Because the Sodalit Family is very political as-is, it is hard to ignore the personal politics invested in the arguments made. It would be foolish to argue that my approach to this is objective; I most definitely have issues with an organization that is inherently racist and hides behind the veil of creating 'social justice' in resource-poor neighbourhoods. It has been incredibly difficult to find a reason to feel indifferent or favourable toward an organization of resource-wealthy Latinos, whose entire existence is political, whose past is rife with conflict and an absence of transparency, and whose messages are pro-colonial and lack true respect for people of mestizo and indigenous descent.

I recall being told about some of the beliefs by a member of this community of why indigenous people of Peru were poor; it was explained to be a 'cultural problem' as opposed to a 'social problem'. The cultural problem being that the Quechua speaker, although creative, has little capacity to understand complex thought processes, such as those attainable by a Spanish speaker. Secondly, their inability to understand complex economics due to their lack of education is the other 'cultural' issue. Hence, this is why they (rural migrants - Andean people) only participate in petty, simple economic activity. This is a good way of explaining why those 'savages' are poor; they apparently just don't know how to be rich because they belong to an inferior culture with an inferior language!

While again my ideas are political, I find it incredibly dangerous that these sorts of ideas are spread about indigenous/Andean people, considering that none of those who are spewed these versions of the Sodality/creole/conservative realities at any given moment are really in any situation to contact rural migrants from Andean/indigenous backgrounds in a meaningful way and in a neutral/safe atmosphere, although I doubt one can create such an atmosphere with 30 wealthy North Americans in a 'pueblo joven'.

The fact that people participating in 'Solidarity in Action', an organization within the Sodalit Family, are not given the opportunity to explore the reality of the people who they are 'acting in solidarity with' is startling and creating a very slippery slope where assumptions are easily made. These assumptions are then asserted by a Sodality member on the trip, who will explain the social realities of the rural migrants to the ignorant 'do-good' foreigners (from what is a fairly racist creole perspective). The notion that the kindness and the 'purity of the heart' of those who live in the 'pueblos jovenes' of Lima are then assumed to be partially caused by the solidarity between the organization 'there to help' and the 'grateful' and 'needy' community.


And we haven't even begun to speak about the ideas spread about liberation theologists and non-conservatives. Having read this article written by a sympathizer of the movement, who had only four days of experience with the Sodality movement, it is apparent that some of the same ideas spread by this organization are already being spewed from his mouth!

"My four days in Peru were spent as the guest of a remarkable religious community you may not have heard about, the "Sodality of Christian Life." Sodality means "promise" or "friendship," and in Peru, I encountered both."

On the other Catholic Institutions:
"San Pablo has already become the leading Catholic university in Peru and is now drawing students from adjacent countries. The older Catholic institutions, such as Catholic University of Lima, are centers of extreme left, radical feminist and pro-abortion ideology. Remnants of the liberation theology that thrived in Peru in the '70s and '80s still exist. (Remember the ex-nuns who assumed combat fatigues and protected terrorists in the name of the people?)"

This is incredibly humorous, as Luis Fernando Figari started in PUCP (Catholic University of Lima) and launched his attack from PUCP on the Liberation Theologist Catholic thinker, Gustavo Gutierrez, who worked in PUCP. The fact that Luis Fernando Figari's movement has contempt for this institution is strange, as radical right-winged movements also were created there. This is perhaps their way of 'othering' less right-wing institutions from their newly founded San Pablo University.

The idea of liberation theology as pro-Senderista [Sendero Luminoso - Shining Path] is also derived directly from the Sodalit Family. The fact that liberation theologists believed in political action does not mean that they supported terrorism or terrorist activities. In fact, liberation theologists spoke out against violent conflict, as it was not part of their theology (at least that derived from Gustavo Gutierrez). Secondly, the fact that in the Takillakkta songs translated and through the speeches of Luis Fernando Figari and his members, the outright support and graciousness for the arrival of the Spaniards, who murdered many indigenous people, is absolutely hypocritical considering that the Sodalites try and portray themselves as anti-conflict and anti-violent by their strong stance against terrorism. I suppose that if they could rationalize non-believers as inhuman, the murders of so many indigenous people during the conquest could be justified and allow them to conclude the Spaniards who came to the Americas were blessed by God and not murderers (remember, the conquest wasn't peaceful by any means).

A couple of interesting afterthoughts on the Sodalits: if they are so anti-terrorist and pretty much all of the victims of terrorism were mestizos or indigenous, why is it that there is no 'solidarity' between indigenous or mestizo organizations and the Sodalit Family? Secondly, why is it that the Sodalit Family doesn't acknowledge the Commission for Truth and Reconciliation, which strives to bring social justice to families affected by terrorism and is actually reported to be in conflict with them? [please refer to the source section, where there is an article about right-wing organizations attacking authors of the Truth and Reconciliation document] Any measure that acknowledges the grave injustices against indigenous people and seeks to ensure the poor treatment of indigenous and mestizo people doesn't happen again I would consider as social justice.

Anyhow, my purpose was not to prove the fallacies of that statement, although it is always important to be critical. The ability for this gentlemen who was in Peru for four days to gain that social commentary on Peru in four days is nearly impossible, at least without being manipulated or told what to think and what to say about certain issues by the people he was surrounded with.

I hope that this example given can help sympathizers of this organization understand that short stints with this organization produce biased 'truth-spewing' based on the words of Sodalits, whose questionable, manipulative tactics are already under scrutiny. By looking at this example, I hope people will think critically about what they have been told and where these ideas came from.