTL has established itself in Latin American in the last three decades, by
seeking to play a role among Latin American evangelicals similar to that which
ISAL and the SRSI played for the ecumenical movement.54 It has intended to be
aware of the social problems of the continent, and of its challenges to the
churches, developing a biblical and balanced approach to respond to that
situation.55 The FTL has created a forum for dialogue among different
evangelicals who share their loyalty to biblical authority and to evangelical faith,
as a basis for their theological reflection and wholehearted commitment to the
fulfillment of the Christian mission in its entirety—including the social dimension
of the Christian actions in the world.
The FTL has been particularly influential within what I am calling the political
progressive Evangelical movement in Brazil. It has also initiated important
dialogues with the ecumenical movement, on one hand, and with Pentecostalism,
on the other hand. Furthermore, it has been able to dialogue with the larger
society, showing genuine concern with changing the social structures that
53 Ibid., 7.
54Carlos Eduardo B. Calvani, 0 Movimento Evangelical, 120.
55Alderi Matos, “Samuel Escobar e a Missao Integral da Igreja,” 93.
199
promote injustice and exclusion in their society.56 Therefore, this movement
has the potential to become an important player in the development of an
Evangelico progressive social ethics in Brazil.
By mastering a religious language that is more familiar to the crowds
attending Evangelico churches in Brazil, the evangelical progressive movement
has also reached out to a larger number of Latin American Evangelicos than the
ecumenical movement.57 Because of its strong emphasis on personal piety and
biblical authority, on one hand, and its intentional engagement in the struggle for
social justice, on the other, the Progressive Evangelical movement can be
appealing to both Brazilian historical Evangelico churches and their Pentecostal
counterparts.
This movement shows that even though Protestantism in Latin America is
diverse and divided into many groups, it can support a holistic mission, avoiding
polarization between evangelization and social action. They seem to incorporate
the relational component of Latin American culture that tends to lead different
groups to engage each other in critical dialogue and cooperation, rather than into
polarized disputes with imported labels that do not have significant meaning in
56 For the increasing concern of this movement with expanding and deepening the
levels of dialogue and involvement with the various sectors of Latin American society—
social movements, local communities, the state and the non-evangelical churches—in
the fulfillment of the “mision integral e la iglesia,” see the papers of CLADE IV in
Tetsunao Yamamori et al, Misidn Integral y Pobreza : El Testimonio Evangdlico Hacia el
Tercer Milenio: Palabra, Esplritu y Misidn (Buenos Aires, Argentina: Kairos, 2001), 125ff.
57 Its dialogue with Pentecostal spirituality enhances the potential of this movement to
reach out to the grassroots in Brazil, which, as Richard Shaull has shown, possess a
Pentecostalized symbolic world. See Richard Shaull and Waldo Cesar, Fentecostalism
and the Future of the Christian Churches (Grand Rapids, Ml.: W. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 2000), 118.
200
that context. It is not a surprise, for example, that the meaning of a word such
as Evangelico is blurred in that context. Manoel de Mello, the founder of the
Brazilian Pentecostal Church Brasil Para Cristo, said that he considered the
Pope John XXIII an Evangelico, since, for him, Evangelico is anyone who is
committed to the Gospel, that is, “to Christ and to justice.”58 That represents the
Latin American Evangelico spirit.
Characteristics of the Progressive Evangelical Movement
Thus, there is a hybrid and relational character that pervades the progressive
Evangelical movement, which enables it to affirm its Evangelical identity in
conversation with other partners—especially with ecumenical Protestants,
liberation theology, and Pentecostalism—as these other movements also seek to
respond to the challenges posed to all of them by the reality of oppression and
injustice in Latin America.
Jose Miguez Bonino has said that he has been labeled a liberation theologian,
an ecumenical, a conservative, a liberal, and many other things, but that at the
end of the day he sees himself as simply an Evangelico,59 This Evangelico
identity more than being another conceptual category, implies also some
relationality. To affirm one’s identity as Evangelico in Latin America implies
58 Roberto Barbosa. “The Gospel with Bread: An Interview with Brazilian

Pentecostalist Manoel de Mello” in Mission Trends 2, Evangelization, edited by Gerald H.
Anderson and Thomas F. Stransky (New York: Paulist Press, 1975), 145-154 (154).
59Miguez Bonino, Faces of Latin American Protestantism, vii.
201
awareness of a plurality within that identity, and the need to be in dialogue
with others who also affirm that identity, although living it out differently.
Speaking of CLADE III, Tomas Gutierrez says that it was a forum for all
Evangelico groups in Latin America, for conservatives and liberals, with more
than a thousand representatives from the whole continent.60 It intentionally
created discussion groups around the debates that existed within Latin American
Protestantism. One of these groups put together representatives of the
ecumenical Latin American Council of Churches (CLAI) and of the conservative
Latin American Evangelical Council (CONELA) to discuss face-to-face their
proposals and differences. 61
By doing that, the FTL wanted to consolidate itself as an open space for
dialogue before the new contemporary challenges in Latin America. It wanted
also to preserve the principle of tolerance, affirming that the acknowledgement
and respect for the other will generate a new commitment to the fulfillment of the
unity and mission of the Latin American church.62
Besides being relational, this kind of radical evangelicalism is also contextual.
As I have shown earlier, contextualization is the paradigmatic word of the
movement, replacing both revolution and liberation. The main difference being
that the FTL claims to start its theological reflection from the biblical text, and
“ Tomas J. Gutierrez S. “De Panama a Quito: Los Congresos Evangelicos en

America Latina. Iglesia, Mision e Identidad (1916—1992),” Boletin Teoldgico. Vol. 27, no.
59/60 (1995):34-64 (58).
61 Ibid.
62 Ibid., 59.
202
then move into the Latin American context, to be able to understand it—not
the reverse, as its is claimed by liberation theology, for instance.63 The
theological arguments elaborated by FTL theologians are usually preceded by an
exegetical work on the biblical texts, which will justify their praxis.64 In practical
terms, however, as they analyze the social structures of Latin American Society,
many times they come to similar conclusions to those of liberation theologians, in
regard to prophetically denouncing the injustices of that conjuncture and calling
for a structural change.65
Progressive Evangelicals have reaffirmed the conviction present in both
liberation theology and ecumenical Protestantism that praxis is the element by
63 Liberation theology and the Religion and society movement described in the
previous chapter have both claimed the priority of praxis in the theological task.
Theology is understood as a critical reflection on the praxis of liberation. Only when one
“does” liberation one can do theology. Theology, then, is a second moment in the
process of liberation. See Leonardo Boff & Clodovis Boff, Introducing Liberation
Theology (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1987), 22; see also Clodovis Boff, Theology and
Praxis: Epistemological Foundations (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1987), 37.
64 For example, the papers of CLADE IV concerned with the evangelical praxis in a
context marked by violence, corruption, poverty and injustice, were preceded by a paper
on the biblical basis for the holistic mission of the church in contexts of poverty. For
these evangelicals, starting from an explicit biblical mandate is crucial. Only then, they
move towards analyzing the social structures and context where they are, and reflecting
on their praxis in response to both, the biblical and the contextual challenges. So, in
terms of their methodology and starting point, they differentiate themselves from both
liberation theology and the religion and society movement. See Esteban Voth, “Bases
Blblicas para la Mision Integral en Contextos de Pobeza,” in Misidn Integral y Pobreza,
73-124.
65See, for instance, Victor Vaca, “Mision Integral y Transformacion Estructural Desde
America Latina,”in Misidn Integral y Pobreza, 49-72 (53). In a similar tone as that found
in most Latin American liberations theologians Vaca affirms, “The sinful structures of our
society, the same ones which maintain the ‘carnivore society’ described above, must be
changed. And we do not have to choose between pure ‘spirit’ and pure ‘matter’...We can
passionately discuss if the soul is mortal or immortal, but that hunger is largely deadly
there is nothing to discuss; that poverty kills, it is so obvious.” [translation is mine]
which the validity of any theological reflection is judged. As Samuel Escobar
affirms, “The real test of the validity of all theological reflection comes when it has
become specific by application, on the ethical level.”66
Orlando Costas has acknowledged that liberation theology poses a
tremendous challenge to contemporary theology. He states that that challenge
must be taken seriously in Evangelical circles especially due to its “biblical
contents.”67 For Costas, liberation theology’s insistence on engaging the concrete
historical situation is the greatest challenge for the theology of mission, because
biblical Christian faith has a historical character, being firmly rooted in a concrete
historical situation.68 According to him, although Jesus was not involved in
political parties, he took a political position as he relativized the authority of the
Empire.69 On that basis, Costas criticized the role of the Evangelical missionary
enterprise as functioning to justify and cover for the domination of Latin American
peoples.
Not only does the theology of liberation challenge missionary theory

and praxis to take seriously the political dimension of the
missionary situation by evaluating its own political instance (its
66Samuel Escobar, “The Kingdom of God, Eschatology, and Social and Political
Ethics in Latin America,” Theological Fraternity Bulletin, 1/1(1975): 1-42 (1)
67Orlando E. Costas, The Church and Its Mission: A Shattering Critique from the
Third World, 240.
68 Ibid., 241.
69 Ibid., 243. As Costas states, “Jesus not only challenged the universal claims of the
Empire and underlined its corrupt moral nature. His political option involved also an
identification with those who were victims of the powerful and the mighty. He took sides
with the weak and destitute.” Here one can see the similarity of Costas’ claims with
those made by Jose Miguez Bonino in “For Life and Against Death: A Theology that
Takes Sides,” in The Christian Century, 97/38 (1980):1154-1158.
204
justification of the status quo through the policy of nonpolitical
commitment), but also by insisting on the incarnational character of
the gospel. If mission is to be faithful to the gospel it purports to
communicate, it must be undergirded by a theology grounded on
serious commitment to mankind in its many situations 70
Such an incarnational mission-oriented theology, according to Costas, must
have at least three characteristics: (1) unfeigned love, which means being
sincerely and completely committed to others; (2) faith that acts, which means a
faith “unconditionally committed in praxis to everything that God is committed to;”
and (3) creative hope, which implies that “our work for the kingdom should
involve at once our creative involvement in the transformation of life and society
and the annunciation of a new world as evidence (‘first fruits’) of the new age
inaugurated by Jesus and as a guarantee of the promised future.”71
Considering that most Latin American Evangelicals have been exposed
exclusively to a completely other-worldly oriented theology, which leads to an
escapist missionary praxis, Costas basically proposes a radical experience of
social conversion to Latin American evangelicalism. Believing that the biblical
70Ibid., 246.
71 Ibid., 246-247. Costas’ acceptance of the challenges coming from liberation

theology was not uncritical. As many other Latin American progressive evangelicals, he
saw, for instance, liberation theology’s understanding of salvation as being reducionist,
since it was defined in terms of political liberation. Besides, Costas wanted to make sure
that his call for contextualization did not allow for any kind of a situational ethics. The
ethics proposed by this movement is biblical and Christocentric. If on the one hand it
accepts the critique of liberation theology that an a priori Christ can be a fabricated
Christ, on the other hand it also affirms that a posteriori Christ, mediated only through
the other, can also be a distortion beyond recognition of the biblical Christ. So, instead of
taking either the a priori Christ of orthodox evangelical theology, or the a posteriori Christ
of liberation theology, Costas stresses the incarnated Jesus Christ, “risen and crowned
Lord over all things and made present through the Holy Spirit acting sovereignly in the
world.” (Ibid., 254-255)
205
gospel in its origin was proclaimed and received at the peripheries of the
world, Costas is convinced that it is only from that incarnated context that it can
become prophetic and apostolic at the same time.
Another characteristic of this progressive evangelical movement is that it is
able to combine a preoccupation with personal and social transformation at the
same time. Differing from the Religion and Society movement, whose emphasis
seemed to be more in the revolutionary transformation of society, and from
traditional Evangelicalism, with its emphasis on individual salvation, this
Evangelical movement presents a gospel, which addresses individual and
society concomitantly. In conversation with the Catholic Base Communities,
William Cook praised Pope Paul Vi’s definition of evangelization in terms of the
total human needs, as he said,
Evangelization will not be complete until there takes place

dialogue...between the gospel and the personal and social lives of
people in the concrete... [It] must keep the whole man and all men
(sic) before its eyes and must communicate to them suitably and
adequately a particular vigorous message in our time on
liberation... always in the context of the global plan of salvation.72
This dual emphasis on individual and social needs is a virtue of this
movement, which corrects a neglected aspect of the gospel in the Religion and
72 Pope Paul VI, Evangelii Nuntiandi of His Holiness Pope Paul VI to the Episcopate,
to the Clergy and to All the Faithful of the Entire World on Evangelization in the Modem
World (London: Catholic Truth Society, 1976), 29, 38. Quoted by A. William Cook Jr.,
“Base Ecclesial Communities: A Study of Reevangelization and Growth in the Brazilian
Catholic Church,” Occasional Bulletin of Missionary Research, July 1980:113-117 (116).
206
Society movement, especially as it blended with liberation theology in the
1960s73
A fourth characteristic of this progressive evangelicalism is an emphasis on
the Kingdom of God as an important dimension of the proclamation of Christ’s
gospel.74 In a critical conversation with Marxism, Escobar calls on Latin American
Evangelicals to rediscover the dimensions of the Kingdom of God in their lives.
These five dimensions show how pervasive the Kingdom can be in the different
spheres of Christian life: (1) The ethical dimension of the Kingdom, with its
content of peace, justice and love, presents a different possibility for the human
relationships with one another, with nature, and with the Creator;75 (2) the critical
73 It is worth noting, however, that, as I showed at the end of last chapter, Richard
Shaull recognized that problem in the Religion and Society movement, even though
affirming that his own theology never abandoned the idea of personal commitment and
spirituality. See Richard Shaull, Surpreendido Pela Graga: Memdrias de Um Tedlogo,
Estados Unidos, America Latina, Brazil (Rio de Janeiro, RJ.: Record, 2003), 168.
Moreover, there is a recognition today among some liberation theologians of the
existential, individual needs to be addressed. Many liberation theologians have put more
emphasis on spirituality lately. See for instance, Leonardo Boff, Ecologia, MundializagSto
e Espiritualidade: A EmergSncia de um Novo Paradigma (Sao Paulo, SP.: Atica, 1993);
Etica e Eco-espiritualidade (Petropolis, RJ.: Animus, 2003); Jose Comblin, O Espirito
Santo e a Libertagio ( Petropolis, RJ.: Vozes, 1982); Gustavo Gutierrez, We Drink from
Our Own Wells: The Spiritual Journey of a People (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1984),
and Frei Beto, Fome de Pao e de Beleza (Sao Paulo, SP.: Siciliano, 1990).
74Such emphasis is also present in the writings of the Religion and Society
movement, initiated by Latin American ecumenical Protestants, as well as in many
writings of Latin American liberation theologians. See, for instance, Gustavo Gutierrez,
The God of Life (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1991), 65ff.
75Samuel Escobar, “The Kingdom of God, Eschatology, and Social and Political
Ethics in Latin America,” 28. Escobar speaks not only of the alternative kind of
relationships offered within the community of faith, but also of its public testimony, as a
prophetic voice challenging the status quo. He says, “If in Latin America we do not give
social and political content to the good that we want to live and share with others, we will
be limited to passively accepting that which the social group in which we move considers
‘good’, and our justice will be no better than that of the Scribes and Pharisees.” ( Ibid.,
34)
207
dimension warns against making any social order sacred, be it the status quo
or the revolution;76 (3) the apologetic dimension points out to the
accomplishments of the Christian faith in Latin America in terms of health care
and education, for example; and (4) the dimension of hope advises against
passive conformity disguised as realism or else spiritualized, and calls for social
and political action in the hope of the Kingdom.77
Rene Padilla, also emphasizing the topic of the Kingdom, speaks of the
relation between the church and the kingdom. For him, the church’s vocation is to
live in “between the times,” that is, in an incomplete eschatological reality that is
only a pallid reflection of the Kingdom.78 He says, “The tension between the
present and the future, between the ‘already’ and the ‘not yet’, belongs to the
essence of the Christian faith. The Kingdom of God is both a present reality and
a promise to be fulfilled in the future.”79 Thus, the church reflects the tension
between the ‘already’ and the ‘not yet’ of the Kingdom of God, being both
eschatological and historical.
76 Ibid., 35. Here Escobar tries to avoid both cultivating false human hopes by holding
an optimistic and utopian view of humanity and assuming a conformist or fatalist position.
He says, “When the social body is sick, the attribute of the Christian who looks for the
coming of the imperishable Kingdom cannot be other than that of showing that human
remedies are imperfect and fallible. But still he can and should, as a doctor or nurse, or
simply as a compassionate companion, contribute to the partial cure of the sick.”
77 Ibid., 38.
78C. Rene Padilla, “The Kingdom of God and the Church,” Theological Fraternity
Bulletin 1/2 (1976): 1-23.
79 Ibid., 2.
The church, as a messianic community, is also seen as the community of
the Spirit, because, for Padilla, it is the Holy Spirit who is “the agent of
eschatology in the process of fulfillment.”80 Through the Spirit, the Kingdom of
God has been made present among human beings, beginning with the acts of
Jesus, and extended to the apostolic witness of the messianic community.81 In
addition, the church is empowered by the Spirit to act as a sign of the Kingdom in
human existence “through proclamation as well as through social service and
action.”82 The church, as the body of Christ, is the sphere in which the life of the
new era of the Kingdom initiated by Jesus operates through the Holy Spirit, which
imparts that new life.
The charismatic gifts of the Spirit imparted within the church enable it to
become an instrument for the fulfillment of God’s redemptive purpose. These
gifts or charismata are not given to a select group, but to all in the community,
showing that “there is no aristocracy of the Spirit.”83
The church exists primarily not as an organization, but rather an organism
whose members are unified by the action of the Spirit. It is the Spirit who is the
author of the communion that binds the members of the koinonia together, the
80 Ibid., 6.
81 C. Rene Padilla, Mission Between the Times (Grand Rapids, Ml.: W. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1985), 192.
82 Ibid.
83C. Rene Padilla, “The Kingdom of God and the Church,” 7. This is a point in
Padilla’s understanding of the work of the Spirit that can be a common ground for the
dialogue with Pentecostalism, which reinforces this empowering democracy of the Spirit
charismata.
209
one who makes the life of the Kingdom present in the church, and also who
empowers the church to proclaim and demonstrate the “Gospel of the
Kingdom.”84 Thus, the mission of the church is the manifestation of the Kingdom,
which has come in Jesus Christ.
As the sign of the ‘already’ of the Kingdom, the church manifests through its
actions the fellowship (koinonia) and the service to the world (diakonia) that
characterizes the Kingdom. As the sign of the ‘not yet’, the church confesses the
sovereignty of God, thus avoiding the absolutization of either its own structures
or of the structures of the society in which it exists.85 So, it sets limits to its
“loyalties to the powers that hold sway in the kingdom of men (sic),” being able
to prophetically criticize all the passing societal structures, on the basis of the
hope of the Kingdom.86
Padilla’s emphasis on the eschatological relationship between the kingdom
and the church, mediated by the action of the Spirit, opens his theology to
dialogue with the Religion and Society movement, which has also emphasized
the historicity of the Kingdom of God. The same can be said with regard to
84 Ibid., 8.
85The church should never be confused with the Kingdom of God. It is only the result
of the Kingdom, and its sign. See C. Rene Padilla, Mission Between the Times, 191.
86 C. Rene Padilla, “The Kingdom of God and the Church,” 13, 14. Padilla’s
statement here is a reinforcement of the Protestant principle so strongly affirmed in the
writings of Richard Shaull. If that is understood, it can proportionate greater openness for
conversation between the theology of ISAL and Padilla’s own Evangelical theology.
210
Pentecostal spirituality, whose emphasis lays on the work of the Spirit in the
day-to-day life of the poor87
His concern, however, with both liberationist and ecumenical thought is that
as they focus on the structural transformation of society, they might have
neglected the need for personal transformation. For him, the political dimension
of the Christian faith, which is so necessary today, cannot absorb all its richness.
Therefore, it must also find other expressions in the process of liberation, such as
the mystical, the liturgical and the personal expressions.88
In fact, progressive evangelicals in Latin America have made for the last three
decades a significant contribution to Latin American Christianity as they have
developed a serious theological reflection from an evangelical but at the same
time Latin American point of view. As Escobar points out, there are five main
areas of immediate concern to evangelical churches, which have been explored
by FTL theologians:
First, what could we describe as the search for a pneumatic and

contextual hermeneutics, in which Rene Padilla and Emilio A.
Nunez have been more explicit. Second, the development of a
missiological Christology, with several Latin American
contributions...Third, a holistic missiology with contributions in the
area of soteriology from Mortimer Arias, in anthropology from
87 According to Richard Shaull, it is in the midst of that reality of daily struggle among
the poor that the prophetic power of the reformed heritage—present both in the
beginnings of the religion and society movement, and in Padilla’s understand of the
Kingdom—seems to be renewed and re-created. See Richard Shaull, “Toward the
Recovery of the Prophetic Power of the Reformed Heritage,” in The Future of Prophetic
Christianity: Essays in Honor of Robert McAfee Brown, edited by Denise L. Carmody &
John T. Carmody (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1993), 59-66.
88See C. Rene Padilla, “La Nueva Eclesiologia en America Latina,” Revista de la

Fratemidad Teoidgica Latinoamericana, 18/24 (1986): 201-226 (224).
211
Sidney Rooy and Tito Paredes, in historical theology from Valdir
Steuernagel and Samuel Escobar. The fourth area is what we could
call a grassroots and post-western ecclesiology with contribution
from Guillermo Cook, John Driver and Rene Padilla. The fifth
emerges from the Pentecostal movement and centers on a
missiological pneumatology and a self-critical Pentecostal
ecclesiology.
In a continent in which evangelical churches are growing and getting more
involved in the social and political spheres, it is not possible any longer to
continue to neglect the theological contributions that are being made by these
progressive evangelicals. These contributions also present a challenge to U.S.
made-evangelicalism, and an alternative to those who lean towards an
Evangelical and biblical faith in Latin America, but who are tired of having North
American Evangelical conservatism imposed on them.
One can also make a clear connection between this kind of Evangelicalism
and both the ecumenical progressive Protestantism (which preceded it as the
leading Protestant movement in Latin America seeking to develop a Christian
social ethics) and liberation theology. As I have shown, FTL was born from a
reaction to these two movements, but has incorporated several of their key
themes in its own theological reflection, regardless of the critical stance taken
towards both of them. The initial fear among these radical Evangelicals in regard
to movements such as ISAL and liberation theology was the reductionism of the
gospel if taken only in terms of political liberation, and also the risk of making it a
mere instrument of Marxist ideology. Those fears led the FTL theologians to
89Samuel Escobar, “The Search for a Missiological Christology in Latin America,” in

Emerging Voices in Global Christian Theology, edited by William A. Dymess (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994): 199-227 (205).
212
focus on the Bible as the origin and main source of the church’s mandate for
social justice. The emphasis on the biblical theme of the Kingdom of God offered
the mediation they needed to dialogue with the social sciences, and many times
to join both ISAL and liberation theology in its critique of imperialism and social
injustice.
The Evangelical holistic theology of this movement has also opened space for
a new dialogue with the emerging Pentecostal theologies in Latin America. As
only now Latin American Pentecostalism is becoming concerned with producing
its own theology, many Pentecostal leaders have been influenced by progressive
evangelicalism. The thematic of the Spirit as empowering Christians to act in light
of the kingdom can provide a good common ground for progressive Evangelicals
and Pentecostals to work together.
Some of the more socially concerned Pentecostal leaders in Brazil have been
strongly influenced by movements whose theology comes from the FTL. Just to
name two examples, Carlos Queiroz, the most visible contemporary leader of the
Igreja Pentecostal de Cristo, in Brazil, has exerted great influence on the turn this
Pentecostal church has made towards its commitment with the cause of the poor
in Northeastern Brazil90—the poorest region of Brazil, and also a fertile area for
revolutionary and Messianic movements.
90See Alexandre Cameiro de Souza, Interview by author, tape recording, Fortaleza,

Brazil, 2 August 2002. Cameiro is the first pastor of the Igreja de Cristo to obtain a
doctoral degree. He is a sociologist who has studied the phenomenon of Pentecostalism
in Brazil. Cameiro affirms that Carlos Queiroz, the main second generation leader of this
Pentecostal church, influenced by his contact with ABU, in the 1970s, and later with the
FTL and also with World Vision, brought this social concern to play a role in the Igreja de
Cristo after the leadership of the church was passed on to him by his father.
213
Queiroz, son of one of the founders of this genuinely Brazilian Pentecostal
church,91 founded from a division of the Assemblies of God, in Mossoro, Rio
Grande do Norte, is a fruit of the work of the Alianga Blblica Universit&ria
(ABU).92 ABU is an evangelical student movement that became an unsuspected
free space for critical reflection during the harsh years of dictatorship in Brazil,
being theologically nourished by the autochthon theology produced by the FTL 93
91 This is, in fact, the first Pentecostal church in Brazil founded by Brazilians and with
no connections with the international Pentecostal movement. Prior to the foundation of
this church, only two Pentecostal churches existed in Brazil—the Assemblies of God and
the Igreja Crista do Brasil, both founded by Pentecostal missionaries who came from the
North American Pentecostal churches. The Igreja de Cristo was begun with three
Nordestinos—the name by which the suffering people who live in the dry lands of the
Northeast region in Brazil are known nationwide—as a split from the Assemblies of God
in the city of Mossoro, Rio Grande do Norte. Despite its unique and interesting history
and characteristics, this church has received almost no attention from those studying
Brazilian Pentecostalism. In my view, it has been ignored for two reasons: (1) It started
in the poorest part of the country, and never established a significant presence in
centers like Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, where most people studying religion in Brazil
are based; (2) also, this is not a numerically attractive Pentecostal churches. It has no
more than 20,000 in the whole country. For more on the history and constitution of this-
church see Alexandre Cameiro de Souza, “A Trajetoria da Luta Pelo Poder no
Pentecostalismo: O Caso da Igreja de Cristo no Brasil” (Master of Social Sciences thesis,
Universidade Federal do Ceara, Fortaleza, Brazil 1996); see also Carlos Queiroz, As
Faces de um Mito: A Fascinante Historia de um Cabra de Deus na Terra do Sol (Brasilia,
Brazil: MZ Produgoes, 1999).
92See Carlos Queiroz, Interview by author, tape recording, Fortaleza, Brazil, 02

August 2002; see also Alexandre Cameiro de Souza, Interview by author, tape recording,
Fortaleza, Brazil, 02 August 2002.
93 Ziel Machado, who was himself an ABU militant, tells that in 1976 ABU organized
a missionary congress in Curitiba, where it presented a concept of mission that
incorporated the social dimension of Christian faith. Machado claims that this was the
first experience of popularization of the Lausanne Covenant in Brazil. See Ziel J. O.
Machado, “Sim a Deus, Sim a Vida: Igreja Evangelica Redescobrindo Sua Cidadania”
(M. Th. thesis, Pontifica Universidade Catolica deSao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 1997),
25. In regard to considering the ABU as an unsuspected space for critical reflection, the
fact that ABU represented a conservative EvangMco group, with no ties to the
ecumenical and liberationist movements, led the military regime not to pay much
attention to them, since they apparently did not pose any threat to the regime. ABU was
seen simply as a conservative evangelistic movement within the universities, which
214
Nowadays, Queiroz is not only a referential for social action in his church,
but has also become one of the most influential contemporary Evang6lico voices
working in Brazil to equip churches and their leaders to serve the poorer and
marginalized in Brazilian society. Since 2005, Queiroz has been the executive
secretary for the Brazilian office of the World Vision.
A similar experience has happened with Rev. Ricardo Gondim, the founder of
the Igreja Assembleia de Deus Betesda, a faction of the Assemblies of God in
Brazil, which formed an independent denomination due to its less sectarian
approach to Brazilian society.94 This church, founded in Fortaleza, Ceara, also in
Northeastern Brazil, has its headquarters nowadays in Sao Paulo. Gondim is one
of the best-known Evangelico preachers and popular writers in the country
today.95 His father was a military lieutenant who rebelled against the military
coup and was arrested by the military regime. Raised as a Presbyterian, Gondim
converted to the Assemblies of God during his years as a college student, in
could even provide a counterweight to the militant student movements that resisted the
regime. So, it ended up becoming a free space for theological and critical reflection of
Evangelical students who did not find that space in their churches, and who needed to
live their faith vis-a-vis the Brazilian social contrasts. See Carlos Queiroz, Interview by
author, tape recording, Fortaleza, Brazil, 01 August 2002.
94 Ricardo Gondim also testifies that his experience in ABU as a college student, and
his later contact with the FTL as a Pentecostal pastor led him to acquire a more
balanced theological vision, influenced by the theology of the holistic mission (teologla
de la misidn integral de la iglesia), and also by liberation theology. He mentions
specifically the work of Leonardo Boff as having had an impact upon his formation.
Ricardo Gondim, Interview by author, tape recording, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 08 April 2003.
95Among his books, which are well known among Brazilian evangelicals, I should
mention Orgulho de Ser Evangelico, where Gondim writes, in popular language, some
chronicles about his struggles with his Evangelico identity. Ricardo Gondim, Orgulho de
Ser Evangelico: Porque Continuarna Igreja (Sao Paulo, Ultimata, 2001).
215
contact with ABU. During that period, as he attended ABU meetings, he
started to reflect about the social responsibility of the church.96 Theologically a
conservative, Gondim surprised the Pentecostal world when he openly supported
the Worker’s Party candidate Luis Inacio “Lula” da Silva to the presidency of
Brazil in 1994— a time when Lula, the current president of Brazil, was demonized
not only by the mainstream media, but also from most Evang&ico pulpits in the
country.97
On these two cases, which are just two among many others that I have
documented in my research,98 this progressive evangelical movement can be an
important bridge to connect the contributions to a Christian social ethics made by
ISAL, and by progressive evangelicals, to the current situation of the Evangelico
church in Brazilian society, which is marked by Pentecostalism. The contributions
of both the ecumenical movement and the progressive evangelical movement
can be of substantial help as a new spirituality takes the stage, seeking to play its
public role in the Brazilian society.
The Evangelical Progressive Movement in Brazil
96 Ricardo Gondim, Interview by author, tape recording, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 8 April
2003.
97See Paul Freston, Evang&icos na Politica Bnasileira: Histdria Ambigua e Desafio
Etico (Curitiba, Brazil: Encontrao Editora, 1994), 92.
98See, for instance, the case of Carlos Alberto Bezerra Jr., a physician, member of
Sao Paulo’s city council, and the son of a Pentecostal preacher, who also gained social
awareness during his years as a college student through the contact with the theology
produced by FTL and made available to university student through ABU. Carlos Alberto
Bezerra Jr., Interview by author, tape recording, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 09 April 2003.
216
Since its birth, the FTL has had the participation of Brazilian evangelical
leaders in its fronts. Although none of them rose up to make important theological
contributions to the FTL, people like Robinson Cavalcanti and Waldir
Steuernagel have been important leaders of the FTL at the continental level, and
have played a significant role in popularizing the contributions of this Latin
American movement into the specific context of Brazilian evangelicalism."
The Brazilian contribution to the FTL has not been felt through any original
theological work done from the Brazilian Evangelical perspective. Such
contribution has rather been felt—in a way that has been more visible than in
most other Latin American countries—in the application of this progressive
Evangelical theology by grassroots movements, inspired by the work of FTL.
Machado has found that authors and movements associated with the theology of
the miss§o integral have been singled out as the most significant influence in the
lives of Brazilian Evangelicals involved in social movements, workers’ unions or
social work.100
The Brazilian theologians working with the FTL are also engaged pastors.
Some of them have founded and/or led movements based on the holistic
99 Robinson Cavalcanti is an Evangelical Anglican Bishop in Recife. He is an

