Emmanuel Magazine July/August 2015 | Page 9

The Chilean Catholic Church: Challenges and Hopes opinions. Most significantly, the Aparecida conference affirmed once again the see-judge-act and signs-of-the-times discernment methodologies that proved to be so effective in Gaudium et Spes and at the watershed CELAM II conference in Medellín, Columbia, in 1968. This in turn led to a much clearer understanding of the preferential option for the poor. At the Fifth General Conference of the Latin American Bishops, it was agreed that each national Latin American church would prepare an overview of its mission, which was to be renewed annually into the final national mission in the year 2013. Unlike the churches of some Latin American nations, the Chilean church was exemplary in following this assignment.6 They have successfully followed the schedule every year between CELAM V and 2012. The Catholic Church in Chile anticipated Vatican II as well as responded to it. Unfortunately, several other aspects of Chilean society, most notably the economic and educational spheres, are more troubling. Much of the enormous change between Chile’s now-thriving economy and the economy of Alberto Hurtado’s time was produced by worldwide recovery from the Great Depression of the 1930s, a depression which impacted Chile more profoundly than any other nation, according to League of Nations economists. Nevertheless, the “Chicago Ideology” of Milton Friedman has altered the shape of economics in Chile so profoundly that much of the credit for Chile’s overall economic strength and much of the blame for the everwidening economic inequality between rich and poor both belong to the profits-before-all-else policies championed by Friedman and his followers, the so-called “Chicago Boys” who have strongly influenced Chile’s economic policies for more than four decades. These policies were undeniably successful in increasing Chile’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which averaged 1.0 percent growth from 1997 to 2011 and 1.4 percent growth during 2012, but those same policies clearly value individual profit more highly than the common good, than human dignity, and than Catholic social teaching. Neither Hurtado nor CELAM’s bishops can think highly of the institutionalized inequality inherent to policies that reward the richest 10 percent of the population with 47 percent of GDP while allocating only 1.2 211