TOP ROMERO STORIES OF 2007

As a tribute to Archbishop Romero's prediction that, "If they kill me, I shall arise in the Salvadoran people," here is a recap Romero's presence in El Salvador and elsewhere, during the recently concluded year.

1. Pope Benedict tells the press, "That Romero as a person merits beatification, I have no doubt." Although the statement was later revised and finessed by the Vatican to ensure due deference to the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, Benedict's unedited, off-the-cuff statement reveals that the Church, at its highest echelons, sees Romero much like the rest of the Christian faithful regard him. The Pope also said, that Romero "was certainly a great witness to the faith. He was a man of great Christian virtue, who was committed to peace and against the dictatorship." The significance of the final point has not been commented on, but the Pontiff here acknowledges that the Salvadoran government at the time was a "dictatorship," and that Romero's opposition to it was consistent with "great Christian virtue." More: click here.

2. OAS Controversy: Tutela Legal puts the Salvadoran government to task over El Salvador's lack of compliance with recommendations by the human rights tribunal of the Organization of American States calling for investigation and reparations for Archbishop Romero's assassination. In the October hearing on the matter, the parties revealed that the government had been holding secret negotiations with the Archdiocese of San Salvador over the matter. This revelation lead to a great outcry. Archbishop Sáenz placated the controversy by assuring broad consultations with civil society and not some secret deal. He quietly fired his lawyer, who was not so quiet in his departure. The fallout from the unresolved assassination also pulled the plug on attempts to bestow legislative honors on the man believed to have ordered the murder, with former U.S. Ambassador Robert White urging Salvadorans to demand accountability from the ruling party, founded by the presumed mastermind of the crime. More: click here.

3. Tony Saca and Hugo Chávez agree on one thing -- that Romero deserves to be recognized. The Salvadoran government announced that it would lobby the Vatican for the beatification of Archbishop Romero. Although the move was criticized as a cynical ploy to avoid having to comply with OAS recommendations to investigate and prosecute the case (see story No. 1), it was the first time the Salvadoran state had made a public statement to acknowledge the special place in its history Archbishop Romero holds. It was also, as far as we could tell, the first time ANY government would intervene formally in a canonization case. Not to be outdone, the government of Venezuela hosted a theological conference and opened a website dedicated to Romero. A skeptic there might question why the Chávez regime would care about the Salvadoran cleric, when it has such lousy relations with El Salvador and with the Catholic Church. Or, perhaps there is the intented rub. More: click here and here.

4. Pope Benedict recalls Archbishop Romero during his March 25 "Angelus" prayer. The second time Benedict XVI evoked Archbishop Romero last year was the day after the anniversary of Romero's death. The date -- March 24 -- has been widely adopted by the Church for its commemoration of its "Missionary Martyrs," an off-the-liturgical-calendar-holiday that has spread from Europe to Asia, and many places where it has been taken up with Evangelical zeal. This is literally true, as in modern times, as in the early days of Christianity, "martyrs are the seeds of the Church." The Pope's invocation of Archbishop Romero in St. Peter's Square was the not the first time a pope would cite Archbishop Romero in his official remarks to pilgrims at the Vatican. Pope John Paul did so in 1980, 1981, 1982, and 1996. Pope Benedict's reference was correctly interpreted as a signal that the Vatican continues to hold Romero in very high regard. More: click here.

5. Óscar Romero, ¡presente! -- at the Latin American Bishops' Conference in Aparecida. Although the bickering Salvadoran bishops did not elect Archbishop Romero to attend the CELAM conference in 1979, Archbishop Romero's presence has been felt at every gathering of the continent's bishops since Puebla. At the May meeting in Brazil, Romero was cited by none other than his successor, the retiring Archbishop Sáenz. Other bishops also brought up Romero, and even took up a furtive bid to have Romero mentioned in the final document. Msgr. Jesús Delgado and other members of the Salvadoran delegation also kept Romero's name in the air in the hallways of Aparecida. Although there was no dramatic acclamation, the conference that began with the press reporting the Pope's belief that Romero "merits beatification" (see story No. 1), appeared to ratify much of Romero's pastoral approach, in light of the social doctrine of the Church and its "preferential option for the poor." More: click here and here.

6. British Catholics launch the Archbishop Romero Trust. Dedicated by the Catholics, Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, and Anglican Archbishops Rowan Williams and John Sentamu, the Trust was established "to promote knowledge and awareness of the life and work of Archbishop Romero, to commemorate the anniversary of his death annually, and to provide support to human rights and justice initiatives in Latin America." In March, London became the second major European capital where Romero's martyrdom will be formally commemorated with an annual mass (it is already commemorated in Rome by Catholic charities activists like the Londoners involved in the Trust). The Trust also produced an audio report that was aired on Vatican Radio. More: click here and here.

7. High ranking Church officials have continued to praise Archbishop Romero's saintly qualities. In February, this blog named "Doce Cardenales Simpatizantes" -- "Twelve Sympathetic Cardinals," who had endorsed Archbishop Romero's canonization cause or recognized his martyrdom. The list was based on published materials and may not include ALL the cardinals with such beliefs but, nonetheless, the group would represent a significant group in the College of Cardinals. Leading clerics continued to join the litany of the sainthood supporters. Archbishop Paolo Romeo of Palermo stated that "`hatred of the faith' (the legal requirement for martyrdom) was obvious" in Romero's beatification cause. Even across denominational divides, the Archbishop of York John Sentamu quoted Romero in his homilies and took to wearing a Salvadoran cross (see also story No. 6). More: click here and here.

8. Archbishop Romero's name continued to be synonymous with heroic acts of conscience in awards set up in his name. Shanti Sellz and Daniel Strauss and the immigration activist group No More Deaths took the prestigious Oscar Romero Award for Human Rights awarded by the Houston-based Rothko Chapel, a church that advocates for human rights. Previous recipients include Sister Diana Ortiz, the American nun who was tortured in Guatemala. At Boston College in Massachussets, Genoveva Abreu was named as the Oscar Romero Scholarship recipient. For several years running, BC has been awarding the Romero Scholarship to students who demonstrate altruistic merit by their community service or interest in human rights. At long last, an "Oscar" we can all strive to win? More: click here and here.

9. British expert to preserve Romero vestments. From now on, the vestments that Archbishop Romero was wearing on March 24, 1980, when an assassin's bullet cut him down at the altar, will no longer hang in a common clotheshanger in a glass case. Instead, the relics will be displayed in a way that exhibits the precious garments to the faithful AND preserves their integrity for generations to come. Jan Graffius, a preservation expert from Stonyhurst College in England, came down to San Salvador as part of the outreach of the newly formed Romero Trust (see also story No. 6). "Handling and examining these vestments was an emotional experience and a great responsibility," said Ms. Graffius. "If, as is expected, Monseñor Romero is beatified in the near future, the hospital will become an even more important centre of pilgrimage than it is at present." More: click here.

10. New 'martyrology' of Salvadoran Church. The Salvadoran Church published a new softcover volume (in Spanish) entitled "Testigos de la Fe en El Salvador" ("Witnesses of the Faith in El Salvador"), featuring the stories of ten priests killed in El Salvador and Archbishop Romero. The book, published extra-officially by a group of priests and distributed through all the parishes, is in part a response to John Paul II's Jubilee call to memorialize local martyrs, whether or not they have been recognized by officialdom. John Paul himself led a ceremony in the Colosseum in Rome (site of ancient persecutions) in the year 2000 in which Archbishop Romero was memorialized, together with all the "witnesses of the faith" of the 20th century. More: click here.

HAY QUE HABLAR DE JUSTICIA ANTES DE SANTIDAD

Desde su establecimiento en mayo del 2006, este blog ha estado textualmente dedicado a promover y dar seguimiento a la causa de canonización de Monseñor Romero. Este ha sido un emprendimiento exclusivo a favor de la causa establecida en los procedimientos internos de la Iglesia Católica Romana para declarar oficialmente a Mons. Romero como un santo. Pero, trás una profundización muy fundamental sobre el caso y los hechos, estamos cambiando un poco el enfoque para dar énfasis a los procesos legales del mundo seglar, las investigaciones a fondo del crímen político, del asesinato desde una perspectiva humana y terrenal que de frutos en la buzqueda de verdad, justicia, paz y reconciliación, especialmente en la esfera del pueblo de El Salvador. Ese proceso ha entrado a una etapa mucho más aguda, especialmente a raíz de los hechos tocantes al caso Romero ante la Corte Internacional de Derechos Humanos de la Organización de Estados Americanos. Este ente ha estado investigando el caso Romero desde 1993 y finalmente se ha llegado el momento en que el gobierno salvadoreño por primera vez digne oportuno responder a las aseveraciones de las partes actoras en el caso. Existe mucha controversia en la etapa actual sobre varios temas pertinentes, pero lo importante es que estos procesos se desarrollen de manera conveniente para hacer justicia y buzcar la verdad.

Desde un sentido más profundo, es importante asegurar que los procesos de canonización no se usen de manera pretextual, para postergar la justicia en el mundo actual. Es muy importante que Mons. Romero sea reconocido santo, más que todo para hacer realidad la oración que Cristo nos mandó a rezar: "hágase tu voluntad así en la tierra como en los cielos." No cabe duda que Mons. Romero es santo en el reino celestial, y por eso es muy conveniente reflejar esa realidad en la iglesia terrenal. Sin embargo, Mons. Romero sería el primero en llamarnos a no mistificar los procesos sagrados de la iglesia, tergiversandolos para hacer ocultar las responsabilidades éticas y morales que se deben cumplier acá en la tierra antes de llegar al altar, a menos que el Padre Celestial nos obligue, como a Moisés, a quitarnos las sandalias antes de plantar nuestros pies en el suelo de la santidad. Es un hecho de que nunca se ha cumplido el deber de hacer justicia en el caso Mons. Romero, y es igüalmente un hecho de que la apertura actual en el caso CIDH nos presenta una oportunidad. Cabe mentar que esclarecer los hechos jurídicamente en los casos legales sería un gran aporte a los elementos más agudos en el proceso eclesial, para establecer los elementos necesarios para el decreto de martirio que se buzca obtener.

Por eso, nos resulta conveniente por el momento cambiar un poco el enfoque, de los procesos canónicos a los procesos jurídicos de Monseñor Romero. Hagamos, Señor, tu voluntad de que impere la justicia y la verdad, antes de pretender formalizar la correspondencia entre el cielo y la tierra con un decreto de canonización, cuando estemos en alguna situación de desacato en nuestra responsabilidad.

STATE RESPONSIBILITY AND CANONIZATION

No one accuses Fernando Sáenz of doing things that will benefit Salvadoran society at the expense of ecclesial concerns. In fact, just the opposite is true: the Archbishop of San Salvador is often seen pleading with supporters of his assassinated predecessor Óscar Romero, to give emphasis to ritual and sacramental aspects of the canonization process, at the expense of more urgent worldly calls for continued denunciations and social criticism that may be warranted by the moment. Sáenz is fond of calling for Romero's memory not to be "politicized" by association with current day protests and political issues of the day, and of calling instead for people to pray for miracles in Romero's name and report positive results to the canonization office. Consider then Sáenz' latest endeavor -- a quiet negotiation with the government to have the state admit its role in the Romero assassination.