influential progressive Evangelical leader in Brazil, having not only founded the
Movimento Evangelico Progressista (MEP), and coordinated the ABU section in
Northeastern Brazil, but also written articles and books that have made an impact upon
the Brazilian Evangelical churches. Among his works, his book on Christianity and
Politics has become a classic among Brazilian Evangelicals, and has had a great
influence on those Evangelicals who have understood that it is possible to be both
Evangelical and politically progressive at the same time. See Robinson Cavalcanti,
Cristianismo e Politica: Teoria Blblica e PrStica Histdrica, 3ed (Sao Paulo, Brazil:
Tematica, 1994).
100Ziel J. O. Machado, Sim a Deus, Sim a Vida, 45.
217
theology they have embraced. I have already mentioned ABU as an example
of a dynamic movement in the 1970s and 1980s where this kind of theology was
propagated among lay evangelical leaders in the Brazilian universities.101 In the
late 1980s, Robinson Cavalcanti, one of the founders of the FTL in 1970,
founded also the Movimento Evangelico Progressista (MEP), which gathered left
wing evangelicals to support the new left-wing political parties such as the
Workers’ Party and to struggle for ethical commitment in the political
environment.102
The greatest symbol of this movement has been Benedita da Silva, a black
Pentecostal woman who became an atypical politician in Brazil.103 Raised in Rio
101 As the Brazilian chapter of the International Federation of Evangelical Students,

the ABU was founded in Brazil in 1957. For being more related to European
evangelicalism, it did not receive much influence from the sectarian North American
evangelicalism. In the beginning, it emerged as the more conservative alternative to the
UCEB. However, after the disappearance of UCEB, ABU started to occupy the space left
in the universities. In the 1970s it began to emphasize socio-political engagement, taking
a more leftist approach to politics, although keeping a theology that defined it as an
Evangelical organism. See Paul Freston, Protestantes e Politica no Brasil: Da
Constituinte ao Impeachment (Ph.D. Diss., Universidade Estadual de Campinas,
Campinas, Brazil,1993), 130-131.
102 First, the movement was formed as a Pro-Lula Evangelical Movement, for the
presidential elections of 1989. This was the first presidential election since 1960, only
four years after the end of twenty one years of military dictatorship. Lula represented the
hopes of the Workers’ Party and of all popular movements in Brazil. Fernando Collor de
Mello was the right-wing candidate. To the surprise of the country, the race was tough,
and Lula could be elected. Most Brazilian Evangelicals sided with the right-wing
candidate, and rumors of religious persecution if Lula won the elections started to be
heard from several Evangelical pulpits. In order to gather those Evangelicals who
desired to vote and campaign for Lula, a movement was organized in seventeen states.
It failed to get Lula elected in 1989, but it ended up giving birth to the Movimento
Evangelico Progressista, which continues to exist and to play a role in Brazilian
Evangelicalism. See Robinson Cavalcanti, Interview by author, tape recording, Recife,
Brazil, 12 July 2002. See also Paul Freston, Evangelicos na Politica, 107ff.
103 Paul Freston, Evangelicals and Politics in Asia, Africa and Latin America
(Cambridge, UK.: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 34.
218
de Janeiro’s shantytowns, Benedita da Silva worked as a maid, street-peddler
and nursing auxiliary. Her political education was in the Catholic Base Ecclesial
Communities, through shanty dwellers’ associations. She joined the Assemblies
of God at twenty-four, without, however, giving up her progressive political
stands. Thus, she had little space in the church. In 1989, through the Pro-Lula
Evangelical Movement and the MEP, she expanded her Protestant contacts.
Since then she has said that her “faith and political militancy is aligned with the
spirit of the Lausanne Pact.”104
MEP began trying to create an alternative to Brazilian Evangelical politics
after the scandals involving Evangelical representatives from 1986 through 1989.
It also wanted to contrast the political view represented by the Evangelical
majority which helped to elect Collor de Mello in 1989.105 It has identified itself as
Evangelical—theologically conservative, affirming the Bible, evangelization,
conversion and prayer—and at the same time as progressive—committed to
structural changes in society. It has encouraged affiliation to social movements,
workers’ unions, and left-wing political parties, and has also promoted dialogue
between Evangelical leaders and progressive political parties, always making
sure that they cannot mix with each other.106 In more recent years, after Lula’s
election in 2002, MEP has taken a critical-prophetic stand towards the political
104Ibid.
105 Paul Freston, Evangdlicos na Politica, 111.
106 Ibid., 112.
219
actions of the government whereas supporting and participating of its social
initiatives such as the Zero-Hunger Program. MEP has also come closer to social
movements such as the Movimento Sem-Terra (MST) and the Popular
Assemblies—organized groups in the civil society, mostly among the poor, to
discuss with political representatives and leaders of social movements public
policies to be developed and those affecting their lives.107
Another characteristic of the Popular Assemblies is its emphasis on forming
popular leadership and building citizenship. The recent move from MEP towards
social movements such as the Popular Assemblies can have interesting
implications. First, it will force more conversation with the Catholic progressive
movements, already present and influencing several social movements. Second,
it can bring MEP closer to the lower classes. Despite its progressive political
stand, MEP, like most other progressive evangelical initiatives, has influenced
middle class evangelicals, with university degrees, more than the popular
classes. This initiative can provoke some changes on that situation.
The event that marked the emergence of the FTL in the Brazilian scenario
was the Congresso Brasileiro de EvangelizagSo, in 1983.108 For the first time in
107G£ter Borges de Sousa, Interview by author, tape recording, Brasilia, Brazil, 3

February 2003. G6ter Sousa is the current executive secretary of MEP. See also, MEP,
“Que Brasil N6s Queremos? Assembles Populares: Exiggncia da ParticipagSo Popular
nos Destinos do Pais,” file availabe from
http://www.mep.org.br/arquivos/encontrodeformadores/mep assembleias populares.do
c; Internet; accessed 19 November 2005.
108The CBE was a direct consequence of CLADEII (1979). After that congress, a
Committee was formed in Brazil to organize the event. Only after the dictatorship was
softened, could they plan an event of such a dimension. More than two thousand people
representing many denominations from all regions of the country gathered in November
of 1983 to participate in that congress. See Ziel Machado, Sim a Deus, Sim a Vida, 58.
220
Brazil, Evangelicals from numerous denominations met to discuss their
Evangelico identity, the commitment with the poor, liberation theology,
evangelization and Brazilian culture, and social projects, among other themes.109
In that year, as a preparation for the congress, the Brazilian section of the World
Vision published the book A Missao da Igreja no Mundo de Hoje, with the main
papers of the Lausanne Congress of World Missions, in 1974.110 That book gave
visibility to the papers delivered by Rene Padilla and Samuel Escobar in that
congress, bringing to it the new evangelical concern with their social
responsibility of the church.111
CLADE II, the congress which brought the theses of the Lausanne Congress
(1974) to be discussed in Latin America, took place in Peru, in 1979. After that
congress, and as part of its posterior developments, the Brazilian delegates to
the congress put a committee together to organize the Congresso Brasileiro de
Evangelizagao (CBE I), in Belo Horizonte, in 1983. That congress in Brazil
marked the moment when this radical evangelicalism became known within
Brazilian evangelical circles. That meeting was regarded two years later as the
109The main documents and papers from that congress have been gathered and
published. See Valdir Steuemagel (ed.), A EvangelizagSo do Brasil: Uma Tarefa
Inacabada (Sao Paulo, Brazil: ABU, 1985).
110 See Dieter Brepohl & Manfred Grellert (ed.) A Missao da igreja no Mundo de Hoje:
As Principals Palestras do Congresso Intemacional de EvangelizagSo Mundial
Realizado em Lausanne, Sulga, 2ed (Sao Paulo, Brazil.: ABU, 1984).
111 It also led many people to see the Lausanne Congress as the starting point of the
movement that was now spreading in Brazil. As Robinson Cavalcanti, however, has said,
when Lausanne took place the FTL already existed for four years, and since 1969 there
had been meetings in Brazil preparing for the foundation of that movement. See
Robinson Cavalcanti, Interview by author, op. cit.
221
most representative nondenominational meeting among Brazilian
Evangelicos, in terms of denominations, regions, states and kinds of ministries
represented there.
In 1988 a regional follow up of the CBE took place in Recife, under the name
Congresso Nordestino de Evangelizagao (CNE I).112 These two congresses
disseminated the theology of the holistic mission among Brazilian evangelicals,
and opened new spaces for the emergence of new movements.
In 1991, in an attempt to unity the Evangelico field once again, a group of
Evangelical leaders of several denominations created the Associagao EvangSlica
Brasileira (AEVB), meant to be an organization concerned with evangelical
morality in the public realm and also with evangelical unity. Besides AEVB,
MEP, and ABU, several other organisms appeared professing this evangelical
holistic theology in Brazil, such as Revista Ultimado, Visao Nacional de
EvangelizagSo (VINDE) and the Sociedade de Estudantes de Teologia
Evangelica (SETE).113
In 1994, the AEVB organized a massive meeting with representatives of all
national EvangMco branches, with the purpose of once again strengthening unity
and demonstrating to Brazilian society that the fragmented EvangSlico field could
112This was the only regional meeting which really took place in the aftermath of the
CBE. It gathered twelve hundred Evangelicals from different states and denominations.
See Carlos Queiroz, “A Missao Integral da Igreja no Brasil: Revisao, Erros e Acertos,”
(unpublished paper, n. d., accessed by author from Carlos Queiroz’s personal files on 31
July 2002), 2.
113 Ibid.
222
have a united voice in the public realm.114 Unfortunately that attempt of unity
failed as many Neo-Pentecostal leaders, under the umbrella of the Igreja
Universal do Reino de Deus (IURD), the most powerful and visible Brazilian Neo-
Pentecostal church, formed another association, denying the AEVB the right to
speak on behalf of all Evangelicos115
If the AEVB failed to reach out to the bases of the neo-Pentecostal churches,
it has the virtue of having tried to promote a wide-ranging dialogue among
leaders of all sectors of the Brazilian Evangelico church. Furthermore, it called
attention to the visibility of a large number of Evangelicos whose political stands
were much different from those of the Neo-Pentecostal politicians who had been
in Congress now for some years, and who were associated with corruption
114The papers of this National Congress organized by AEVB are published in Rubem
M. Amorese (ed.) A Igreja Evangelica na Virada do Milinio: A MissHo da Igreja num
Pals em Crise (Brasilia, Brazil: Comunicarte, 1994). This congress was probably the
most diverse and representative meeting that has ever taken place among Brazilian
Evangelicos. It had representative and speakers that ranged from ecumenists to neo-
Pentecostals. The political crisis that had led to the impeachment of President Fernando
Collor de Mello two years later, and all the moral scandals involving evangelical
representatives, made the AEVB organize this event in search of an ethical referential
that could bring together all the different branches of Brazilian Protestantism. However,
the emphasis of the congress was not only ethics. As a congress organized by
Evangelicals, it also emphasized evangelization, spirituality and creative ministries. It
was a unique opportunity of encounter, but no follow-up happened afterwards. Ricardo
Gondim, vice-president of AEVB at the time, and one of the organizers of the program of
that event complained that whereas he intended the AEVB to have its own prophetic
voice in that moment of national crisis, Caio Fabio D’araujo Filho, the charismatic
president of AEVB, preferred to prioritize unity and representativity. For him, that turned
the congress into a Babel Tower, where none listened to the other’s voice. Ricardo
Gondim, interview by author, op. cit.
115 It is worth noting too that the more ecumenical churches, although a tiny group,
had its own representative organism, the Conselho Nacionalde Igrejas (CONIC). During
the 1990s, the AEVB was without question the most visible Evangelico organization in
the country, conquering space even in the mainstream media, which had historically
looked suspiciously to Evangelicos, in general, and had strong ties with the Roman
Catholic Church.
223
schemes and the defense of the status quo. Many leaders of the AEVB
publicly declared their left-wing preferences in terms of Brazilian politics, and
showed solidarity with the emerging social and political progressive movements
in the country.116 The influence of the AEVB has weakened after the resignation
of Caio Fabio de Araujo Filho, the charismatic leader who was its president for
several years. Nevertheless, new movements were born out of its efforts.
Carlos Queiroz and the Brazilian World Vision organized the CBE II, in 2003,
which discussed the developments of the theology of the holistic mission in the
two decades that separated it from the first CBE.117 This time, the topics
discussed included the problem of race, the environment, the feminine, ethics,
citizenship and social responsibility, and politics.118 The CNE II has been
announced for August of 2006, once again in Recife, the same historical city
116 Paul Freston, Evangelicos na Politica, 99ff.
117See the main papers of the congress in CBE2, MissSo Integral: Proclamaro Reino
de Deus, Vivendo o Evangelho de Cristo (Belo Horizonte, MG.: Visao Mundial, 2004).
118Among the documents issued during the congress there was a manifesto from the
Forum of Black Evangelical Leaders in Brazil. Ibid., 297. This organization is unique
among Brazilian Evangelicals. First, there are no black churches in Brazil. Almost all
Brazilian churches are racially mixed. Second, Evangelical Afro-Brazilians have never
affirmed their racial identity before—there was a myth of a racially blind culture within the
churches, which is falling. So, only in recent years, Evangelical Afro-Brazilians have
begun to organize themselves into different movements to combat racism within and
outside the church. A Forum has emerged to unite those movements and make their
voice stronger. This Forum was represented and made its voice heard in a unique way
in the CBE II. Another point to be noticed is that there were many more women speaking
this time, in comparison with CBE I. One of them was Marina da Silva, a Pentecostal
from the Amazon region; always involved in the environment struggles in that region that
has cost so many lives, and the current Minister of the Environment in Brazil. For more
on the trajectory of this woman, who has built a political career defending rainforest
communities, see Ziporah Hidelbrandt, Marina da Silva: Defending Rainforest
Communities in Brazil (New York: The Feminist Press, 2001).
224
where two important meetings took place: CNE I, in 1988, and the
Confer§ncia do Nordeste, in 1962.
In the Northeast region, the FTL has taken a more independent position in
terms of its theological reflection in the past few years.119 Certain that Brazil is a
gigantic country, with different problems in its different regions, and conscious of
the particularity of the social problems that the Nordestino population faces, the
Northeastern section of the Brazilian FTL has met every year since 2003 to
produce a contextual Nordestino theological reflection.120 This theological effort
also reinforces its dialogical character, which makes it inclusive and opens to all
kinds of different voices.121 Consequently, new experiences in praxis and
theology have emerged from these encounters, and theology has been done not
by professional theologians, but by all those who have been immersed in the
daily struggles of the Nordestino poor.122
Special reference should be made to the experiment made in a faveia, in the
metropolitan region of Recife. A new Baptist church emerged in the shantytown
119See Marcos A. Monteiro, “A Respeito da Fratemidade Teologica Latino-

Americana no Nordeste,” unpublished document, read at the I Jornada Teologica da
FTL-Nordeste, on 21 April 2003.
120According to Monteiro, “the Nordestino history, imaginary and culture are the
primary locus of our theology.” Ibid., 2.
121 Ibid., 1. This is an unique openness in terms of Brazilian evangelicalism.
122 Ibid., 2. As it affirms its Latin American and Nordestino identity, the FTL Nordeste
distances itself from the European and North American ways of theologizing. Theology
now is not an academic exercise, nor it is in the hands of professional theologians. Now,
all are invited to theologize, by using different theological tools, which include drama,
dance, music and literature. In the past three years, hundreds of seminarians, pastors,
professional theologians and regular church members have been gathering yearly to an
event where they share experiences and reflect upon those experiences together.
225
of Bultrins, one of the most violent neighborhoods in that region. A
veterinarian doctor, ordained as a Baptist minister, and his wife, a physician,
began to work among the poor in Bultrins twelve years ago.123An interesting
experiment was made at the local level, as this church, without doors or
windows—an open space where the children of the neighborhood can play
during the weekdays, and the women can sit and chat whereas sewing—has
given itself to the community by providing services, offering professional courses,
promoting education and literacy, and giving medical support and pastoral
assistance to the Bultrins population. Furthermore, it has also worked at the
political level to urbanize the favela and improve the living conditions of its
population.124
As interesting as this can be, it is not a unique social work done by an
Evangelico church in Brazil today. Other social initiatives have been taken in the
Northeast and in other parts of the country by different Evangelico churches,
some of which were influenced by the theology of the holistic mission. The
uniqueness of the Bultrins experiment resides in its next step. For four years this
congregation formed by the poorest among the Brazilians, has sponsored a
theological conference gathering representatives of many Brazilian states, and
various denominations, to reflect theologically from the perspective of the poor.
123Marcos A. Monteiro, Interview by author, tape recording, Feira de Santana, Brazil,

20 June 2002. Marcos Monteiro, a Northeastern Brazilian theologian linked to the FTL,
has also been one of the voluntary pastors at the Bultrins Baptist Church.
124 During my field research, I visited this community twice, attended services, and
participated in the Forum of Popular Theology, which the church organizes every year.
Part of what I report here comes from my own impressions of these visits.
226
Bultrins is an experiment that brings together Catholic liberation theologians
such as Jose Comblin and Pentecostal pastors such as Carlos Queiroz,
politicians such as the mayor of Olinda, and the population of that favela to
discuss themes such as Christian praxis, citizenship, human rights, poverty,
racism, creative resistance and spirituality, in an popular forum known as the
Northeastern Forum of Popular Theology. Progressive evangelical theology has
reached its peak in Brazilian soil in terms of the kind of conversation it has
established in Bultrins with popular Nordestino culture.
A similar kind of conversation has happened in the annual gatherings of the
FTL-Nordeste, and the experiences shared by those who attend that annual
meeting. Those initiatives have not taken place without some resistance coming
from the more dogmatic evangelicals, even from within the FTL. The resistance
to this kind of initiative shows the limitations of this evangelical theology, which
has not been able yet to break free from its conservative heritage. Even if one
can be sympathetic to the theological discourse coming from leading theologians
of FTL such as Orlando Costas, Rene Padilla and Samuel Escobar, its limitations
and problems come to the fore once one moves to the practical realm.
One cannot deny that the theology of the holistic mission developed by FTL
has made tremendous progress in equipping evangelicals hitherto socially
unconcerned and otherworldly oriented to play their role as Brazilian citizens and
as Christians committed to God’s kingdom of justice and peace. In addition to
that, one must recognize that this theology allowed many of these Evangelicals
to move from a position of marginality to one of social commitment and action
227
based on their faith. However, concerned with defining an a priori biblical
justification for their praxis, this theology still keeps many of these Evangelicals
tied up to dogmatic concerns, wondering whether such action is in accord with
the Bible or not. Too much time is spent on doctrinaire quarrels, and praxis ends
up coming to be secondary.
Brazilian progressive evangelicals, in general, have not managed yet to play a
more significant role in the Brazilian society. That, I should say, is not the case
for all those involved in the movement. Progressive initiatives, even on polemical
topics such as homosexuality, have been taken in isolation by churches or other
organisms influenced by the movement. However, it seems that the Evangelical
movement is in need of a new theological language that can free it to realize all
the transformative potential this movement can realize.
Dialogues with ecumenical and Pentecostal partners are under way as I have
shown, and I think that a new language of the Spirit can emerge from those
encounters. Such a new theological language can enable Brazilian progressive
evangelicals to get rid of problems such as the biblical literalism and doctrinaire
strictness that have limited the actions and the reach of this movement—still
considered elitist and incapable of influencing a great number of Evangelico
churches in the country. However, once again, one should not diminish the
important role that this movement can play in the near future.
CHAPTER SIX
THE PENTECOSTAL FACE: THE CHARISMATIC RESPONSE TO THE POOR
The Pentecostal face of Latin American Protestantism represents its most
widespread manifestation. Pentecostalism is the fastest-growing kind of
Christianity in Brazil and accounts today for around 70 percent of the estimated
twenty million Evangelicos in the country.1
Brazilian Pentecostalism has developed a peculiar response to their suffering.
Differently from the other two Protestant faces, which have struggled to legitimize
themselves among the poor, Pentecostalism does not need that kind of
legitimization, since it is born among the poor.2
All of Latin American Protestantism, as Miguez Bonino says, was influenced, in
various degrees by the holiness movements, which were also at the roots of
Pentecostalism.3 Missionary evangelicalism, however, which first manifested the
1Paul Freston, Evangelicals and Politics in Asia, Africa and Latin America
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 11. See also Paul Freston, “Brazil:
Church Growth, Parachurch Agencies, and Politics,” in New Face of the Church in Latin
America, edited by Guillermo Cook (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis, 1994), 226-244.
2 See Alexandre Carneiro de Souza, Pentecostalismo: Um Desafio £s Leituras

Contemporineas da Religiosidade Brasileira (Vigosa, MG.: Ultimata, 2004), 24. This
holds true both for Brazilian Pentecostalism as well as for Pentecostalism in general.
See Walter J. Hollenweger, “From Azusa Street to the Toronto Phenomenon: Historical
Roots of the Pentecostal Movement,” in Pentecostal Movements as an Ecumenical
Challenge, edited by Jurgen Moltmann and Karl-Josef Kuschel (London: SCM Press,
1996), 3-15 (4); see also Walter J. Hollenweger, “The Black Roots of Pentecostalism,” in
Pentecostals After a Century: Global Perspectives on a Movement in Transition, edited
by Allan H. Anderson & Walter J. Hollenweger (Sheffield, U.K.: Sheffield Academic
Press, 1999), 33-44.
3Jose Miguez Bonino. Faces of Latin American Protestantism (Grand Rapids,

Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997), 17.
228
229
spirituality that originated in the revivals, was neither able to appeal to the
needs of the masses, nor capable of overcoming the problems of class
exploitation, sexism and racism which afflicted the Brazilian masses, due to the
rigid dogmatism it developed under the influence of fundamentalism . Therefore,
the influence of Evangelicalism upon Brazilian society during many decades was
limited.
Conscious of the obstacles Protestantism, in general, was facing to reach the
Latin American people in the first half of the twentieth century, North American
missionary John Mackay said, “No Christian movement can succeed today that
does not move the masses and make them the chief objective.”4
John Mackay’s remarks were prophetic. As the most visible and popular face
of Brazilian Protestantism today, Pentecostalism has grown because of its
capacity to engage Brazilian popular culture. At the same time, it also raises
some concerns, as it can function simply as a religion of substitution, absorbing
the old hierarchical structures of traditional Brazilian society, and becoming
incapable of transforming them.
In this chapter, I want to briefly present the main approaches that have been
taken to the study of Pentecostalism in Latin America and also of
Pentecostalism’s interaction with Brazilian culture. Then, I view how
Pentecostalism challenges all Latin American Christians to enter a new dynamics
4John A. Mackay, “How My Mind Has Changed in the Last Thirty Years,” The
Christian Century, July 12, 1939, 874. Quoted by Jose Miguez Bonino, Faces of Latin
American Protestantism, 54.
230
of faith, in which the empowering presence of God in the day-to-day struggles
enables people to survive and even subvert the terrible conditions of poverty and
oppression in which they live as well as to face the corrupted systems that
produce them.
Pentecostalism as a New Topic of Study in Latin America
Despite the fact that Pentecostalism appeared in Brazil just a few years
after the Azusa Street’s Pentecostal revival in North America, only in the 1960s
did Latin American scholars of religion begin to regard it as worthy of scholarly
attention. The first attempts to understand the Pentecostal phenomenon in Latin
America were made by two sociologists, Christian Lalive D’Epinay and Emilio
Willems.
Pentecostalism as a Haven for the Masses
Lalive D’Epinay in his classic study of Latin American Pentecostalism defined
it as “a popular form of Protestantism in which emotion prevails rather than
reason, which is divided into a multiplicity of denominations and belong to
Troeltsch’s ‘sect type.’” 5 Drawing upon Ernst Troeltsch’s church/sect typology,6
Lalive D’Epinay used the terms ‘sect’ and ‘sectarian’ to speak of a religious group
5 Christian Lalive D’Epinay, Haven of the Masses: A Study of the Pentecostal

Movement in Chile (London, UK.: Lutterworth Press, 1969), xvii.
6 Ernst Troeltsch,, The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches, vols. I & II
(Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992), 331ff, 656ff, 993.
231
or movement characterized by “a desire to break as much with society as with
other churches.”7
Lalive D’Epinay also referred to Pentecostalism as “a communal religious
answer to the confusion of large sections of the population, caused by the
anomic character of a society in transition.”8 For him, Pentecostalism was a
religious protest against the miseries of a society in transition from rural to
industrial, just as Marxism was a socio-political protest. Both protests were bom
out of the same need, and both were nourished by the same rebelliousness, but
they had different orientations.9 As a form of protest, says Lalive D’Epinay,
“Pentecostalism condemns the world, and puts a distance between the world and
itself transferring human hopes to a divine world beyond.”10
Lalive D’Epinay’s understood Pentecostalism as sectarian on the basis of its
rejection of the world. However, he seemed to have a somewhat paradoxical
view of Pentecostalism when he looked at it vis-a-vis the Latin American culture.
According to him, the alternative society offered by Pentecostalism did not
entirely contradict the model of the Chilean society which he studied. It only
renewed it.
The success of this sect... rests on the continuity/discontinuity

relationship which unites Pentecostalism with society and the
environing culture...Pentecostalism both offers equality (rupture)
7Christian Lalive D’Epinay, Haven of Masses, xxxii.
8 Ibid.,15.
9 Ibid., 35.
10 Ibid.
232
and also recreates the old seigniorial form of society by fulfilling its
ideal of protection and trust in vertical human relationships
(continuity).11
This paradox of Pentecostalism in its relationship with Latin American
traditional culture is remarkable. At the level of individual behavior, the
Pentecostal believer is a ‘being apart,’ one of the elect recognizable by his/her
way of life. The individual does not drink or smoke, does not go to the theaters or
cafes, and does not swear, among other things. As Lalive D’Epinay puts it, “all
deviant conduct is interpreted by the group as the sign of a ‘fall’, of loss of one’s
standing as a believer, and so the individual who does not conform to the cultural
norms is immediately excluded from the community.”12At the level of the group,
however, Pentecostalism, by the force of its own spontaneous acculturation to
the authority pattern of the hacienda, with the pastor playing the role of the
patriarch or the boss, has effected a metamorphosis of Western Christianity,
reinforcing the Latin American cultural milieu.13
Lalive D’Epinay saw this duality of rejection and continuity as resulting from
the fact that Pentecostal leaders were direct participants of that culture. In the
case of the other forms of Protestantism, conversion implied “acceptance of a
foreign cultural system, since missionaries showed themselves to be totally
11 Ibid., 38, 39.
12 Ibid., 55.
13 Ibid., 56.
233
incapable of separating the Gospel from the clothing which has little by little
muffled it up in the West.”14
Troeltch’s sect-type, however, seemed to apply to Lalive D’Epinay’s analysis
of the political involvement of Chilean Pentecostals. In his investigation of what
Pentecostals thought of Christian involvement in politics, most of them affirmed
that politics had nothing to do with the gospel, and rejected all forms of political
participation.15 In his view, even the philanthropic ethic that characterized some
of the missionary enterprises in Latin American Protestantism was eliminated
from the Pentecostal approach towards society. Referring to Niebuhr’s ideal-
types in Christ and Culture,16 Lalive D’Epinay asserted that the Pentecostal
social ethics in Chile could be defined as a radical form of the ‘Christ-against-
culture’ type, because of the Pentecostal radical withdrawal from society.17 At the
end of his study, he concluded that some Pentecostal groups seemed to be at
the beginning of the road leading to a denominational form. However, most
Pentecostal groups remained identical with the ‘sect-type.’ 18
In spite of Lalive D’Epinay’s adoption of the church-denomination-sect
distinction throughout his work, this kind of typology did not work so well to
describe the kind of relationship that exists between Pentecostalism and Latin
14Ibid., 63.
15Ibid., 108ff.
16 H. Richard Niebuhr, Christ and Culture (New York: Harper, 1951).
17Christian Lalive D’Epinay, Haven of the Masses, 122ff.
18Ibid., 221.
234
American culture. With regard to politics, the Pentecostals who answered
Lalive D’Epinay’s questionnaires overwhelmingly rejected any form of political
involvement. However, in the cultural realm, the relationship between
Pentecostalism and traditional culture looked much more ambiguous, as there
seemed to be much more continuity than discontinuity between Pentecostal
behavior and the traditional values of Latin American culture.
Lalive D’Epinay thought that, in spite of its growth, Pentecostalism ultimately
keeps its members alienated from the socio-political sphere, leading them to
avoid more direct involvement in political and social struggles. Therefore, he did
not see this charismatic form of Protestantism as a significant force for social
change in Latin America. His Haven o f the Masses has become a classic in the
study of Latin American Protestantism, and Brazilian Pentecostalism, in
particular. Although its perspectives on the participation of Pentecostals in the
civil society have been radically challenged,19 no study of this theme has ignored
the contributions of this classic.
Pentecostalism as Symbolic Protest
Lalive D’Epinay’s contemporary, Emilio Willems,20 on the other hand,
detected some ways in which what he called charismatic Protestantism might be
19For an overview of the discussion on Pentecostal participation in the civil society in

Latin America see Michael Dodson, “Pentecostals, Politics, and Public Space in Latin
America,” in Power, Politics, and Pentecostals, edited by Edward L. Cleary and Hannah
W. Stewart-Gambino (Boulder, CO.: Westview Press, 1997), 25-40.
20 Emilio Willems, Followers of the New Faith: Culture Change and the Rise of
Protestantism in Brazil and Chile (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1967).
a positive factor for socio-political change. He envisioned an indirect influence
through the shaping of the region’s political culture and the personal values of the
people. Willems identified an egalitarian element in the Pentecostal communal
experience. Contrasting with Lalive D’Epinay, he saw the rise of Pentecostalism
as a ‘symbolic protest’ that rejected the traditional hierarchical social order that
prevailed in Latin American societies, and instilled a more democratic ethos into
new generations of Latin Americans. Seeing Pentecostalism also as a sectarian
type of religion, he suggested, “conversion to Protestantism, especially to its
sectarian varieties, constitutes one of the many ways in which hostility and
rebellion against a decaying social structure may be expressed.”21 Willems,
however, did not expect Pentecostalism to actively engage the political arena.
For him, the social impact of Pentecostalism takes place through a process of
“subverting the traditional social order in the language of religious symbolism.”22
In 1990, David Martin, a British sociologist, further developed Willems’
arguments, by affirming that Pentecostalism has the potential to open new
spaces for democracy and to promote a silent revolution in the traditional
hierarchical, authoritarian and patriarchal Latin American society.23 Martin argued
that Latin American Pentecostalism is the third wave of religious change
21 See Emilio Willems, “Protestantism and Culture Change in Brazil and Chile,” in
Religion, Revolution and Reform: New Forces for Change in Latin America, edited by
William V. D'Antonio and Frederick B. Pike (New York : Praeger, 1964), 91-108 (103).
22 Ibid., 108.
23 David Martin, Tongues of Fire: The Explosion of Protestantism in Latin America
(Oxford: Blackwell, 1990), 274.
236
movements, which represent a cultural pattern that characterizes the Anglo-
Saxon Protestant cultures, especially as they appear in Britain and the United
States.
That cultural pattern contains the seeds of voluntarism and religious
democracy, and is in clash with the Hispanic monolithic empire that has
dominated Latin American culture for over four hundred years. The Puritan and
Methodist movements represented the first two Protestant waves. Martin sees a
line of continuity between Methodism (the second wave) and Pentecostalism (the
third), and points to similar elements shared by both movements. Among other
common characteristics, he mentions “an emphasis on the availability of grace to
all, a millennial hope, and an intense search after ‘scriptural holiness.’”24 For
Martin, both waves, Methodism and Pentecostalism, bring about a revolution of
values, which substitute “seriousness for frivolity, cooperation for competition,
compassion for brutality, and egalitarianism for deference.”25 Furthermore, these
religious movements create supportive communities, networks of solidarity,
which reinforce the ethic of work, and a temperate manner of life, assuring God’s
favor to the faithful.
Martin maintains that what seems to be a divisive sectarianism of the
congregational religious life intensely manifested in the Pentecostal movement,
becomes, in fact, a force that breaks the monopoly of Catholicism, and opens a
24 Ibid., 28.
25 Ibid., 38.
237
social space for new forms of association, authority, and popular dissent,
which encourage the kind of pluralism necessary for a democratic society.
Furthermore, through Pentecostal ism the poor are bringing real revolution, or
cultural revision, to the Latin American social order. Martin suggests that they
“have taken an option to walk out of Latin American society, its violence,
machismo, and corruption, and its warring elites of left and right, in order to
experiment and create a new life for themselves in the evangelical group...
[Within that group] the social order is reversed or nullified.”26
Like Willems and Lalive D’Epinay, Martin affirms that one should not
expect any direct action by Pentecostals to promote structural changes in the
social order. The “revolution” promoted by Pentecostalism is indirect. It occurs
through a process that Martin calls “psychic mutation.”27 For Martin, Latin
American Pentecostalism, at least in its classic form, presents an advanced
differentiation of the religious and political spheres. It is extremely suspicious of
power as such and tends to discourage its adherents from being politically active.
In spite of this, Martin sees political potential in Pentecostalism in the form of an
anticipation of liberty, “initially realized in the religious sphere and stored there
until either a shift in cultural underpinnings actually undermined the structural
barriers, or protest moved from a cultural to a structural expression.”28
26 David Martin, “Evangelicals and Economic Culture in Latin America: An interim

