Emmanuel
clearly recognized that the purpose of their presence was to aid the
Latin American church, not to impose U.S. attitudes and customs.
Considine’s theories of missionary activity were highly successful, and
some of his way of “doing theology” is still at work in contemporary
Chile.
Hierarchical innovations equaled those at the grass-roots level.
For example, the Archdiocese of Santiago implemented major
organizational changes in 1961, forming deaneries with territorial
vicars in an attempt to deepen their involvement in the lives of
ordinary people.
As planning began for Vatican II, Marcos G. McGrath, CSC, later the
archbishop of Panama, led the Pontifical Faculty of Theology at the
Catholic University of Santiago into a major preparatory role. Cardinal
Raul Silva and Bishop Manuel Larrain initiated extensive contact with
pastoral leaders in other nations, including Belgium, France, and
Germany, in order to better prioritize issues for conciliar discussion.
Although Cardinal Silva is best remembered for his staunch advocacy
of human rights, his interventions on the council floor clearly reflected
the theology of Congar, Suhard, and Suenens. In all, the Chilean church
leadership was in the vanguard of thought at Vatican II.5
It should be noted also that two synods were held in Santiago in
1967-1968 to adapt the council’s principles to the specific needs of
Chile. One of these synods (Church of Santiago, What Do You Say
about Yourself?) consulted representatives of all the ministries to
better understand widespread needs and then initiated specialized
departments (education, youth, workers, etc.) in in order to better
meet those needs.
Chile’s Present Reality
Although the past performance of the Chileans is excellent, how
committed is the current Chilean church to carrying out its ongoing
mission? How well has it responded to the CELAM V conference, held
in Aparecida, Brazil, in 2007?
CELAM V was both a revitalization of the previous CELAM conferences
and a recommitment to a living out of the Second Vatican Council.
Both the location of the conference in Brazil and its methodology were
determined after extensive consultation with persons of divergent
210