In typical form, Sáenz bristled at the insinuation of stealth in his conversations with the government. "There are no secrets in the dialogue," Sáenz insisted, seeing no hint of insconsistency as he added, "it is simply a meeting for which, while there are no agreements, it is better to maintain a prudential silence until we have results." He also declined to identify the members of two commissions formed to lead the dialogue, when their sessions are scheduled or held, the topics for discussion, or the number of meetings intended. Sáenz assured reporters that his goals in the "negotiations" are to obtain the concessions demanded by human rights activists and governmnet critics across the board: "we are looking for a way that the state's responsibility is acknowledged." Sáenz recognized that the talks are geared to searching for ways to undergird a "true peace." Tellingly, Sáenz did not explain how obtaining an admission from the government regarding state responsibility for the Romero assassination would aid the canonization cause pending in Rome.

At first glance, it would appear to complicate matters. The key element in the Romero case is the prong of analysis known by its Latin term, ODIUM FIDEI, or "hatred of the faith," which canon law requires must be the motive in fact of a martyr's persecutor. Lacking that motive, there can be no martyrdom. The sticking point in the Romero case has been the fact that anti-religious motives have commingled with purely political or tactical motives, and the censors and relators of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints have had a difficult time finding a purely anti-religious motive when both the actors and the victim were ostensibly Christians, and even Catholics. Saying that the state is the author of the crime muddies the analysis even further because of the conceptual stumbling block that a state possesses no mind, and the practical obstacle of identifying the "motives" behind an institutional decision. Anyone who has ever done legislative intent research will be familiar with the problems involved. However, the law provides ready solutions to these problems in the concepts of agency law and imputed or attributed intent (corporate or institutional mindset, such as "mens rea" and intent, can be inferred from the actions of individuals who posses either knowledge or intent). Therefore, any confusion introduced by state responsibility could be easily overcome. However, state responsibility adds very little to the "odium fidei" analysis (possibly, it allows some flexibility since you can attribute intent based on actions and beliefs done or held by different people). One can conclude that Sáenz is pursuing an objective which helps Salvadoran society as a whole -- the search for the truth, closure, the fulfillment of the terms of the Peace Accords, etc. -- that does not necessarily further a strict ecclesiastic aim.

MONS. ROMERO Y SAN JUAN CRISÓSTOMO

«Sólo El Salvador será fermentado en la vida divina, en el reino de Dios, si de verdad los cristianos de El Salvador se proponen a no vivir una fe tan lánguida, una fe tan miedosa, una fe tan tímida; sino que de verdad como decía aquel santo -creo que San Juan Crisóstomo-: "Cuando comulgas, recibes fuego; debías de salir respirando la alegría, la fortaleza de transformar el mundo".»

--Mons. Romero, Homilía del 28 de mayo de 1978

En sus reflexiones en su audiencia general del 26 septiembre de 2007, Su Santidad el Papa Benedicto XVI profundizó sobre el legado de san Juan Crisóstomo (347-407 a.D.), proclamado patrón del Concilio Vaticano II por el Beato Juan XXIII, como un padre de la Doctrina Social de la Iglesia. El Papa Benedicto explicó como este santo se encontró en su día involucrado en «intrigas políticas», castigado por las autoridades eclesiales por sus enfrentamientos con la emperatriz y los poderosos de su era. Una parte de la Iglesia acusaba a san Juan Crisóstomo y otra parte, que incluía al papa de su día, lo favorecía, pero no tenía la fuerza para ayudarle. Despues de su muerte, pasaron 31 años antes que la memoria de este obispo de Constantinopla fuera restaurada y su nombre vindicado. Benedicto constató las obras de San Juan por los pobres, en seguida añadiendo que «Crisóstomo comprendió que no es suficiente hacer limosna, ayudar a los pobres de vez en cuando, sino que es necesario crear una nueva estructura, un nuevo modelo de sociedad; un modelo basado en la perspectiva del Nuevo Testamento». Los paralelos con la historia de Mons. Romero, de un obispo comprometido con el Evangelio hasta sus últimas consequencias, que queda mal con los poderosos y aboga por los pobres, son tantos que vale la pena comentar algunos detalles.

En la teología de Crisóstomo, explica el Santo Padre, «la vieja idea de la "polis" griega es sustituida por una nueva idea de ciudad inspirada en la fe cristiana». Esto nos hace recordar que en su discurso en Universidad de Lovaina, tanto como en su homilía del 17 de febrero de 1980, Mons. Romero profundiza que, «En su origen política es de "polis", que quiere decir: Ciudad. Los pobres nos dicen qué es la "polis", qué es la ciudad, y qué significa para la Iglesia vivir realmente en el mundo, en la "polis", en la ciudad.» Según lo expone el papa, San Juan Crisóstomo tambien definió la "polis" desde la perspectiva de los pobres, ya que insistió en que ellos fuesen incluidos en su alcanze, mientras que las definiciones griegas de la misma palabra excluían a los pobres y a los esclavos. Así mismo, en la teología de San Juan Crisóstomo, «la vieja idea de la "polis" griega es sustituida por una nueva idea de ciudad inspirada en la fe cristiana».

Crisóstomo defendió, nos dice el gran maestro vaticano, «el primado de cada ... persona en cuanto tal, incluso del esclavo y del pobre». Este «primado de la persona» de San Juan Crisóstomo es lo mismo de lo que nos hablaba Mons. Romero cuando predicaba en su homilía del 2 de marzo de 1980 que:

A la Iglesia no le importa más que el hombre. El hombre, el hijo de Dios; y por eso le duele encontrar cadáveres de hombres, torturas a hombres, sufrimiento de hombres. Para la Iglesia, la meta de todos los proyectos tiene que ser éste de Dios: el hijo, el hombre. Todo hombre es hijo de Dios y en cada hombre matado es un cristo sacrificado que la Iglesia también venera.

El «primado de la persona» o «primado del hombre», continua Benedicto, «nos dice que nuestra "polis" es otra, "nuestra patria está en los cielos" y esta patria nuestra, incluso en esta tierra, nos hace a todos iguales, hermanos y hermanas, y nos obliga a la solidaridad». Y en la prédica de Mons. Romero encontramos la misma idea:

El cristiano es habitante de la eternidad, que va peregrinando en esta tierra, trabajándola, porque le tiene que dar cuenta a Dios, pero que su patria definitiva es allá dónde Cristo vive para siempre, y donde seremos felices con él, con el gran liberado, los pueblos liberados; los hombres liberados serán aquellos que han hecho suya ésta que San Pablo llama "la energía que posee todo para someterlo todo a Cristo". (Ibidem.)

San Juan Crisóstomo y Mons. Romero, ¡rogad por nosotros! +

ROMERO FOR YOM KIPPUR

Perhaps there is no more fitting way for us to pay our respects to the Jewish Day of Atonement, than to reflect on the Hebrew prophets' influence on Oscar Romero's theology and preaching. Yom Kippur is celebrated this year on Saturday September 22. The feast commemorates the episode related in the Book of Exodus wherein the Isrealites built a shrine to a golden calf in honor of the Apis bull, thereby engaging in idolatry. After the crisis was mediated by Moses, it was engrained in the annals of Jewish history as the "Chet ha'Egel" or "The Sin of the Calf."

In his sermon of February 24, 1980 -- given exactly one month before his martyrdom -- Archbishop Romero states that, "one of the services that the Church is providing today is to unmask idolatries: the idolatry of money, the idolatry of power, the pretense to keep men on their knees before those false gods." In this perspective, Archbishop Romero was powerfully driven by the prophets of the Hebrew Bible. The previous Sunday, March 17, Romero had preached: "How awesome are the prophets when they denounce those who annex house to house and conjoin property with property and become the owners of the entire country!" The clear reference to Isaiah 5:8 reveals the Scriptural underpinnings of a man who has been himself called a "modern prophet," who heard in the voice of Christ preaching the Beatitudes, "the accent of the prophets of the Old Testament." (March 17 Sermon.)

Romero explained the pertinancy of the Old Hebrew texts to 20th Century El Salvador:

The impovireshed majorities of our country find the voice of the prophets of Israel in our Church. There are those among us who sell the just for money and the poor for a pair of sandals, as stated by the prophets (Amos 2:6-7,8). Those who stack violence and deprivation in their palaces, those who squash the poor, those who make a reign of violence approach while they lie in marble beds, those who join house to house and annex field to field in order to occupy the entire place and have the country all to themselves. These texts of the prophets are not distant voices that we read reverently in our liturgy, they are the daily realities whose cruelty and intensity we live day to day.

In fashioning his responses to these "daily realities," Archbishop Romero drew on Jeremiah, Isaiah, Hosea, Amos and Micah as much as he drew on the Second Vatican Council and the social teaching of the Popes. The legacy of the Hebrew prophets over Archbishop Romero is made manifest today in the instinctive attraction that Romero's ministry has for the delegations of American Jewish World Service students who have made Ciudad Romero a mecca for exploring their relationship between Judaism and the developing world.

An expert in the Old Testament said a few days after Archbishop Romero's assassination that Biblical Israel had eight great prophets and that, in our days, Archbishop Romero would be one of them. On this Yom Kippur/Day of Atonement, we meditate upon Archbishop Romero's fidelity to the Hebrew prophets:

It is wise to read the Old Testament, to read, above all, the prophets and to hear in the tenor of the prophets the severe reprimands, the calls to order that the prophets made, even to the kings, to the rulers, to the wealthy, to those who abused and who trampled their people. 'You are the cause of God's breaking His alliance with this nation,' the prophets said to them, and they called to repentance. 'Convert, renew yourselves." (Jan. 1, 1978 Sermon.)

Romero believed that Christ's mission resumed that call to repentance and reconciliation, and that his ministry was the echo of that call to repentance: "Convert yourselves, be faithful to the alliance of your Baptism, be faithful to your Lord!" (Id.).

THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK

In a brazen move that illustrates the danger of political manipulation of the Romero image, the Hugo Chavez regime in Venezuela announced a new website about Archbishop Romero and sponsored a Liberation Theology seminar in Caracas on the occasion of Romero's 90th birthday in which participants triumphantly declared that Romero was a "liberation theologian" and that socialism and liberation theology, alone, were the viable alternatives to gain social justice in Latin America. These developments followed the announcement last month that El Salvador's ARENA government, whose ruling party was established by the man signaled as the intellectual author of the Romero assassination, would officially back the Romero canonization drive. Both gambits demonstrate how political actors have exploited a perceived void in ownership of the Romero brand for self-serving purposes, given the lack of action on the ecclesiastic front along those lines.