Comment on Research in Progress,” Social Compass 39/1 (1992): 9-14 (10).
27 Ibid., 12.
28 David Martin, Tongues of Fire, 44.
238
Martin emphasizes the centrality of ‘conversion’ in the Pentecostal
experience. Conversion for Pentecostals is not related to structural changes, nor
is it considered a means to a social end. On the contrary, conversion is a very
real and personal experience, with more comprehensive notions of ‘betterment,’
and of ‘goods.’ For Martin, ‘betterment’ is not simply an economic category that is
directly connected to the motives behind the individuals’ conversion.29 Most
people who become Pentecostals in Latin America are not thinking of moving up
socially—many of them are even willing to make sacrifices in order to please
God. In most cases, people seek spiritual transformation and improvement,
although deep in their hearts they believe that if they please God, they will be
blessed in the material life too. In fact, the material blessing comes as a result of
a lifestyle change: they give up drinking, and start stressing sexual continence,
seriousness, self-discipline, hard work and educational aspirations.
These things promote, first of all, a revolution within the self, but also bring
economic improvement to those individuals and their families. Martin focuses
mainly on Weber’s analysis of small sects and their promotion of trust and credit
in the network of believers. For him, these networks of mutual assistance
provided by credit-worthy fellow Christians are the most effective contribution of
Pentecostal communities to Latin American people. They provide an
29According to Martin, this notion of ‘betterment’ “includes moral recovery and

restitution of previous wrongs; it suggests a reversal of old ways and wasteful and
destructive priorities. To seek ‘betterment’ is to adopt personal disciplines and restraints,
to be reliable and punctual, to accept regimes of health, wholeness and holiness, and to
conduct transaction in a spirit of integrity and trustworthiness.” David Martin,
“Evangelicals and Economic Culture in Latin America,” 11.
239
extraordinary “information service, and offer a kind of insurance as well as the
emotional support of stable relationships.”30
What distinguishes Latin American Pentecostalism from other forms of
Protestantism is that the former is more efficient in reaching the masses. It has
even been able to penetrate the indigenous cultures, thus providing an all-
encompassing worldview for the marginalized, by being a religious form of a
raised consciousness that relocates those who used to be excluded and calls for
the participation of all.31 The power of Pentecostalism resides in its capacity to
unite the ancient and the modern, the old and the new, the pre-literate and the
post-literate.
Martin’s analysis of Latin American Pentecostalism cannot be dismissed,
especially when he affirms that Pentecostalism has been more successful than
any other form of Protestantism in reaching the masses, and in offering them a
worldview that relocates them from the margins to a situation of empowerment.
He is also right in pointing out the significance that personal conversion has in
the lives of poor Pentecostals and the signs of betterment that come to them as a
result of that experience. Martin may also be right as he stresses that the
Pentecostal contribution to social change resides primarily at the cultural rather
than at the strictly socio-political level.
30 David Martin, Tongues of Fire, 218.
31 Ibid., 65.
240
However, Martin has jumped to conclusions that do not match the
empirical evidence among Pentecostals in Latin America today. One main
example of this is his insistence on the fact that Pentecostals tend to stay away
from politics. Recent developments have shown a completely different picture,
with an increasing Pentecostal involvement in Latin American politics.32
Another problem with Martin’s analysis is his imposition of a foreign model,
which emphasizes the clash of two European-born imperialistic projects. He does
not take Latin American native culture seriously, as having any significant
element of its own, which can subvert and transform both projects as it interacts
with them. Rather than seeing Pentecostalism as an heir of English and North
American Methodism, one should focus on the social roots of the Pentecostal
movements and its capacity to interact with the poor, in their own social and
cultural location. As Alexandre Souza, a Brazilian Pentecostal sociologist has put
it, Pentecostalism is a “religious practice that was bom in the soul of the poor,”
having the capacity to express “the pain, the anxieties, the dreams, and the
challenges of the poor.”33 There is a power in the Latin American “oppressed
other” that subverts the dominant cultures, and one needs to pay more attention
to it in order to fully understand the potentialities of Latin American
Pentecostalism.
32 For two different studies showing those findings, see Jos6 Miguez Bonino, Poder
del Evangelio y Poder Politico: La Participacidn de los EvangMcos en la Polltica en
America Latina (Buenos Aires, Argentina: Kairos, 1999); and Paul Freston, Evangelicals
and Politics in Asia, Africa and Latin America (Cambridge, UK.: Cambridge University
Press, 2001).
33Alexandre C. Souza, Pentecostalismo, 24.
241
Finally, although Martin focuses his study on the Pentecostal boom, he
continues using the more generic term ‘evangelical’ to refer in fact to Latin
American Pentecostalism. By doing this, he misses some of the peculiarities of
the Pentecostal faith, especially its emphasis on the empowerment of the
Baptism of the Holy Spirit, which, according to other researchers of Latin
American Pentecostalism, plays a central role in their oral testimonies.34 The
vivid experience of being possessed by the Spirit is crucial to the understanding
of Pentecostal empowerment in the midst of death and suffering.
Scholars such as Jean-Pierre Bastian35 and David Stoll36 have disputed
Martin’s theory of Pentecostal intrinsic egalitarianism and its potential to promote
social change. However, several Latin American scholars have to some extent
supported Martin’s views on Pentecostalism. Brazilian sociologist of religion
Cecilia Loreto Mariz contests those who think that social changes just happen in
the realm of politics, pointing out instead that poverty is experienced as a daily
problem in the lives of individuals, on a micro-social level. This is the level at
34 See Andrew Chestnut, “Bom Again in Brazil,” in On Earth as it is in Heaven:

Religion in Modem Latin America,” edited by Virginia Garrard-Bumett (Wilmington, Del.:
Scholarly Resources, 2000), 219-234 (222).
35Jean-Pierre Bastian, La Mutacion Religiosa de America Latina: Para una

Sociologia del Cambio Social en la Modemidad Periferica (San Lorenzo, Mexico: Fondo
de Cultura Economica, 1997) 194.
36Stoll, Is Latin America Turning Protestant?, 316ff. Stoll acknowledges that

Pentecostalism creates universal ethical standards, promotes individual responsibility,
and creates expanding structures with the capacity for adapting to changing conditions.
However, he is not so sure about the social effects of Pentecostal growth on Latin
American social structures.
242
which Pentecostal churches most help the poor.37 For her, the poor are not
passive and powerless victims of society, and scholars should respect and value
their way of thinking and behaving.38 In most cases, she argues, the poor are not
listened to.
Mariz proposes that through its warm welcome of the poor, its emphasis on
the supernatural, the promotion of mutual support networks, and the access to
direct experience of the sacred, Pentecostalism helps the poor to regain dignity
and to build a new identity.39 Pentecostal emphasis on conversion gives the
opportunity for the believer to change his or her life.40 In her interviews with
Pentecostal women in Recife, Mariz noticed that even the rigorous dress code of
some Pentecostal churches is seen positively by Pentecostal women, who take it
as a kind of protection from the violence that, unfortunately, is still very present in
the Brazilian society 41 She also believes that Pentecostalism presents solutions
to material problems in daily life. It supports the family by motivating men to give
37Cecilia L. Mariz, “Pentecostalism and Confrontation with Poverty in Brazil,” in In the

Power of the Spirit: The Pentecostal Challenge to Historic Churches in Latin America,
edited by Benjamin F. Gutierrez & Dennis A. Smith. Drexel Hill, PA: SKIPJACK Press,
1996:129-146 (130). For an expanded view of her argument, see Cecilia L. Mariz,
Coping with Poverty: Pentecostals and Christian Base Communities in Brazil
(Philadelphia, PA.: Temple University Press, 1994).
38 Ibid., 134.
39 Ibid.,135.
40 Ibid., 137. Mariz sees this emphasis on conversion as breaking with traditional
religiosity, since in Afro-Brazilian popular religions one’s destiny cannot be chosen.
41 Ibid. ,136. Protection is also the meaning of faith in Divine Providence. Pentecostal
teaching stresses the promise of protection that faith offers. Faith in God protects
believers from spells, evil spirits, and black magic, but also protects them from violence
and threats in daily life.
243
up alcoholism and other vices in favor of the family, and by proposing new
values for masculine behavior, redefining masculine and feminine roles in public
and private lives.
Mariz is not blind to the fact that some Pentecostal theologies support the
submission of women to their husbands; however, she affirms that the machismo
is less severe than in the rest of Latin American society 42 Thus, Pentecostalism
reconstructs family relations without redefining the discourse about family.
Moreover, through its spiritualization of evil, Pentecostalism redefines social
order by seeing the oppressors as themselves oppressed (by demons).43 Thus,
it is by this re-symbolization and redefinition of the social order that
Pentecostalism promotes empowerment and social change.
Bernardo L. Campos, however, has opposed the idea of Pentecostalism as an
apolitical movement, unconcerned with changing the structures of society. For
him, it may have been so in the past, but third and fourth generations of Latin
American Pentecostals are beginning to participate actively in civil society,
embracing forms of political participation and social action that Pentecostals had
formerly rejected.44 Campos sees some characteristics of Pentecostalism that
can make a profound impact on social transformation in Latin America; its
42 Ibid.,144.
43 Ibid., 145.
44 Bernardo L. Campos, “In the Power of the Spirit: Pentecostalism, Theology and
Social Ethics,” in In the Power of the Spirit, 41-50 (45).
244
autonomous financial structures, its liturgy expressing popular religiosity, its
community experience, and its organic solidarity.45
Another point of contrast between Campos and Martin is Campos's rejection
of an uncritical use of Weber in the study of Latin American Pentecostalism. For
him, Weber’s thesis on the Protestant ethics and the spirit of Capitalism does not
apply to some forms of Latin America Pentecostalism, where there is more
mysticism than asceticism, and where work is not considered a divine vocation.
He believes that “the power of Pentecostalism resides not in the coherence of its
doctrine, but in its flexibility and its capacity to give expression to new social
practices in the defining moments of a society in transition.”46
Indeed, Latin American Pentecostalism is not only flexible, but also amazingly
diverse. As Juan Sepulveda points out, it has an atomistic tendency, and grows
mainly by schisms. That has led to the appearance of several independent
Pentecostal churches in almost each Latin American country.47
Diversity and Change in Brazilian Pentecostalism
One common mistake in the study of Pentecostalism is fail to observe that this
phenomenon is not uniform. Many scholars studying Brazilian Pentecostalism
have noticed its diversity, and have tried to develop ways to understand it.
45 Ibid., 46.
46 Ibid., p. 49.
47Juan Sepulveda, “The Pentecostal Movement in Latin America,” in New Face of

the Church in Latin America: Between Tradition and Change, edited by Guillermo Cook,
Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1994:68-74 (69).
245
According to Eric W. Kramer, the first studies of Brazilian Pentecostalism
sought to identify the degrees of rejection and accommodation and openness of
Pentecostal churches to society as a whole.48 Besides the classic church/sect
types, dichotomies such as classic versus autonomous Pentecostalism, classic
Pentecostalism versus divine healing, and churches of mediation versus small
sects have been unsuccessfully employed to understand Brazilian
Pentecostalism.49
In the early 1990s, Paul Freston, an Anglo-Brazilian sociologist who had
worked as associate researcher with David Martin during the tatter’s field
research in Brazil,50 called for a historical sociology of Brazilian Pentecostalism,
capable of grasping the dynamics of its development and typification. Following
Martin’s three waves in Tongues o f Fire, Freston proposed three waves of
Pentecostalism in Brazil, which emphasize Pentecostal versatility and
evolution.51
48 Eric W. Krammer, “Possessing Faith: Commodification, Religious Subjectivity, and

Collectivity in a Brazilian Neo-Pentecostal Church” (Ph.D. Diss., The University of
Chicago, 2001), 21.
48 Ricardo Mariano, Neo-Pentecostais: Sociologia do Novo Pentecostalismo no

Brasil (Sao Paulo, Brazil: Loyola, 1999), 23ff.
50 See David Martin, “Bedeviled,” in On Losing the Soul: Essays in the Social
Psychology of Religion, edited by Richard Fenn and Donald Capps (Albany, NY.: State
University of New York Press, 1995), 40.
51 Paul Freston “Breve Historia do Pentecostalismo Brasileiro,” in Nem Anjos nem

Demdnios: Interpretaqdes Socioldgicas do Pentecostalismo, edited by Alberto
Antoniazzi, et al (Petropolis, Brazil: Vozes, 1994), 70ff. For Freston, the advantage of
having this chronological typology of Brazilian Pentecostalism is that whereas pointing
out the versatility and evolution of Pentecostalism in Brazil, it also reveals some
singularities of each major Brazilian Pentecostal church.
246
Freston’s first wave of Brazilian Pentecostalism dates from the 1910s, with
the arrival of the Christian Congregation and the Assemblies of God to Brazilian
soil. In this stage Brazilian Pentecostalism was a part of the international
expansion of the Pentecostal movement, which originated in Los Angeles, in
1906, and emphasized the baptism of the Holy Spirit and the gift of speaking in
tongues. European immigrants coming from the U.S. brought Pentecostalism to
Brazil. Therefore, its reception by the Brazilian society was still timid.52
The second wave is related to the rapid growth of Brazilian Pentecostalism
experienced in the 1950’s with the arrival of the Foursquare Gospel Church (FGC)
and the foundation of one of the first truly national Pentecostal churches in Brazil,
the Evangelical Pentecostal Church ‘Brazil for Christ’ (EPCBC). The FGC
imported from California new strategic models of modem mass media
evangelization, as well as the use of tents to take the gospel outside the building,
making itself at home in a society that was experiencing a fast process of
urbanization. Moreover, the FGC emphasized divine healing and innovated with
“a relaxation of some behavioral taboos, and greater adaptation to the
sensitivities of a consumer society.”53
52 Paul Freston, “Between Pentecostalism and the Crisis of Denominationalism: The

Future of the Historic Churches in Brazil,” in In the Power of the Spirit: The Pentecostal
Challenge to Historical Churches in Latin America, 195 -212.
53 Ibid., 197. This tendency of relaxing old behavioral taboos reached its climax in the
Universal Church of the Kingdom of God (usually mentioned in the literature as IURD,
initials for Igreja Universal do Reino de Deus), where there are neither prohibitions, nor
behavioral restrictions for its members. The IURD teaches that it is the responsibility of
each person to live in accordance with the Bible, and that it is the Holy Spirit—not the
church or the pastors—that guides people to the truth. See IURD, Fundamentos da
247
The EPCBC, a more innovative national version of this Pentecostal wave,
took the Pentecostal message into secular spaces such as cinemas and
stadiums, and was the first to make large-scale use of radio and a short-lived
incursion into television.54 This church is known also for being one of the first
Pentecostal churches to participate in the ecumenical movement, affiliating itself
with the World Council of Churches. Manoel de Mello, its founder and president,
also anticipated the neo-Pentecostal strategy of forming electoral blocks to elect
representatives to the Brazilian congress. Manoel de Mello was one of the few
Pentecostal critical voices during the years of military dictatorship in Brazil (1964-
1985). In general, however, his political stands derived not from ideological
convictions, but from a pragmatic interest and a messianic spirituality.55
Freston situates the third Pentecostal wave as starting during the authoritarian
modernization of Brazil by the military regime, in the 1970’s. The country now
had an overwhelmingly urban population that “was feeling the effects of the
waning of the ‘economic miracle’... [being] beset by violence and economic
decadence.”56 In this context, the IURD—one of the fastest growing, most
powerful, and most controversial Pentecostal churches in Brazil—and other ‘Neo-
Pentecostal’ churches updated the relationship of Pentecostalism with Brazilian
Nossa Fe: Proibiq&es e Restrigdes, internet; available from www.iareiauniversal.orq.br.:

accessed 23 November 2003.
54Ibid.
55 Paul Freston, "Pentecostalism in Brazil: A Brief History," Religion, 25/2 (1995): 119-
133.
58 Paul Freston, “Between Pentecostalism and the Crisis of Denominationalism, 197.
248
society.57 For him, what differentiates these newer Pentecostal churches from
the older ones is that the newer are freer to innovate. They do this through
“adaptation to recent changes in society and culture and by greater boldness in
delving into the country’s religious tradition in search for more efficient
communication.”58
Freston’s three waves have been largely used among Brazilian scholars to
describe Pentecostalism in Brazil. However, it presents some limitations. One of
these limitations is the lack of clarity to differ the second from the third wave.
Freston names the first two waves respectively Classic Pentecostalism, and Neo-
Pentecostalism, but does not name the third wave, leaving that task for others.
The main problem with this historical periodization is that it does not pay enough
attention to the changes that occurred between the second and the third waves.
For Brazilian historian Paulo Siepierski, major theological changes have
occurred between these two last waves, and one will miss the target if he or she
does not notice those changes. Siepierski summarizes the main theological
characteristics of the two first Pentecostal waves as being a confluence of the
doctrines of the Baptism of the Spirit, speaking in tongues, divine cure, and a
pre-millennial eschatological view.59 He also observes that most first and second
57 Ibid.
58 Ibid., 198. Freston says that this latter practice has been regarded positively as
contextualization, or negatively as syncretism—which is one of the accusations made by
historic Protestants against the IURD.
59 Paulo D. Siepierski, “A Emergencia da Pluralidade Religiosa (1),” ReflexSo e F6,

1/1(1999): 59-75 (62).
249
wave churches sought to identify themselves with their traditions of origin—
many of them included the word ‘evangelical’ in the name of the church.60
However, that does not happen among the third wave churches.61
Siepierski shows that the significant differences between the third wave and
the first two are the third-wave emphases on spiritual war, theology of prosperity,
and the elimination of the external signs of holiness.62 The most significant
change is that the eschatology of these third wave churches, instead of being
other-worldly—-focusing on salvation and on the future coming of Christ—
promotes a vision of establishing the reign of Christ here and now.63 For
Siepierski, all these changes move the third wave Brazilian Pentecostalism away
from classic Pentecostalism, and lead it to establish a different kind of
relationship with Brazilian culture, which is marked rather by continuity than by
rupture with it. Furthermore, Sipierski shows that this change in Pentecostal
traditional behavior in Brazil has political consequences, and explains the
aggressive political involvement—motivated by the idea of conquering the world
for Christ—of, particularly, third-wave Pentecostal churches in the past twenty
years.
60 Ibid., 73.
61 Ibid., 74. Siepierski cites the cases of the IURD, the Reborn in Christ Church, and
the “Christ Saves” Church. The last one changed its name just to take the words
'Evangelical Pentecostal Church’ out of its original name.
62Siepierski, “Pos-Pentecostalismo e Politics no Brasil,” Estudos Teologicos

37/1(1997): 47-61(51).
63 Ibid. While political incursions of Pentecostal churches used to be rare, they have
increased systematically in the third-wave Pentecostal churches.
250
Siepierski’s conclusions do not differ much from those of Eric W. Krammer.
However, Siepierski restricts the use of the term neo-Pentecostalism to the
second wave, and refers to the third wave by the term post-Pentecostalism,
stressing the theological departure of those churches from both classic
Pentecostalism and historic Protestantism.
Sociologist Ricardo Mariano agrees with both Freston and Siepierski on the
choice for periodization as the best approach to understand the variety within
Brazilian Pentecostalism. However, he names the second and third waves in a
different way. He calls the second wave Deutero or Neoclassic Pentecostalism,
and refers to the third wave as Neo-Pentecostalism.64 By so doing, he minimizes
the differences between the first and second waves, and stresses the novelties of
the third wave, without going as far as Siepierski in talking about a radical rupture
of third wave churches from classic Pentecostalism. According to Kramer,
Mariano’s terminology has been generally adopted as standard of reference in
academic and journalistic literature in Brazil.65
No matter how they interpret this third wave, it is a point of agreement among
all these scholars that a deep paradigm shift has happened in the third wave
Pentecostal churches.66 They have moved from an otherworldly religious focus to
64 Ricardo Mariano, Neo-Pentecostais, 32.

65 Eric W. Krammer, “Possessing Faith,” 23.
66 Even those scholars who have not used any typology to differentiate among
different kinds of Pentecostalism in Brazil point to a paradigm change in Brazilian
Pentecostalism. Richard Shaull, for instance, stresses a shift in Pentecostal discourse
from salvation to solution. Although Pentecostals still use traditional language to speak
about sin and salvation, they are much more concerned with the immediate presence
251
a faith intentionally concerned with the problems one faces here and now.
There is a shift of focus from salvation to solution.67 Along with this paradigm shift
within Pentecostalism, there is also a paradigm shift affecting the whole Brazilian
society. Sociologist Leonildo Silveira Campos has related the changes within
Brazilian Pentecostalism to changes on a larger scale in Brazil. In particular,
Campos situates the growth of Pentecostalism in the context of a shift in the
Brazilian religious scenario from Catholic monopoly to religious pluralism.68
For Campos, the Brazilian religious scenario is now experiencing “a market
situation” where religious groups and institutions have to “compete in order to
maintain or gain space within the disputed ‘religious market.’”69 Thus, Campos
sees the schisms and changes within Pentecostalism since the 1950s in Brazil
as a response to the needs of this market. Pentecostalism has done what historic
and power of God in everyday life through the work of the Holy Spirit. Their emphasis is
on health, material well being and a new quality of life here and now. Shaull sees a new
paradigm of salvation emerging here. Differently from other popular movements within
Christianity, Brazilian Neo-Pentecostalism does not stress a pre-millennial theology with
emphasis on the imminent return of Christ to establish his kingdom. Instead, it believes
that the reign of God is already breaking into the present. Richard Shaull and Waldo
Cesar. Pentecostalism and the Future of tee Christian Churches (Grand Rapids,
Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 2000), 185.
67 Ibid.
68 Leonildo Silveira Campos, “Why Historic Churches are Declining and Pentecostal
Churches are Growing in Brazil: A Sociological Perspective,” in In the Power of the
Spirit, 82.
69 Ibid.
252
Protestantism was not able to do in Brazil; it has adapted to the needs of
Brazilian society both by accommodation and by change.70
The necessity of adaptation to the urban situation in Brazil led to
disintegration and specialization among Pentecostal agents. That is the reason
for the appearance of what Siepierski calls post-Pentecostal churches. Those,
indeed, are churches more adapted to the religious market mentality. They use
marketing strategies to reach target groups that are seen as consumers of their
religious products, which Campos, drawing on French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu,
calls “symbolic merchandise.”71
At least in two of the main Brazilian Neo-Pentecostal churches, the IURD and
the Reborn in Christ, their main leaders are also marketing specialists who
employ marketing strategies intuitively.72 It should not be a surprise, then, that
these churches are constantly adapting and transforming, in accordance with the
70See Leonildo S. Campos, Teatro, Templo e Mercado: OrganizaqSo e Marketing de

um Empreendimento Neo-Pentecostal (Petrdpolis, Brazil: Vozes, 1997), 48.
71 Leonildo Silveira Campos, “Why Historic Churches are Declining and Pentecostal
Churches are Growing in Brazil,” 83.
72 Estevam Hemandes Filho, the charismatic leader of the Reborn in Christ Church,
is a former marketing director of IBM in Brazil. Edir Macedo, the founder and leader of
the IURD, used to be a businessman who worked for a Brazilian lottery. Neither of these
churches simply imitates North American television evangelists. They use television and
other instruments of mass media in a Brazilian way. Religious programs on Brazilian TV
stress the church rather than the charismatic leader, and have no intention of immediate
financial recompense. The IURD is the owner of the third-largest TV network in Brazil.
The church uses it not as a religious TV, but as a secular TV network, which makes the
lURD’s power visible to the whole society as its programs compete head by head for the
market of audience with the most powerful Brazilian communication empires. See
Freston, “Breve Historia do Pentecostalismo Brasileiro,” 132; Antdnio Carlos Barro,
“Brazil: Wrestling with Success,” Christianity Today 42/13 (1998): 70(2); and Ken Serbin,
“Brazilian Church Builds an International Empire,” The Christian Century, 113/6 (1996):
386.
253
needs of the ‘market.’ This also explains the abandonment of classical
Pentecostal emphasis on pre-mi llennial eschatology in order to respond to more
urgent concerns like financial problems—theology of prosperity—physical health,
and relief from psychological problems.73 It is worth noting that the slogan of the
IURD is “Stop Suffering: Jesus is the Solution.”74
This marketing-oriented mentality also explains the changes in the attitudes of
Pentecostal churches toward the world. The emphasis now is not on withdrawing
from the world, but on conquering it for Christ. In order to do that, political power
becomes necessary. Today, Pentecostal churches in Brazil are becoming more
and more involved in politics.75 In the 1994 national elections, the IURD managed
to elect six representatives to the National Congress and six regional deputies. It
named 500 candidates—all IURD members—in the October 1996 nationwide city
73 Leonildo Silveira Campos, “Why Historic Churches are Declining,” 85. Campos
says that in the IURD, the members are not practioners of the gift of the Spirit, but only
consumers. Only the pastors have the power to exorcize evil or heal.
74See Anders Ruuth. Igreja Universal do Reino de Deus: Gudsrikets Universella

Kyrka—en Brasiliansk Kykobildning (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1995),
265.
75Siepierski, “Pos-Pentecostafismo...,” 55. Political engagement has not been a

specific characteristic of the IURD. However, no other Pentecostal or Protestant church
in Brazil has managed to be as effective as the IURD in political strategy. All the IURD
politicians are extremely loyal to the interests of their church. Their political agenda has
nothing in common with the agenda of progressive evangelicals, such as Benedita da
Silva, the first black woman in Brazil to become a senator, and now the governor of the
state of Rio de Janeiro. A member of an evangelical church, she has gained national
respect and admiration as a representative of the poorer strata of Brazilian society,
rather than of her church. For more on the story of Benedita da Silva see Harvey Cox,
Fire from Heaven: The Rise of Pentecostal Spirituality and the Reshaping of Religion in
the Twenty-first Century (New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1995), 161-
184. See also Medea Benjamim e Maisa Mendonga, Benedita da Silva: An Afro-
Brazilian Woman's Story of Politics and Love (Oakland: The Institute for Food and
Development Policy, 1997).
254
council elections, aiming to have 200 of them elected.76 In the general
elections of 2002, the IURD elected sixteen federal deputies—all members of the
IURD—and nineteenth state deputies in ten different Brazilian states.77 This
strong Pentecostal presence in Brazilian politics, and its relevant participation in
the civil society—in areas such as education, health, and social work, in
general—challenge the old stereotype of Pentecostals as passive, indifferent or
even hostile to politics.78
It is important to notice, however, that this increasing political participation
does not always entail a rise of consciousness regarding the socio-political role
these churches should play in Brazilian society. Freston has shown that in many
cases this greater political participation is marked by church corporatism and
represents an act of cultural defense, “a reaction to changes in the social milieu
which threatened to undermine the group’s capacity to maintain its culture.”79
Therefore, in many cases, “the dominant strain of Pentecostal politicization seeks
76 Ibid. Siepierski is right in saying that post-Pentecostal churches have their own
project of Christendom. They cannot be said to be apolitical anymore.
77Ari Pedro Oro, “A Igreja Universal: Um Poder Politico,” in Igreja Universal do Reino
de Deus: Os Novos Conquistadores da F6, edited by Ari P. Oro, Andre Corten and
Jean-Pierre Dozon (SSo Paulo, Brazil: Edigdes Paulinas, 2003), 281-302 (285)
76Ibid., 282. For the philantropic and social work done by the IURD, see Maria das
Dores C. Machado, “Igreja Universal: Uma Organizagao Providencia,” in Igreja Universal
do Reino de Deus, 303-320.
79Paul Freston, “Political Evolution of Brazilian Pentecostalism,” in Imaginaires

Politiques et Pentecdtismes: Afrique/Am&rique Latine, edited by Andre Corten & Andre
Mary (Paris: Editions Karthala, 2000), 287-305 (291).
255
to strengthen internal leaderships, protect the frontiers of sectarian
reproduction, tap resources for religious expansion, and dispute spaces in civil
religion.”80
Another strategy adopted by Neo-Pentecostal churches to conquer and
transform Brazilian society is the proclamation of a “holy war” against their
enemies: the Afro-Brazilian religions and Catholicism.81 To some extent, this war
becomes a fight for power and influence within Brazilian society. Health problems,
family break-ups, unemployment, and all other social illnesses are seen as
symptoms of demonic possession. “The Enemy” is the ultimate cause of all
problems.82 However, during the rituals of exorcism, when asked for their names,
the demons identify themselves by names such as Exu Caveira, Exu-Capa Preta,
Exu Tranca-Rua, Maria Padilha, Exu Sete Encruzilhadas, Pombajira Meta-Meta,
all of them names of spiritual entities in the Afro-Brazilian religious pantheon.83
Thus, the real origin of the demons is manifest: the Afro-Brazilian religions. At
first sight, there is religious intolerance in this kind of behavior, which needs to be
overcome. However, one can also consider that this spiritual warfare gains
80 Ibid.
81 Leonildo Silveira Campos, “Why Historic Churches are Declining,” 86. Two things
are worth noting here. Historic Protestant churches are ignored as enemies by the third
wave Pentecostalism. Also, apparently, the competition among Pentecostal churches
does not become a “war”, since Churches like the IURD and Reborn in Christ, for
example, aim for different segments of the population as their target groups.
82See Ronaldo de Almeida, “A Guerra das Possessoes,” in Igreja Universal do Reino

de Deus, 321-343 (323).
83 Ibid., 324.
paradoxical meaning, as it becomes not only a sign of rejection of traditional
religions and culture, but also, by means of appropriation and “learning from the
enemies”, a sign of cultural adjustment and acculturation.
As part of the spiritual warfare strategy, there is an appropriation of popular
symbols, which creates connections with the imaginary universe of Brazilian
popular culture that have never been developed by any kind of Protestantism in
Brazilian lands.84 So, rather than the classical rupture with popular culture
proposed by earlier versions of Pentecostalism, Neo-Pentecostal churches in
Brazil express a certain amount of continuity with Brazilian popular religions. On
that respect, the IURD, the main representative of this kind of Pentecostalism,
confirms the findings of Jean-Pierre Bastian, who holds that Latin American
Pentecostalism exists in continuity with the traditional values of Latin American
society.85
84 Leonildo Silveira Campos, “Why Historic Churches are Declining,” 87. Campos
notices that the IURD has used many elements and objects that are also part of the
Afro-Brazilian rituals as symbols to attract the sacred and attain a given end, which
makes its practices and rhetoric very similar to those of other Brazilian popular religions.
Edir Macedo calls these symbols “points of contact.” See Anders Ruuth,. Igreja
Universal do Reino de Deus: Gudsrikets Universella Kyrka—en
Brasiliansk Kykobildning, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1995, 278.
86Jean-Pierre Bastian, La Mutacidn Religiosa de America Latina: Para una

