Popular Religion, Catholicism and Socioreligious Dissent in Latin America

Abstract

Popular religion, Catholicism and religious dissent are part of the same triangle, unavoidable in any analysis of the religious life of Latin America. A conceptual frame has not yet been established, however, to explain, from the point of view of the region's own religious experience, the specific forms taken by this religious life and how they relate to other similar expressions worldwide, as well as to general processes, such as secularization. The paradigm of modernity seems to resist as long as it follows the guidelines of the gestation of a secularization process which translates into the strengthening of individual conscience, the debilitation of ecclesiastical control and the formation of freedom spaces for those who do not think like the group of believers. However, the paradigm does not find its parallel in the European model of Protestantism in the consolidation of a class or social group that feeds and explains this dissenting religious thought. Consequently, it is necessary, from our point of view, to question the centrality or pertinence of the modernity paradigm. Most of all, because the modernity paradigm results in an Eurocentrist paradigm, too oriented towards a set concept of socioeconomic development and, therefore, of religious `evolution'.

An enchanted modernity: Making sense of Latin America’s religious landscape

“…Therefore, for some scholars, popular religiosity became the religious expression of the cultural nativism and political populist movements. It is conceived as the religious result of the ethnic blend, which gave birth to national imagined communities that overcame the differences between whites, natives, and blacks (Ameigeiras, 2008; Blancarte, 2000; Camurça, 2009; Cuda, 2016; De la Torre, 2012; Engelke, 2011; Forni, 1986; Linkogle, 1998; Mariz and Campos, 2011; Meliá, 1993; Parker Gumucio, 1999).…”

“…Therefore, this conceptualization has left aside Pentecostals, other religious minorities, and the unaffiliated (Da Costa, 2011). Scholars such as Ameigeiras (2008), Blancarte (2000), and Semán (1994) apply it to Pentecostals, identifying them as “Popular Protestants,” echoing the theological Protestant tradition. The problem with this position is that Pentecostalism is a different religion, not a way of practicing Lutheranism or Calvinism (Hall, 1997; Sharot, 2001; Williams et al, 2009).…”

“…It emphasizes the characteristic of being a religiosity “in-between” (De la Torre, 2012), practiced either in private or public spaces, involving bodily and emotional experiences (Ammerman, 2014) in a particular cultural setting. Lived religiosity is not a fixed unit of coherent beliefs or practices; it is a mixture of changing, complex and diverse beliefs, practices, relations, experiences, and communities (Berger, 2014; Blancarte, 2000; Mallimaci, 2008; Martin, 2010).…”

“…The lack of priests and, therefore, the inability to cover territory and to impose doctrine left local communities in charge of their own faith and churches (Garrard-Burnett et al, 2016;Lynch, 2012). This institutional weakness gave way to an a-clerical form of Catholicism, far from the regulations of the elites (Blancarte, 2000(Blancarte, , 2007Da Costa, 2003;De la Torre, 2012;Hughes, 2009;Linkogle, 1998;Mallimaci and Gime´nez Be´liveau, 2007;Negrão, 2008;Romero, 2009). Popular religiosity is neither official nor individualistic, but a communal religiosity (Marzal, 2002) in which religious "tribes" create a "community of conversation" (Ammerman, 2014) that allows people to talk about the presence of the spiritual in daily life and to identify with each other (Romero, 2009).…”

From Popular Religion to Practices of Sacralization: Approaches for a Conceptual Discussion

“…As Blancarte (2000) argued, it is fundamental to avoid a Eurocentric perspective for analyzing popular religion in Latin America. Nevertheless, it is necessary not to drift towards the reification of a "Latin-American culture", whose heritage feeds regional and national versions-where each one of the "cases" analysed only constitutes a variation on that culture.…”