A much-circulated AP story by Nicole Winfield, timed to coincide with the 90th anniversary of Romero's birth this past week alleges that, "The campaign to make him a Roman Catholic saint appears to be languishing." Winfield does not point to any specific setbacks or identifiable obstacles that were not already known, and would justify such analysis. In fact, Winfield acknowledges various incremental gains, such as the record-correcting Morozzo della Rocca biography, and Pope Benedict's astonishing remark that "Romero as a person merits beatification." Winfield's depiction of church paralysis before the controversy surrounding Romero and, more specifically, the complexities of the analyses of the political as opposed to purely theological ramifications of his martyrdom, however, does describe the reality perceived by political actors who appear to conclude that the Church has foresaken Romero, and that he is up for grabs (in very simplified terms).

On the one hand, of course the Church is right to stay out of partisan rows over the purely political implications of Romero's ministry, and there is even perhaps some benefit in having the extremists on both ends of the political spectrum fight over the scraps of Romero's legacy that they like, so that they will benefit from the edification of being exposed to Romero's message and perhaps find in it enough traces of the Gospel and the Magisterium as to be made better for it. On the other hand, the danger that they will corrupt and defile the figure and message of Romero seems all too great to leave it to chance. When Bishop Vincenzo Paglia first received the appointment of postulator of Romero's cause, he immediately reported to John Paul II, after having reviewed Romero's orthodoxy, "Romero is ours!" However, ownership is extrinsically linked to possession, and where an owner relinquishes possession, he eventually relinquishes right if another interposes a claim and too much times passes in between.

EL SALV. SUMA SU APOYO A LA BEATIFICACIÓN

El estado salvadoreño se ha comprometido a prestar una intervención ante la Santa Sede para pedir la beatificación de su más destacado hijo, Mons. Oscar A. Romero. Desde varias perspectivas, el anuncio constituye algo excepcional. Es la primera vez que el gobierno de El Salvador se pronuncia oficialmente sobre la causa de canonización de Mons. Romero. Es raro el caso en que un gobierno intervenga de manera oficial en una causa de canonización.

Desgraciadamente, el anuncio por parte del gobierno, hecho despues de un encuentro con Tutela Legal del Arzobispado de San Salvador y el Centro de Justicia y el Derecho Internacional, ha sido percibido como una maniobra cínica por el estado, ya que ofreció su anuncio sobre la beatificación en lugar de lo que estos organismos le pedían: la derroga de la amnistía que prohibe enjuiciar a los sospechados del magnicidio de Romero, y la aceptación por el estado de su parte en el asesinato. Ciertamente la propuesta del gobierno es especiosa y vacía por tres razones. En primer lugar, el gobierno pretende dar, en substitución de algo justificado y necesario en si mismo, otra cosa que tambien lo es. No se puede substituir la justicia para Mons. Romero con la santidad para Mons. Romero porque las dos causas son obligadas, y no es ninguna "concesión" ceder a una de las dos cosas. En segundo lugar, la intervención que el gobierno ofrece viene sumamente tardía, hasta el punto de ser inútil y de nada necesaria. Ya Mons. Romero está en una etapa avanzada de su proceso, y no por la ayuda del estado salvadoreño ha llegado a tener la estatura de heroe espiritual a nivel internacional que lo impulsa hacia la beatificación. Finalmente, el anuncio del gobierno salvadoreño incluye varias contradiciones en su argumento, inclusive que no se puede investigar porque existe una amnistía, que no se puede aceptar responsabilidad porque ya se investigó (aunque la amnistía no permite investigar), y que no se puede quitar la amnistía porque hay que ser responsable (aunque se rechaza la responsabilidad de la actuación del estado).

Es evidente que el gobierno no se adhiere a la ley de no usar para fines políticos la figura de Romero con que constantemente acusa a la oposición, porque cuando le conviene usar la figura de Romero para salir de un aprieto, lo hace con abandono singular. Pero lo que nos interesa analizar en esta conexión es si esta intervención podría hasta dañar la causa de beatificación. El peligro viene desde el hecho de que una causa de martirio se basa en la teoría de que el mártir fue asesinado por un victimario que actua en odio a la fe cristiana de la víctima (el famoso ODIUM FIDEI). Sin embargo, si el victimario se está sumando a los promotores de la causa, ¿no puede esto interferir con la teoría del ODIUM? Aunque es interesante la noción, la respuesta está bien clara: no hace estorbo. Al mismo Jesús despues de haber sido crucificado le reconocieron sus asesinos, "Este verdaderamente era el Hijo de Dios," y no deja de ser su sacrificio un acto divino con un significado teológico monumental. De hecho, el único daño que se percibe en esta conexión es la posible contaminación que semejante maniobra política de un gobierno tenga sobre el resultado de una causa de canonización: que digan que fue beatificado como resultado de las políticas sucias de un gobierno sin sentido de la santidad.

El análisis final puede ser este. Aunque hay riesgo de manchar la pureza del proceso, la promesa del gobierno puede hacer un bien. Hay que ser optimista y tener fe, y es posible que gente decente en el gobierno y entre los salvadoreños tomen el respaldo del gobierno con un sentido de autenticidad, y que esto ayude a la reconciliación (usando la palabra en el sentido espiritual, que conlleva el sentido de arrepentimiento y de perdón). Principalmente, el aporte que esta decisión daría al proceso es quitar el pretexto de que la beatificación sería polémica, o rechazada por el sector conservador, ya que ellos son los que están en el gobierno. Tambien hay que aceptar el progreso aún cuando sea lento y reconocer que por lo menos ya no se está calumniando a Mons. Romero como un agitador a la violencia, ni a sus seguidores como devotos de una causa ilegítima como se hacía hasta hace poco. Hay que reconocer este progreso, y no dejar de pedir más.

RATZINGER & ROMERO

Marveling on the theological insight of Pope Benedict's new book, "Jesus of Nazareth," the leading papal biographer George Weigel asks, «When was the last time you heard a sermon in which [the Beatitudes] were described as 'a sort of veiled interior biography of Jesus, a kind of portrait of his figure'-- and thus 'a roadmap for the Church, a model of what she herself should be'?» Mystified by the unusual slant given to familiar Biblical stories by the stellar theologian-pope, the author goes on to query, «How many preachers explain [the stories of Jesus’s temptations in the desert] as dramatic variations on the perennial human temptation to utopianism, to a self-sufficiency that 'pushes God off the stage'?» (George Weigel, NEWSWEEK, May 21, 2007 issue, "A Jesus Beyond Politics, Pope Benedict becomes the teacher he always wanted to be.")

Archbishop Oscar Romero made exactly those observations in two consecutive sermons in February 1980, in the final run-up of homilies that would lead to his March 24, 1980 assassination. It is perhaps no wonder then that, an audit of Archbishop Romero's preaching conducted by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger found no fault in Romero's theology and concluded that, «Romero was not a revolutionary bishop, but a man of the Church, of the Gospel, and of the Poor.» (ANSA News Service, March 15, 2005.) Speaking over the Sahara desert during the flight to Brazil to open the V General Synod of the Latin American Bishops' Conference, Pope Benedict remarked that Romero «was certainly a great witness to the faith. He was a man of great Christian virtue, who was committed to peace and against the dictatorship.» The Pope noted that, «He was killed during the moment of consecration,» and that his death was therefore, «a testimony to the faith.» The Pope concluded, «That Romero as a person merits beatification, I have no doubt,» and that he was awaiting the final report from the Congregation for the Causes of Saints. (See Transcript, http://ncrcafe.org/node/1081 )

Weigel notes that in analyzing the Sermon on the Mount, «Benedict XVI unpacks the New Testament with the help of his profound knowledge of the Hebrew Bible.» In his February 17, 1980 Sermon, Romero took his listeners through each of the Beatitudes, leading into one by saying, «Take note of the moment in which Christ teaches this Beatitude so that we can see its reach. Let us not tear it out of the context of the history of Israel.» Romero then goes on to encapsulate the entire history of Israel from Abraham to Moses to the Roman occupation in a whirlwind two-minute capsule summary to hightlight the "context." Weigel continues to explicate the Pope's analysis: «Why is it the meek to whom the Beatitudes promise the inheritance of 'the land'? Because, explains Ratzinger, drawing on the imagery of the Exodus, 'the land was given [to the people of Israel] as a space for obedience, a realm of openness to God that was to be freed from the abomination of idolatry'.» In Feb. 1980, Romero talked about the relationship of the land to God's promises to Israel, and like Joseph Ratzinger, he also spoke in terms of 'idolatry:' «That is why Jesus preached with such enthusiasm, 'Happy are you the poor, because yours is the Kingdom of God! You are the best prepared to understand what is not understood by those who kneel before the false idols and trust in them. You who do not have those idols, you who do not trust because you do not have money or power, you who are disenfranchised of everything, the poorer you are, the more you are the owners of the Kingdom of God!»

Weigel writes that, «amidst some familiar Ratzingerian themes, there is a new chord struck with particular force, it is Benedict XVI’s insistence, repeated several times, that a Christian Church faithful to its Lord cannot be a Church of power ... For the fusion of faith and political power always comes at a price: faith becomes the servant of power and must bend to its criteria.» Similarly, Romero concluded in his February 17, 1980 sermon: «That is why, brothers and sisters, it is no prestige for the Church to be in good stead with the powerful. This is the prestige of the Church: to feel that the poor feel it as theirs, knowing that the Church lives a dimension on the earth calling everyone, including the rich, to convert and be saved, from the world of the poor, because they are the only ones who are Blessed.»

That point is further emphasized in an analysis of Jesus' temptations in the desert. In his book, Pope Benedict likens Satans' temptations of Jesus to the «perennial human temptation to utopianism.» In his next Sunday sermon, given on February 24, 1980 -- exactly one month before his martyrdom -- Archbishop Romero compared the temptation to turn bread to stones to political solutions that seek facile or immediate solutions of complex problems, «like so many politicians who only wish to have everything taken care of and who demand even what is impossible. These infantile demands are very much like the temptation of the Devil: to want to turn stones to bread and thus get out of hunger.» In a stinging after-touch, Romero tacks on the temptation to resort to artificial contraception as a way to combat world hunger: «to deprive men from coming into being alive» instead of preparing the banquet of life «so that there is enough bread for everyone.» Weigel concludes that Pope Benedict sees in the temptations an invitation to accept «the murderous depredations of those twentieth-century totalitarians who made ultramundane gods out of themselves,» a danger that Romero obviously recognized also.

A STANDARD OF 'ORTHOPRAXY'

The 27th anniversary of Archbishop Romero's martyrdom saw a flurry of public statements regarding the status of the canonization cause made to the Spanish language and Salvadoran press. Among the most interesting revelations are the statements by Msgr. Rafael Urrutia and Archbishop Fernando Saenz in San Salvador. According to their statements, in November 2006, the Vatican informed the San Salvador archdiocese that the after the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) reviewed and cleared Romero's orthodoxy ("right thought") in 2001-2004, it would retain Romero's file for an analysis of his orthopraxy ("right action"). Therefore, the canonization process is not moving forward in the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, but remains detoured in the CDF. Urrutia revealed that, at that time, the Vatican even proposed that Romero's cause be modified from one premised on martyrdom to a traditional sainthood cause based on spiritual virtues -- hinting at the level of difficulty in proving Romero's status as a martyr.