Sociologia del Cambio Social en la Modemidad Periferica (Ciudad del Mexico: Fondo de
Cultura Econdmica, 1997), 125. Bastian affirms that the rupture brought by
Pentecostalism has been a rupture with the hierarchical manipulation of the Catholic
clergy rather than a rupture with its religious imaginary. He says, “This abandonment of
the images, the saints and the rhythms of the Catholic feasts does not imply a rupture
with the ancestral religious universe. This universe is, on the contrary, revivified by the
elective affinity between Pentecostalism and the shamanic beliefs and practices, which
found, then, a renewed legitimization.” [translation is mine] It is exactly by means of this
flexibility that Pentecostalism goes beyond other forms of Protestantism in its
engagement of Latin American culture.
257
To its merit, however, this kind of Pentecostalism has been able to engage
the Brazilian cultural milieu in a way that only popular Catholicism and Umbanda
had been able to do before. The IURD has especially shown an enormous
capacity to blend elements of Brazilian culture, demonstrating why it has been so
attractive to the Brazilian poor.
Pentecostalism and Brazilian Culture

As I showed in chapter two, Gilberto Freyre is the Brazilian sociologist who
best managed to describe what makes the singularity of Brazil as a nation. For
Freyre, Brazilian society is a result of a singular historical experiment that fused
people from three different races and cultures—European, African, and
Amerindian—into one, bringing together their traditions, beliefs, and
idiosyncrasies.86 Thus, anything genuinely Brazilian blends elements from these
three cultures, and even from other cultures that he also mentions as participants
in the formation of Brazilian society.87 For him, in this miscegenation of races
and cultures resides the uniqueness of Brazilian society.
Brazilian anthropologist Roberto DaMatta has pointed out the enormous
tolerance of the Brazilian cultural system. The reason for that tolerance is the
86Gilberto Freyre, Casa-Grande y Senzala: Introduccidn a la Historia de la Socledad

Patriarcal en el Brasil. Prologo y Cronologia Darcy Ribeiro (Caracas: Biblioteca
Ayacucho, 1977), ix-xlii.
87 Gilberto Freyre, The Masters and the Slaves: a Study of the Development of
Brazilian Civilization (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1946), xiii.
258
mediations that are possible in a system that is based on a relational logic.88
Whereas mediations are almost impossible in an egalitarian system, they
become fundamental in a relational system. So, in the Brazilian case, whereas
there are constitutional laws that govern what can be seen as a democratic
system like any other system influenced by Western liberalism, one also needs to
pay attention to the place of favor, patronage, and social relations within that
social system.89 Therefore, anyone that wants to understand Brazilian reality as
the Brazilian people experience it must prioritize those relations.
When one speaks of religion in this context, Umbanda is the religious
movement most associated with this Brazilian identity, the religious outcome of
Brazilian society, especially because it is considered a religion of synthesis.90
The same can be said about popular Catholicism, with its syncretism. Since both
Catholicism and Protestantism in Brazil have either European or Euro-American
roots, the fact that only Protestantism is regarded as a foreign religion shows that
traditional Protestant over-rational faith has had difficulty in relating to this kind of
88Roberto DaMatta, A Casa & a Rua: Espago, Cidadania, Mulhere Morte no Brasil,
6ed (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.: Rocco, 2000), 25.
89 Roberto DaMatta, “For an Anthropology of the Brazilian Tradition or ‘A Virtude esta
no Meio,’” in The Brazilian Puzzle: Culture on the Borderlands of the Western World,
edited by David J. Hess and Roberto A. DaMatta (New York: Columbia University
Press, 1995), 270-292 (274).
90 Harmon A. Johnson claims that Umbanda is characteristically Brazilian, mixing
ancient religions with elements that leads him to call it a modem religion. For him,
Umbanda is the most attractive religion to Brazilian people. See Harmon A. Johnson.
“Umbanda: A Modem Brazilian Religion,” in Dynamic Religious Movements: Case
Studies of Rapidly Growing Religious Movements around the World, edited by David J.
Hesselgrave (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1978), 247-269.
259
hybrid and religiously eclectic cultural milieu. This also explains why
Pentecostalism has been so successful in reaching out to the most popular
classes.
This is the reason for my claim that Pentecostalism occupies a space never
occupied before by any other Protestant movement in Brazil, relating to several
elements of Brazilian society as few other Brazilian Protestant churches have
been able to do. The success, for instance, of the IURD cannot be only attributed
to its marketing orientation, but also to its ability to penetrate society with a strong
sense of religious mission.91
Neo-Pentecostalism and Brazilian Popular Religiosity
The kind of spirituality developed by Neo-Pentecostalism in Brazil intersects
with both Umbanda, and popular Catholicism.92 The IURD, which is the most
visible Brazilian Neo-Pentecostal church, has been labeled as “the first product of
syncretism to emerge among Brazilian Evang&icos.”93 Some have said that the
IURD is “a Christian version of macumba,” whereas others call it “the daughter of
the people.”94Although perhaps the word syncretism would not be the most
91 Paul Freston, “Breve Historia do Pentecostalismo,” 143.
92See Jean-Pierre Bastian, La Mutacidn Religiosa, 149. Bastian speaks of an

“umbandizaciOn” and a “catolicizaciOn” of Brazilian Pentecostalism, based on the
assimilation of popular religiosity by Pentecostal movements.
93 K. Serbin, Brazilian Church Builds an International Empire, 398.
94 Ibid. Macumba is a generic name used, very often as a pejorative term, to

designate Afro-Brazilian religions.
260
precise term to describe this relation, there is some continuity between
Brazilian popular religiosity and that kind of Pentecostalism expressed by the
IURD.
Afro-Brazilian religions have been generally understood as kept by African
Brazilians for centuries in order to preserve their ethnic identity. There were
many, representing the variety among the African people who were enslaved and
sent to Brazil.95
In spite of the diversity, as time passed, they started fusing with each other so
that the first kind of syncretism in Brazilian religion took place even before the
religions from Africa were blended with Brazilian Catholicism and Amerindian
religions.96 The structure of the African religions that came to Brazil was
constituted by the cult of the Orishas—the forces of nature—and the cult of the
Eguns—the masculine ancestors.97 This religious system of the YorubA was
soon incorporated by the native religions of Bantu origin—which also contributed
by introducing the pantheon of the Orishas to the cults of both African and native
ancestors—the Preto Velho and the Caboclo98
95Marco Aurelio Luz mentions the Ketu, Oyo, Egbado, Egba, Sabe, Ijesa and Ijebu.
Most of them were part of the Yoruba people of the present-day Nigeria and Benin.
Among those the Ketu and the Oyo gained prominence in expanding the Nag6 culture in
Brazil. See Marco Aurelio Luz, “A Tradigao dos Orixas, Continuidade Transatlantica,” in
Sicretismo Religioso: 0 Ritual Afro-Brasileiro, edited by Tania Lima (Recife: Editora
Massangano, 1996), 155.
96 Ibid.,157.
97 Ibid., 156.
98 Ibid., 157. Preto Velho means the Old Black Man, and is a popular figure in Afro-
Brazilian religions, representing the cult of the African Ancestors. Caboclo is a word that
261
The Portuguese colonial enterprise, as a Catholic event, forced both the
natives and the African slaves into baptism, in order to turn them into Catholics.
By adopting a cultural policy of “acculturation,” they tried to give a new identity
especially to the African slaves." So, the Afro-Brazilian religions had to exist side
by side with Catholicism. That was the beginning of the syncretism between Afro-
Brazilian religions and the Catholic faith.
One method used by Catholic priests to catechize Africans and Afro-
Brazilians was organizing them into brotherhoods and sisterhoods. The objective
was that the members of these societies would “increase their knowledge of and
zeal for Catholicism, while also acting as mutual aid societies.”100 However, soon
the brotherhoods and sisterhoods served functions not intended by the church.
One of these functions was the camouflage of the very African religious
practices that they were supposed to eliminate. The slaves learned to used the
Catholic saints to mask their continued worship of the Orishas. They began
drawing parallels between the saints and the Orishas that continue to exist in
could be translated as mestizo. In Brazilian native religions, it represents the spirit of an

ancestor, as Preto Velho does for Afro-Brazilian religions.
99 It is worth pointing out that the Indians were decimated in the contact with
European civilization and that the Africans were taken in larger numbers as slaves. But
insofar as there was continuity in the contact of the Europeans with both African and
Amerindian cultures, the process of “acculturation” was similar.
100Sheila S. Walker, “The Saints and the Orishas in a Brazilian Catholic as an

Expression of the Afro-Brazilian Cultural Synthesis in the Feast of Good Death,” in
African Creative Expressions of the Divine, edited by Kortright Davis, Elias Farajaje-
Jones, and Iris Eaton (Washington: Harvard University School of Divinity,1991), 84-98
(85).
262
Brazilian popular religion to this day.101 By taking advantage especially of the
feast days, they employed “the very structure that was intent upon eliminating the
worship of the Orishas as a vehicle through which to continue honoring them.”102
The process that allowed the perpetuation of the Yorub& religion in Brazil can
be called Afro-Brazilianization—that is, its adaptation to a new environment,
which consisted of a mix of the African elements with other elements from the
Brazilian and the European cultures. The Afro-Brazilianization of African
religions reached its climax with the rise of Umbanda, “a deliberate synthesis of
various aspects of traditional Brazilian religious beliefs and practices.”103
In the second half of the nineteenth century, the Afro-Brazilian cults that had
hitherto existed relatively peacefully became victims of violent persecution,
especially after 1870.104 During this period, Yoruba rituals were carried out in
secret, usually hidden in the periphery of towns.
101 Ibid. Walker briefly describes some of those parallels: “Yemanja, Orisha of the
seas, was equated with the Virgin Mary for her maternal qualities. And Oshala, the
eldest Orisha and creator of human beings, was, as the supreme male figure, seen as
equivalent to Jesus. Omolu, Orisha of disease and pestilence, specifically smallpox, and
ultimately death, resembled Saint Lazarus the leper. The Catholic saints’ days, holidays
from work, came to be celebrated by the enslaved as well as their masters, albeit
separately, and which allowed Africans and Afro-Brazilians to celebrate in their own
ways and in fulfillment of their non-Catholic beliefs.”
102 Ibid.
103 Harmon A. Johnson, Umbanda: A Modem Brazilian Religion, in Dynamic Religious

Movements: Case Studies of Rapidly Growing Religious Movements Around the World,
edited by David J. Hesselgrave (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1978), 250.
104Maria Isaura P. de Queiroz, “Afro-Brazilian Cults and Religious Change in Brazil,”

in The Changing Face of Religion, edited by James A. Beckford and Thomas Luckmann,
(London: SAGE Publications, 1989), (88-108):92.
263
Umbanda is said to be one of the fastest-growing religions in Brazil, “still
spreading throughout the country and across all social classes.”105 It is an urban
phenomenon, like Pentecostalism, having first reached the lower social strata
and then expanding to reach the middle and upper classes by the 1960s.106
Umbanda is considered a Brazilian religion because it integrates elements of all
traditions that make up Brazilian culture.
Umbanda deals with spiritual problems that reflect the Brazilian beliefs about
the nature of supernatural powers. People seek the help of spirits mainly for
protection against the action of evil spirits that can cause harm to daily life. Most
umbandistas identify themselves as Catholics, which shows how they see the
two religions as complementary.
One of Umbanda’s most significant social contributions to Brazilian society is
the role of symbolic resistance it played over the years, as it spread the cultural
values of the lower classes and minority ethnic groups to the point that it has
been incorporated into the dominant worldview of Brazilian society. In addition to
that, Umbanda, and other Afro-Brazilian religious, have promoted an inversion of
social positions, which takes place in the terreiros. Umbanda has found a place
among European descendants and has penetrated the upper classes of Brazilian
society. However, its priests and mediums continue to be mostly women, African
Brazilians, or mestizos—the poor, in general. Therefore, what happens in the
105 Ibid.
106 Ibid, 100.
264
terreiros is a sort of power inversion, since it is very common to find high-
ranking officials paying to receive advice from lower-class female priests, or
requesting the benefits of magical intervention made by those priests/healers. In
that situation the “mother of saints” (the female priest) is superior to mayors,
governors, and even Brazilian presidents that have also sought help from Afro-
Brazilian religions.107
Some scholars have seen Pentecostalism as opposed to Umbanda m The
main contrast is that while Pentecostalism is taken as representing a break with
folk Catholicism and popular religious tradition, Umbanda represents continuity
with both.109 As I have shown earlier, however, Brazilian Neo-Pentecostalism
represents a form of Pentecostalism that does not entirely break with the
traditions of popular religiosity, but continues them through an appropriation of
the symbolism of Umbanda and of other popular symbols present in the universe
of popular religiosity in Brazil.
The worldview of Brazilian Pentecostalism, in fact, has much in common with
that of Afro-Brazilian religions. As much as Umbanda, Pentecostalism can also
107See Leni M. Silverstein. “The Celebration of Our Lord of the Good End: Changing
State, Church and Afro-Brazilian Relations in Bahia,” in The Brazilian Puzzle, 134-
154(135).
108See David Martin, Tongues of Fire, 69.
109Gary Nigel Howe, “Capitalism and Religion at the Periphery: Pentecostalism and
Umbanda in Brazil,” in Perspectives on Pentecostalism: Case Studies from the
Caribbean and Latin America, edited by Stephen D. Glazier (Washington: University
Press of America, 1980), 125-142(128). See also Luiz Eduardo Soares, “A Guerra dos
Pentecostais contra o Afro-Brasileiro: Dimensoes Democraticas do Conflito Religioso no
Brazil,” Comunicagoes do ISER, 44 (1993): 43-50 (44).
265
provide elements for the development of a spirituality of resistance.
Pentecostalism breaks with the traditional dominance of Catholic hierarchy, but
does not break with the symbolic world of popular religiosity. Nonetheless, it goes
beyond the experience of trance found in the terreiros, to an experience of being
possessed by the Holy Spirit all the time. That experience of living under the
dominion of the Spirit allows the Pentecostal believer to live permanently in the
sacred time, even when she is exerting her social roles in a supposedly secular
space.110 Thus, the Pentecostal experience transforms the cotidiano (daily life)
into a place of real experiences of another realm, a place of rupture with a routine
of suffering, and of capacity to transcend the situations of despair and
wretchedness.111
If there is some commonality between Neo-Pentecostalism and Umbanda, on
the other hand, the former maintains the discourse of incompatibility by declaring
a holy war on the Afro-Brazilian religions. In fact, the IURD demonizes the spirit
world of the Afro-Brazilian religions. In this regard, some scholars have shown
that in the very attitude of demonizing the spirit world of African Religions, the
IURD and other Pentecostals who do so are acknowledging the reality of that
world.112
110Alexandre C. Souza, Pentecostalismo, 31.
111 Waldo Cesar, “Sobrevivencia e Transcedencia: Vida Cotidiana e Religiosidade no

Pentecostalismo,” ReligiSo e Sociedade 16/1-2 (1992): 46-59 (49).
112 K. Serbin, Brazilian Church Builds an International Empire, 398. This is a step
beyond comparing to the attitude of all historic forms of Protestantism, both ecumenical
and evangelical, which just ignored it as superstition.
266
Indigenization or contextualization has been a goal of Brazilian
Protestantism for a long time. However, most attempts to make Protestantism
Brazilian have clashed with another form of dealing with traditional practices and
beliefs in Brazilian culture coming from below, which some forms of Pentecostal
churches in Brazil have been more apt to understand.
The IURD reflects Afro-Brazilian practices by the negation, demonization,
and reinterpretation of their symbols. No Protestant church has given as much
special attention to the Afro-Brazilian pantheon as the IURD. Whereas in classic
Pentecostalism, demons are just sent away rather than challenged, in the IURD
services they are invoked to manifest themselves in order to be defeated.113 As
the IURD pastors call them by their Afro-Brazilian names, they are
acknowledging the Afro-Brazilian pantheon and putting them in the center of their
service.114 This valorization of the popular imaginary goes further as the IURD
appropriates feast days, colors, objects, music, and other elements and practices
of Brazilian popular religions into its rituals and practices. The plasticity of the
IURD also combines an organizational structure similar to that of Roman
113 It is worth noting that this ritual, central in the IURD practices, is empowering for
the people in the church, since they see those demons/deities as supernatural powers
that influence daily life negatively, bringing problems and sickness. Furthermore, they
know that many of their oppressors are guided by those entities, since most Brazilian
politicians, to some extent, believe in those spirits and, at least time to time, seek for
their favors. So, the defeat of those spirits by the IURD in the name of Jesus—especially
in the dramatic way of exorcism that happens in the IURD temples, with the whole
congregation shouting words like ‘go out’ and ‘bum’—becomes a demonstration of the
power those believers have at their disposal. That, in the Brazilian context, surely has a
significant impact on the lives of those believers. For a description of an IURD service
see Ibid., 386.
114 Paul Freston, “Breve Historia do Pentecostalismo,” 140.
267
Catholicism along with an audacious vision of the political and the
technological spheres.
This Pentecostalism represented by the IURD, and many other Brazilian
Pentecostal churches115 has great ability to deal with the fluidity of Brazilian
culture, being able to move freely within and among the different facets of
Brazilian reality, either modern or traditional. Furthermore, it has a potential to
recover the indigenous and African Brazilian heritages, which are for the most
part absent in all other forms of Brazilian Protestantism.
A Call for Progressive Evang6licos to Engage Pentecostalism
One should look critically to the Pentecostal religious manifestations
presented above. The market-mindset, the authoritarian ecclesiastic format, and
even the belligerent discourse towards Afro-Brazilian religions that some forms of
Pentecostalism take are elements that merit critical attention. However, there are
challenges for non-Pentecostals coming from this impressive growing
Pentecostal Christianity, especially if one pays attention to the Pentecostal
experiences and worldview, rather than to Pentecostal ecclesiastical structures.
First, the Pentecostal experience, which is originally marked by the receiving
of the Holy Spirit, offers a new language for the poor to cope with the afflictions of
115 In the past seven years, I have attended services both at IURD, and in other
Brazilian Pentecostal churches such as Reborn in Christ, Christ Lives, Christ Saves,
International Church of the Grace of God, and also some Charismatic Baptist churches.
In all of them, I could notice the same plasticity in adapting elements of Brazilian popular
religions into their practices; something that is not so present in other forms of Brazilian
Protestantism.
268
poverty in their everyday lives.116 Most testimonies given by poor
Pentecostals show that the essence of their faith is power, divine power, “spiritual
strength [that] can be harnessed for secular purposes.”117 The Pentecostal God
is a powerful God, who makes God’s power available to today’s believers, as it
was available to the disciples in the Pentecost event two thousand years ago.
This is a belief that can help to reorganize the lives of the wretched and
empower them. The center of this belief is the experience of baptism by the Holy
Spirit, through which believers are infused “with a tremendous sense of power
through ekstasis, or the sensation of being taken out of place.”118 This
experience allows believers to transcend their oppressive social locus. This
power is distributed democratically in most Pentecostal churches, so that the
poorest and most marginalized are also entitled to experience the power of the
Holy Spirit in the community.
The gift of speaking in tongues also has a revolutionary meaning, as it gives
voice for those whose social voices have been muted by the powerful. According
to Chestnut, “glossolalia is speech for those whose tongue is tied by official
society, particularly for poor women of color.”119 As Pentecostal theologian Frank
D. Macchia puts it, “The presence of ecstatic, incomprehensible expressions in
116See R. Andrew Chestnut, “Bom Again in Brazil,” in On Earth as it is in Heaven:

Religion in Modem Latin America, 225ff,
117 Ibid., 220.
118 Ibid., 224.
119 Ibid., 228.
269
Pentecostal services can grant the uneducated and illiterate a strong voice in
the meetings and help to deliver us from the ‘tyranny of words’ in worship, a trend
which has parallels in dramatic liturgies that have implications of meaning no
words spoken at the event could fully convey.”120
In Pentecostalism, everyone has been commissioned, empowered by God,
and has a voice. For Pentecostals, God has chosen the poor and the destitute of
the earth to speak about the goodness of God in all languages. Anyone can be
granted this commission.121
As I have shown in chapter three, Richard Shaull argues that the Pentecostal
response to the movement of the Spirit is in line with the biblical witness to God’s
particular concern for and presence among the poor. Pentecostals have touched
a large number of poor people because they speak the language of the poor.
Pentecostals are thus in a better position today than other Christian churches to
hear, understand, and respond to God’s revelation. So, one cannot speak today
of the poor and oppressed without listening to their own voice. Listening to the
Pentecostal voice is imperative for Christian theology and ethics, especially for
those who take seriously the hermeneutical advantage of the poor,
understanding that they “occupy a privileged position as interpreters of God’s
self-revelation.”122
120 Frank D. Macchia, “Discerning the Spirit in Life: A Review of God the Spirit by
Michael Welker,” Journal of Pentecostal Theology, 10 (1997):15.
121 Ibid., 23.
122 Richard Shaull, “From Academic Research to Spiritual Transformation,” 75.
270
Furthermore, Pentecostalism is emerging in Brazilian society as an
important force for social transformation. Many Brazilian Pentecostals are
becoming increasingly involved in diverse struggles for societal transformation.123
But how can it contribute to the construction of a more just society in Brazil?
Despite Pentecostalism’s potential to interact with Brazilian culture and
popular religious worldview, any effective action to transform society must also
have a defined political character. Therefore, the challenge that both
Pentecostals and mainline Christians face today is to work together in order to
use the resources of the Spirit to empower the poor and to develop a new
process of conscientizagao and new strategies for action which will eventually
contribute to the emergence of a new and more just order. A clear example of the
possibility of this encounter can be seen in the political engagement of some
Pentecostals in politics in Brazil, such as Senator Benedita da Silva, whom I
mentioned earlier.
Brazilian Pentecostalism might be signaling a new step in the struggle of
liberation. In this, there is a challenge for both mainline Protestantism and
liberation theologians to respond, by providing fresh biblical and theological
reflection on the “hermeneutical advantage of the poor.” This engagement is
123This involvement has occurred both in the political arena as, since 1986
Pentecostals have not only occupied the public scene but also redefined the Evang&ico
identity as they took the center of the political stage and relocated historical
Protestantism to the margins of the political process, and also in the social realm, as
Pentecostal Christians have become much more involved in the initiatives of Brazilian
civil society through its NGOs—many of which are of Evang6lico inspiration. In that
context, Pentecostals have become the new social actors of Brazilian society. See
Joanildo Burity, “Reconfigurando o Campo da Religiao e Seus Vinculos com a Esfera
Publica,” (n.d., unpublished paper, accessed by author from Burity’s personal files, on 30
January 2005).
271
imperative, since this Pentecostal vision can be easily distorted by
fundamentalist and prosperity theologies. The encounter between those
concerned with social justice and these charismatic Protestants becomes
essential for the development of any social ethics that intends to be significant for
the lives of the oppressed in Brazilian society today. In order for that to take
place, an attitude of reverence and humility is required of those who approach
this new reality. That is why Shaull, in fact, talks about undergoing a true
conversion as one encounters with the Pentecostal poor.124
With a humble disposition to learn from the poor, one becomes able to enter
their symbolic world, and realize that in this realm of the Spirit, in the midst of all
struggle for life, they have come to know “the presence of the Holy Spirit in all
aspect of their lives,” which allow them to realize a new way of life, in which they
live an integral relation with others, with nature and with the Divine.125
All Pentecostal experiences take place in community. That communitarian
experience of God makes the impossible become possible time and again for
those caught in impossible situations, makes miracles happen, restores broken
family relationships, and breaks the addictions of those imprisoned by alcohol or
drugs. In short, there is a re-structuring of life in community, which brings
empowerment and improvement in their economic situation. All this happens in
the midst of and over against the background of demonic forces that surround
124Shaull, “The Third Conversion: Hearing the Spirit’s Call to Deeper Faith,” The
Other Side 33/2 (1997):32-34.
125Shaull, “From Academic Research to Spiritual Transformation,” 78.
272
them. But given the presence of the Spirit among them, these Pentecostals
live their lives “oriented toward the future, the coming of the Reign of God,”
whose signs are already present among them in the manifestation of God’s
Spirit.126
As Shaull has pointed out, when one enters the Spirit’s realm, one’s life and
world “are set in the context of a divine reality which is compassionate, centered
on a God who suffers with those to whom a full life is denied and acts to change
their situation.”127 As one finds oneself in that context, one is empowered to do
justice, to be totally committed to the transformation of life and the world in the
direction of the kingdom of God
Kwame Bediako, a Ghanaian scholar of religion, has emphasized the need for
Western theology to interact with the ancient cultures of Africa, Asian, and Latin
America. As he claims, “the quality of twenty-first-century Christianity as a whole
will depend on the quality of that interaction.”128 Brazilian Christianity, because of
its hybrid character that I developed in chapter two, has the privilege of providing
a special place where Western and Ancient religious values meet and blend, and
where the poor and oppressed can creatively discover new meanings in their
Christian experiences. There is a challenge before all Christian theologians to
engage that reality, and to work creatively not only to make sense of it
126 Ibid.
127 Ibid., 79.
128 Kwame Bediako, Christianity in Africa: The Renewal of a Non-Western Religion

(Maryknoll: Orbis/Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1995), 161.
273
theologically, but also to generate a transformative social action in that
environment. The actions of the Spirit should perpetuate the actions and options
of Jesus, who walked among the poor and outcasts, sharing their burdens and
confronting the powers that are destroying their lives.129
As I said before, this must be a critical dialogue. If on the one hand
Pentecostalism in Brazil has much to offer to non-Pentecostal Christians engaged
in the struggle for social justice, on the other hand Pentecostalism also needs to
be challenged. Some Pentecostals in Brazil are already aware of the
contributions that non-Pentecostals can make to improve Brazilian
Pentecostalism. According to Ricardo Gondim, the main leader of the Pentecostal
church Assembleia de Deus Betesda, that contribution would bring a balance
between experience and theological reflection to Pentecostalism,
I would say that the great appeal of our church is precisely the
appeal of bringing the Pentecostal message, the charismatic
message of access to God through Christ, without any need to
commit intellectual suicide. You can think, and you can experience
God simultaneously. The two things aren’t mutually exclusive... Our
church is a Pentecostal church and it looks Pentecostal. But we
want our struggle here, our Pentecostal practice, to be balanced
with reflection and with exposition of the Scriptures. We have a
community here and we want to be holistic in our mission...That
mission includes political involvement.130
Such holistic vision is not alien to Pentecostal spirituality. Therefore, such
interaction does not entail making violence to Pentecostal spirituality through a
129Richard Shaull, “From Academic Research to Spiritual Transformation”, 84.
130 Ricardo Gondim, interview by Phillip Berryman, Religion in the Megacity: Catholic
and Protestant Portraits from Latin America (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1996), 24.
274
forceful assertion of mainstream Protestant tools. Instead, it means sharing
visions, and awakening possibilities which are already inherent to Pentecostal
spirituality. As Cheryl B. Johns affirms,
There are inherent within Pentecostalism characteristics which are

themselves conducive to conscientization. Such elements as the
roots of the movement from its holiness and black origins, its oral-
narrative theologizing, its experiential, pneumatic hermeneutic
create an ethos which gives dignity to the marginalized and a voice
to the voiceless. These dynamics call for people realizing their
ontological vocations as subjects of history. Such characteristics
are themselves powerful means of liberation and humanization
within the ‘free spaces’ of Pentecostal communities, and they are
pregnant with possibilities for the transformation of social
structures.131
Pentecostalism, as a religious expression that emerges from the poor, has
provided its own responses to the plight of the poor and marginalized in Brazil
and elsewhere. As much as the other two responses that I presented earlier, the
Pentecostal response will reach its fullness as it realizes its own identity in
conversation with Non-Pentecostal Christians sincerely concerned with working
for a more just society.
Through the contact with Brazilian Pentecostal progressive leaders such as
Carlos Queiroz, Ricardo Gondim, Alexandre C. Souza, Benedita da Silva and
Marina da Silva,1321have become convinced that there is more openness today
than some years ago among some Brazilian Pentecostals to reflect in partnership
with non-Pentecostals on the development of a Christian social ethics that takes
131 Cheryl B. Johns, Pentecostal Formation: A Pedagogy Among the Oppressed

(Sheffield, UK.: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 139.
132Whose stories I have already mentioned in previous chapters.
275
into consideration Pentecostal and non-Pentecostal responses to the
challenge of the poor in Brazil. This interaction, in fact, is already taking place, as
in exchanges such as those which happened in CLADE III and IV, and which one
sees in the annual meetings of the FTL-Nordeste. This interaction has the
potential to change the face of Brazilian Protestantism.
Mainstream Brazilian Protestants are being challenged by Pentecostalism to
listen to the voices of the poor as they immerse in their symbolic worldview.
Brazilian Pentecostals have awakened to their responsibility as social actors to
work for a less unjust social order. Since this awakening requires theological
reflection, and since until very recently Brazilian Pentecostalism did not stress the
need for developing a theology of social concern, there is an increasing need for
interaction as Brazilian Pentecostals continue to shape their own theology.
As Samuel Escobar has noticed,133 in not having their own theological
expression, new leaders of Pentecostalism in Latin America are open to embrace
theological reflection through the ecumenical contact with other Protestants.
Interdenominational agencies and seminaries have a very important role to play
in this scenario.
At the same time that most Evang&icos in Brazil to some extent experience
the impact of Pentecostalism, an increasing number of Pentecostals are
becoming more aware of their social responsibility. In the language of Paul
Freston, there are two parallel phenomena happening in Brazil today, a
133Samuel Escobar, Interview by author, tape recording, Prague, Czech Republic, 08

