Populus Dei

Abstract

"THE QUESTION ofthe 'popular church' (iglesia popular) as a theological issue in need of clarification is immensely complex and cannot be given a quick explanation, as many critics have tried to do. 1 ha ve to point out right from the beginning that part of the difficulty derives from the ambiguity, not just of the multi-faceted category 'people' (pueblo) but also ofits various uses. 'People' may refer to the first people (Israel) or the new people (the Church); it may refer to the Gentiles (non-Christian) ora 'Christian people' (as in the Christian tradition of Latin America or Poland). John XXIIl's expression 'the church of the poor', taken up in Laborem Exercens 8, may be an exact synonym of 'the popular church' if by 'popular' is meant the 'poor' of a Christian peo ple. If, on the other hand, as we shall see, 'people' is taken as gentes (Gentiles), and it is said that 'The church is born so/e/y ofthe people', the result is a sort of Pelagianism. Obviously to say, as has been said, that 'The church is born solely of the Holy Spirit,' is in turna sort of monophytism. On the other hand, ifby 'church' are meant those Christians, part ofthe one official and institutional Church, who are being renewed, and evangelised, who make a choice for the poor, the oppressed and live among them, then this renewed 'church' (nota new church) can 'be born of the people' (from among the poor and oppressed, who in Latin America are already Christian, baptised and believers) through the action ofthe holy Spirit (which the theology ofliberation has never denied). This is what is meant by Medellín, by Puebla, by the Christians who 'make the option' and live among the poor. lt is absurd to say that the theology of liberation is the inspiration behind the popular church (in the sense indicated). The situation is precisely the opposite."