The unprecedented scrutiny of Romero's orthopraxy, Urrutia revealed, would center on Romero's pastoral actions as archbishop, as these are revealed in his sermons and diaries -- which have already been combed through for doctrinal error and found to be theologically sound. In a December 2006 letter from Fr. Jon Sobrino to Fr. Peter-Hans Kolvenbach, the Jesuit Superior General, Fr. Sobrino reveals that the inquest that led to a recent CDF notification against two of Sobrino's books also raised suspicion against Romero, and Sobrino indicates that one of the clerics instigating suspicion of Romero is the Colombian cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, the retired prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy who led a campaign against Liberation Theology from the Latin American Bishops' Conference beginning in the 1970s. Previous reports had pointed to "Latin American cardinals" as the source of obstacles against Romero's sainthood. Nevertheless, the sainthood cause caught a break from an unexpected source when Pope Benedict XVI cited Romero in his March 25 Angelus greeting, lauding the "Yes" of Virgin Mary and the martyrs to Christs' call to sacrifice.

If Archbishop Romero, whose writing and preaching has been cleared of doctrinal error, is examined again for error in his pastoral action, one wonders what standard of review is employed by the Vatican commissions studying the matter. A logic of fairness would suggest that, where someone has already been found to be a right-thinker (orthodox), the presumption of right-action (orthopraxy) would automatically attach, unless demonstrated otherwise. In other words, the theological censors ought not go in with a fine tooth comb looking for the slightest hint of 'not-right' action, but they should presume that someone who is a good Christian and adheres to the tenets of the Faith, will also dutifully carry them out, and not shirk them in the execution. Stated differently, a Servant of God who has passed one study by the CDF should be accorded more deference in subsequent investigations, particularly, where logic would dictate, as here, that the clean bill of health on one theological factor would also result in a positive result in a derivative and related area (as are thought and action).

In other judicial processes (canon law being, after all, a legal process), tribunals adopt "standards of review" appropriate to different types of situations. For example, appellate courts give some deference to trial courts in certain matters, such as a trial court's fact-finding function. The appeals court realizes that it has limited ability to re-conduct a trial and will examine the lower court's decision making and legal analysis, but not its basic factual investigation. That premise has some carry-over value where theological scholars are reviewing a Church pastor's action. It is unfair to conduct a full-hindsight review, for example, that does not give due consideration to the pressures and constraints with which a pastor, in a situation of repression and political instability, would have faced acting in the pressure cooker of real time, and not in the contemplative luxury after the fact. The Church is very sensitive, for example, about criticisms against the actions of Pope Pius XII regarding the Holocaust, for many of the same reasons. Moreover, there is a theological factor to be accounted for, which is that a pastor, especially a bishop, is not just an official to be second-guessed: he was put there by Providence, and by the holy process of Apostolic Succession. An archbishop who is also primate of his countrymen, during a national tribulation, must also be presumed to have been put there by God for a reason, and not forsaken by the Holy Spirit in his decisions.

In sum, the approach should not be tantamount to "de novo" review: "Would we, the theological scholars sitting around in the Vatican archives in 2007, be taking this action?" -- but, instead, "Is Brother Romero, in the crossfires of rightwing assassins, burying hundreds of peasants every week in a cataclysm of social injustice, entitled to deference in his pastoral action unless he strays so decisively from his stated principles that he abuses the discretion that would reasonably be accorded to him under the circumstances?" Let us pray that the guardians of the Faith adhere strictly to this tenet of fairness.

THE SOBRINO FLAP

Last week's landmark "Notification" by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) regarding Jesuit theologian Jon Sobrino, a leading proponent of Liberation Theology closely allied with Archbishop Romero, has raised questions of whether the Vatican censure will affect the progress of Romero's beatification. In a December 13, 2006 letter to the Jesuit Superior General, Father Peter Hans Kolvenbach, published on the Internet, Sobrino wrote: "I know quite well that my possible influence in his writings and homilies has been a problem for his canonization in the Vatican." Sobrino goes on to detail that he has drafted and signed a 20 page explanation. Sobrino first responded to Vatican objections regarding his theology in March 2005, the same month that Bishop Vincenzo Paglia, the postulator of Archbishop Romero's beatification cause, first announced that beatification was imminent, possibly occurring within six months to a year. By fall 2005, those rosy expectations were quashed, and it seems possible that the Sobrino flap was the cause of the derailment.

If that were true, that result would be most unfortunate. Perhaps a key document to the recovery and clarification of Archbishop Romero's theology as being free from the narrow, methodological errors attributed to Sobrino, is a sermon Romero delivered on August 5, 1976, in which, half a year before being named Archbishop, Romero criticized precisely the types of theological shortcomings in Sobrino's scholarship that are complained of in the Vatican's "Notification." Fr. James Brockman recounts the episode in his Romero biography:

Romero preached the homily at the pontifical mass [for the Feast of the Transfiguration, El Salvador's national patronal feast] ... He spoke of the doctrine of the human and divine natures of Christ, defined by Council of Chalcedon in 451, and proceeded to make a swinging attack on "so-called new Christologies." Jon Sobrino, director of the Center for Theological Reflection at the Central America University had just published a book on Christology and took Romero's words as an attack on his work... Romero spoke of Christ as liberator, but most of his words were a warning about merely temporal liberation ... He attacks the new theology because it seems to him to threaten the church's teaching and belief in the divinity of Christ.

"The Word Remains: A Life of Oscar Romero," Orbis Books, 1982, 1989, 1999.

Father Brockman's description seems astonishing, in light of last week's "Notification" because it goes to the heart of the subject matter of concern to the CDF, including the divinity of Jesus and the correct construction of the early councils (both matters specifically referred to in the "Notification"). Brockman goes on to acknowledge, as Fr. Sobrino does in his Dec. 2006 letter, that Sobrino collaborated with Romero in two of Romero's works: his second pastoral letter, and his speech at Leuven University. Brockman indicates that Romero heavily revised the first, and accepted the latter. If Romero's revisions were made consistent with his 1976 speech, Romero's treatment of Sobrino would be in step with the Church's -- calling attention, but not excluding -- and it would appear that the CDF and the Congregation for the Causes of Saints should be able to come to an expeditious resolution (assuming they have identified the right pieces of the puzzle).

DOCE CARDENALES SIMPATIZANTES

Son los príncipes de la Iglesia Romana. Cada uno de ellos puede ser el próximo papa. Todos son hombres sobresalientes en la sociedad, la política y la cultura, y llevan importantes cargos en la organización más grande del mundo. Pero, además de ser miembros del colegio cardenalicio, los siguientes purpurados son simpatizantes abiertos de la causa de canonización de Mons. Romero. Esto es importante, ya que muchas veces se reporta la "oposición jerárquica" a la beatificación de Romero -- frequentemente, sin identificar a los que supuestamente se oponen -- y estos ejemplos sirven para comprobar que la jerarquía está acogiendo el legado de este futuro santo. Y no son personajes obscuros, desconocidos, sino que los jerarcas principales de ciudades principales, como Londres, París, y Los Ángeles.

1. RODRÍGUEZ de Tegucigalpa (Honduras). El Cardenal Óscar Andrés Rodríguez Maradiaga puede ser uno de los más grandes admiradores de Mons. Romero en la Iglesia. En un discurso en la Universidad de Notre Dame lo calificó como el obispo modelo para el nuevo mileneo, y divulgó que había dedicado su cardinalicio a varios pastores que admiraba, incluyendo Romero. Considera a Romero el mártir más querido del siglo XX, y también escribió un discurso para conmemorar el XXV aniversario del asesinato.

2. MARTINI de Milán (Italia). El Cardenal Carlo Maria Martini, igual que el Cardenal Rodríguez, fue considerado posible sucesor al papa Juan Pablo II. Retado a identificar los tres cardenales más influyentes, mencionó a Óscar Romero, porque aunque nunca fué nombrado cardenal formalmente, dijo que lo considera cardenal por la escarlata de su sangre derramada. El sucesor de Pablo VI como arzobispo de Milán tambien tuvo escritos en que habla muy ciertamene sobre el "martirio" de Mons. Romero.

3. MAHONY de Los Ángeles, Calif. (Estados Unidos). El Cardenal Rogelio M. Mahony viajó a El Salvador en marzo del 2000 para celebrar una misa al aire libre en la Plaza de las Américas, en que enfatizó que Mons. Romero fue un auténtico pastor de la Iglesia. Además, Mahony tiene una foto de Mons. Romero en su despacho, y se dice que el purpurado encuentra inspiración en el ejemplo de Romero para tratar temas sociales en su arzobispado, incluso en el ámbito de la política de migración de los Estados Unidos.

4. ETCHEGARAY de París (Francia). El Cardenal Roger Marie Élie Etchegaray escribió el prefacio para la biografia sobre Mons. Romero por Roberto Morozzo della Rocca. Este libro pretendió "rescatar" la figura de Mons. Romero y calificarlo de una vez para todas como un hombre que perteneció y sigue perteneciendo a la Iglesia. En su introducción, el cardenal francés enfatizo que entre más científica y escrupulosa la examinación de la vida de Romero, más grande la estatura que logrará alcanzar en la Iglesia.

5. HUME de Londres (Gran Bretaña). El Cardenal Basil Hume dijo en una misa en la Catedral de Westminster: “Yo creo personalmente que un día Óscar Romero será declarado santo.” Tomamos el nombre del purpurado británico como representante de los demás cardenales ahora difuntos que quisieron a Romero (como el Cardenal Hickey, el Cardenal Corripio Ahumada, etc.).

6. SILVESTRINI de Roma (Prefecto de la Congregación para las Iglesias Orientales). El Cardenal Achille Silvestrini escribió un prefacio para una biografia de Romero llamada Oscar Romero e l’America Centrale del Suo Tempo.

7. QUEZADA de Ciudad de Guatemala (Guatemala). El Cardenal Rodolfo Quezada Toruño se apuntó para participar en las celebraciones del XXV aniversario del martirio de Mons. Romero en San Salvador y permaneció en la ciudad a pesar del fallecimiento de Su Santidad el Papa Juan Pablo II.

8. CASSIDY de Sydney (Australia). El cardenal Edward Idris Cardinal Cassidy ha asistido a congresos sobre la persona de Mons. Romero, y su presencia nos trasmite su acompañamiento de la figura de Mons. Romero en una manera muy abierta y destacada.

9 y 10. MURPHY O'CONNOR de Westminster y O’BRIEN de Edinburgh (Gran Bretaña). El Cardenal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor y el Cardenal Keith Patrick O'Brien son miembros de una fundación dedicada a conservar la memoria de Mons. Romero en Inglaterra.