May 1998.
276
Pentecostalization of the historical Protestant churches, and a historicization
of Pentecostal churches. On the one hand, Pentecostal churches have begun to
see themselves as a part of a broader community of Evang&icos that includes
their historical brethren. In Freston’s own words, “greater social and political
visibility has led to a multiplication of projects to unify the Protestant field and
address areas of national life previously distant from Pentecostal concerns.” On
the other hand, there is “the diffusion in historic circles of Pentecostal forms of
worship and theological themes, such as healing, prosperity and ‘spiritual
warfare.’” 134 Pentecostalism, little by little, seems to be impregnating many
historical churches.
Because of the character of Brazilian culture, Pentecostal and non-
Pentecostal realities cannot and should not isolate themselves. What is needed
today is a Christian social ethics that can offer to those living in the midst of this
encounter between charismatic Christianity and the struggle for social justice a
theological language that might guide their path into the future. My task in the last
chapter is to show how this social ethics might be developed through the
interaction of the three Evang&ico responses to the suffering of the poor in Brazil.
I am not proposing an integration of the three responses, but rather calling for a
dialogue among them with the aim of choosing some forms of cooperative action,
which might be more effective in the struggle for the construction of a more just
society in Brazil.
134 Paul Freston, “Between Pentecostalism and the Crisis of Denominationalism: The
Future of the Historic Churches in Brazil,” In the Power of the Spirit, 207ff.
CHAPTER SEVEN
INTEGRATING THE THREE FACES: TOWARDS A PROGRESSIVE
EVANGELICO SOCIAL ETHICS
The Ethical Demand of a Socio-Historical Location
Jurgen Moltmann has affirmed that in his contact with Latin American
theology he learned that “any good Christian theology knows in which context, in
which kairos , in which community it must be situated.”1As I have shown in earlier
chapters, in Brazil, all Christian theologians are located in a context marked by
extreme poverty and social injustice. A recent survey done by the Instituto de
Pesquisa Econdmica Aplicada (IPEA) has shown that 53.9 million (or 31.7% of
the Brazilian population) live below the line of poverty. The poor were defined as
those living with less than one American dollar per day. Among those, 21.9
million people live on half of that. This poll also showed that Brazil has one of the
most unequal distributions of wealth.2
This social location—the situation that I meet face-to-face everyday—
demands of me a response, and requires from me a prior social engagement if I
1Jurgen Moltmann, “Teologia Latino-Americana,” in 0 Mar Se Abriu: Trinta Anos de

edited by Luis Carlos Susin (S3o Paulo, Brazil: Ed. Loyola,
Teologia na America Latina,
2000), 227.
2 Jomal A Tarde, Salvador, Brazil, 2 June 2005,14. A prior poll showed that 80
percent of the Brazilian population cannot be counted as potential consumers for their
lack of money to buy what is produced. It also says that 65 percent of the Brazilian
people do not have enough money even to open a bank account. In general, the
financial situation of the population has deteriorated in the last 5 years. Amelia Safatle
and Paula Pacheco, “S6 Falta a Grana,” Carta Capital 183 (2002), [magazine on-line];
Internet, available from http.y/www.terra.com.br/cartacapital: accessed 04 December
2002.
277
278
want to offer any significant theological/ethical contribution from that context.3
One of the most important contributions made by Latin American liberation
theology is that in order to do theology from the perspective of the poor one has
to have a strong and vivid commitment with the social reality which surrounds
them.4
As I claimed earlier, no matter whether liberation theology, in the form it was
conceived during the late 1960s, will continue to play any important role in the
social transformation of Brazilian society, the injustices it prophetically
denounced are still among us, and still need to be addressed. Thus, new forms
of liberating social ethics must be developed to respond to the new ways these
challenges are now conveyed to us. I have argued in the previous chapters that
different types of Protestant Christians in Brazil have undertaken this task and
that the way they have responded to the issues of social injustice and poverty
must be taken seriously by those who intend to develop adequate ethical
responses to those issues which continue to press on us today.
3 If the situation briefly portrayed in the paragraph above is the general situation of
poverty experienced by a considerable number of Brazilians, my specific social location
in the Northeastern part of Brazil is specifically crueler. Among the ten poorest Brazilian
cities, seven are located in the Northeast. One hundred fifty among the Brazilian cities
with the highest infantile mortality rates are also “Nordestinas.” More than 30 percent of
the Nordestino children under the age of five present clear signs of malnutrition. Finally,
although only thirty percent of the Brazilian population, sixty four percent of those living
under the line of poverty are Nordestinos. This abundance of poverty and its structural
causes form the context from which I must theologize, and affects the way I must think
ethically. See Marcos A. Monteiro, “A Igreja Evangelica e o Nordeste Brasileiro,” in
Diaconia no Contexto Nordestino: Desafios, Reflex&es, Praxis, edited by Sergio
Andrade & Rudolf von Sinner (Sao Leopoldo, RS.: Editora Sinodal, 2003), 42-70 (46).
4 Leonardo Boff & Clodovis Boff, Introducing Liberation Theology, 22.
279
The Public Role of Religion
According to sociologist Jose Casanova, the world today is experiencing a
process of deprivatization of religion, by which “religious traditions throughout the
world are refusing to accept the marginal and privatized role which theories of
modernity as well as theories of secularization had reserved to them.”5 One of
the results of this process is what Casanova calls “the renormativization of the
public economic and political spheres.”6 This process reaffirms not only the
continuous presence of religion in the world, but also the fact that religion
continues to play important public roles in the ongoing construction of the
contemporary politico-economic order.7
Religion can play an important role in the process of humanizing the social
order, by providing it with the moral foundations for the development of a more
humane order. In the context, in particular, progressive Christianity has the
5Jose Casanova, Public Religions in the Modem World (Chicago:The University of

Chicago Press, 1994), 5.
6 Ibid., 6. Peter Berger and others have spoken of a process of desecularization of

the world, to refer to the public resurgence of religion. See Peter Berger (ed.), The
Desecularization of the World: Resurgent Religion and World Politics (Grand Rapids, Ml.:
W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1999). In Latin America, however, it might not be
accurate to speak of de-secularization, when there has never been a complete process
of secularization—in terms of a decline in the influence of religion in the public realm. In
that context, religion has always played a public role. See Cecilia L. Mariz,
“SecularizagSo e Dessecularizagdo: Comentarios a um Texto de Peter Berger,” ReligiSo
e Sociedade 21/1 (2001): 25-40 (27).
7See, for instance, Richard Falk, Religion and Humane Global Governance
(Houndmills, England: Palgrave Publishers, 2001). In this book, Falk acknowledges that
religion must take a central role in the global affairs, since it can provide a vision of the
possible and the necessary for a more humane global governance.
280
potential to both provide the foundations for a spirituality of resistance8 that
can equip and nurture those involved in the process of resisting the injustices of
the prevailing social order, and also provide a moral alternative to change the
basic values of that order by substituting life-oriented values for the ideology of
death 9
The liberationist movements that emerged in Latin America and soon spread
throughout the Third World have been concerned with public issues such as
resisting economic and political oppression, and improving the living conditions of
the poor and wretched on earth.10 In fact, one can say that the idea of resistance
in the Latin American context is an important expression of a certain form of
spirituality, which seeks to respond to the challenges coming from those living in
8Any spirituality rooted in the Gospel of Jesus demands resistance to the

dehumanizing forces of the dominant order. See Walter Brueggemann, “Always in the
Shadow of the Empire,” in The Church as Counterculture, edited by Michael L. Budde &
Robert W. Brimlow (Albany: State of New York University Press, 2000), 39-57 (39).
9 Here I draw upon Martin Luther King Jr.’s understanding of moral revolution, which
he proposed as an alternative to Marxist revolution. Speaking to his own nation, King
said that the United States needed to undergo a radical revolution of values. At the core
of that revolution of values was a shift from a”thing-oriented,” society to a “person-
oriented” one. King believed that such a moral revolution would lead Americans to
question the fairness and justice of many of the U.S. past and present policies toward
the South, as well as to make them “look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and
wealth.” Martin Luther King, Jr., “A Time to Break Silence,” in a Testament of Hope: The
Essential Writings and Speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr. Edited by James M.
Washington (New York: HarperCollins, 1991), 231-244 (241). In Latin America, because
of the scandalous contrast between death and life, this moral revolution seeks to
substitute life-oriented values in place of the ideology of death. For more on the ideology
of death in Latin America see Franz J. Hinkelammert, Las Armas Ideoldgicas de la
M uerte: El Discemimiento de los Fetiches: Capitalismo y Cristianismo (San Jose,
Costa Rica: Editorial Universitaria Centroamericana,1977).
10See Jon Sobrino and Felix Wilfred (eds.), Globalization and Its Victims, Concilium
2001/5 (London: SCM Press, 2001).
281
a context impacted by death and exclusion. It is also the expression of a
spirituality that deliberately refuses to accommodate to the ideology of death and
to its myth of sacrificial violence.
Resistance, however, does not entail only a negative reaction to a process of
domination and oppression. It also has a positive and creative aspect, which can
redirect such processes by reorganizing the creative power of the masses. The
strategies to achieve transformation might shift from confrontation to creative
protest and from protest to proposal.11 As Walter Brueggemann implies, to resist
also means to “nurture, nourish and evoke a consciousness and perception
alternative to the consciousness and perception of the dominant culture around
us.” 12 This kind of spirituality affirms that all the dimensions of life are affected by
the following of Jesus. Spirituality, then, as stated by Gustavo Gutierrez,
becomes a way of life which brings deep unity to our praying, thinking and
acting.13 Spirituality, from this perspective, is a journey characterized by solidarity
with those who suffer.
11 See Arturo Escobar and Sonia E. Alvarez, “Introduction: Theory and Protest in
Latin America Today,” in The Making of Social Movements in Latin America: Identity,
Strategy and Democracy, edited by Arturo Escobar & Sonia E. Alvarez (San Francisco,
CA.: Westview Press, 1992), 1-18 (5).
12Walter Brueggemann, Prophetic Imagination (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1978),
13. According to Brueggemann there is an imperialistic, dominant culture which must be
radically criticized and finally dismantled, and alternative Christian communities exist for
the sake of criticizing and dismantling it. Ibid., 80.
13Gustavo Gutierrez, We Drink from Our Own Wells: The Spiritual Journey of a
People(Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1984), 89.
In that context, Latin American theology acknowledges that no
theologizing is neutral, but rather socio-historically located. Therefore, in the Latin
American context it is imperative to take sides with life against death, with the
needy and against the structures that oppress.14Taking sides with the
impoverished is an imperative because the biblical reading that one does from
the Latin American reality sees God as also taking the side of the marginalized
and excluded.15 The preferential option for the poor is understood as a divine
option, expressed biblically in the exodus narrative, the prophets, and the
gospels. Christians, in that context, are called to live in solidarity with those who
suffer and who are victims of an unjust dominant social order.
Putting the Different Evangelico Faces in Dialogue with Each Other
As I have shown before, whereas Brazilian liberation theology was cultivated
mostly among Roman Catholic priests and theologians, individualism and an
anti-Catholic sentiment prevailed among most Evangelicos in Brazil for a long
time. Despite this fact, some Brazilian Evangelico groups, in their daily face-to-
face encounter with the poor, began to experience a kind of social conversion,
which led them to search for their public role in Brazilian society and to struggle
for justice. Different faces of Brazilian Protestantism have produced different
theological and practical responses to the cry of the poor, as we have seen.
14Jose Miguez Bonino, “For Life and Against Death: A Theology that Takes Sides” in
The Christian Century 97/38 (1980):1154-1158.
15 Robert McAfee Brown, Unexpected News: Reading the Bible with Third World
Eyes (Philadelphia, PA.: The Westminster Press, 1984), 33-48.
283
None of them is complete, but as one takes all the different responses into
consideration, one can see that they complement each other, and together can
lead to a more significant Christian action to produce a more just and egalitarian
society. The consciousness raising that has taken place among a number of
Brazilian Evangelicos in past decades, and which has led them to reflect
theologically on and respond to the plight of the poor, has also increased the
interaction between these Evangelicos and other religious traditions which are
also concerned with the struggle for social justice. It has contributed, as I have
shown earlier, to the development of a new kind of ecumenism, a base
ecumenism, which is not so concerned with ecclesiastical unity as it is concerned
with a unity of efforts in the struggle for justice, a unity formed from the bottom
up.
In the chapters that anteceded this one, I presented three different responses
to the plight of the poor in Brazil by different faces of Brazilian Protestantism.
First, I introduced the ecumenical face of Brazilian Protestantism and the rise of a
concern for social justice in the ecumenical movement in the 1950s. Then, I
presented the evangelical response, mainly through the theology of the “mision
integral,” to the realities of oppression and social injustice in Brazil. Finally, I
described the Pentecostal response to the suffering of the oppressed in the
Brazilian context. Each of these three responses comes from a peculiar face of
the Brazilian Evangelico Christianity, and each of them offers its own contribution
to the development of a Brazilian Evangelico social ethics.
284
I have also shown the relationality that characterizes Brazilian culture,
arguing that this relationality demands that a Brazilian Evangelico social ethics
produce the interaction of these different elements in a dialogical and even
mingling manner. Such interaction, as I have made clear, takes seriously the
Other’s otherness, by empowering each distinct voice. However, it recognizes
that the different responses can be complemented and enriched when related in
a dialogical manner with one another.
Furthermore, throughout this dissertation I have taken a relational approach
as I focused on the response each face of Brazilian Protestantism elaborated as
they met the poor and were affected by them. Each response of these different
faces is primarily linked to the moral appeal of the poor. I have sought to show
that, to some extent, there is a degree of continuity that signals a move from one
face to another as each of them searches for the most adequate response to the
situation of injustice and oppression in which the many Brazilians live.
A relational-dialogical approach to Christian social ethics leads to the
necessity of putting these different faces face-to-face with one another in order
for one to fully benefit of the complementary contributions that we find in each
face. I claim that none of the faces has all the elements to produce a Evangelico
social ethics in Brazil that can properly respond to the current needs of Brazilian
people and society. Each face, in fact, is complementary to the others. If they are
seen in conversation with each other, their contribution to a Brazilian progressive
Evangelico social ethics will be more significant.
285
After one decade of active presence of some progressive Evangelico
movements in the public space, there was a time of little involvement, when most
Evangeiicos in Brazil took an apolitical stand under a repressive and dictatorial
regime. After 1985, upon Brazil’s return to democracy, there was a rehabilitation
of the presence of Evangelico movements and churches in the public realm.
Joanildo Burity has shown that such rehabilitation is linked to the process of
redemocratization that has taken place in Brazil in the past two decades.16 This
new situation has brought back the question, “What role is religion going to play
in the renewal of the Brazilian political culture?”17
To be sure, Evangelico socio-political participation in Brazil is not novel. What
is new in the current political situation is that, as Jose Miguez Bonino has
revealed, the new Evangelico social actors are the ones coming from formerly
“apolitical” churches.18 However, when one observes this new scenario, one
must not underestimate the memory of previous processes, in which—by means
of theological fermentation and concrete engagement in socio-political
movements—some sectors of the Evangelico churches sought to play a more
16Joanildo Burity, “Reconfigurando o Campo da Religido e Seus Vinculos com a

Esfera Publica,” Internet, available from www.mep.com.br. accessed on 03 March 2005.
17Joanildo Burity, “Mudanga Cultural, Mudanga Religiosa e Mudanga Politica: Para

Onde Caminhamos?” in Cultura e Identidade: Perspectivas Interdisciplinares, edited by
Joanildo Burity (Rio de Janeiro, DP&A Editora, 2002), 29-64 (30). It can either morally
reinforce the democratic practices, or it may also strengthen a spirit of submission and
deference to a conservative pseudo-democracy which, in fact, simply assures the old
authoritarian and hierarchical ethos in Brazilian society.
18Jos6 Miguez Bonino, Poderdel EvangSlio y Poder Poltico: La Participacidn de los

Evangeiicos en la Politica en America Latina (Buenos Aires, Argentina: Kairos Ediciones,
1999), 12.
286
active role in the social debates and actions.19The new social actors do not
appear in the public realm in an historical and existential emptiness. There is a
legacy of Evangelico socio-political participation from which they had to draw,
and which they must build upon.
On the other hand, the process of re-democratization has brought to the
scene a set of new social actors—with new demands, values and types of action.
Those new social actors emerged in the public realm as a consequence of the
pluralization of socio-political agents generated by the process of re
democratization, which contributed to the awakening of political interest in groups
hitherto characterized by conservatism and isolation.
Such new social actors emerged onto the political scene also due to the crisis
of traditional political representation, which opened possibilities of political
participation outside the partisan channels of the civil society, from which new
19Joanildo Burity, “Reconfigurando o Campo da Religiao,” op. cit. Such memory of

previous process has begun to be recovered only in the past two decades, since there
was an imposed silence during the twenty-one years of military repression, in which this
memory continued to be registered, but could not become public—being many times
brutally erased from the public realm. Several published and yet unpublished texts used
in this dissertation are part of that process of recovering a memory forced into silence.
Some of the personal archives I visited, such as the personal files of Waldo Cesar, were
hidden for years to escape the military attempts to bum all documents possessed by
those who were considered to be subversive and dangerous do the regime. A good
summary of how that memory continued to be registered and kept even under an
oppressive regime, especially through the Centro Ecum§nico de Informagao (CEI) can
be found in Magali do Nascimento Cunha, “Contra Todo Silenciamento e Esquecimento:
Memoria de uma Experiencia de Contra-informagao Religiosa,” unpublished text,
accessed by author, from archives of ISER (Instituto Superior de Estudos da Religiao),
Rio de Janeiro, on 9 September 2004.
287
socio-political actors emerged.20 Many of those sociopolitical newcomers
emerged under the umbrella of, or in solidarity with, religious movements,
particularly those referenced by the progressive stream of the Evangelico
churches. 21
Thus, the redefinition of the relation between religion and society/politics in
contemporary Brazil has a direct connection with the experiences of socio
political engagement of religious groups and institutions, developed since the
1950s. Despite the discontinuity or failure of some of those initiatives—which we
have seen previously—there has been an accumulation of experiences, which is
being relocated to other forms of action and projects coming from religious social
actors. Furthermore, there is a recovery of the symbolic force and exemplarity of
these past initiatives by new generations, which re-describe and reinterpret the
legacy of past generations in light of the new issues and challenges of their own
times. It is not a coincidence, for instance, that there is renewed interest in
Richard Shaull’s theological praxis, as one sees happening in some sectors of
Brazilian Protestantism today.
In fact, there is a legacy that goes back to the origins of a progressive
ecumenical movement in the 1950s, which provides a foundation for the creation
20This is the same process that gave birth to a variety of new social movements as
expressions of new social interests, new identities, and new ways of doing politics. See
Arturo Escobar & Sonia E. Alvarez, “Introduction,” op. cit., 2.
21 Joanildo Burity, “Reconfigurando o Campo da Religiao,” op. cit. It is worth

mentioning that the novelty in the Brazilian political scene from the 1980s on it the
evangelical/Pentecostal occupation of the public realm, where progressive Catholics and
a few ecumenical Protestants were already present as the solo religious actors in the
public realm.
288
of different modalities of socio-political actions inspired by religious motives.
Such actions can be exemplified by the social pastorals and the ecclesial base
communities, among Catholics, and by the social projects in poor communities
among Protestants.22 Even with the interruption brought by the military coup in
1964, these actions continued to be seen as referential for the resistance to the
authoritarianism of the dictatorship as well as to the social effects of the capitalist
development experienced by the country during the military regime.23
In the Protestant field, which is the focus of this work, it is this legacy that
inspired some progressive Evangelico sectors for social action in the 1980s. As
soon as there were flashes of political openness, in the end of the 1970s, some
Evangelicos—including both the more ecumenical Protestants directly linked to
the religion and society movement of the 1950s, and a group of young pastors
and students linked to more evangelical sectors of the Evangelico churches—
discretely began to organize in the direction of a more intense socio-political
participation.
Some examples of this new mobilization, which helped to break with the
immobilization and political isolation of most Evangelicos can be seen in the
appearance of the Movimento Cristao Democratico de Centro (MCDC),
organized by Robinson Cavalcanti, years before the organization of the
Movimento Evangdlico Progressists (MEP); the process of theological
22 Ibid.
23 Ibid.
289
radicalization that took place in the Alianga Biblica Universitaria do Brasil
(ABU); the social action of Evangelico churches inspired and supported by the
Brazilian chapter of World Vision; and the convocation of the Congresso
Brasileiro de Evangelizagao, in 1983 24
The relational character of this process has created a complex situation
characterized by mutual influence. Since the 1990s, with the rapid Pentecostal
emergence in the Brazilian socio-political realm, greater interchange has been
taking place among these different faces and their responses to the plight of the
poor in Brazil.
Although corporative motifs continue to be a major factor in the socio-political
involvement of many Evangelicos, there is no doubt that greater commitment to
transforming the Brazilian social reality has been present in the Evangelico
universe in the recent past as never before. It is on that basis that I suggest that
a Brazilian Evangelico social ethics, to be effective, must bring together the
contributions of the different responses given by the three Evangelico faces to
the plight of the poor. As one puts these different contributions in conversation
with each other, there are some common elements that come to the surface as
providing common ground for a cooperative social action, and as possible
elements for the development of a contemporary Brazilian Evangelico
progressive social ethics.
24These evangelical initiatives in their move towards a greater participation in the

struggles of Brazilian society for social justice have been discussed in chapter five.
290
Any Brazilian Evangelico social ethics that comes out of this dialogical
experience ought to be contextual and responsible. As I have shown earlier,
contextual Christian ethics has to do with relations and functions more than with
norms and rules.25 In other words, relations and functions shape the normative in
this kind of ethics. It is a relational ethics, concerned with both the individuals and
the community, and having its starting point not in abstract ideas, but in concrete
situations, to which it intends to respond. Christian life in Brazil takes place in the
midst of a number of encounters that Brazilian Christians, as moral agents, have
throughout their lives with specific people and realities that surround them—
realities struck by injustice, exclusion and suffering. Furthermore, the hybrid
nature of the Brazilian culture leads to a valuing of relational links.
If the reality in which most Brazilians live is profoundly affected by poverty and
social injustice, Richard Shaull has reminded us that such reality has become
also a Pentecostalized one. By affirming God’s preferential option for the poor,
and taking this principle further, Shaull realized that the worldview of the poor,
where liberation theology has affirmed that God is remarkably present, is now a
Pentecostal worldview.
By taking this new social reality into consideration and by recovering the
contributions that have been made by the three faces of Brazilian Protestantism
as they meet the poor face-to-face, I want to show some orientations and
features which compose the ethos for a Brazilian Christian social ethics—one
25 Roy H. May. Discemimiento Moral: Una Introduccidn a la Iztica Cristiana.(San Jose:

DEI, 1998), p. 65.
291
that can identify new alternatives to those struggling for the development of a
better society in Brazil.
Elements for an Evangelico Progressive Social Ethics in Brazil
In the presentation of the ecumenical face, in chapter four, I showed that
ecclesiastical ecumenism in Brazil has lost much of its appeal to the Brazilian
grassroots in the past three decades. To be sure, the ecumenical movement
continues to play an important role in Brazilian society, as an active and socially
engaged Christian minority, which, despite being small in numbers, still makes its
voice heard in the public realm. Their influence is similar to that of the
mainstream churches in the U.S., whose social work were described by
sociologist Robert Wuthnow as “the quiet hand of God.”26 However, for reasons
26 Robert Wuthnow & John H. Evans (eds.), The Quiet Hand of God: Faith-Based
Activism and the Public Role of Mainline Protestantism (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 2002). Through ecumenical agencies such as CLAI, CESE, and DIACONIA, the
ecumenical movement in Brazil is intentionally active in the socio-political realm, highly
connected with non-religious NGOs and government agencies, able to fund many social
initiatives, through churches and other social agencies. It is interesting that as many
Evangelical and Pentecostal churches are now developing their own social projects,
despite any kind of anti-ecumenical stand they have, they have looked for technical and
financial support for their projects from these ecumenical agencies. So, the work done
by ecumenical Protestants cannot simply be counted in terms of the number of adepts
they have. Instead, it needs to be taken into account in other ways, which take into
consideration their funding of and influence upon non-religious social movements and
non-ecumenical Protestant movements, also funded and supported by ecumenical
agencies. One example of this Kind of relation is the partnership for social projects
established between the Centro Comunitario Cleriston Andrade, a community center run
by Igreja Batista da Graga, a conservative Brazilian Baptist church, and ecumenical
organisms such as CESE and Diaconia. Pedro Rocha, interview by author, tape
recording, Salvador, 25 June 2002. Other interviews, which I did with Carlos Queiroz,
Osni Bonfim, Waldir Martins, Joaquim Brito, and Geter B. Sousa, also confirm that kind
of relationship and influence. It is interesting that even anti-ecumenical organizations
such as the State Baptist Convention of Bahia, have sought support and funding from
292
that still need further investigation, they have not been able to appeal to the
masses. Thus, more recently, a new ecumenical vision has emerged, which has
given greater emphasis to base ecumenism—an ecumenism greater than the
ecumenical movement itself—instead of focusing on ecclesiastical ecumenism.27
Base ecumenism has shifted the focus from bringing ecclesiastical structures
together to making alliances with all sectors and social agents in Brazilian society
willing to work together to develop social projects envisioning the enhancing of
justice, freedom, equality, and the construction of a less unjust society 28 There is,
then, a need for a new kind of ecumenical effort, one that starts from below, and
which is a movement of the people rather than of institutional churches.
Despite all odds, Evangelical and Pentecostal Protestantism might be
preparing the way for this kind of ecumenism from below. Among other things,
especially Pentecostal spirituality has shown the potential to replace the
European-North American accent that has predominated for centuries as the
voice of the Brazilian church with an accent that can voice the claims, concerns
and needs of Brazilian Christians, who, because of the situation in which they live,
have different priorities and a different agenda.
organisms such as CESE, as they become aware of the need to respond to the
challenges posed by the social reality surrounding their churches.
27 See Gerhard Tiel, Ecumenismo na Perspectiva do Reino de Deus: Uma An&Hse do

Movimento Ecum&nico de Base (Sao Leopoldo, RS.: Editors Sinodal, 1998), 206. It is
worth noting that although the term base ecumenism is being used only in the past three
decades, the proposal of the MEC in the 1950s was very dose to this kind of ecumenism.
At that point, Richard Shaull referred to this movement as being “tomorrow’s church.”
See Richard Shaull, “A Proposito da Estrategia dos MECs,” Paper presented at the
Conferencia dos MECs do Cone Sul, Sao Leopoldo, Brazil, July 1967.
28 Ibid., 207.
293
This new ecumenical Christianity requires an openness from all involved to
see what the Spirit of God is doing in the surrounding society, including among
non-Christian movements that have been able to function as prophetic voices in
crucial historical moments of Latin American history. The social ethics informed
by the encounter between progressive Christianity and charismatic spirituality
can offer possibilities for new and creative ways of discerning what God is doing
in the world, and of creating community and restoring justice.
Based on the dialogue between the three Evangelico responses to the plight
of the poor in Brazil presented in previous chapters, I propose four pervasive
orientations and three practical features that can be found in the practice of
Brazilian progressive Evangelicos today, and which both create an ethos and
provide some elements for the construction of a Brazilian Evangelico progressive
social ethics.
First, I identify some pervasive orientations that should inform a Brazilian
progressive Evangelico social ethics, based on the elements already present in
the three faces of Brazilian Protestantism, which include the following: (1) A
Messianic orientation, based on an eschatological hope on the kingdom of God;
(2) A Communal orientation, based on a pneumatic hermeneutics, which binds
the whole of life together; (3) A Charismatic or Mystic orientation, with its
conjuring culture and its potential to put forth parabolic performances of
294
resistance;29 (4) and a Praxis orientation, which emphasizes the priority of
praxis, and of the prophetic role of the Christian community.
Then, I point to some practical features for a progressive Evangelico social
ethics in Brazil, which show its potential to transform and reorganize the lives of
the wretched at the individual and social levels. Specifically, a social ethics that
combines the elements provided by the three faces of Brazilian Protestantism is
one that features the following practical elements: (1) promotion of an internal
reorganization of the lives of those suffering injustice in the social order; (2) an
experience of empowerment that moves people from a situation of
disenfranchisement to one of having some power over one’s own existence; and
(3) an active participation in organizing efforts outside the church to promote
changes in the larger socio-political order.
A social ethics which emerges from the conversation among the three faces
promotes a language of the Spirit which is all-inclusive, and allows for
discussions of issues of race, gender, class, and environment. It requires
complete openness to go beyond totality, and an ability to be continuously open
to encounter oppressed others—face-to-face, everyday, anew. The language of
the Spirit brings with it a constant call for openness to the new and the different,
291borrow the term “parabolic action” from Richard Shaull, meaning any collective
action that, like the parabolic method used by Jesus himself, dramatizes a human
situation, providing new insight into it, in ways that no abstract philosophical or
theological argument can do. Parables make certain human realities transparent,
bringing new light into them, and confronting those who hear or see them with a moment
of decision. Parabolic action is an act which attempts to expose the real situation in
moments of our history when it cannot be apprehended by purely empirical analysis of
the given order. See Richard Shaull, “The Political Significance of Parabolic Action,”
unpublished lecture given at the University Christian Movement Conference, Cleveland,
26 December 1968.
295
as well as a prophetic challenge for continuous reassessment of all our social
structures and institutions.
Pervasive Orientations for a Brazilian Progressive Evangelico Social Ethics
The social ethics that emerges from the integration of the three responses
coming from the three different faces of Brazilian Protestantism ought to have
some general orienting characteristics, which already pervade the discourses
and actions of the three faces. These orientations can guide the social action and
reflection that flow from the dialogue among the three responses and encompass
them.
Messianic Orientation
The first of these characteristics is a Messianic Orientation, based on an
eschatological hope for the Kingdom of God. The theme of the Kingdom or the
Society of God has been an important theme for progressive Evangelicos in
Brazil of all nuances—ecumenical, evangelical and Pentecostal. In the three
Evangelico responses presented here, the Kingdom is promised to the poor, and
announced to them as a manifestation of God’s will. The Kingdom becomes an
imperative for the Christian social ethics developed by all those who are
concerned with transforming the reality in which the poor live in Latin America.30
30 Eldin Villafane, El Espiritu Liberadon Hacia una Etica Sociak Pentecostal Hispana
(Buenos Aires, Argentina: Nueva Criacion, 1996), 169.
296
Richard Shaull was the first to introduce the centrality of the Kingdom in
the Brazilian Protestant message.31 Shaull believed that the Bible portrayed a
messianic vision of a world in transformation. For him, all things should be
understood in light of the coming of the Kingdom of God, which implies the
redeeming presence and action of God in human history.32 The Kingdom, under
this perspective, becomes the vision of a preferable future which guides our
present actions. Christians are called to act not only with a view of contemporary
reality, but also vis-a-vis the escathological hope of the Kingdom, which show
them the future willed by God. As Shaull put it, “we can act more responsibly in
the world when guided by a vision of the things that most contribute to its future
transformation.”33
This view of the Kingdom, based on the transformative, redemptive presence
and action of God in the world, and the discernment of its nature, provides the
lens through which one sees Jesus in Latin America, and a model for the relation
between Christians and their society.
It is at this point that one question becomes central: Who is Jesus

Christ? The answer one gives to that question will determine the
direction of one’s life... Jesus’ teaching regarding the Kingdom
presupposes this understanding of his nature. Christ announced,
through words and deeds, the fall of the kingdom of Satan, and the
defeat of all powers that destroy human life. ‘The blind receive their
sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the
31 Reynaldo Ferreira Leao Neto, “Richard Shaull: O Profeta da Revoluô,” Cademos

de Pos-Graduagao Ciencias da ReligiSo 13/8 (1995): 83-110 (91).
32 Richard Shaull, Surpreendido Pela Graga: Memorias de Um Tedlogo: Estados

Unidos, America Latina, Brasil (Rio de Janeiro, RJ.: Record, 2003), 30.
33 Ibid.
297
dead are raised up, the poor have good news preached to them.’ (Lc.
7,22). In this sphere, opened now due to the defeat of all hostile
powers, God’s power is creating a new order. The Kingdom of God
has been established, offering a new structure to all aspects of
human life and all its relations within society.34 [translation is mine]
Jesus is the new being, the referential of the Kingdom, and the incarnation of
the divine-human encounter. There is no longer separation between sacred and
profane, since he has made all things sacred. Incarnation is the main
characteristic of Christian action. Christians are taken away from their
ecclesiastical cloisters and sent into the world to act. As Rubem Alves has put it,
Now, the entire world is sacred...Suddenly, the secular and the

religious world have overlapped; day-to-day life has been turned
into a cosmic liturgy... “You are looking for God where things seem
to be calm, aren’t you? I suggest another search: go and look for
God in the wings of the hurricane...” For [Shaull], it was exactly in
the midst of the world problems that one could find the marks of
God’s presence. God appears as human being wherever common
human life is lived out: this is the meaning of incarnation.35
This messianic and incarnational view of the Kingdom presented by Shaull
found resonance in the hearts of a young generation of Brazilians because this
view was not foreign to them. A Messianic mentality—one which believes that
God is going to intervene in human reality, and that the current conditions in
which we live will be replaced by a reign of justice, peace and blessings—has
34 Richard Shaull, Attemativa ao Desespero (Sao Paulo, Brazil: CEB/UCEB, 1962),

23, 26.
35 Rubem Alves, “O Deus do Furacao,” in De Dentro do FuracSo: Richard Shaull e os

