51茶馆

On February 18th, the Boisi Center welcomed Kevin Coleman, an associate professor of history at the University of Toronto who focuses on capitalism, photography, and political conflict in modern Latin America. His lecture, titled 鈥淭heopolitical Authorization: 脫scar Romero, Far-Right Christianity, and a Contest for the Soul of the Americas,鈥� focused on the role of theopolitical authorization in the murder of 脫scar Romero and the dangers that come when political actors resort to fighting on theological grounds.

Coleman began by providing background on the life and assassination of 脫scar Romero. In 1980, 脫scar Romero, a bishop in El Salvador, was shot on the altar while saying mass. His life and legacy have been the subject of intense debate, with some painting him as a communist and others remembering him as a defender of human rights and an icon of Christian solidarity. Although earlier in his ministry, Romero was a critic of the Jesuits and complicit in the El Salvadorian military regime, in the latter part of his life, he became an outspoken critic of his government鈥檚 human rights abuses, using his ecclesial authority to hold the government accountable for acts of state terrorism and to defend the Jesuits. His acts unveiled a growing transnational divide between liberal Christians and their conservative counterparts, which produced a militant Catholicism that eventually led to his assassination. While Romero publicly called out El Salvador鈥檚 violent military regime for committing mass murder, a growing conservative Catholic group used theopolitical claims, such as calling Romero a 鈥渇alse prophet鈥� and a 鈥渉eretic鈥� to discredit his work. These attacks laid the foundation for authorizing violence as a religious obligation. This theological division survived his death, as the meaning of his death became part of a larger theopolitical battle over whether Romero was a martyr or a victim of political circumstances. Ultimately, the church concluded that Romero was killed in defense of his faith, and Romero was canonized a Saint.

Toward the end of the lecture, Coleman engaged questions from the audience. One audience member asked if martyrdom was inevitable in this case. Coleman noted that the political and religious circumstances created conditions for using corrupt conceptions of religion to justify violence. Instead of launching political attacks against Romero, the opposition resorted to theological attacks, which created a type of permission structure for Romero鈥檚 assassination. In Romero鈥檚 case, the symbolic violence that was latent in religious language used to describe him was a prelude to the direct physical violence that led to his death. Overall, Coleman鈥檚 lecture provided an important reflection on the life and contested legacy of 脫scar Romero.