11. TUCCI de Napolí (Italia). El Cardenal Roberto Tucci, S.J., acompañaba al Papa Juan Pablo II en todos sus viajes afuera de Roma y visitó con él al tumba de Mons. Romero. Se ha refirido a Mons. Romero publicamente como el "obispo que fue martirizado mientras celebraba la misa".

12. RATZINGER de Bavaria y Roma (Prefecto de la Congregación para la Doctrina de la Fe). No se nos olvida que antes de su elección como Romano Pontífice, el Cardenal Joseph Alois Ratzinger calificó a Mons. Romero como "un hombre de la Iglesia, del Evangelio, y de los pobres". Como papa, Benedicto XVI caracterizó a Mons. Romero como "un hombre de la paz y del diálogo" cuya beatificación debe seguir su debido camino.

No pretendemos que esta lista sea exclusiva y comprensiva, porque bien sabemos que seguramente hay otros cardenales de la estatura de estos nombrados que han reconocido en el sacrificio de Mons. Romero un eco pequeño pero certero del martirio salvífico de Jesucristo.

2007 BEATIFICATION OUTLOOK

The first few months of 2005 saw a heady rush in the Romero beatification cause, following years of stagnation. The vice postulator, Msgr. Rafael Urrutia, told the Salvadoran press, “we have advanced 95 percent” of the way, and the postulator, Bishop Vincenzo Paglia, predicted beatification in as little as six months’ time. In September ‘05, Paglia told the National Catholic Reporter to expect “good news” within a month. Then, at a meeting of Cardinals of the Congregation for the Causes of Saint in October, something happened. That month, the Prefect of that saint-making body told the press that Paglia’s calculations did not add up, and the following month, a Vatican publication predicted that beatification was still “years away.”

In March 2006, San Salvador Archbishop Fernando Sáenz confirmed the obvious: the beatification cause was proceeding very slowly now. Romero friend and Opus Dei cleric Jesús Delgado gave the Salvadoran press the intriguing tidbit that “the shadows of the orthopraxis are still conniving over the Romero case and the Church has prudently and wisely has decided to take its time.” That Spring, three synchronized signals regarding the case came from the highest levels of the Church hierarchy. In May 2006, Pope Benedict himself declared that, in order to establish martyrdom, there must be, “moral certainty” that the persecutor's action stemmed “directly or indirectly” from a hatred of the faith, as opposed to political motivations. At about the same time, the head of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, and Msgr. Paglia both signaled that this was the sticking point in Romero’s case. At about that time, the trail goes cold on clues regarding the Romero beatification.

2007 would therefore seem to be a no-action year -- were it not for the fact that three major dates on the Catholic agenda this year all augur in favor of progress in the Romero beatification cause. The first is the fact that this year will mark the 30th anniversary of Romero’s ascension to the San Salvador archbishopric. Romero was selected on February 9, and invested on February 22, 1977. This year also marks several associated milestones, including the 30th anniversary of Romero’s priests, Rutilio Grande (March 12) and Alfonso Navarro. To provide a bookend to the reflection, 2007 also marks the 15th anniversary of the Salvadoran Peace Accords. The time, would therefore, seem ripe to tie it altogether and attempt to resolve the political implications for the beatification in a manner that helped the society most affected by the question -- Salvadoran society -- to have closure and reconciliation.

The other significant anniversary this year is that March 26, 2007 -- two days after the 27th anniversary of the Romero assassination -- marks the 40th anniversary of Pope Paul VI’s encyclical, Populorum Progressio. This is the one where the Pope declares that, “The world is sick. The poor nations remain poor while the rich ones become still richer. The very life of poor nations, civil peace in developing countries, and world peace itself are at stake.” Pope Paul, whom Romero believed to be supportive of his pastoral work, concludes “We want to be clearly understood on this point: The state of affairs must be confronted boldly, and its concomitant injustices must be challenged and overcome. Everyone must lend a ready hand to this task, particularly those who can do most by reason of their education, their office, or their authority.” In his three years as archbishop, Romero cited Populorum Progressio in 16 different sermons.

Finally, in May 2007, the Latin American Bishops are having the fifth general assembly in Aparecida, Brazil, in a gathering that will be attended by Pope Benedict. This is the successor conference to the 1968 conference, held in Medellin, Colombia, which gave us the phrase “preferential option for the poor,” and the Puebla conference, held in 1979, which Romero himself attended. Arguably, there is no more prominent apostle of the teachings of the CELAM fathers than Archbishop Oscar Romero, who embraced the teachings of the conferences and followed the teachings to the bitter end, even if it meant death and martyrdom. Previous conferences have recognized the heroic deeds of men like Bartolome de las Casas who bravely have confronted what the bishops themselves defined as the continent’s most urgent problem -- economic and social injustice. This year’s gathering would be a fitting forum for recognition of Romero.

EL PRÓXIMO ARZOBISPO DE SAN SALVADOR

Este pensamiento es en gran medida un reconocimiento de que un proceso de canonización es en parte un proceso humano -- es a fondo un proceso divino, pero tiene necesariamente su aspecto humano ya que son seres humanos los que lo deben llevar adelante. En estos días, acaba de marcarse el 17º aniversario de la Masacre de la UCA, un acontecimiento que nos apunta a la realidad humana de la Iglesia, y de la dimensión personal del martirio. Es una fecha significativa para la Iglesia Salvadoreña, ya que fué en esa misma fecha, un 16 de noviembre, que en 1924 Mons. Luis Chávez y González fue ordenado sacerdote, y fué un 16 de noviembre, que en 1932, Mons. Fernando Sáenz Lacalle, nació en Cintruénigo, España. Hace 74 años. Llegamos al punto esencial, que ahora queda menos que un año para que el arzobispo actual de San Salvador cumpla 75 años, la edad cuando se hace obligatorio que un obispo católico se retire.

Esta fué la circumstancia en que, en un febrero de 1977 se anunció que Mons. Óscar A. Romero, llegaría a ser el arzobispo metropolitano de San Salvador, llegado el momento en que el arzobispo por 38 años se tenía que jubilar. Tres décadas después, otro cambio arzobispal en esa sede dislumbra no solamente la pastoral de esa arquidiócesis, sino también el camino que el arzobispo que se inauguró hace treinta años llevará hacia los altares. Resulta que las grandes preguntas restantes en el proceso de canonización se Mons. Romero se le ceden a la sabiduría y discreción del obispo local, que en este caso sería el Arzobispo de San Salvador. Durante su gestión que surge desde 1995, Mons. Sáenz ha respaldado firmemente el proceso de canonización de su predecesor, pero ha marcado los límites de su apoyo, observando que no se debe adelantar la canonización de Mons. Romero con un proceso "popular" que lo declare santo antes de que se cumplan los procedimientos de Roma, y pautando que no puede haber canonización mientras se use la figura del presunto santo para hacer campañas políticas.

Muchos consideran que si el obispo auxiliar, Mons. Gregorio Rosa Chávez es nombrado sucesor de "Don Fernando", el Arzobispo Rosa no tuviera ninguna inquietud por recomendar que "San Romero" se beatificara cuanto antes, y es posible que su accesión a proceder de manera expedita sería suficiente para acelerar el proceso de beatificación. Sin embargo, el caso de 1977 es uno que nos recuerda que no es automático que el obispo auxiliar sea nombrado el sucesor. En esa circumstancia, el obispo auxiliar de aquel entonces, Mons. Arturo Rivera y Damas, fue sobresaltado por el Vaticano y en su lugar fue nombrado el obispo de Santiago de María, Mons. Romero, como el nuevo arzobispo de San Salvador. Es más, el mismo Mons. Rosa ha sido ignorado una vez, ya que cuando murió Mons. Rivera, ya era Mons. Rosa el obispo auxiliar, y el Vaticano prefirió al obispo castrense, Mons. Sáenz, que al jóven obispo auxiliar. Pero esta vez, Mons. Rosa ya no es un niño, y el Vaticano tendría que ignorar fuertes antecedentes para no nombrarlo el próximo obispo. Será este año muy importante para leer las claves secretas de esa sucesión.

ST. RAFAEL GUIZAR, CARD. HUMMES, & MSGR. ROMERO


Two recent developments bode well for the canonization cause of Archbishop Oscar A. Romero: one is the canonization on October 15, 2006 by Pope Benedict XVI of Bishop Rafael Guízar Valencia of Vera Cruz, Mexico, and the Holy Father’s appointment this week of Claudio Cardinal Hummes of Sao Paolo, Brazil as the new Prefect of the Congregation for Clergy.

Although the two events constitute two very different acts -- one is an honor bestowed upon a dead prelate in order to present him as a model of Catholic values and virtues, and the other is a working appointment of a living cleric to fulfill ministerial duties -- we must start by fusing them and seeing what they tell us that is the same. First of all, they are both the actions of the same man, the Roman Pontiff who is pastor to the worldwide Church. In this respect, the appointment of Cardinal Hummes has been interpreted in some quarters as indicative of a magnanimous spirit at the Holy See. As the conservative Catholic news agency Catholic World News commented before the story was confirmed: “If the report is accurate, the selection of Cardinal Hummes, a Franciscan who was friendly to exponents of liberation theology in Latin America, would suggest that Pope Benedict is determined to fill the Roman Curia with prelates who will represent a wide variety of views.” Or to put it differently, being associated with Liberation Theology is not the kiss of death. (In a similar vein, arlier this year, we noted that one candidate whose sainthood cause had advanced, Fr. Antonio Rosmini, once had been the subject of a censorship by the Holy Office because his writings had been considered unorthodox.)

The second prism which helps us see two acts as one is the caritas (to use Pope Benedict’s language) that motivated both men. On his first day as Archbishop of Sao Paolo, Card. Hummes attacked the spread of global capitalism, saying the privatization of state companies and the lowering of tariffs had contributed to the "misery and poverty affecting millions around the world." And, on the eve of the papal election of 2005, he told the press that the next pope needs to be "especially at the service of the poor and most excluded." Bishop Guízar, who was canonized on Oct. 15, was known as the “Bishop of the Poor.” During the canonization Mass, Benedict praised the new saint because he rejected the allure of power and privilege and identified himself with the poor: “Imitating the poor Christ, he renounced his goods and never accepted the gifts of the powerful, or rather, he gave them back immediately.” During the military dictatorship of the 1970s, Hummes also identified with the poor in Sao Paolo, speaking out and letting anti-military activists use church facilities. In 1978, army helicopters buzzed a Sao Paulo stadium where Hummes was celebrating Mass, in an effort by the military to intimidate Hummes. Bishop Guizar, Benedict noted, also faced persecution and exile, but he was committed to “help the poor, even amid endless persecutions.”

Finally, the presence of Card. Hummes in Rome may be an eloquent reminder to the entire hierarchy of how Romero’s critics have misrepresented and mischaracterized profound commitment to the social doctrine of the Church as mere politics. Harsh critics have already began to rail against Card. Hummes, even before his taking office. Commentators on the conservative CWN news board have lamented that it is a “Very sad day” because of his appointment. Another poster decried that, “I couldn't think of anyone worse for the job.” Another: “akin to hiring the fox to guard the chicken coop.” By becoming a lightning rod for mean spirited accusations, Card. Hummes may prove to Rome that a man’s harshest critics are not the best source to define the man.