Primdrdios da Teologia da Libertagao, 35.
298
been part of the symbolic world of a significant parcel of Brazilian society.36
Such mentality has many times inhibited human action as it makes God the main
agent of the desired social transformation. However, in many other situations this
messianic hope has been used to encourage human action, hastening God’s
action towards the realization of the Kingdom.37
For the ecumenical movement in Brazil, this emphasis on the Kingdom
promoted the most significant change in the movement, as it shifted it focus from
the church to society, expanding its actions into the world—38since it believes
that there must be cooperation among all who seek God’s Kingdom. This
understanding of ecumenicity centered on the Kingdom is more inclusive, and
has been more effective in Latin America. As Chilean Pentecostal theologian
Daniel Farfan P. has said,
We have to acknowledge that the experiences of unity or of

ecumenism that best succeeded in Chile, were able to persist
thanks to the fact that their main concerns and efforts were oriented
towards collaborating on the resolution of concrete problems
experienced by the people.39 [translation is mine]
Whereas all ecumenical efforts centered on dialogue among ecclesiastical
bodies have significantly failed in Brazil, and excluded many evangelicals and
36Josildeth G. Consorte, “A Mentalidade Messianica,” Ci§ncias da ReligiSo 1/1

(1983): 43-50 (43).
37 Ibid.
38See Waldo Cesar, “Urn Ecumenismo Voltado Para o Mundo,” Contexto Pastoral 26
(1995), 3-8 (3).
39 Daniel Farfan P., “Nos, Pentecostais, Somos Ecumenicos?” Tempo e Presenga

15/271 (1993):26-28 (26).
299
Pentecostals, an ecumenism centered on the Kingdom of God can unite ail of
them around their understanding of the Christian mission in light of the Kingdom.
Samuel Escobar, as he developed his theology of holistic mission, defined
Christian mission as the irruption of God’s kingdom in history.40 On that basis,
Latin American progressive evangelicals have been called to live in accord with
the justice of God’s Kingdom and in the power of the Spirit. In a context
characterized by abuse of power and the dominance of injustice, the church is
called to witness the Kingdom and confront the dominant present powers. The
announcement of the Kingdom becomes a prophetic proclamation of Jesus
Christ and the denouncing of the powers of e vil41
Similarly, the Kingdom of God has been an emphasis on the emerging Latin
American Pentecostal theology. The specific Pentecostal contribution to an
ethics that is centered on the Kingdom of God is that for Pentecostals the
Kingdom is not only a future utopia to guide one’s socio-political actions in the
world, nor only an incentive for prophetic action in society. For Pentecostals the
Kingdom is a living reality experienced by the believer on a daily basis. As Eldin
Villafane has pointed out, for Latin American Pentecostals, to participate in the
Kingdom is to partake in the forthcoming Era, which, by the Spirit, is made
40 Samuel Escobar, “Missao Crista e Transformagao Social,” in Servindo com os

Pobres na America Latina (Curitiba, Brazil: Editora Descoberta, 1998), 61-88 (61).
41 CLADE III, “Declaragao de Quito: Todo Evangelho a Partir da America Latina para
Todos os Povos,” Revista Teoldgica 8/23 (1992): 32-40 (34).
300
present and available to the church 42 In his study of Brazilian Pentecostalism,
Waldo Cesar pointed to that reality.
The Pentecostal fervor—symbolized by the baptism in the Holy

Spirit, in the gift of speaking in tongues, and the occurrence of
miracles—is concretely manifested in converts’ daily struggles. The
‘miracle’ which conversion announces makes its appearance in the
form of a new standard of living and a new relationship with the
community and society which go far beyond the formalities of
traditional religious allegiance...The symbolic plays a fundamental
role in this process. It functions as a language which blends what is
immanent in the world with the transcendental; the ‘experience of
the sacred’ reveals itself in concrete situations in everyday life.43
Richard Shaull has described the supreme reality in the Pentecostal
movement as being “an overwhelming experience of the presence and power of
God in the midst of life.”44 That consciousness of God’s presence has provoked a
paradigm shift from an emphasis on salvation to an emphasis on solution,
relating the experience of the Spirit to the believer’s daily struggle for life.45 That
unique experience of God’s presence and intervention in daily life has
42 Eldin Villafane, El Esplritu Liberador, 169.
43Waldo Cesar, “From Babel to Pentecost: A Social-Historical-Theological Study of

the Growth of Pentecostalism,” in Between Babel and Pentecost: Transnational
Pentecostalism in Africa and Latin America, edited by Andre Corten and Ruth Marshall-
Fratani (London, UK: Hurst & Company, 2001), 22-40 (27).
44 See Richard Shaull and Waldo Cesar, Pentecostalism and the Future of the
Christian Churches (Grand Rapids, Ml.: W. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2000), 145.
45 Ibid., 150ff.
301
empowered many Pentecostals, also resulting in greater participation and
involvement with the broader struggles of Latin American society.46
A Brazilian progressive Evangelico social ethics should incorporate all these
contributions to the understanding and experience of the Kingdom of God in the
midst of life. The conversation among these three understandings of the
Kingdom will generate greater socio-political participation, a recovery of the
prophetic role of the church in face of all kinds of injustices, a new view of
ecumenicity which is inclusive and goes beyond ecclesiastical walls, and the
empowerment of those whose lives have been broken by the injustices of the
dominant order. The Kingdom now has become a vivid reality through the
empowering presence of the Spirit of God among the poor.
Communal Orientation
The second characteristic of a Brazilian Progressive Evangelico social ethics
that brings the three Evangelico responses into dialogue is a Communal
Orientation,47 based on a pneumatic hermeneutics which empowers each
individual at the same time that it binds the whole of life together.48
46See Dario Lopez, Pentecostalismo y Transformacidn Social: M6s Alia de los

Estereotipos, las Cnticas se Enfrentan con los Hechos (Buenos Aires, Argentina: Kairos
Ediciones, 2000), 24ff.
47This communal orientation refers to the notion of koinonia developed by the early
church and present in the ethics of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Paul Lehmann and Richard
Shaull. All these three theologians emphasized the koinonias as the communities in
which Christ is being formed. Speaking more directly to the Latin American churches,
Shaull said, “Through His Church, the Risen Lord is taking form in Latin American life
and culture. The true Man, Jesus Christ, is building a new style of life for men (sic), both
as individuals and in their relationships in society. This life manifests itself in the Church
302
One of the most important contributions of the three progressive
Evangelico movements presented earlier has been the slow overcoming of an
inherent individualism which characterized the kind of Protestant faith brought to
Brazil in the nineteenth century. The three responses presented here have
moved towards a more communal character oriented toward social change. That
has enriched their contributions in terms of their greater identification with the
social struggles in Brazilian society.
Once again, in the ecumenical movement, Shaull’s theological contribution
was significant, as he emphasized the ecclesial community as the locus where
one can properly develop the theological task. Theology could no longer be done
and, through her, penetrates into all forms and spheres of each nation’s life.” Richard
Shaull, “The Present Life and Structure of the Church in Relation to Her Witness in Latin
American Society,” unpublished paper, 1959 (?). Accessed from the Richard Shaull
Archives, Luce Library, Princeton, December 2003.
48 Further studies might explore the similarities and differences between this
orientation in Brazilian Evangelico social ethics and North American communitarian
ethics. Since this is beyond the scope of this work, I only point to the concern that this
orientation has to find a balance between a concern with community, understood as
small groups where face-to-face relation is possible, and a praxis that affects the larger
society. It also recognizes the tension between concerns with individual rights and
empowerment, and the common good of the community/society. On one hand, it
understands the limits of community, which implies that individual rights must be
respected, and individuals must be empowered as such. The language of the spiritual
charismata is used to empower each individual. On the other hand, due to the
background of an individualistic morality which once dominated the Brazilian Evangelico
ethos, this communal orientation always situates the individual in the context of the
koinonia. Differently from a communitarian ethics such as that of Stanley Hauerwas, for
instance, the koinonia is not self-referential. It is oriented to social change, and its
actions are posed in the context of the larger society. For an ethics of community which
seeks to establish a similar balance, see Frank G. Kirkpatrick, The Ethics of Community
(Oxford, UK.: Blackwell, 2001). For a view of communitarianism, see Will Kymlicka,
Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction, 2ed (Oxford, UK.: Oxford University
Press, 2002), 208-283. For a view of Hauerwas’ understanding of an ecclesial,
communal ethics, see Stanley Hauerwas, In Good Company: The Church as Polis
(Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1995).
303
apart from the koinonia.49 In his first years in Brazil, Shaull already pointed out
the broader significance of that approach.
The church is not simply that group that meets on Sunday

morning to listen to a sermon; it is the communion of the believers,
in small, intimate unities, to study the Bible, pray and share their
problems and needs, to discover the Lord’s will regarding each one
of them and form a center of action, from which Christian witness
might irradiate. The recovering of this true Christian koinonia is
indispensable for the revitalization of the church. 50 [translation is
mine]
That sense of communal action was important for the Religion and Society
movement of the 1950s, especially as they began to experience it in practice, in
social experiments such as the one in Vila Anasticio.51 The formation of
community was not an end in itself. In fact, these Christian koinonias existed in
what Shaull called “the frontiers of social change.”52 It is there that Christian
communities should struggle to discern God’s will by realizing what God is doing
today in the world. Shaull functioned as an organic theologian for that movement,
creating around him prophetic communities, i.e., movements questioning the
49 Eduardo G. Faria, Fe e Compmmisso: Richard Shaull e a Teologia no Brasil (Sao

Paulo, Brazil: ASTE, 2002), 39.
50 Richard Shaull, Cristianismo e Revolugao Social (Sao Paulo, Brazil: UCEB, 1953),
100.
51 See Richard Shaull, Surpeendido Pela Graga, 120ff. This was the project “Students
in the Industry,” in 1955, in which a group of students under Shaull’s supervision rented
a home in a industrial area to live along with the industrial workers, work with them, and
participate in their struggles. They also prayed and studied the Bible together. To my
knowledge, this is the first prototype of the later Christian base communities, which
emerged in Latin America in the 1960s.
52 Ibid., 154.
304
status quo.53 Even if there is no historical continuity between Shaull’s
prophetic koinonias and the Base Christian Communities, the latter can be said
to have emerged under the same spiritual legacy, moved by the Spirit to form
prophetic Christian communities, which existed in the boundaries of society,
identifying with the poor and marginalized, and struggling against oppressive
forces.
The evangelical face offered another contribution as it also turned from an
individualistic evangelization to a more communal one. The emphasis now was
not in forming vanguard communities seeking to understand God’s action in the
world and joining them, but instead forming communities that could be exemplars
for the new society. For Carlos Queiroz, one of the main representatives of this
perspectives in Brazil, the Christian mission results in “just and fraternal living
communities,” voluntarily engaged and committed to God’s Kingdom.54
“Community” is understood here as the natural consequence of the
redeeming action of God’s love. “Men and women reached out by the love of
God begin to love naturally.”55 As a result, they feel the need to create and live in
communities. Such communities are prototypes of the new humanity, and
through its capillary capacity to penetrate the diverse societies and cultures, it
53 Reynaldo Ferreira L. Neto, Richard Shaull, 102.
54 Carlos Queiroz, “Evangelizagao e Responsabilidade Social,” in Fdrum

Intemacional de Teologia Contemporinea, edited by Instituto Mysterium (Mendes, Brazil
Instituto Mysterium, 2005), 22-38 (24).
55 Ibid., 25.
305
infiltrates social, political, cultural, ethnic and religious environments, bringing
to them some expressions of the new society.56
These communities are not final products, but are always in pilgrimage, in a
continuous learning practice. These communities can be compared to ShaulPs
koinonias in the sense that they are not identified with any ecclesiastical
structure. They are social places where Christ is being formed, in multiple ways.
Queiroz always refers to communities, in the plural, meaning a movement of
popular character, where all are in fact priests. These are communities of God’s
children, laicized, free from hierarchical ties.57
As prototypes of the new society, which is understood as the communal living
of the children of God, these communities have not only a prophetic role to play,
by denouncing and opposing the forces of evil and injustice, but also a role as
moral exemplars. In the construction of its political relations, these communities
seek to develop an inverted hierarchy, founded on Jesus teachings, where
leadership is based on service, and social relations are based on love and
grace58
As communities of love,59 developing a counter-culture that opposes the
dominant values of an unjust society, these communities thrive by the way they
56 Ibid., 26.
57 Ibid.
58 Ibid., 28.
59Which, here, seem to be similar to communities of character in Neo-Aristotelian

ethics, such as that of Stanley Hauerwas.
306
serve each other, and serve the larger society. All their engagement, being
social or political, is understood as service in love.60 As followers of Christ, and in
continuity with his ministry and communities, the ultimate goal of the actions of
these communities is to promote humanity, in all ways possible. By so doing,
they can identify with God’s action in the world.61
For Pentecostals, the community is always understood as the community of
the Spirit. A Pentecostal ethics always begins by the affirmation of the
experience of the Spirit, and such experience, since the Biblical reports, happens
in community, and forms community. By offering love, acceptance and dignity to
the lowest in Latin American society, Pentecostal communities have had a strong
appeal to the masses.62
The novelty of Pentecostalism is that it offers a new experience of God,
without any priestly or institutional mediation to those who are at the margins of
society. This encounter with God in Pentecostal experience is intense and
powerful, often being described as a “change of life.”63 However, one mark of this
experience is that it is always communal. Most people attracted to
60 Carlos Queiroz, “Evangelizagao e Responsabilidade Social,” 29.
61 Ibid., 37. Humanity is promoted through teaching, assisting the needy, participating
in social struggles, and promoting liberation through the transformation of unjust social
structures.
62 Cheryl Bridges Johns, Pentecostal formation: a Pedagogy Among the Oppressed
(Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 73.
63Juan Sepulveda, “The Pentecostal Movement in Latin America,” in New Face of

the Church in Latin America, edited by Guillermo Cook (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books,
1994), 68-74 (72).
307
Pentecostalism have experienced some sort of neglect, powerlessness,
loneliness and marginalization. Being included in the community the Spirit carries
the powerful meaning of being accepted.
Besides acceptance, all those who are accepted in the community of the Spirit
are also empowered by the Spirit to fulfill a personal mission.64 For people who
otherwise would be completely powerless and excluded from the goods of
society, partaking in a Pentecostal community also brings a sense of recovering
one’s dignity. Each person experiences in their soul and body, the revitalizing
power of the Spirit, which not only empowers, but also enables one to fulfill his or
her call. Their have their dignity back because they are touched in a new way.
The recovery of one’s sense of worth results in the re-immersion of marginalized
people into society, and also in their engagement in different sorts of social
movements. That effect has become visible today in Brazil through the greater
participation of Pentecostal Christians in social movements, community
organizing, and unions.65
64 Ibid., 73.
65 In several meetings with the Movimento Evangelico Progressista (MEP), which I

have attended in the past two years, in different Brazilian states, mostly in the Northeast,
some of the leaders of the Landless Workers Movement, and also of Homeless
Movements, were Pentecostals. Twenty years ago, it was unimaginable to think of
Pentecostals leading struggles such as these. I interviewed Sargento Isidoro, a low
ranking police officer, member of the Assemblies of God, in Bahia, who led a strike of
police officers in 2001, became leader of the officers’ union, and ended up being elected
as a state deputy in Bahia. With little formal education, Isidoro told me that the source of
inspiration for his actions, which gained fame in Bahia, was Amos, the Old Testament
prophet. He had never been involved previously in any social struggle, and had not been
in touch with any progressive literature. In his words, a sense that justice needed to be
done, and that the Bible spoke to him about it, led him to lead the strike. By leading the
308
Everyone in the Pentecostal community is commissioned, becoming a
missionary. As a missionary, he or she can impart the gifts received from the
Spirit, becoming channels of the Spirit to other broken lives. As the Pentecostal
gospel is announced in the language of the people,66 the poor become able to
share God’s saving news with other poor. Another importance of Pentecostal
communities is that they create an alternative support network, by which
members of the community share psychological and spiritual support, but also
limited material means.67 Finally, through their religious beliefs, symbols and
practices, Pentecostal communities end up subverting the traditional order—one
example of this is the way women, African-Brazilians, lower class workers and
semi-literate people assume a status in these communities that is markedly
higher than that awarded them in the larger society.68 This communal orientation
needs to be balanced by respect for individuality, difference and diversity.
Charismatic Orientation
A third characteristic of a Brazilian Evangelico social ethics that takes the
three responses seriously is a Charismatic orientation, with its conjuring culture
strike he was sent to jail, and that fact made him known nationwide. Sargento Isidoro,
interview by author, tape recording, Salvador, Brazil, 10 November 2002.
66 Ibid.
67Cecilia Mariz, “Religion and Poverty in Brazil: A comparison of Catholic and

Pentecostal Communities,” in New Faces of the Church, 75-81 (79).
68 Rowan Ireland, “Pentecostalism, Conversions, and Politics in Brazil,” in Power,

Politics, and Pentecostals in Latin America, edited by Edward L. Cleary and Hannah W.
Stewart-Gambino (Boulder, CO.: Westview Press, 1997), 123-138 (126).
309
and its potential to put forth parabolic performances of resistance. By
charismatic orientation, I mean one influenced by Pentecostal spirituality. The
notion of the sacred in Pentecostalism is constructed vis-a-vis the type of relation
the Pentecostal believer has with God. Pentecostal activities and services reflect
their conviction of the continuous reception of divine power and its discharge in
the daily demands.69 An understanding that God is always present and always
acting in the midst of life, then, marks Pentecostal or charismatic spirituality.
A magical understanding of life and a consequent spiritualization of all its
dimensions complement that conviction of God’s presence and action in daily life.
Everything in life is directly affected by the activity of God’s Spirit, and the
Pentecostal believer is someone continuously possessed by the Holy Spirit.70
There seems to be no rupture with the material world. It is possible to live always
in the universe of the sacred, and do that within the material world and its
immediate concerns.
As Shaull noticed, Pentecostal spirituality is “a faith grounded in the Spirit,
which would have the power to reconstruct broken lives and a broken world.”71
Here resides the transformative potential of this kind of spirituality, which, as I
have noticed earlier, pervades the Brazilian contemporary Evangelico universe.
As opposed to other forms of Christian discourse, Pentecostalism is not about
the “preferential option for the poor,” but rather a religious emotional discourse of
69Alexandre, C. Souza, Pentecostalismo: De Onde Vem? Para Onde Vai?, 27.
70 Ibid., 31.
71 Richard Shaull, “From Academic Research to Spiritual Transformation,” 74.
310
those who refuse to accept poverty 72 By understanding that the empirical
world within which they exist is only part of a greater divine reality which
permeates everything, Pentecostals have come to experience the presence and
power of the Spirit in the midst of all their struggles 73 Since the Spirit permeates
the whole of human life, many Pentecostals have been able to understand
human beings as living an integral relation with one another, with nature and with
God74
This holistic understanding of Charismatic spirituality makes it clear that the
‘relation to God’ can never be a purely private matter. As Michael Welker has
said,
A faith that does not want to owe itself to any other creature’s
witness, a faith that wants to remain absolutely isolated and
speechless, is no Christian faith, no faith brought about by the Holy
Spirit. The Holy Spirit brings us into relationship to God. But with
this relation to God the Holy Spirit also renews inner-creaturely
72 Ibid., 76.
73 Ibid., 78.
74 Ibid. Because of its close connections with African and Native American worldviews,
Pentecostal spirituality opens new spaces for a more integral spirituality. In a speech
about FEINE, the Indigenous Evangelical Federation of Ecuador, an indigenous
Evangelical federation under the influence of charismatic, Pentecostal spirituality its
president Marco Murillo affirmed, “[FEINE] proposes the construction of a just and caring
society, based upon the relationship between God and human beings, and of human
beings with nature, in accord with Christian principles and an indigenous worldview.”
[translation is mine] The love of God, the love of neighbor and the love of earth form an
encompassing and integral basis for an Amerindian Christian social ethics, profoundly
impacted by Pentecostal spirituality. See Marco Murillo, “Mas Alla de la Decada Perdida:
Movimientos Indigenas y la Transformation del Desarrollo y la Democracia en la
America Latina (FEINE, unpublished speech delivered at PLAS, Princeton University, on
10 March 2001).
311
relations of life...The Holy Spirit is a vivifying and enlivening power.75
The charismatic spirituality so present today among Brazilian Evangelico
churches can work as an empowering and creative element, in the formation of a
Christian social ethics that will adequately respond to the dominance of injustice
in Latin America. Richard Shaull realized that the things he saw among
Pentecostals in Rio de Janeiro were part of a new expression of Christian faith
that was significantly different from Christian faith as the Protestant Reformation
had defined it in the sixteenth century. However, “if developed in faithfulness to
the biblical witness, this vision and experience of Christian faith...could offer a
compelling response to the present crisis of civilization, especially to the vast
numbers of poor and excluded people victimized by it.”76
However, how can this kind of spirituality be helpful? First, it can be helpful as
non-Pentecostal Christians are challenged to get closer to the reality in which the
poor live and be converted to them.
If we take all this seriously, we cannot escape the fact that it calls
for a radical change in our mission strategy: a decision first of all to
enter into the world of the poor, to re-situate ourselves among the
poor... Now this doesn’t just mean re-situating ourselves
geographically among the poor, although that in itself would mean a
formidable change of direction. To enter the world of the poor
means to enter into their religious world, and allow ourselves to
become broken by that experience and thus become wounded
healers as Christ was... Our traditional churches are not going to
take these steps toward solidarity with the poor. But there is one
76 Michael Welker, “Faith in the Holy Spirit,” in Faith in the Living God: A Dialogue,
edited by John Polkinghome and Michael Welker (London: SPCK, 2001), 84-98 (84, 85).
76 Richard Shaull, Renewed by the Spirit, The Other Side, 1998, Internet; available
from www.theotherside.orQ/archive/nov-dec98/shaull.html: accessed 23 November 2003.
312
thing we can do and that is urgently needed. We can find ways of
relating authentically to Christian communities, largely Pentecostal,
who are living this relationship, if we are willing to become wounded
to go through a process of kenosis which permits us to relate to
them and engage in dialogue with them, on their terms not ours.
That in itself is something we have hardly begun to do... And a
second radical change is called for: not just to move toward the
world of the poor but also to be open to their witness to usJ 7
Second, Pentecostal charismatic spirituality, based on the living experience of
the Spirit, and its conjuring culture, has the potential to creatively develop dramas
of resistance. As I have discussed in earlier chapters, Pentecostal dress codes,
speaking in tongues, and other Pentecostal practices can be interpreted as
covert codes of resistance to the dominant culture, which they cannot risk
confronting directly.
James C. Scott has shown that although most people pay more attention to
confrontational tactics of resistance, most subaltern classes are more interested
in subverting the system, and working it to their minimum satisfaction than in
radically changing it.78 Instead of passivity, the lack of overt confrontation owes to
the realization that acts of open resistance cannot be afforded by determined
subaltern groups, in certain circumstances. However, instead of adhering to
passivity or to injustice, the impoverished classes have been able to creatively
77 Richard Shaull, “Response,” in Followers of the Wounded Healer: The Mission of

the Church in the Ministry of Healing. Internet, available from
www.zendinasraad.nl/shaull1 .htm.. accessed 03 November 2003.
78James C. Scott, Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance

(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985), xv.
313
develop daily tactics of resistance which do not bring the whole system down,
but slow it down. These tactics include foot-dragging, dissimulation, desertion,
false compliance, pilfering, feigned ignorance, slander, arson, sabotage and so
on 79 Such techniques of everyday resistance have been used by Native
American peoples, African American slaves, and other subjugated peoples
around the world.
Mark Taylor calls this dynamic a dramatic action of resistance to imperial
power. It adopts dramatic and creative ways of action and engagement.80 This
performative creative action, although not confronting directly the established
power, weakens it. In such circumstances, direct actions of liberation or
confrontation might not be possible. Nevertheless, resistance can be established
as a long-term praxis, which at the end of the day might be also liberating.
Charismatic spirituality can play a role by offering a different language, a different
symbology, and a different hope than that of political strategies and scientific
predictions.81 It is through this new language and through new and creative
aesthetic practices that people can move from a position of victimization and
impotence to what Dorothee Soelle has called “the power of the weak.”82
79 Ibid., xvi.
80 Mark L.Taylor, The Executed God: The Way of the Cross in Lockdown America,
(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001), 99.
81 Dorothee Soelle, The Silent Cry: Mysticism and Resistance, 197. In Brazil this
praxis is mostly referred to as the mystic of militancy. See Movimento Nacional de Fe e
Politica (ed.) A Mistica da Militancia (Santo Andre, SP.: Editora Rede, 2001).
82 Ibid., 205.
314
This charismatic or mystic orientation is important to the development of
any social ethics that intends to exist in dialectical conversation with Brazilian
EvangGlico Christians. Brazilian reality, as I showed earlier, is filled with
charismatic spirituality, especially among the poor, who constitute the majority of
the population. In addition, Evangelico spirituality is becoming increasingly
Pentecostal. This religious context cannot be neglected by those who undertake
the task of developing a Brazilian Evangelico progressive social ethics.
Practical Orientation
Finally, there is a Practical orientation that characterizes all three responses
viewed here. This orientation emphasizes the priority of praxis, and of the
prophetic role of the Christian community. Since the prophetic and practical
mode of each response has been so salient in previous chapters, there is no
need for further development of this orientation. In fact, all three responses have
emphasized the priority of praxis, which in Latin America, in general, is what
makes any theoretical reflection valid and relevant. The three responses reflect
each face’s praxis, which envision the transformation of society and of the
condition of suffering and marginalization in which the poor live. Ecumenical,
Evangelical and Pentecostal praxis vary in style, but all three faces of Brazilian
Protestantism come together to offer practical responses to a social reality that
challenges them and to those within it who cry for help.
As all the responses have had a practical emphasis, the integration of the
three responses must also produce some practical consequences. A Brazilian
315
Evangelico progressive social ethics which bring those three responses into
dialogue, then, is characterized by some practical features.
Practical Features of a Brazilian Evangelico Progressive Social Ethics
The first practical feature of a Brazilian Evangelico progressive social ethics
developed through the integration of the three Evangelico faces and their
responses to the dilemmas raised by poverty and injustice in Brazilian context is
that it promotes an internal reorganization of the lives of those suffering injustice
in the social order.
Although this feature seems to have been neglected by part of the ecumenical
movement, which, after Richard Shaull’s departure, focused basically on the
demands for social structural changes, the focus on internal reorganization was
present in the origins of the movement. Immediately before he left the country,
Shaull wrote a message to the Brazilian young students who were involved along
with him in the struggle for social justice. His appeal is revealing as he used
Romans 12:1 to warn again the dangers of conformity, be it either with bourgeois
or revolutionary ideologies. For him, there is a distinction in being Christian, in
following Christ, which should be the ultimate motif for all our commitment made
by that group of young Christians involved in the revolutionary movement.83 That
he used a text like Romans 12 is also telling, since this text speaks of a need for
83See Richard Shaull, “Momenta Revolucionario,” in Brasil Urgente, 1/30 (1963): 5-6.
In this text one can see how Shaull valued the Christian contribution to revolution, but
also how he wanted to preserve the distinctive commitment of Christians to follow Christ
in any situation or ideological location.
316
transformation through the renewal or reorganization of one’s mind so that
one could discern and experience God’s will. In his later years, Shaull’s repeated
use of terms such as conversion and spiritual transformation made also evident
that for him there has always been an association between personal piety and
social commitment.
Many among Brazilian Evangelicals and Pentecostals point to the neglect of
this more existential and internal reorganization of the life of the wretched as the
cause for the numerical decline of the ecumenical churches. A Christian social
ethics that contemplates the three faces of Brazilian Protestantism and their
responses to the cry of the poor and wretched must learn especially from
Pentecostal spirituality to attend to the more internal needs of those whom it
wants to help.
Benedita da Silva, the first black woman to become a senator in Brazil,
commenting on her spiritual journey, said that when she underwent a divorce
followed by depression, she was in need of spiritual and emotional support. It
was in the Assemblies of God that she found the inner peace and tranquility she
needed to reorganize her private life. A Pentecostal community provided her with
a way to cope with things that were out of her control. However, this same
community at that point did not fulfill her political and social needs, including her
desire to work with the community. Therefore, despite her conversion to
317
Pentecostalism, she continued to perform her social work with the Christian
Base Communities.84
Such a dichotomy is no longer necessary. Today, many Pentecostal
communities have awakened to the need to be involved with and serving the
larger society. On the other hand, ecumenical leaders, once more secularized,
are now aware of the need to pay attention to the internal need for reorganization
of the lives of those whom they serve. A Brazilian Evangelico progressive social
ethics based on orientations presented above can contribute to the overcoming
that kind of dichotomy.
The second practical feature of such an Evangelico social ethics is that it
ought to promote an experience of empowerment that moves people from a
situation of disenfranchisement to one of having some power over one’s own
existence. Once again, all the three responses have promoted a certain level of
empowerment: The ecumenical response, with its emphasis on socio-political
conscientization of workers and students by living and working with them, was
responsible for the empowerment of students and seminarians who created one
of the most significant lay movements in the Brazilian Evangelico churches.
The Conferencia do Nordeste was the apex of that process, since it brought a
marginal religious group center stage in the discussions about the destiny of the
country. However, the movement had a short existence, and there is no way to
measure the empowering effects it had upon the working classes with which they
84 Medea Benjamin & Maisa Mendon9a, Benedita da Silva: An Afro-Brazilian

Woman’s story of Politics and Love, 89.
318
became more involved. One could say that due to the similarity of approaches,
this movement, had it lived longer, would have made an impact upon the lower
classes in the same way that the Ecclesial Base Communities (EBC) did later.
Although they have experienced a visible decline in the past decade, the EBC
played a very important role in empowering the least of the Brazilian society.
Many of the EBC served as quasi-parishes in small villages and in the periphery
of large cities. Others focused on becoming social movements. Many of them
have become or given birth to NGOs, losing their explicitly religious identity.85
Evangelicals and, particularly, Pentecostals, have also worked to empower the
least of society. As I have shown in my chapter on the Pentecostal face,
Pentecostalism has been able to offer not only social empowerment, but also
spiritual and emotional empowerment. Even those who are at the bottom of
society can feel the empowerment of the Holy Spirit, and that can promote both
an internal revolution, with the recovery of one’s dignity and worth, and a change
in the social scale, as that person who recovers her sense of worth can more
easily come back to the struggle for both personal improvement and social
transformation.
The third and final practical feature of a possible Brazilian Evangelico social
ethics is that it can lead to active participation in organizing efforts outside the
church to promote changes in the larger socio-political order. A growing number
of Evangelico Christians are becoming more active in their participation of social
85Jose Comblin, “Brazil: Base Communities in the Northeast,” in New Face of the
Church, op. cit., 206-207.
319
movements working to promote changes in the larger social order.
Furthermore, it is becoming more common for Evangelico churches and NGOs to
join forces in social projects or in social protests. There is no doubt that the time
of social apathy of the Evangelico churches is gone, and a new era of greater
participation and social agency is beginning. The greatest present need for those
Evangelico churches and people taking their place in the public arena is the need
for developing a proper Evangelico theology that will equip them in the creation
of a more just society in Brazil. The recent increase in theological production
among progressive evangelicals working with the FTL shows that a response to
this challenge is on the way. Conversations involving Pentecostals, Evangelicals
and Ecumenical Christians are also increasing.
The emergence of Pentecostal and Evangelical black movements, women’s
organizations, and other Evangelico-oriented NGOs dealing with specific issues,
ranging from children’s rights to homelessness, is also raising the need for more
theological reflection on those themes. That means that new demands are going
to provoke new responses. There are issues that are delicate for most
Evangelicals and Pentecostals, especially those regarding homosexuality and
inter-religious dialogue. Both are pressing issues that need to be addressed by
an emerging Brazilian Evangelico social ethics.
The issue of inter-religious dialogue is pressing due to a history of mutual
aggressions involving Pentecostal churches and Afro-Brazilian religions in poorer
communities in the peripheries of cities such as Rio de Janeiro and Salvador. At
some point in the past, when Evangeiicos were a small minority, some of them,
320
especially in the Northeast, suffered aggressive persecution from both
Catholic and Afro-Brazilian religious leaders, because of their proselytizing
practice. Today, with the Pentecostal boom in those poor neighborhoods, the
Afro-Brazilian religions are the current minority. A kind of Afro-Pentecostal “holy
war” has been declared by some Pentecostal churches, which have demonized
those religions.86 Religious tolerance, the only issue that seemed to be able to
mobilize most Brazilian Protestants for a long time is being neglected now, with
regard to the African-Brazilian religious minorities. The issue needs to come back
to the Evangelico moral agenda; now from another perspective.
My attempt in this work was to show how three different Evangelico
movements have responded to their encounter with poverty and injustice in Brazil.
My claim was that the three responses offered by these movements, when
related to each other and to the Brazilian social reality, create the ethos and offer
the elements for the development of a Brazilian Evangelico social ethics that
might promote changes at both individual and societal levels.87
86The demonization of the Afro-Brazilian religions is a racist reminiscence of the

Evangelicalism developed in Brazil by missionaries coming from the Southern part of the
United States. This racism penetrated Brazilian Pentecostal spirituality too. Only recently,
a new approach to the issue has emerged as some black Evangelical/Pentecostal
theologians are re-examining the relationship between Protestantism and Brazilian
culture. See, for instance, Marco D. de Oliveira, A Religiao Mais Negra do Brasil: Porque
Mais de Oito Milhdes de Negros Sao Pentecostais (Sao Paulo, Brazil: Mundo Cristao,
2004).
87Although this work has an ethical nature, as I have studied the Evangelico
responses to the problems of social injustice in Brazil, it does not develop an ethical
system or theory. In this sense, my intent is simply to show the changes in the ethos of
Brazilian Protestantism, and to offer some elements that must be taken into account in
the development of a Brazilian Evangelico social ethics. This or other author may
undertake such development as a future task. Ethics in traditional evangelicalism in
321
For a long time Brazilian Evangeiicos developed an ethos mainly
concerned with private matters. As I have shown, since the 1950s, however,
there has been a consistent development of a concern among some Evangelico
groups with their participation in the struggle to promote social change and social
justice in Brazilian society. Due to the conservative takeover in most Evangelico
denominations and the repression of the military dictatorship, the first Evangelico
efforts to develop a social ethics that could equip them to a greater participation
in the struggles of the Brazilian people was almost aborted.
From the 1980s on, after the re-democratization of the country, many
Evangeiicos have come back to the public scene. In such a short time, and with
many newcomers now taking their place in the social-political realm, Evangeiicos
in Brazil are striving to develop a Christian social ethics that can guide their
social action. Such an ethics has to draw from the previous initiatives, which I
presented in this dissertation, as well as from other non-Protestant initiatives,
such as the liberationist thought developed for more than three decades,
particularly among progressive Catholics in Brazil.
On the other hand, this Evangelico social ethics has to take into consideration
the changes that have taken place in both the political and the religious Brazilian
milieu. Those changes point to both a growing Pentecostal participation in the
struggles of the poor in Brazil, and a growing Pentecostalization of Evangelico
spirituality in the country. So, in dialogue with the previous contributions from
Brazil has been a reflection on moral behavior in an individualistic ethos. The

orientations and features presented in this chapter become the new ethos from which a
new Brazilian Evangelico social ethics will come.
322
both progressive Protestants and Catholics to the development of a Christian
social ethics and their responses to the plight of the poor in Brazil, contemporary
Evangeiicos can offer an unique contribution as they bring into play the new
voices and new social actors, which were not partaking in this process before.
My hope is that I have pointed to the new ethos in which such an ethics is
emerging and that I have pointed to some important elements that can contribute
to the development of such a Christian social ethics. Such an ethics, although
from an Evangelico perspective, can offer a significant contribution to the
deepening of ecumenical initiatives in Brazil—as it offers a basis for the
development of an ecumenism from below, based on the Kingdom of God, which
is made present by the actions of the Holy Spirit.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abumanssur, Edin Sued.“ATribo Ecum§nica: Um Estudo do Ecumenlsmo no

Brasil nos Anos 60 e 70.” Master of Social Sciences thesis, Universidade
Catblica de S5o Paulo, 1991.
Aguilera, Jose M. Um Povo Chamado Batista: Um Jornal (OJB) a Servigo da

FormagSo de uma Mentalidade Retigiosa. M. Th. thesis, Institute Metodista de
Ensino Superior, Brazil, 1988.
Agus, Jacob B. Modern Philosophies o f Judaism. New York; Behrman’s, 1941.
Alencar, Gedeon. “O Protestantismo Brasileiro e SincrStico,” Ec/3s/a115 (1 Abril

2006);
Internet, accessed 1 April 2006; availabe from
http://www.eclesia.com.br/revistadet1 ,asp?cod artiqos=445#.
Alves, M3rcio Moreira. A Igreja e A Politica no Brasil. Sao Paulo, SP.: Editora
Brasiliense, 1979.
Alves, Rubem. A Theology o f Human Hope. Washington, D.C.: Corpus Books,

1969.
________. “Funcion Ideoldgica y Possibilidades Utopicas del Protestantism

Latinoamericano. ” In De La Iglesia y la Sociedad, Rubem Alves et al, 1-6.
Montevideo: Terra Nueva, 1971.
________. Protestantismo e RepressHo. S3o Paulo: Atica, 1979.
________. “su cadaver estaba lleno de mundo,” ReligiSo e Sociedade 23,

special issue (2003), 91-94.
________. “Towards a Theology of Liberation: an Exploration of the Encounter

between the Languages of Humanistic Messianism and Messianic
Humanism.” Ph.D. Diss., Princeton Theological Seminary, 1968.
Amado, Jorge. Dona Florand Her Two Husbands: A Moral and Amorous Tale.
Translated by Harriet de Onis. New York: NY.: Knopf, 1969.
Amorese, Rubem M. (ed.). A Igreja Evangdlica na Virada do Mildnio: A MissSo

da Igreja num Pals em Crise. Brasilia, Brazil: Comunicarte, 1994.
Araujo, Jo io D. InquisigSo Sem fogueiras: Vinte Anos de Histdria da igreja

Presbiteriana do Brasil: 1954-1974. 2 ed. Rio de Janeiro: ISER.1982.
323
324
Azevedo, Israel B. “A Palavra Marcada: Um Estudo Sobre a Teologia Politica
dos Batistas Brasileiros Segundo o Jomal Batista, de 1901 a 1964.” M. Th.
thesis, Seminario Teologico Batista do Sul do Brasil, 1983.
Azevedo, Marcello. Basic Edesial Communities in Brazil: The Challenge o f a

New Way o f Being Church. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press,
1987.
Barbosa, Roberto. “Innovation in Brazil: Ecumenical Structure for Social

Problems,” in Christian Century 90/18 (1973): 516-517.
________. “The Gospel with Bread: An interview with Brazilian Pentecostalist

Manoel de Mello.” In Mission Trends 2, Evangelization, ed. Gerald H.
Anderson and Thomas F. Stransky, 145-154. New York: Paulist Press, 1975.
Barreto Jr., Raimundo C. “A Terceira Conversao de Richard Shaull,” Religiao e

Sociedade 23/special issue (2003):83-90.
Bastian, Jean-Pierre. Breve Histdria do Protestantismo en America Latina.

Mexico City: Casa Unida de Publicaciones, 1986.
________. La Mutadon Religiosa de America Latina: Para una Sodologia del

Cambio Social en la Modemidad Periferica. San Lorenzo, Mexico: Fondo de
Cultura Economica, 1997.
Bediako, Kwame. Christianity in Africa: The Renewal of a Non-Westem Religion.

Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1995.
Benjamin, Medea & Maisa Mendonga, Benedita da Silva: An Afro-Brazilian

Woman’s Story of Politics and Love. Monroe, OR.: Food First Books, 1997.
Berger, Peter (ed.). The Desecularization o f the World: Resurgent Religion and
World Politics. Grand Rapids, Ml.: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1999.
Berryman, Phillip. Religion in the Megacity: Catholic and Protestant Portraits from
Latin America (Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1996.
Beto, Frei. Fome de Pao e de Beleza. Sao Paulo, SP.: Siciliano, 1990.
Bittencourt Filho, Jose. “Por Uma Eclesia Militante: ISAL Como Nascedouro de
uma Nova Eclesiologia para a America Latina.” M.Th. Thesis. Instituto
Metodista de Ensino Superior, 1988.
Boff, Clodovis. Theology and Praxis: Epistemological Foundations. Marykndl,

NY.: Orbis Books, 1987.
325
Boff, Leonardo. Ecotogia, Mundializagao e Espirituatidade: A Emergencia de um

Novo Paradigma. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Atica, 1993.
________. fztica e Eco-espiritualidade. Petropolis, Brazil: Animus, 2003.
________. Jesus Cristo Libertador, 9ed. Petropolis, RJ.: Vozes, 1983.
Boff, Leonardo & Clodovis Boff, Introducing Liberation Theology. Maryknoll, NY.:
Orbis Books, 1987.
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. Ethics. New York: Touchstone, 1995.
Braga, Erasmo. Pan-Americanismo: Aspecto Religioso. New York: Sociedade de

Preparo Missionario, 1916.
Braga, Erasmo & Kenneth Grubb. The Republic o f Brazil: A Survey o f the
Religious Situation. London: World Dominion Press, 1932.
Brepohl, Dieter & Manfred Grellert (ed.). A Missao da Igreja no Mundo de Hoje:
As Principals Palestras do Congresso International de Evangelizagao
Mundial Realizado em Lausanne, Suiga, 2ed. Sao Paulo, Brazil: ABU, 1984.
Brown, Robert McAfee. Unexpected News: Reading the Bible with Third World
Eyes. Philadelphia, PA.: The Westminster Press, 1984.
Brueggemann, Walter. “Always in the Shadow of the Empire.” In The Church as

Counterculture, ed. Michael L. Budde & Robert W. Brimlow, 39-57. Albany:
State of New York University Press, 2000.
________. Prophetic Imagination. Philadelphia, PA.: Fortress Press, 1978.
Baineau, T. The Catholic Church in Brazil: The Politics o f Religion. Austin:

University of Texas Press, 1982.
Brunner, Emil. The Divine Imperative. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937.
________. The Divine-Human Encounter. Philadelphia: Westminster Press,

1943.
Buber, Martin. Between Man and Man. London: Keagan Paul, 1947.
Bueno, Rubens M. “Ah, Ah! Bern, E Entao?... Como, a Ver, Richard Shaull
Pensava e Agia,” Religiao e Sociedade 23/special issue (2003): 95-96.
326
Burdick, John. Looking for God in Brazil: The Progressive Catholic Church in
Urban Brazil’s Religious Arena. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of
California Press, 1993.
Burity, Joanildo., “Mudanga Cultural, Mudanga Religiosa e Mudanga Politica:

Para Onde Caminhamos?” In Cultura e Identidade: Perspectivas
interdisciplinares, ed. Joanildo Burity, 29-64. Rio de Janeiro, DP&A Editora,
2002.
________. “Os Protestantes e a Revolugao Brasileira, 1961-1964: A

Conferencia do Nordeste.” M. Th. Thesis, UFPE, 1989.
________. “Reconfigurando o Campo da Religiao e Seus Vinculos com a Esfera

Publica. “ Unpublished paper, accessed by author from Burity’s personal files,
on 30
January 2005.
Caldart, Roseli S. Pedagogia do Movimento Sem Terra, 3ed. Sao Paulo, Brazil:
Expressao Popular, 2004.
Calvani, Carlos Eduardo B. “O Movimento Evangelical: Consideragoes Historicas

e Teologicas.” M. Th. Instituto Metodista de Ensino Superior, Sao Paulo,
Brazil, 1993.
Camargo, CSndido P. F. Catdlicos, Protestantes e Espiritas. Petropolis: Vozes,

1973.
Campos, Bernardo L. “In the Power of the Spirit: Pentecostalism, Theology and
Social Ethics.” In: In the Power o f the Spirit: The Pentecostal Challenge to
Historic Churches in Latin America, ed. Benjamin F. Gutierrez & Dennis A.
Smith, 41-50. Drexel Hill, PA: SKIPJACK Press, 1996.
Campos, Leonildo S. “Evangeiicos e o Golpe Militar de 1964”, Tempo e

Presenga 334 (March/April 2004):23-31.
________. “Protestantes e Politica no Brasil: Atos e Retorica da Igreja

Presbiteriana Independente na Primeira Fase do Regime Militar Brasileiro
(1964-1969).” Unpublished paper, Sao Paulo, UMESP, 2002.
________. Teatro, templo e mercado. Petropolis/Sao Paulo/Sao

Bernardo do Campo: Vozes/Simposio/Umesp, 1997.
Campos, Orlando A. “The Mission of the Church and the Kingdom of God in Latin
America.” Ph.D. diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 2000.
327
Cardoso, Miriam L. Ideologia do Desenvolvimento (Rio de Janeiro, RJ.: Paz
e
Terra, 1977.
Carvalho Dias, Agemir de. “O Ecumenismo: Uma Otica Protestante.”Unpublished

lecture delivered at the I Simposio Internacional de Religiao, Religiosidades e
Cultura. Campo Grande, Brazil: Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso do Sul,
2003.
Casanova, Jose. Public Religions in the Modem World. Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press, 1994.
Cavalcanti, Robinson. Cristianismo e Politica: Teona Biblica e Pratica Histdrica,

3ed. Sao Paulo, SP.: Tematica, 1994.
CBE2, Missao Integral: Proctamaro Reino de Deus, Vivendo o Evangelho de

Cristo. Belo Horizonte, MG.: Visao Mundial, 2004.
CCLA, Christian Work in South America: Official Report o f the Congress on

Christian Work in South America, at Montevideo, Uruguay, April, 1925. New
York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1925.
CEB, Relatdrios: Bienio 1934-1936. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: CEB, 1936.
CEB, Relatdrios, 11°Bidnio— 1955-1956. Rio de Janeiro, RJ.: CEB, 1958.
Cesar, Waldo (ed.). A Conferencia do Nordeste: Cristo e o Processo

Revoluciondrio Brasileiro, vol. I & II. Recife, PE.: CEB, 1962.
________. “Church and Society—Or Society and Church?” In Revolution o f

Spirit: Ecumenical Theology in Global Context. Essays in Honor o f Richard
Shaull, ed. Nantawan B. Lewis, 133-148. Grand Rapids, Ml.: W. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1998.
________., “From Babel to Pentecost: A Social-Historical-Theological Study of

the Growth of Pentecostalism.” In Between Babel and Pentecost:
Transnational Pentecostalism in Africa and Latin America, eds. Andre Corten
& Ruth Marshall-Fratani, 22-40. London, UK: Hurst & Company, 2001.
________. “Igreja e Sociedade: Uma Experiencia Ecumenica, Tempo e

Presenga 26/334 (2004): 7-14.
328
________“O Contexto Ecumenico no Brasil: 1964-1975.” Undated
unpublished paper, Rio de Janeiro, accessed from Waldo Cesar’s personal
files on July 18, 2004.
________., “O setor de Responsabilidade Social da Igreja e a Crise da CEB."

Unpublished paper accessed by the author 18 July 2003, from Waldo Cesar’s
personal files, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
________(ed). Presenga da Igreja na Evolugao da Nacionalidade. Rio de

Janeiro, RJ.: CEB, 1960.
________., “Situagao Social e Cresdmento do Protestantismo na America

Latina.” In Protestantismo e Imperialismo na America Latina, ed. Waldo Cesar,
7-36. Petropolis, RJ.: Vozes, 1968.
________. “Sobrevivenda e Transcedencia: Vida Cotidiana e Religiosidade no

Pentecostalismo,” Religiao e Sociedade 16/1-2 (1992): 46-59.
________. “Um Ecumenismo Voltado para o Mundo. Esbogo para uma Historia
do Ecumenismo no Brasil,” Contexto Pastoral, 5(26), Rio de Janeiro: Koinonia,
mai./jun. 1995. Suplemento Debate, p. 3-4.
Chapman, Clarke. “Bonhoeffer and Liberation Theology,” in Ethical

Responsibility: Bonhoeffer’s Legacy to the Churches, eds., John Godsey et al,
147-195. Toronto: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1981.
Chestnut, Andrew. “Born Again in Brazil.” In On Earth as it is in Heaven: Reiigpn

in Modern Latin America,” ed. Virginia Garrard-Burnett, 219-234. Wilmington,
Del.: Scholarly Resources, 2000.
CLADE III, “Declaragao de Quito: Todo Evangelho a Partir da America Latina

para Todos os Povos,” Revista Teologica 8/23 (1992): 32-40.
Comblin, Jose. O Espirito Santo e a Libertagao. Petropolis, RJ.: Vozes, 1982.
________. The Church and the National Security State. Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis
Books, 1979.
Consorte, Josildeth G. “A Mentalidade Messianica,” CiBncias da ReligiSo 1/1

(1983): 43-50
Cook, Guillermo (ed.). New Face o f the Church in Latin America: Between
Tradition and Change. Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1994.
329
Cook Jr., A. William. “Base Ecclesial Communities: A Study of
Reevangelization and Growth in the Brazilian Catholic Church,” Occasional
Bulletin o f Missionary Research, July 1980:113-117.
Convengao Batista Brasileira, “Filosofia de Agao Social da CBB,” in Uvro da 78a

Assembl&a da CBB, 176-186. Salvador, Brazil: CBB, 1997.
Corten, Andre. “Prefacio,” in Pentecostalismo e o Future das Igrejas Cristas:

Promessas e Desafios, by Waldo Cesar and Richard Shaull, 9-15. Petropolis,
Brazil: Vozes, 1999.
Costa, Esdras B. “Protestantism, Modernization and Cultural Change in Brazil.”

Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1979.
________., “Relembrando Richard Shaull,” Religiao e Sociedade, 23/special

issue (2003): 67-68.
Costa, Marcio Luis. Levinas: Uma Introdugao. Petropolis: Vozes, 1998.
Costas, Orlando. The Church and Its Mission: A Shattering Critique from the
Third World. Wheaton, IL.: Tyndale House Publishers, 1976.
________. Theology of the Crossroads in Contemporary Latin America:

Missiologyin Mainline Protestantism 1969-1974. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1976.
________. “Una Nueva Consciencia Protestante: la III CELA.” In Oaxtepec 1978:

Unidad y Mision en America Latina, ed. CLAI, 81-118. San Jose, Costa Rica:
CLAI, 1980.
Cox, Harvey. Fire from Heaven: The Rise o f Pentecostal Spirituality and the
Reshaping o f Religion in the Twenty-first Century (New York: Addison-Wesley
Publishing Company, 1995.
DaMatta, Roberto. A Casa & a Rua: Espago, Cidadania, Mulhere Morte no

Brasil, 6ed. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Rocco, 2000.
________. “For an Anthropology of the Brazilian Tradition or ‘A Virtude est£ no

Meio.’” In The Brazilian Puzzle: Culture on the Borderlands o f the Western
World, eds. David J. Hess & Roberto A. DaMatta, 270-292. New York:
Columbia UniversityPress, 1995.
________. O Que 6 o Brasil? Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Rocco, 2004.
________. O Que Faz o Brasil Brasil?, 1led. Rio de Janeiro, RJ.: Rocco, 2000.
330
________. Tocquevilleanas Notlcias da America. Rio de Janeiro, RJ.: Rocco,
2005.
De Almeida, Ronaldo. “A Guerra das PossessSes.” In Igreja Universal do Reino

de Deus: Os Novos Conquistadores da Fd, ed. Ari P. Oro, AndrS Corten and
Jean-Pierre Dozon, 321-343. SSo Paulo, SP.: EdigOes Paulinas, 2003.
De G6es, Paulo. “Do Individualismo ao Compromisso Social: A ContribuigSo da

C onfederate Evangelica Brasileira para a ArticulagSo de uma Etica Social
CristS,” Master’s of Religious Science Thesis. Instituto Metodista de Ensino
Superior, SSo Bernardo do Campo, Brazil, 1989.
Deiros, Pablo A. “Protestant Fundamentalism in Latin America.” In

Fundamentalisms Observed, ed. Martin E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby, 142-
196. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1994.
De Matos, Alderi Souza. “O Protestantismo Brasileira no Periodo Republicano.”

Internet; accessed 20 March 2006; available from
http://www.thirdmill.ora/files/portuauese/60307~11 1 01 10-16
52_AM~0_Protestantismo_Brasileiro_no_Per%C3%ADodo_Republicano.html.
________. “Samuel Escobar e a MissSo Integral da Igreja: Uma

Perspectiva Latino-Americana,” Vox Scripturae 8/1 (July 1998): 95-111.
De Santa Ana, Julio ., “A Richard Shaull: Tedlogo e Pioneiro EcumSnico—Um

Testemunho Reconhecido.” In Richard Shaull e os Primdrdios da Teologia da
LibertagSo, by Richard Shaull et al, 33-39. SSo Paulo: Editora Sagarana;
CEDI/CLAI, 1985.
________. “The Influence of Bonhoeffer on the Theology of Liberation,”

Ecumenical Review 28 (1976): 188-197.
Dias, Zwinglio M. “Notas Sobre a ExpansSo e as Metamorfoses do

Protestantismo na America Latina,” Numen 3/2 (2000): 47-62.
Dodson, Michael. “Pentecostals, Politics, and Public Space in Latin America.” In

Power, Politics, and Pentecostals, ed. Edward L. Cleary & Hannah W.
Stewart-Gambino, 25-40. Boulder, CO.: Westview Press, 1997.
Dussel, Enrique. Ethics and Community. Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1988.
331
________. “Historia Recente da Teologia na America Latina.” In Historia
Liberations: 500 Anos de Histdria da Igreja Na America Latina, ed. Enrique
Dussel, 546-562. Sao Paulo, Brazil: CEHILA/Edigoes Paulinas, 1992.
________. History and the Theology o f Liberation. Translated by John Drury.

Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1976.
________. Mdtodo Para una Filosofia de la Liberacidn. Salamanca, Spain:

Ediciones Sigueme, 1974.
________. Philosophy of Liberation. Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1985.
________. The Invention of the Americas: Eclipse o f “the Other” and the Myth o f
Modernity, translated by Michael D. Barber. New York: Continuum, 1995.
Dussel, Enrique & Daniel Guillot, Liberacidn Latinoamericana y Emmanuel

Levinas. Buenos Aires: Editorial Bonum, 1975.
Elizondo, Virgil. The Future is Mestizo: Life where Cultures Meet. Bloomington:
Meyer-Stone Books, 1988.
Escobar, Arturo & Sonia E. Alvarez, “Introduction: Theory and Protest in Latin
America Today.” In The Making of Social Movements in Latin America:
Identity, Strategy and Democracy, eds. Arturo Escobar & Sonia E. Alvarez, 1-
18. San Francisco, CA.: Westview Press, 1992.
Escobar, Samuel. A Responsabilidade Social da Igreja, Topicos do Momenta 3.

Sao Paulo: Vida Nova, 1970.
________. Changing Tides: Latin America & World Mission Today (Maryknoll,
________. Desafios da Igreja na Amdrica Latina: Histdria, Estratdgia e Teologia

de Missoes. Vigosa, MG: Editora Ultimata, 1997.
________. “La Fundacion de la Fratemidad Teologica Latinoamerica,” Boletin

Teologico 27159-60 (1995): 7-25.
________. “The Kingdom of God, Eschatology, and Social and Political Ethics in
Latin America,” Theological Fraternity Bulletin, Argentina (1975:1): 1-42.
________., “The Search for a Missiological Christology in Latin America.” In

Emerging Voices in Global Christian Theology, ed. William A. Dyrness, 199-
227. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994.
332
Falk, Richard. Religion and Humane Global Governance. Houndmills,
England: Palgrave Publishers, 2001.
Faria, Eduardo G. Fd e Compromisso: Richard Shaull e a Teologia no Brasil.

Sao Paulo, Brazil: ASTE, 2002.
Farfan P., Daniel. “Nos, Pentecostais, Somos Ecumenicos7’ Tempo e Presenga

15/271 (1993):26-28.
Ferreira, Julio A. Histdria da Igreja Presbiteriana do Brasil en ComemoragSo ao
Seu Primeiro Centenario. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Casa Editora Presbiteriana, 1959.
________. O Profeta da Unidade: Erasmo Braga, Uma Vida a

Descoberto. Petropolis/Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Vozes/Tempo e Presenga,
1975.
Frase, Ronald Glen. “A Sociological Analysis of the Development of Brazilian

Protestantism: A Study in Social Change.” Ph.D. Diss., Princeton Theological
Seminary, 1975.
Freire, Paulo. The Pedagogy o f the Oppressed, new revised edition. New York:
Continuum, 1993.
Freston, Paul. “Between Pentecostalism and the Crisis of Denominationalism:

The Future of the Historic Churches in Brazil,” In the Power of the Spirit: The
Pentecostal Challenge to Historical Churches in Latin America, ed.
Benjamin F. Gutierrez & Dennis A. Smith, 195-211. Louisville:PCUSA/WMD,
1996.
________., “Brazil: Church Growth, Parachurch Agencies, and Politics.” In New

Face o f the Church in Latin America, ed. Guillermo Cook, 226-244. Maryknoll,
________. “Brother Votes for Brother The New Politics of Protestantism in

Brazil.” In Rethinking Protestantism in Latin America, ed. Virginia
Garrard-Burnett and David Stoll, 66-110. Philadelphia, PA.: Temple University
Press, 1993.
________. Evangelicals and Politics in Asia, Africa and Latin America. New York:
Cambridge University Press, 2001.
________. Evangeiicos na Politica Brasileira. Histdria Amblgua e Desafio Iztico.

Curitiba: Encontrao, 1994.
________. "Pentecostalism in Brazil: A Brief History," Religion, 25/2 (1995): 119-
333
133.
________. “Political Evolution of Brazilian Pentecostalism.” In Imaginaires

Politiques et Pentecdtismes: Afrique/Amerique Latine, ed. Andre Corten &
Andre Mary, 287-305. Paris, France: Editions Karthala, 2000.
________. “Popular Protestants in Brazilian Politics: A Novel Turn in Sect-State

Relations,” Social Compass 41/4 (1994): 537-70.
________. “Protestantes e Politica no Brasil: Da Constituinte ao Impeachment.”

Ph.D. Diss. Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Brazil, 1993.
Freyre, Gylberto. Casa Grande & Senzala: Formagao da Famllia Brasileira Sob o
Regime da Economia Patriarcal, 50ed. Sao Paulo, SP.: Global Editora, 2005.
FTL, CLADE: Tercer Congreso Latinoamericano de Evangelizacidn. Quito,

Ecuador: FTL, 1992.
Gardner, E. C. Fe Biblica e fztica Social, 2ed. Sao Paulo: ASTE, 1982.
Garrard-Bumett, Virginia & David Stoll. Rethinking Protestantism in Latin

America. Philadelphia: Temple University, 1993.
Geertz, Clifford. The Interpretation o f Cultures. New York: Basic Books, 1973.
George, Sherron K. “Brazil: An ‘Evangelized’ Giant Calling for Liberating

Evangelism, International Bulletin o f Missionary Research, (2001): 104-109.
Glatzer, N. N. The Way of Response: Martin Buber, Selections from His Writings.
Schoken Books, New York, 1966.
Gondim, Ricardo. Orgulho de Ser Evangelico: Porque Continuarna Igreja. Sao

Paulo, Ultimato, 2001.
Gonzalez, Justo. “Voices of Compassion Yesterday and Today,” in New Face of

the Church in Latin America, ed. Guillermo Cook, 3-12. Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis
Books, 1994.
Gordon, Amy Glassner. “The First Protestant Missionary Effort: Why Did It Fail?”
International Buletin of Missionary Research 8/1 (1984): 12-18.
Green, James N. “Clerics, Exiles and Academics: Opposition to the Brazilian

Military Dictatorship in the United States,” Latin American Politics and Society,
45/1 (2003):87-117.
334
Grenholm, Carl-Henric. Christian Social Ethics in a Revolutionary Age: An
Analysis of the Social Ethics of John C. Bennett, Heinz-Dietrich Wendland and
Richard Shaull. Upsala: Verbum, 1973.
Grisolli, Paulo. “Acampamento da ACAs do Rio, Sao Paulo e Campinas,

Testimonium 1/3 (1953): 47.
Gusso, Sandra de F. K. “O Inicio do Protestantismo Historico no Brasil,” Via

Teologica 1/3 (2001): 73-89.
Gutierrez, Gustavo. A Theology o f Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation.

Maryknoll, N.Y., Orbis Books, 1973.
________. Essential Writings, edited with an introduction by James B. Nickoloff.

New York: Orbis Books, 1996.
________. The God of Life. Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1991.
________. We Drink from Our Own Wells: The Spiritual Journey o f a People.
Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1984.
Gutierrez S., Tomas J. “De Panama a Quito: los congresos evangeiicos en

America Latina. Iglesia, Mision e Identidad (1916—1992),” Boletin Teoldgico.
Vol. 27, no. 59/60 (1995):34-64.
Hall, Barbara & Richard Shaull, “From Somewhere Along the Road,” Theology
Today 29/1 (1972): 86-111.
Hauerwas, Stanley. In Good Company: The Church as Polis. Notre Dame:

University of Notre Dame Press, 1995.
Hebmuller, Paulo. “Terras Prometidas,” Revista Vinde II. 16 (1997): 26-31.
Heidegger, Martin. Being and Time. New York, NY.: Harper and Row, 1962.
Herberg, Will (ed). The Writings o f Martin Buber. New York: Meridian Books,
1956.
Hess, David J. & Roberto DaMatta (eds). The Brazilian Puzzle: Culture in the
Borderlands o f the Western World. New York: Columbia University Press,
1995.
Hidelbrandt, Ziporah . Marina da Silva: Defending Rainforest Communities in

Brazil. New York, NY.: The Feminist Press, 2001.
335
Hinkelammert, Franz J. Las Armas ldeol6gicas de la Muerte: El
Discernimiento de los Fetiches: Capitalismo y Cristianismo. San Jos6, Costa
Rica: Editorial Universitaria Centroamericana,1977.
Hollenweger, Walter J. “From Azusa Street to the Toronto Phenomenon:

Historical Roots of the Pentecostal Movement.” In Pentecostal Movements as
an Ecumenical Challenge, ed. Jurgen Moltmann & Karl-Josef Kuschel, 3-15.
London: SCM Press, 1996.
________. “The Black Roots of Pentecostalism.” In Pentecostals After a Century:

Global Perspectives on a Movement in Transition, ed. Allan H. Anderson &
Walter J. Hollenweger, 33-44. Sheffield, U.K.: Sheffield Academic Press,
1999).
Hopkins, Charles H. The Rise o f the Social Gospel in American Protestantism

1865-1915. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1967.
Howe, Gary N. “Capitalism and Religion at the Periphery: Pentecostalism and

Umbanda in Brazil.” In Perspectives on Pentecostalism: Case Studies from the
Caribbean and Latin America, ed. Stephen D. Glazier, 125-142. Washington:
University Press of America, 1980.
Ireland, Rowan. "Pentecostalism, Conversions, and Politics in Brazil.” In Power,

Politics, and Pentecostals in Latin America, ed. Edward L. Cleary and Hannah
W. Stewart-Gambino, 123-138. Boulder, CO.: Westview Press, 1997.
ISAL, America Hoy: Accidn de Dios y Responsabilidad del Hombre (Montevideo,

Uruguay: ISAL, 1966.
IURD, “Fundamentos da Nossa Fe: Proibigoes e Restrigoes.” Internet; accessed

23 November 2003; available from www. iareiauniversal.ora.br.
Johns, Cheryl B. Pentecostal Formation: A Pedagogy Among the Oppressed.