MONS. ROMERO Y EL 11-S

«Todo lo que es sufrimiento humano, la Iglesia lo siente como propio».

-- Monseñor Romero, 11 de Septiembre de 1977

[Mons. Romero – en sus propias palabras – denuncia el terrorismo.]

Para aquellos que ya no creen en el amor y que han puesto su confianza en la violencia, en el terrorismo y que la Iglesia no los puede acompañar por esos caminos, los obispos desde Puebla, hacen un llamamiento: "A primera vista -la civilización del amor" ... Hermanos, como los profetas anunciando a los cautivos de Babilonia horas de alegría y de libertad, puede parecer como una burla la palabra de la Iglesia llamando al amor, a la reconciliación, al perdón, mientras otros creen más en la violencia, en el secuestro, en el terrorismo. La Iglesia no caminará nunca por esos caminos y todo lo que en este sentido se diga, es falso, es calumnia que viene a ennoblecer más la aureola de nuestra persecución en la Iglesia. FN1.

Ojalá, los fanáticos de la violencia y el terrorismo; ojalá, los que creen que con la represión y la fuerza se van a arreglar las cosas, aprendieran que no son esos los caminos del Señor, sino éstos: los humildes caminos de Cristo por la obediencia a la ley del Señor, por el respeto y el amor, y el que ahora entrega a los hombres la verdadera liberación para que el que la quiera aprovechar: Cristo, pues, Él es la clave de la revelación de Dios. FN2.

Que cesen ya esos actos de violencia y terrorismo, muchas veces sin sentido, y que son provocadores de situaciones más violentas. FN3.

Déjennos tranquilos a nosotros, no nos molesten, ustedes son violentos, ustedes son terroristas. ¡Esto no es justicia! La Iglesia también señala esas diferencias pero dice: que la causa principal de estos problemas es la injusticia social. La Iglesia no promueve violencia ni odio, sino que predica paz; les dice: la paz que podría haber, que se ha perdido, no puede venir si no hay justicia. FN4.

Sí existe terrorismo, y hay que acabar con él, pero la manera no es la represión. Hay que arreglar las bases desordenadas, injustas, de donde brotan las violencias terroristas. FN5.

¡Cuánta paz nos hace falta, cuánta sangre, cuánto crimen, cuánto terror! Y cuando decimos terrorismo no sólo pensamos en aquellos que persiguen los uniformados, sino también en el terrorismo uniformado que también es horroroso y mata, y llena de miedo... FN6.

El camino más seguro para derrotar al terrorismo consiste en promover la justicia en nuestras sociedades: justicia legal, económica y social. La justicia de tipo sumario socava el mismo futuro que intenta promover, produce únicamente más violencia y terrorismo. El respeto por el imperio de la ley promueve la justicia y elimina las semillas de la subversión. Al abandonar ese respeto, los gobiernos descienden a los bajos fondos del mundo terrorista e invalidan su arma más poderosa, su autoridad moral. La mejor manera de hacer cumplir las leyes y hacer respetar los derechos humanos, dice nuestro diplomático, es ganar la confianza y la lealtad de los ciudadanos al actuar con justicia a través de las leyes, cortando de raíz la oposición violenta. FN7.

-NOTAS-

FN1. Homilía del 18 de febrero de 1979.

FN2. Homilía del 14 de Abril de 1979.

FN3. Homilía del 20 de Enero de 1980.

FN4. Homilía del 2 de Septiembre de 1979.

FN5. Homilía del 16 de julio de 1978.

FN6. Homilía del 3 de diciembre de 1978.

FN7. Homilía del 11 de diciembre de 1977.

OSCAR ROMERO, BEACON OF ECUMENISM

Although commentators are quick to point out that an invisible minority in the Church opposes Archbishop Romero’s canonization, an official Vatican document states that Romero is considered to be among the decidedly non-disputed candidates for the sainthood. A 1998 declaration by the Ecumenical Commission of the Central Committee of the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000, states that there are are controversial figures, and then there are holy people whose merit is "recognised beyond confessional boundaries," i.e., not just in Catholic circles, but across other denominations. The declaration, authored by Bishop Paul-Werner Scheele, the President of the Ecumenical Commission of the Central Committee of the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000, specifically mentions Archbishop Romero as an example of the undisputed exemplars of Christian holiness. The declaration makes clear that Archbishop Romero’s saintliness is not only recognized in Catholic circles, but in the "full communion" of Christendom.

The declaration states in relevant part:

«All Christians agree that the Holy Spirit is the sanctifying spirit.

«In many places Christians have acknowledged in their midst martyrs and exemplary confessors of faith, hope and charity - both men and women. Some of these, such as Francis of Assisi, Roublev, Johann Sebastian Bach, Monsignor Romero, Elizabeth Seton, the martyr Anuarite of Zaire, and Martin Luther King, have been for various reasons recognised beyond confessional boundaries. Ecumenical groups could look at the example of some of these witnesses with a view to identifying how the work of the Holy Spirit can be distinguished in them and what their role might be in the promotion of full communion.

«Other figures remain controversial, or indeed are considered symbols of division and rupture. [To the Commission’s mind, Romero was clearly not in this latter group, as he was named in the former.] »

As we point out in the Wikipedia article on Romero, “The work of Romero was honored by various other religious denominations of Christendom, most notably the Church of England and its Anglican Communion. In July 1998, the Church of England unveiled a statue depicting Romero at the west door of Westminster Abbey in London in the United Kingdom as part of a monument in memory of 20th century Christian martyrs. The Church of England and its Anglican Communion also added to its liturgical calendar a memorial commemoration celebrated annually on March 24 (The liturgical calendar is similar to the Roman Catholic calendar of saints).” Catholic shrines to ecumenical martyrs also place Romero among the consistently recurring martyrs of modern times (for example, in the shrine on Tiber Island, near the Vatican).

MONS. ROMERO y el TERCER SECRETO de FÁTIMA




Mons. Romero en el Cerro de las Pavas, Santuario de la Virgen de Fátima en El Salvador desde 1949.

El 13 de mayo del 2000, el Vaticano reveló el llamado Tercer Secreto de Fátima, el texto final de la revelación que según la Iglesia, la Vírgen María comunicó a tres niños pastores el 13 de julio de 1917 durante una aparición. Parte del mensaje se refería a "un Obispo vestido de Blanco," quien despues de atravesar una ciudad destruida, sube una montaña donde había una gran cruz, llegando a ser matado al pie de esa cruz. Según el comentario no doctrinal de la Iglesia, esta era una alusión al atentado contra la vida del Papa Juan Pablo II el 13 de mayo de 1981, durante la fiesta de la Vírgen de Fátima. Mons. Romero tambien reconoció el vínculo entre la Vírgen de Fátima y el Papa, que lo explicó en que los dos representan dos partes que juntas proporcionan la plenitud de la Iglesia: "plenitud Jerárquica" (el Papa) y "plenitud carismática" (la Vírgen). (Homilía del 20 de Enero de 1980).

Pero, algunos observadores se preguntaron si la referencia no podría aplicarse más naturalmente al martirio de Mons. Romero. El Vaticano no descartó la posibilidad de multiples interpretaciones. El mismo Card. Ratzinger publicó un comentario en que alude a que el mensaje no se limita a un solo hecho ya que, "En esta imagen, se puede ver representada la historia de todo un siglo. Del mismo modo que los lugares de la tierra están sintéticamente representados en las dos imágenes de la montaña y de la ciudad, y están orientados hacia la cruz, también los tiempos son representados de forma compacta".

Las pertinentes partes del secreto leen así: «Y vimos en una inmensa luz qué es Dios ... a un Obispo vestido de Blanco ... También a otros Obispos, sacerdotes, religiosos y religiosas subir una montaña empinada, en cuya cumbre había una gran Cruz de maderos toscos como si fueran de alcornoque con la corteza; el [Obispo vestido de Blanco], antes de llegar a ella, atravesó una gran ciudad medio en ruinas y medio tembloroso con paso vacilante, apesadumbrado de dolor y pena, rezando por las almas de los cadáveres que encontraba por el camino; llegado a la cima del monte, postrado de rodillas a los pies de la gran Cruz fue muerto por un grupo de soldados que le dispararon varios tiros de arma de fuego y flechas; y del mismo modo murieron unos tras otros los Obispos sacerdotes, religiosos y religiosas y diversas personas seglares, hombres y mujeres de diversas clases y posiciones. Bajo los dos brazos de la Cruz había dos Ángeles cada uno de ellos con una jarra de cristal en la mano, en las cuales recogían la sangre de los Mártires y regaban con ella las almas que se acercaban a Dios. »

En su gloso, el Card. Ratzinger comentaba que, "Montaña y ciudad simbolizan el lugar de la historia humana: la historia como costosa subida hacia lo alto, la historia como lugar de la humana creatividad y de la convivencia, pero al mismo tiempo como lugar de las destrucciones, en las que el hombre destruye la obra de su proprio trabajo". Para algunos, la “ciudad medio en ruinas” a la par de una montaña podría ser San Salvador de pos guerra, a la orilla del Volcán San Salvador, y el Obispo vestido en Blanco que bendice a los muertos y moribundos antes de ser acribillado al pie de la Cruz es Mons. Romero. Los obispos, sacerdotes, religiosos y religiosas que lo acompañan hasta la cima para caer acribillados con él son los Jesuitas de la UCA, Rutilio Grande, Alfonso Navarro, las religiosas estadounidenses, y demás mártires de la Iglesia salvadoreña.

Varias coincidencias históricas apoyan esta interpretación. Por ejemplo, el día de su muerte, cuenta su biografiador Jesús Delgado, "Monseñor Romero había amanecido con su sotana blanca. Las hermanas sabían que cuando vestía esa sotana era señal de que iba a descansar al mar". Pero cuando le preguntaron a donde iba, él les respondió, "A donde yo voy ustedes no pueden ir". Fuente: Óscar A. Romero, Biografia. Autor: Jesus Delgado. Ese mismo día, Mons. Romero iba a llegar a la gloria de Dios. Esa misma tarde, celebrando una Eucaristía en un hospital de cancerosos, bendiciendo a muertos y moribundos, Mons. Romero sería acribillado al pie de una cruz rústica, "de maderos toscos", tal como lo detalla la visión. Sus asesinos serían vinculados con las fuerzas de seguridad de El Salvador. Desde su nacimiento, Mons. Romero parecía destinado a una cercanía con la Madre de Dios. Su natalicio el 15 de agosto coincide con la Fiesta de la Asunción de la Vírgen y su muerte el 24 de marzo es en vísperas de la Fiesta de la Anunciación. Más dramático aún es que el mismo día de su nacimiento el 15 de agosto de 19717 cayó en medio de las apariciones de Fátima que se desplegaron desde el 13 de mayo de 1917, cada mes, hasta el 13 de octubre de ese año. La aparición de agosto no ocurrió el 13 ya que uno de los participantes no estaba disponible y posiblemente ocurrió dos días despues, ¡o sea que la aparición durante la cual se dió precisamente el "Tercer Secreto" pudo haber ocurrido el mismo día en que nació monseñor!.