Sheffield, UK.: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993.
Johnson, Harmon A. “Umbanda: A Modern Brazilian Religion.” In Dynamic

Religious Movements: Case Studies of Rapidly Growing Religious Movements
around the World, ed. David J. Hesselgrave, 247-269. Grand Rapids: Baker
Book House, 1978.
Kessler, J. & W. M. Nelson, “Panama 1916 y Su Impacto Sobre el

Protestantismo Latinoamericano.” In Oaxtepec 1978: Unidad y Misidn en
Amdrica Latina, ed. CLAI, 11-30. San Jos6, Costa Rica: CLAI, 1980.
336
King, Jr., Martin Luther. “A Time to Break Silence.” In a Testament o f Hope:
The Essentiat Writings and Speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr. Edited by
James M. Washington, 231-244. New York: HarperCoilins, 1991.
Kirk, J Andrew. What is Mission? Theological Explorations. Minneapolis: Fortress

Press, 2000.
Kirkpatrick, Frank G. The Ethics o f Community. Oxford, UK. : Blackwell, 2001.
Krammer, Eric W. “Possessing Faith: Commodification, Religious Subjectivity,

and Collectivity in a Brazilian Neo-Pentecostal Church.” Ph.D. Diss., The
University of Chicago, 2001.
Kymlicka, Will. Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction, 2ed. Oxford,

UK.: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Lage, Nilton & Carlos Chemij, “Filhos da Pobreza: Estatlsticas Revelam que
Apesar da Queda na Nataiidade, a Miseria e a Desigualdade Aumentaram no
Brasil,” Isto £, on-line magazine, 5 March 2003. Internet; accessed 6 March
2003; available from http://www.terra.com.br/cai-
bin/index frame/istoe/1903/brasil/1903 beira mar.htm.
Lalive D’Epinay, Christian. Haven of the Masses: A Study o f the Pentecostal

Movement in Chile. London: Lutterworth Press, 1969.
Lambert, Jacques. Os Dois Brasis. Rio de Janeiro, RJ.: Companhia Editora

Nacional, 1967.
LeSo Neto, Reynaldo F. “Richard Shaull: O Profeta da Revolugdo,” Pastorale

Mlstica. Cadernos de P6s-GraduagSo/Ci£ncias da ReligiSo 13/8 (1995):83-
110 .
Lehmann, Paul. Ethics in a Christian Context. Eugene, OR.: Wipf and Stock
Publishers, 1998.
Lessa, Vicente Themudo. Annaes da Primeira Egreja Presbyteriana de SSo

Paulo (1863-1903). Sao Paulo: Primeira Egreja Presbyteriana fndependente
de SSo Paulo, 1938.
Levinas, Emmanuel. Totality and Infinity. Pittsburg, PA: Duquesne University

Press, 1998.
Lewis, Nantawan Boonprasat (ed.). Revolution o f Spirit: Ecumenical Theology in

Global Context. Essays in Honor o f Richard Shaull. Grand Rapids, Ml.: W.B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1998.
337
Longuini Neto, Luiz. “Conferencias Anteriores a Satvador Dados Historicos,”

Tempo e Presenga no. 289 (September/October, 1996), 7-33.
________. O Novo Rosto da Missao: Os Movimentos Ecumentco e Evangelical

no Protestantismo Latino-Americano. Vigosa, MG.: Ultimata, 2002.
Lopes Jr., Orivaldo P. “Protestantism in Brazil and the Cause of the Poor.”
Unpublished paper, Natal, Brazil: UFRN, 2000.
Lopez, Dario. Pentecostaiismo y Transformation Social: Mas Alla de los

Estereotipos, las Criticas se Enfrentan con los Hechos. Buenos Aires,
Argentina: Kairos Ediciones, 2000.
Ldwy, Michael. The War o f Gods: Religion and Politics in Latin America. New
York, NY.: Verso, 1996.
Machado, Maria das Dores C. “fgreja Universal: Uma Organizagao Providencia.”

In Igreja Universal do Reino de Deus: Os Novos Conquistadores da F6, ed.
Ari P. Oro, Andre Corten and Jean-Pierre Dozon, 303-320. Sao Paulo, SP.:
Edigoes Paulinas, 2003.
Machado, Ziel J. O. “Sim a Deus, Sim a Vida: Igreja Evangelica Redescobrindo

Sua Cidadania.” M. S. S. thesis, Universidade Catalica de Sao Paulo, 1997.
Maciel, Elter D. O Drama da Conversao: Analise da FicgSo Batista. Rio de

Janeiro, Brazil: ISER, 1983.
Magalhaes, Antonio Carlos de M. Deus no Espeiho das Palavras. Sao Paulo,

SP.: Edigoes Paulinas, 2000.
Mainwaring, S. The Catholic Church and Politics in Brazil, 1916-1985. Stanford:

Stanford University Press, 1986.
Mariano, Ricardo. Neo-Pentecostais: Sociologia do Novo Pentecostaiismo no

Brasil. Sao Paulo, SP.: Loyola, 1999.
Mariz, Cecilia L. Coping with Poverty: Pentecostals and Christian Base

Communities in Brazil. Philadelphia, PA.: Temple University Press, 1994.
________., “Pentecostalism and Confrontation with Poverty in Brazil,” in In the

Power o f the Spirit: The Pentecostal Challenge to Historic Churches in Latin
America, ed. Benjamin F. Gutierrez & Dennis A. Smith, 129-146. Drexel Hill,
PA: SKIPJACK Press, 1996.
338
Marsden, George. “The Evangelical Denomination.” In Piety and Politics:
Evangelical and Fundamentalists Confront the World, ed. Richard J. Neuhaus
& Michael Cromartie, 55-68. Washington, D.C.: Ethics and Public Policy
Center, 1987.
Martin, David., “Evangelicals and Economic Culture in Latin America: An interim

Comment on Research in Progress,” Social Compass 39/1 (1992): 9-14.
________. Tongues o f Fire: The Explosion o f Protestantism in Latin America.

Oxford, UK.: Blackwell, 1990.
May, Roy H. Discernimiento Moral: Una Intmduccidn a la t=tica Cristiana. San

Jose, Costa Rica: DEI, 1998.
McIntyre, Alasdair. Whose Justice? Whose Rationality? Notre Dame, IN.: 1988.
Mendonga, Antonio G. & Procoro Velasques Filho. lntrodug§o ao Protestantismo

no Brasil. Sao Paulo/S3o Bernardo do Campo: Loyola/Ci£ncias da Religiio,
1990.
Mendonga, Ant6nio G. “A History of Christianity in Brazil: An Interpretative

Essay,” International Review o f Mission, 85/338 (1996): 366-386.
________. 0 Celeste Porvir. A lnserg§o do Protestantismo no Brasil. S3o Paulo:

Paulinas, 1984.
________. Protestantes, Pentecostais & Ecum&nicos. 0 Campo Religioso e

Seus Personagens. Sao Bernardo do Campo: Umesp, 1997.
MEP, “Que Brasil N6s Queremos? Assembleias Populares: Exigdncia da

ParticipagSo
Popular nos Destinos do Pais.” Internet; accesses 19 November 2005;
available from
http://www. meo.ora, br/arauivos/encontrodeformadores/mep assembleias popu I
ares.doc.
Miguez Bonino, Jos6. Faces of Latin American Protestantism. Grand Rapids:

William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995.
________. “For Life and Against Death: A Theology that Takes Sides,” in The
Christian Century, 97/38 (1980):1154-1158.
________., “Hacia un Protestantismo Ecumdnico: Notas Para una Evaluacidn

Historica del Protestantismo entre la I y la IICELA (1949-1960).“ In Oaxtepec
339
1978: Unidad y Mision en America Latina, ed. CLAI, 65-80. San Jose,
Costa Rica: CLAI, 1980.
________. “Historia y Mision,” in Protestantismo y Liberalismo en America

Latina, Jose Miguez Bonino et al, 15-36. San Jose, Costa Rica: Departamento
Ecumenico de Investigaciones/Seminario Biblico Latinoamericano, 1983.
________. Poder del Evangelio y Poder Politico: La Participacion de los

Evangelicos en la Polltica en America Latina. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Kairos,
1999.
Miguez Bonino, Jose, Juan Sepulveda and Rigoberto Galvez, Unidad y

Diversidad del Protestantismo Latinoamericano: El Testimonio Evang6lico
Hacia el Tercer Milenio: Palabra, Espiritu y Mission. Buenos Aires, Argentina:
Kairos, 2002.
Monteiro, Marcos A ., “A Igreja Evangelica e o Nordeste Brasileiro.” In Diaconia

no Contexto Nordestino: Desafios, Reflexdes, Praxis, ed. Sergio Andrade &
Rudolf von Sinner, 42-70. Sao Leopoldo, RS.: Editora Sinodal, 2003.
________. “A Respeito da Fratemidade Teologica Latino-Americana no

Nordeste.” Unpublished document, read at the I Jornada Teologica da FTL-
Nordeste, on 21 April 2003.
Mota, Jorge Cesar. “A Federagao Mundial Crista de Estudantes,” Testimonium 2

(December, 1954): 145-146.
Neely, Alan. “Protestant Antecedents of the Latin American Theology of

Liberation.” Ph.D. diss., American University, 1977.
Nelson, Wilton M. “En Busca de un Protestantismo Latinoamericano: De

Montevideo 1925 a La Habana 1929.”In Oaxtepec 1978: Unidad y Misidn en
America Latina, ed. CLAI, 31-44. San Jose, Costa Rica: CLAI, 1980.
Niebuhr, H. Richard. Christ and Culture. New York: Harper, 1951.
________. The Responsible Self: An Essay in Christian Moral Philosophy. New

York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1963.
________., “The Structure of Faith.” In Faith on Earth: An Inquiry into the

Structure of Human Faith, ed. Richard R. Niebuhr, 43-62. New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1989.
Oliveira, Marco D. de. A Religiao Mais Negra do Brasil: Porque Mais de O'rto
Milhoes de Negros SSo Pentecostais. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Mundo Cristao,
340
2004.
Oliveros, Roberto. “History of the Theology of Liberation,” in Mysterium

Liberationis: Fundamental Concepts o f Liberation Theology, ed. Ignacio
Ellacuria & Jon Sobrino, 3-32. Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1993.
Oro, Ari Pedro. “A Igreja Universal: Um Poder Politico.” In Igreja Universal do

Reino de Deus: Os Novos Conquistadores da Fe, ed. Ari P. Oro, Andre Corten
and Jean-Pierre Dozon, 281-302. Sao Paulo, SP.: Edigoes Paulinas, 2003.
Padilla, C. Rene (ed.). Fe Cristiana y Latinoamerica Hoy. Buenos Aires:

Ediciones Certeza, 1974.
________., “La Nueva Eclesiologia en America Latina,” Revista de la

Fraternidad Teoldgica Latinoamericana, 18/24 (1986): 201-226.
________. “Mensaje Biblico y Revolution,” Certeza 39 (1970): 200.
________. Missao Integral: Ensaios Sobre o Reino e a Igreja. Sao Paulo, Brazil:
FTL-B, 1992.
________. Mission Between the Times. Grand Rapids, Ml.: W. B. Eerdmans

Publishing Co., 1985.
________. “The Kingdom of God and the Church,” Theological Fraternity

Bulletin 1/2 (1976): 1-23
Paixao, Marcelo J. P. Desenvolvimento Humano e Relagdes Raciais. Rio de

Janeiro, Brazil: DP&A, 2003.
Paixao Junior, Valdir G. A Era do Trovao: Poder e Repressao na Igreja

Presbiteriana do Brasil na Epoca da Ditadura Militar (1966-1978). M. Th.
thesis, UMESP, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 2000.
Paris, Peter. “Expanding and Enhancing Moral Communities: The Task of

Christian Social Ethics.” In Issues of Justice: Social Sources and Religious
Meanings, ed. Roger D. Hatch and Warren R. Copeland, 111-124. Macon,
GA.: Mercer University Press, 1988.
Pierson, Paul E. A Younger Church in Search o f Maturity:Presbyterianism in

Brazil from 1910 to 1959. San Antonio: Trinity University Press, 1974.
Pierucd, Antonio Flavio. “Secularizagao e Declinio do Catolicismo.” In Sociologia

da Religiao e Mudanga Social: Catolicos, Protestantes e Novos Movimentos
341
Religiosos no Brasil, ed. Beatriz M. De Souza & Luiz Mauro S. Martinho,
13-21. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Paulus, 2003.
Plou, Dafne S. Caminos de Unidad: Itinerario del Didlogo Ecumdnico en America

Latina 1916-1991. Quito, Ecuador: CLAI, 1994.
Proano, Leonidas E. Conscientizacidn, Evangelizacidn, Polltica, 3ed.

Salamanca: Ediciones Sigueme, 1975.
Queiroz, Carlos P. “A Missao Integral da Igreja no Brasil: Revisao, Erros e

Acertos.” Unpublished paper, n.d., accessed by author from Carlos Queiroz’s
personal files on 31 July 2002.
________. As Faces de um Mito: A Fascinante Historia de um Cabra de Deus

na Terra do Sol. Brasilia, Brazil: MZ Produgoes, 1999.
________. Cristo e a Transformagao Social do Brasil: 0 Compromisso

do Povo de Deus com os Pobres. Belo Horizonte, MG.: Visao Mundial/Missao
Editora, 1991.
________. “Evangelizagao e Responsabilidade Social.” In Fdrum Intemacional

de Teologia Contemporanea, ed. Instituto Mysterium, 22-38. Mendes, Brazil:
Instituto Mysterium, 2005.
________. “Responsabilidade Social Na missao da Igreja.” Unpublished paper

presented at the First Social Action Forum of the Igreja Batista Esperanga,
Salvador, Brazil, 2005.
Queiroz, Maria Isaura P. de. “Afro-Braziiian Cults and Religious Change in

Brazil.” In The Changing Face o f Religion, ed. James A. Beckford & Thomas
Luckmann, 88-108. London: SAGE Publications, 1989.
Ramalho, Jether P. “Buscando Novidades no Trabalho do Espirito,” Religiao e

Sociedade, 23/special issue (2003): 69-70.
________. Pratica Educativa e Sociedade: Um Estudo de Sociologia da

Educagio. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: ZAHAR Editores, 1976.
Ramos, Jovelino., “Caminhando com Richard Shaull,” ReligiSo e Sociedade

23/special issue (2003): 71-74.
________. “Voce Nao Conhece o Shaull.” In De Dentro do FuracSo: Richard

Shaull e os Primdrdios da Teologia da Libertagao, by Richard Shaull et al, 25-
32. Sao Paulo: Editora Sagarana; CEDI/CLAI, 1985.
342
Ramos, Myra Bergman. “Muito Obrigada, Shaull,” Religiao e Sociedade
23/special issue (2003): 81-82.
Rapp, Robert S. A Confederagao Evangdlica do Brasil e o Evangelho Social.

Sao Paulo, Brazil: Missao Biblica Presbiteriana do Brasil, 1965
Rauschenbusch, Walter. A Theology for the Social Gospel. Nashville, TN.:

Abingdon, 1981.
Reily, Duncan Alexander. Historia Documental do Protestantismo no Brasil, 3ed.

Sao Paulo: ASTE, 2003.
Ribeiro, Boanerges. O Padre Protestante. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Casa Editora

Presbiteriana, 1979.
Richard, Pablo et al. “Challenges to Liberation Theology in the Decade of the

Nineties,” in New Face of the Church in Latin America, ed. Guillermo Cook,
245-258. Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1994.
Rieger, Joerg. “Introduction: Watch the Money” in Liberating the Future: God,
Mamon and Theology, ed. Joerg Rieger, 1-13. Minneapolis: Fortress Press,
1998.
Rios, Roberto E. “Iglesias y Movimientos Ecumenicos,” Cristianismo y Sociedad

17/61-62 (1979): 67-72.
Rosado-Nunes, Maria Jose. “O Catolicismo Sob o Escrutinio da Modemidade.”

In Sociologia da Religiao e Mudanga Social: Catdlicos, Protestantes e Novos
Movimentos Religiosos no Brasil, ed. Beatriz M. De Souza & Luiz Mauro S.
Martinho, 22-36. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Paulus, 2003.
Ruuth, Anders. Igreja Universal do Reino de Deus: Gudsrikets Universella

Kyrka—en Brasiliansk Kykobildning. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell
International, 1995.
Savage, Pedro (ed.). El Debate Contemporaneo Sobre la Biblia. Barcelona:

Ediciones Evangelicas Europeas, 1972.
Scannone, Juan Carlos. Nuevo Punto de Partida de la Filosofia

Latinoamericana. Buenos Aires: Editorial Guadalupe, 1990.
________. “Para una Filosofia a Partir de la Sabiduria Popular,” in Para una

Filosofia Desde America Latina, ed. Ignacio Ellacuria & Juan Carlos
343
Scannone, 123-140. Santafe de Bogota, Bolivia: Pontificia Universidade
Javeriana, 1992.
________. “Trascendencia, Praxis Liberadora y Lenguaje: Hacia una Filosofia de

la Religion Postmoderna y Latinoamericanamente Situada,” in Panorama de la
Teologia Latinoamericana, vol. II, ed. Equipo Seladoc, 83-115. Salamanca,
Spain: Ediciones Sigueme, 1975.
Schuurman, Lambert. “La Influencia de Emmanuel Levinas en la Teologia

Latinoamericana,” in Los Pobres: Encuentro y Compromiso, ed. J. Severino
Croatto et al, 149-179. Buenos Aires: Editorial La Aurora, 1978.
Scott, James C. Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms o f Peasant Resistance.

New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985.
Sepulveda, Juan. “The Pentecostal Movement in Latin America.” In New Face of

the Church in Latin America: Between Tradition and Change, ed. Guillermo
Cook, 68-74. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1994.
Shaull, Richard. Alternativa ao Desespero. Sao Paulo, SP.: CEB/UCEB, 1962.
________. “A Proposito da Estrategia dos MECs,” Paper presented at the

Conferencia dos MECs do Cone Sul, Sao Leopoldo, Brazil, July 1967.
________. Entre Jesus e Marx: Reflexoes Sobre os Anos que Passei no Brasil.”
In De Dentro do Furacao: Richard Shaull e os Primdrdios da Teologia da
Libertagao, by Richard Shaull et al, 183-212. Sao Paulo: Editora Sagarana;
CEDI/CLAI, 1985.
________. “From Academic Research to Spiritual Transformation: Reflection on

a Study of Pentecostalism in Brazil,” Pneuma 20/1 (2001): 71-84.
________. Heralds o f the New Reformation: The Poor o f the South and North
America. Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 1984.
________., “Latin American Theology of Liberation.” Unpublished lecture, 1986.

Accessed by author in December 2003, Princeton Theological Seminary,
Special Collections, Richard Shaull’s archives, box 5.
________. “Latin America: Three Responses to a New Historical Situation,"

Interpretation 46/3 (1992): 261-270.
________., “Momento Revolutionary,” in Brazil Urgente, 1/30 (1963): 5-6.
________. “New Voices, New Visions: Liberation Theology is Alive and Well,”
344
The Other Side 32/1:48-50.
. “Nossa Tarefa Imediata em Face da Crise Iminente.” De Dentro do

FuracSo: Richard Shaull e os Primdrdios da Teologia da LibertagSo, by
Richard Shaull etal, 167-173. S3o Paulo: Editora Sagarana; CEDI/CLAI,
1985.
. 0 Chstianismo e a Revolugio Social. S3o Paulo, SP.: UCEB, 1953.
. “Renewed by the Spirit,” The Other Side, 34 (1998). Internet;

accessed 3 September 2003; available from
www.theotherside.org/archive/nov-dec98/shaull.html.
. “Responding to the Challenge: Renewal and Re-Creation,” in

Freedom and Discipleship: Liberation Theology in an Anabaptist Perspective,
ed. Daniel S. Schipani, 147-158. New York: Orbis Book, 1989.
. “Social Scientists and Theologians Look at Pentecostalism in Latin

America,” Unpublished lecture at the University of Florida, 1994, accessed by
the author in December 2003, Shaull Archives, Special Collections, Luce
Library, Princeton Theological Seminary, Box 6.
. Surpreendido Peia Graga: Memdrias de Um Teoldgo. Rio de Janeiro,

Brazil: Record, 2003.
.“The Challenge of Student Work in Brazil,” International Review of

Missions 44 (1955): 323-328.
. “The Christian Base Communities and the Ecclesia Reformata

Semper Reformanda,” Princeton Seminary Bulletin, 12/2 (1991), 201-213.
. “The Form of the Church in the Modern Diaspora,” The Princeton

Theological Bulletin 57/1 (1963): 3-18.
. “Theological Developments in Brazilian SCM, 1952.” Unpublished

manuscript accessed by the author in the Richard Shaull archives, at Luce
Library, Princeton Theological Seminary, November 2003.
______ . “The Pentecostal Appeal to the Poor,” Church and Society 86/3
(1996):49-55.
. “The Political Significance of Parabolic Action,” unpublished lecture,

University Christian Movement Conference, Cleveland, 26 December 1968.
345
________. “The Present Life and Structure of the Church in Relation to Her
Witness in Latin American Society,” unpublished paper, 1959 (?). Accessed
from the Richard Shaull Archives, Luce Library, Princeton, December 2003.
________. “The Third Conversion: Hearing the Spirit’s Call to Deeper Faith,” The
Other Side 33/2(1997): 32-34.
________. “Toward the Recovery of the Prophetic Power of the Reformed

Heritage.” In The Future o f Prophetic Christianity: Essays in Honor of Robert
McAfee Brown, ed. Denise L. Carmody & John T. Carmody, 49-66. Maryknoll,
Shaull, Richard et al, De Dentro do Furacao: Richard Shaull e os Primdrdios da

Teologia da LibertagSo. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Editora Sagarana, CEDI/CLAI,
Programa Ecumenico de Pos-Graduagao em Ciencias da Religiao, 1985.
Shaull, Richard & Waldo Cesar, Pentecostalism and the Future o f the Christian
Churches. Grand Rapids, Ml.: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2000.
Siepierski, Paulo D. “A Emergencia da Pluralidade Religiosa (1),” ReflexSo e Fd,

1/1(1999): 59-75.
________. “Do Sobrado ao Mestrado: a Iniciagao Cientifica de Gilberto Freyre.”

Unpublished paper, presented in the Quarta Jornada de PIBIC/CNPq, UFRPE,
Recife, Brazil, 2000.
________. “Pos-Pentecostalismo e Politica no Brasil,” Estudos Teologicos 37/1

(1997):47-61.
Silva, Elizete da. “Cidadaos de Outra Patria: Anglicanos e Batistas na Bahia.”

Ph. D. Diss.. Universidade de Sao Paulo, 1996.
________. “Protestantismo e Representagoes Politicas.” In Histdria das

Religides no Brasil, vol. II, ed. Sylvana Brandao, 585-608. Refice, PE.:
CEHILA;Editora Universitaria-UFPE, 2001.
Silva, Marcio B. da. Rosto e Alteridade: Pressupostos da £tica Comunitdria. Sao

Paulo, SP.: Paulus, 1995.
Silva, Reginaldo Jose da. “Batistas e Pentecostais nas Ligas Camponesas,”

Unpublished paper, Seminario Teologico Batista do Norte do Brasil, Recife,
Brazil, 2003.
Silverstein, Leni M. “The Celebration of Our Lord of the Good End: Changing
State, Church and Afro-Brazilian Relations in Bahia.” In The Brazilian Puzzle:
346
Culture on the Borderlands of the Western World, eds. David J. Hess &
Roberto A. DaMatta, 134-154. New York: Columbia University Press, 1995.
Skidmore, Thomas. Uma Histdria do Brasil, 4ed. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Paz e Terra,
2003.
Soares, Luiz Eduardo. “A Guerra dos Pentecostais contra o Afro-Brasileiro:

Dimensoes Democraticas do Conflito Religioso no Brazil,” Comunicagoes do
ISER, 44 (1993): 43-50.
Sobrino, Jon. Christ the Liberator. Maryknoll, NY.: Orbis Books, 2001.
________. “Teologia Desde la Realidad,” in O Mar Se Abriu: Trinta Anos de

Teologia na America Latina, ed. Luis Carlos Susin, 153-170. Sao Paulo,
Brazil: Edigoes Loyola, 2000.
Sobrino, Jon & Felix Wilfred (eds.), Globalization and Its Victims, Concilium
2001/5, London: SCM Press, 2001.
Soelle, Dorothy. The Silent Cry: Mysticism and Resistance. Minneapolis:

FortressPress, 2001.
Soper, Christopher. Evangelical Christianity in the United States and Great

Britain: Religious Beliefs, Political Choices. New Work: New York University
Press, 1994.
Souza, Alexandre C. de. “A Trajetoria da Luta Pelo Poder no Pentecostaiismo:

O Caso da Igreja de Cristo no Brasil.” M. S. S. thesis, Universidade Federal do
Ceara, Fortaleza, Brazil, 1996.
________. Pentecostaiismo: Um Desafio ds Leituras Contempordneas da

Religiosidade Brasileira. Vigosa, MG.: Ultimato, 2004.
Stackhouse, Max. Ethics and the Urban Ethos: An Essay in Social Theory and
Theological Reconstruction. Boston: Beacon Press, 1972.
Steuernagel, Valdir (ed.). A Evangelizagao do Brasil: Uma Tarefa Inacabada.

Sao Paulo, Brazil: ABU, 1985.
Stoll, David. Is Latin America Turning Protestant? The Politics o f Evangelical

Growth. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1990.
Stott, John. Evangelical Truth: A Personal Plea for Unity, Integrity & Faithfulness.
Downers Grove, IL.: Intervarsity Press, 1999.
347
Sung, Jung Mo & Josue C. da Silva. Conversando Sobre Etica e Sociedade.
Petropolis: Vozes, 2002.
Taylor, Mark L. The Executed God: The Way of the Cross in Lockdown America,.
Minneapolis, MN.: Fortress Press, 2001.
Telles, Edward. Racismo a Brasiieira: Uma Nova Perspectiva Socioidgica. Rio de

Janeiro: Relume Damara, 2003.
Tiel, Gerhard. Ecumenismo na Perspectiva do Reino de Deus: Uma Andlise do

Movimento Ecumenico de Base. Sao Leopoldo, RS.: Editora Sinodal, 1998.
Toledo, Caio. “Movimento Estudantil,” Boletim dasACAS 1 (November 1962): 3.
________. “O Que e a UCEB,” Boletim dasACAS 1 (November 1962):1.
Tombs, David. “Latin American Liberation Theology Faces the Future,” in Faith in
the Millennium, ed. Stanley E. Porter, Michael A. Hayes & David Tombs, 32-
58. Sheffield, England: Shaffield Academic Press, 2001.
Troeltsch, Ernst. The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches, vols. I & II.
Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992.
Vasquez, Manuel A. The Brazilian Popular Church and the Crisis o f Modernity.
Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Vial, Jorge Pena. “Levinas y el Olvido del Otro,” Scripta Theologica 28/1(1996):
543-565.
Villafahe, Eldin. El Espiritu Liberador: Hacia una Iztica Sociak Pentecostal

Hispana. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Nueva Criacion, 1996.
Walker, Sheila S. “The Saints and the Orishas in a Brazilian Catholic as an

Expression of the Afro-Brazilian Cultural Synthesis in the Feast of Good
Death.” In African Creative Expressions o f the Divine, ed. Kortright Davis,
Elias Farajaje-Jones, and Iris Eaton, 84-98. Washington: Harvard University
School of Divinity, 1991.
Welker, Michael. “Faith in the Holy Spirit.” In Faith in the Living God: A Dialogue,
ed. John Polkinghorne & Michael Welker, 84-98. London: SPCK, 2001.
West, Cornel. “Prophetic Christian as Organic Intellectual: Martin Luther King,

Jr.,” in The Cornel West Reader, ed. Cornel West, 425-434. New York, NY.:
Basic Civitas Books, 1999.
348
Willems, Emilio. Followers o f the New Faith: Culture Change and the Rise of
Protestantism in Brazil and Chile. Nashville, Tenn.: Vanderbilt University
Press, 1967.
________. “Protestantism and Culture Change in Brazil and Chile.” In Religion,

Revolution and Reform: New Forces for Change in Latin America, ed. William
V. D'Antonio & Frederick B. Pike, 91-108. New York : Praeger, 1964.
Wright, Delora Jan. 0 Coronet Tern um Segredo: Paulo Wright Nao Estci em
Cuba. Petropolis, RJ.: Vozes, 1993.
Wuthnow, Robert & John H. Evans (eds.), The Quiet Hand o f God: Faith-Based
Activism and the Public Role of Mainline Protestantism. Berkeley, CA.:
University of California Press, 2002.
Yamamori, Tetsunao et al. Servindo com os Pobres na Amdrica Latina: Modelos

de Ministerio Integral. Curitiba, PR.: Editora Descoberta, 1998.

Barreto, Raimundo. Facing The Poor in Brazil Tow

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Barreto, Raimundo. Facing The Poor in Brazil Tow

Caricato da

Copyright:

Abstract of

“Facing the Poor in Brazil: Towards an EvangSlico Progressive Social Ethics”

by Raimundo C. Barreto Jr.

Advisor: Mark L. Taylor

Progressive Evang&icos have received little attention from those studying

Brazilian Protestantism. By focusing on this branch of Brazilian Protestantism,

this dissertation intends to contribute to the understanding of the socio-political

relevance of the Evang4lico presence in Brazil.

Progressive Evang6lico Christianity, which combines charismatic spirituality

with socio-political progressive action, offers a valuable approach to Christian

social ethics in contemporary Brazil which may lead to substantive transformation

at both individual and social levels.

I suggest that it is important to look at three specific EvangMco responses to

specific responses to realities of suffering, injustice and oppression in Brazil, and

in ways that are instrumental for the development of a Brazilian progressive

EvangSlico social ethics.

encounter with the poor.

responses and contributions to empower those who are suffering, paying

their face-to-face encounter with the poor.

The work of Richard Shaull is used as an exemplar of the responsible and

conversation with each other. I conclude by presenting some pervasive

development of a Progressive Evang6lico social ethics in Brazil.

FACING THE POOR IN BRAZIL: TOWARDS AN EVANGELICO

PROGRESSIVE SOCIAL ETHICS

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY

OF PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

RAIMUNDO C. BARRETO JR.

PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY

All rights reserved.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION....................................................................... 1

Is There a Brazilian Protestant Social Ethics?...........................................1

The Thesis Stated and Explained.............................................................. 9

Theological and Sociological Perspectives............................................... 12

Significance of this Research to the Field................................................ 18

Method and Organization of the Chapters............................................... 19

CHAPTER TWO: ENCOUNTERING THE POOR FACE-TO-FACE, THE

CONTEXT FOR A BRAZILIAN EVANGELICO SOCIAL ETHICS....................... 33

The Relational Nature of Brazilian Culture................................................ 35

From Individualism to Social Responsibility............................................. 45

An Ethics of Response to the Cry of the Poor.......................................... 50

Moral Responsibility and the Appeal of the Other’s Face........................ 63

From Encounter to Conversion................................................................ 77

CHAPTER THREE: RICHARD SHAULL, INTERFACING THE BRAZILIAN

EVANGELICO RESPONSES TO THE POOR....................................................81

Unity and Diversity in the ‘Faces’ of Brazilian Protestantism................... 81

Richard Shaull as Interface: Why Shaull?.................................................85

An Overview of Shaull’s Theology............................................................ 96

Shaull’s First Conversion............................................................. 102

Shaull’s Second Conversion........................................................ 107

Shaull’s Third Conversion............................................................ 113

New Frontiers of Social Change............................................................. 118

CHAPTER FOUR: THE ECUMENICAL FACE: BRAZILIAN ECUMENICAL

PROTESTANTS MEET THE POOR..................................................................121

The Origins of Brazilian Ecumenical Protestantism: a Brief Sketch 122

The Rise of Latin American Ecumenism................................................ 128

Ecumenism and the Nationalization of Brazilian Protestantism.............135

The Ecumenical Response to Social Injustice in Brazil..........................140

The Confederagao Evangelica do Brasil......................................... 140

The Student Christian Movement.................................................... 145

The Setor de Responsabilidade Social da Igreja.............................159

Ecumenism beyond the Churches......................................................... 170

CHAPTER FIVE: THE EVANGELICAL FACE: PROGRESSIVE EVANGELICAL

RESPONSES TO THE POOR...........................................................................177