En su comentario en el año 2000, el que es ahora el papa Benedicto XVI dijo que "la palabra clave de este 'secreto' es el triple grito: '¡Penitencia, Penitencia, Penitencia!' Comprender los signos de los tiempos significa comprender la urgencia de la penitencia, de la conversión y de la fe." Veinte y tres años antes, sin tener la ventaja del texto del Tercer Secreto Mons. Romero había predicado en el 60 aniversario de la Aparición: "Este es el resumen del mensaje de Fátima que queremos recoger ahora como una oportunidad maravillosa para el momento que estamos viviendo: penitencia y oración." (15 de Mayo de 1977.) Quizá Mons. Romero debe estar vinculado con Fátima y el Papa porque él representa, siendo mártir, la plenitud carismática de María y, siendo obispo, la plenitud jerárquica del papa y de la Iglesia institucional.

THE CASE AGAINST ROMERO: The Delgado Hypothesis




Archbishop Romero is called a "controversial" contender for sainthood mostly by sources outside the Church structure. A 1998 declaration by the Ecumenical Commission of the Central Committee of the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000, however, found that there are are controversial figures in Church history, and there are holy people whose merit is "recognised beyond confessional boundaries," because their renown is so universal. The declaration specifically mentioned Archbishop Romero as an example of the undisputed cases. The declaration made clear that Archbishop Romero is not only recognized in Catholic circles, but in the "full communion" of Christendom.

Nevertheless, a few intransigent Catholics have been inflexible in their opposition to Romero’s sainthood cause. Perhaps the most stubborn of these was the Salvadoran bishop Freddy Delgado, who made the case against Romero in a strident letter entitled, "Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo Romero: A figure manipulated by the parallel magisterium." In his paper, Delgado argues that Romero was manipulated by a shadow Church hierarchy controlled by Liberation Theologians and Jesuits (a "Parallel Magisterium"). They got Romero to do their bidding by playing to his vanity, servile nature, and spinelessness. (Vain, despite the fact that he turned down the Archbishop’s Palace for a modest shack in a cancer ward; servile, despite the fact that he challenged the government, the military and the oligarchy; and, spineless, despite the fact that he refused security guards and defied death threats!) Delgado’s central hypothesis was that Romero was a stooge, led by the nose by a committee of elitist Marxist intellectuals until he was corrected by Pope John Paul II. When the chastised Romero began to tow the line, Delgado says, the leftists realized he was more beneficial to them dead than alive. He leaves the door open to the scandalous proposition that the left was behind the assassination.

Despite its flagrant inaccuracies and irregularities, the Delgado hypothesis was historically the central Catholic critique of Romero’s legacy and his canonization process. Much of the Delgado hypothesis has been widely refuted already, especially by the findings by a Church commission which concluded that Romero’s preaching, far from being aligned with a “parallel magisterium,” adhered vigorously to the doctrinal teaching of the Church. Historical investigations by Church and other researchers have also discredited the "facts" cited by Delgado. But, one part of the the Delgado’s hypothesis which has survived until now is the notion that the left has approppriated Romero’s image and therefore any boost to his memory of legacy will play in favor of the Marxist cause more than it will benefit Christianity or Catholicism. By all accounts, the status of the canonization cause is that it is complete except for the date of the beatification ceremony, which the Vatican is reluctant to set because the time is not ripe yet. If Romero were canonized now, it would be manipulated politically (presumably by the left).

And so the case against Romero comes down to discredited conspiracy theories and political timing. The devil’s advocates out there have swiched their strategy from outright obstruction to simple delaying tactics.

MONS. ROMERO, DOCTOR de la IGLESIA

Una propuesta atrevida: además de ser declarado mártir y santo, Mons. Romero debería ser declarado un Doctor de la Iglesia -- aunque el título no se le conceda normalmente a los mártires. El título ha sido conferido solamente 33 veces, y es reservado para personas que han beneficiado tremendamente a la doctrina, la teología, o la enseñanza de la iglesia siendo eminentes maestros de la fe para los fieles de todos los tiempos. Originalmente, cuatro santos llevaban ese honor (San Gregorio Magno, San Ambrosio, San Agustín, y San Jerónimo), pero ha sido extendido varias veces. Mons. Romero cumple dos de los tres requisitos: eminens doctrina, insignis vitae sanctitas (i.e. conocimiento eminente y un alto grado de santidad), y el tercero - Ecclesiae declaratio - (proclamación de la Iglesia) se le puede otorgar facilmente según los siguientes criterios.

Mons. Romero produjo cuatro cartas pastorales y un sin fin de discursos y sermones que han sido el enfoque de diversos congresos, seminarios, y convenios académicos y teológicos por todo el mundo. La exhortación apóstolica PASTORES GREGIS del Papa Juan Pablo II nos predica que "el obispo es tambien defensor y padre de los pobres, se preocupa por la justicia y los derechos humanos" y "predica la Doctrina Social de la Iglesia fundada en el Evangelio, y asume la defensa de los débiles, haciendose la voz de los que no tiene voz para hacer valer sus derechos". Por eso, uno de los seminarios sobre Mons. Romero, llevado a cabo anualmente en una respetada universidad norte-americana lo declara "Un obispo para el nuevo milenio."

Por supuesto, Mons. Romero no fue un teólogo profesional: "No pretendo decir, ni ustedes pueden esperar de mi, la palabra de un técnico en materia de política, ni tampoco la especulación con que un experto en teología relacionaría teóricamente la fe y la política." (Discurso en la Universidad de Lovaina, febrero de 1980.) En lugar de ser capacitado en la academia, Mons. Romero aprendió de manera que él prestó "una atención especial a las exigencias de amor y justicia que se derivan de las condiciones sociales y económicas de las personas más pobres" (Pastores Gregis). Por eso da su aporte de enseñanza a la iglesia "como pastor, que, juntamente con su pueblo, ha ido aprendiendo la hermosa y dura verdad de que la fe cristiana no nos separa del mundo, sino que nos sumerge en él, de que la Iglesia no es un reducto separado de la ciudad, sino seguidora de aquel Jesús que vivió, trabajó, luchó y murió en medio de la ciudad" (Lovaina).

El maestro Romero aporta además una enseñanza muy particular y muy util para la iglesia en el aspecto de los desafíos de la globalización y del nuevo milenio, especialmente en el sentido de que han habido errores en ciertos acercamientos de la "Teología de la Liberación." Pero el mismo Card. Ratzinger reconoce que el concepto de la "Teología de la Liberación" incluye "los esfuerzos hechos dentro del marco de una teología correcta y eclesiástica ... que enfatiza la responsabilidad que los cristianos tienen necesariamente por los pobres y los oprimidos, como lo constantan los documentos de la Conferencia Episcopal Latinoamerican desde Medellín hasta Puebla". Mons. Romero nos pide: "Que conste que yo estudio la teología de la liberación a través de estos teólogos sólidos, como es el Cardenal Pironio, que actualmente es prefecto de una de las congregaciones del Papa, hombre de la plena confianza del Papa" (Homilía del 24 de Julio de 1977). Una comisión de expertos vaticanos revisó los escritos y discursos de Romero y los decaró sin errores teológicos.

En vista de todo esto, Mons. Romero surge como un eminente maestro de la fe para los fieles de todos los tiempos, y en especial, para los fieles del tercer milenio del cristianismo, ayundandoles a navegar las suceptibilidades entre el llamado a ser "defensor y padre de los pobres" y evitar sobrepasar "el marco de una teología correcta y eclesiástica" al hacerlo.

ROSMINI & ROMERO

This week, the Vatican announced it was moving forward with 162 beatifications, the largest number yet approved under Pope Benedict XVI, under whom the activity of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints has been decidedly slow. The decrees included the certification of 150 martyrdom causes, an exceeding high figure that recalls the mass beatifications under John Paul II. Strikingly, the decrees include certifications of heroic virtue of interest to the Romero case. CWNews.com reported:

Perhaps the most interesting case … is that of Father Antonio Rosmini, whose controversial theories prompted the placement of his works on the Index of forbidden books in 1849. In 1887, the Holy Office specifically condemned 40 propositions attributed to the Italian priest. But in June 2001 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith-- the successor to the Holy Office-- wrote that the works of Father Rosmini should be recognized as "idealistic and not ontological," and when his writings are seen in that perspective he was faithful to the teachings of the Church.

The case is striking for multiple reasons. First, it suggests that being implicated in disapproved theological snares is not a complete non-starter in canonizing a saint. In fact, Father Rosmini will be beatified as a confessor, not as a martyr. Canonization is considerably harder for non-martyr candidates, whose "heroic virtue" must be approved after a comprehensive review of their doctrinal orthodoxy. Secondly, it suggests that even if your views are condemned and your writings banned (compare Archbishop Romero who was never a subject of official reproach and, in contrast, whose writings and sermons were declared orthodox by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), your path to sainthood can be later cured. Thirdly, the distinction between “idealistic” and “ontological” views allows the burdened candidate a final onramp back onto the beatification path. All of this augurs very well for the Romero cause, which, of course, has several advantages over the Rosmini case, as it involves a martyrdom, and a body of preaching that has been largely vindicated by the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. (Even Cardinal Ratzinger has conceded that the concept of “Liberation Theology,” with which Romero is sometimes identified, includes “the efforts which are being made within the framework of a correct and ecclesial theology … which stresses the responsibility which Christians necessarily hear for the poor and oppressed, such as we see in the documents of the Latin American Bishops' Conference from Medellin to Puebla.”)

LA POLÍTICA DE LA CANONIZACIÓN

La noticiera católica Zenit reportó hace unos días sobre el proceso de beatificación de dos misioneros franciscanos de origen polaco que fueron asesinados en Perú por el «Sendero Luminoso» en agosto de 1991. La situación de los padres, Michael Tomaszek y el padre Zbigniew Strzalkowski, es muy parecida a la situación del conflicto salvadoreño diez años atrás, pero con los colores partidistas invertidos (o sea que en El Salvador, la ultra-derecha tenía a la Iglesia como enemiga, y en el Perú los subversivos de izquierda eran los perseguidores).

Relata la nota de Zenit:

Del 1 de enero al 22 de agosto de 1991 se alcanzó la cifra «récord» de 1.638 muertos por violencia en un país que ya registraba el 53% de los desaparecidos en todo el mundo.

En este entorno «se vio como un peligro» la actividad de la Iglesia, con la puesta en marcha de una catequesis más incisiva y la apertura de centros estables de animación cristiana. De forma que se incrementó la violencia contra los misioneros extranjeros y laicos.

Uno de los muchos panfletos de «Sendero Luminoso» decía: «Con la Biblia y la cruz pretendían ser una barrera al avance de la subversión...».

Algunos lectores que conocen el marco histórico del ministerio de Mons. Romero reconocerán instantaneamente la correspondencia entre estos detalles y lo que ocurrió en El Salvador, en que una ola de represión dejó centenas de muertos y desaparecidos, y la Iglesia se encontró en el ojo de esa represión al ser identificada como un enemigo estratégico de los para-militares, y aparecieron panfletos de una organización clandestina llamada «la Mano Blanca» que decían «Haz patria, mata un cura.»

Interesante será ver si estos procesos de beatificación son acompañados por la intriga y las acusaciones internas de la feligresia de querer entrampar, o manipular o politizar el proceso de esas beatificaciones. (Quiera Dios que no.)

BEATIFIC VISION: The Romero Beatification

THE DAY THAT OSCAR ROMERO IS BEATIFIED, the ceremony will likely be celebrated in San Salvador under norms promulgated by Pope Benedict XVI, extending the bishops’ participation in beatifications first set out by Pope John Paul II. As such, the Holy Savior Cathedral where Romero is buried would become the stage for a popular pageantry unlike any other previously seen in Latin America. As the National Catholic Reporter has noted, “Among popular 20th century Catholic icons, no saint-in-waiting figures more prominently than Oscar Romero.” The long awaited beatification would likely draw the largest crowd in Salvadoran history, but also the largest popular gathering of the Latin American church, attracting nearly all of the continent’s contingent of cardinals and bishops. Nothing in the Church’s history would rival it, except the beatification of Mother Teresa and the funeral rites of Pope John Paul.

The spectacle of Salvadoran school children wearing plaid skirts and black dress pants, filing to their designated positions in a large outdoor crowd flooding Plaza Barrios and many blocks around would be carried live over Salvadoran national television, and the VIP seating on the dais in front of the Cathedral would include official delegations from the ruling party, including the President of El Salvador, and the opposition. The Salvadoran military, which once invited Romero’s stinging rebuke would circle the perimeter of the vast multitude to keep order, while police and army helicopters buzz overhead. The ceremony would be punctuated by colorful details, such as the participation of many peasant groups who overrun San Salvador, many of them seeing the capital city for the first time. Of course, political expression would be hard to suppress. Left wing demonstrators would block traffic and burn tires in some streets, but the pressure from civil society and their discreet approval of a heavy police presence to preserve the dignity of the occasion would keep such outbursts from stealing the day’s headlines.

A fair-like atmosphere would prevail for the week leading up to the ceremony over the corridor of San Salvador that runs from the Metropolitan Cathedral downtown, to the Divine Savior landmark five miles to the west. That strip contains the Cuzcatlan Park civil war memorial where Romero’s name appears on a commemorative wall alongside that of thousands of other war victims, and is near the Divine Providence cancer hospital where Romero lived and at whose chapel he was felled by an assassin’s bullet. Mini vans ferrying pilgrims and tourists between these locations, and to the 1989 Jesuit massacre site, and other places of pilgrimage in and around the capital, would pass each other on the streets, the harried passengers laughing in recognition having passed each other at other locations. At the cancer hospital, multi-lingual guides would lead throngs of visitors into the shack where Romero lived, and the line to get into the martyrdom chapel would be measured in hours. The spot where Romero fell at the altar would be hidden under flower offerings that hospital staff would occasionally remove and send to other hospitals.

Romero’s Palm Sunday funeral in 1980 attracted the largest crowd in Salvadoran history at the time, under a military dictatorship all too willing to fire on crowds unfriendly to the government, and bishops and clerics braved a hail of bullets from guards stationed at the nearby National Palace just to be in attendance. Romero’s beatification, under much more auspicious circumstances, would likely draw the attendance of vast numbers of Salvadorans, and unprecendented numbers of visitors. The funeral of Shafick Handal earlier this year attracted vast numbers into the streets of San Salvador. Normal commemorations of Romero’s anniversary already attract thousands of pilgrims every year, and high ranking clerics have taken to leading memorial masses for Romero in various countries. In 2005, Romero masses were celebrated by the Patriarch of Jerusalem, and such prominent prelates as the Archbishop of London and the Archbishop of Dublin. Romero’s beatification would likely be concelebrated by the Prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, the Papal Nuncio (if not the Pope himself), and the Archbishop of San Salvador. They would likely be joined at the altar by all the archbishops of Central America, and hundreds of other high ranking clerics who would ring the crowd, as they would likely not fit at the altar.

UN HOMBRE DE LA IGLESIA Y DEL EVANGELIO

«Los especialistas del Vaticano han determinado recientemente que la actuación de Romero estuvo apegada a la doctrina sólida y tradicional de la iglesia católica. Los escritos y las homilías fueron analizados durante diez años por la Congregación para la Doctrina de la Fe.» Así lo reportó EL DIARIO DE HOY el 22 de marzo 2005, uno de los periódicos salvadoreños más conservadores, y uno que había criticado mucho al arzobispo en vida.

Según varias fuentes de la Iglesia, la comisión de teologos del Vaticano dictaminó despues de haber estudiado minuciosamente más de 3.000 páginas de escritos, sermones, discursos, archivos, documentos, cartas, editoriales, y demás papeles de Romero, que fue «un hombre de la Iglesia, del evangelio y de los pobres.» Como lo reportó el DIARIO DE HOY en aquel marzo del 25 aniversario del martirio de Mons. Romero, «las homilías del fallecido arzobispo, a quien algunos consideran un personaje emblemático de la historia contemporánea del país, fueron considerados incendiarios en su tiempo, sobre todo por los componentes de denuncia, que fueron rechazados por un sector y manipulados por otro.»

Sin embargo, la comisión de expertos consideró su prédica ortodoxa y apegada a la linea de la doctrina de la Iglesia. Todos los llamamientos que hizo Romero desde el púlpito están respaldados con enseñanzas análogas en la doctrina social de la Iglesia, empezando con el famoso sermón del 23 de marzo de 1980, que muchos consideran como el hecho que motivó el asesinato de Romero el día siguiente. En su homilía, Romero hizo un «llamamiento de manera especial a los hombres del Ejército -- que ningún soldado está obligado a obedecer una orden contra la Ley de Dios.» Romero explicó su instrucción argumentando que, «Una ley inmoral, nadie tiene que cumplirla.» El siguiente día trás el asesinato, algunos oficiales militares comentaron que Romero había cometido «un crímen» por estar instando a los soldados a desobedecer las ordenes de sus superiores, o sea cometer la insubordinación. Sin embargo, quince años antes, el papa Juan XXIII había dictaminado en su encíclica PACEM IN TERRIS, de que «si los gobernantes promulgan una ley o dictan una disposición cualquiera contraria a ese orden espiritual y, por consiguiente, opuesta a la voluntad de Dios, en tal caso ni la ley promulgada ni la disposición dictada pueden obligar en conciencia al ciudadano, ya que es necesario obedecer a Dios antes que a los hombres.» En este caso, la LEY DE DIOS que Romero citaba era el Quinto Mandamiento: «ante una orden de matar que dé un hombre, debe de prevalecer la Ley de Dios que dice: no matarás.»

Toda la prédica de Mons. Romero referente a la situación socio-económica que imperaba en El Salvador en su tiempo estaba apegada a las enseñanzas de la Iglesia. Estas han sido solemnizadas en el Catecismo de la Iglesia Católica, recopilado bajo la dirección del entonces Cardenal Joseph Ratzinger, el prefecto de la Congregación para la Doctrina de la Fe, que es ahora el papa Benedicto XVI. En varias instancias, las palabras de Romero eran fieles hasta en los más pequeños detalles. Por ejemplo, en el mismo sermón del 23 de marzo, Romero suplicó «en nombre de este sufrido pueblo cuyos lamentos suben hasta el cielo cada día más tumultuosos.» El Catecismo de la Iglesia dice que la injusticia social es uno de los «pecados que claman al cielo». Inciso 1867.

Este tema de la injusticia social como un pecado que prevalece en la realidad nacional había sido tocado tambien en la conferencia episcopal de los obispos latinoamericanos en Medellín, que culminó con un escrito en que los obispos del continente declaran que existe una «miseria que margina a grandes grupos humanos» y que «esa miseria, como hecho colectivo, es una injusticia que clama al cielo.» Documento Final de la Conferencia Episcopal de Medellín. Tanto la carta de los obispos, desde una conferencia cuyos estudios estaban autorizados por el Concilio Vaticano Segundo, y aprobados por el Papa Pablo VI, como la prédica de Romero, encajan con la doctrina social aprobada por la Congregación para la Doctrina de la Fe en el Catecismo de la Iglesia. Por ejemplo, Mons. Romero denunciaba la brecha entre los pobres y los ricos; un hecho criticado también por el Catecismo, incisos 2443-2445. De hecho, el Catecismo nos habla de «desigualdades escandalósas.» Inciso 1938. Mons. Romero decía que es pecaminoso estar dedicados al poder y las riquezas y querer excluir a otros de manera egoista. Lo mismo dice el Catecismo en su inciso 2445. Igual a Mons. Romero, la iglesia tambien apoya un sueldo digno y justo. Inci. 2428-2429, 2434. Tambien como Romero, la iglesia apoya los derechos de sindicalismo y organización popular, como tambien el derecho de estar en huelga. Inci. 2435.

Estos eran los dos extremos de la prédica de Mons. Romero: condenar atrocidades cometidas por el ejército, y denunciar la injusticia social que imperaba en el país. Ambos ramos de su proyecto pastoral estaban abastecidos en la doctrina cristiana de la Iglesia, y la Congregación para la Doctrina de la Fe pudo haber comprobado todo esto facilmente al comparar la prédica de Romero con la linea doctrinal del Catecismo y otros documentos eclesiales. Pero, la biblioteca privada de Mons. Romero tambien fue útil para evaluar desde donde se alimentaba espiritualmente. Resulta que un 60% del material de estudio de Romero consistía de literatura sobre la vida mística y sobre la santidad. Hay bastantes obras sobre la Devoción al Sagrado Corazón de Jesús entre los libros que conservaba en su casa durante el periodo en que era arzobispo (devoción que el Papa Benedicto exhortó a los Jesuitas renovar esta semana). Un 25% de los libros son obras de espiritualidad, de la doctrina, y de las enseñanzas de los papas. Algunas obras sobre la teología de la liberación obsequiadas al arzobispo por sus autores aún conservaban sus sellos plásticos y presentaban señas de poco uso, mientras que otros autores modernos pero ortodóxos le llamaban más la atención, por ejemplo el Cardenal Eduardo Pironio. Los expertos del Vaticano comprendieron que desde esta base doctrinal, la prédica de Mons. Romero chocaba con una realidad nacional pésima y opresiva, lo cual lo llevaba a denunciar la realidad desde la perspectiva profética y evangélica de la doctrina de la Iglesia.