Oscar Garza

El diálogo teológico sobre la eucaristía entre católicos, luteranos y anglicanos ha pasado de un conflicto histórico a un acercamiento doctrinal significativo. Los esfuerzos ecuménicos, en particular el documento de 1978 titulado La cena del Señor, han tendido puentes sobre las diferencias relativas a la misa entendida como memorial y sacrificio. Aunque Martín Lutero rechazó la transubstanciación como un concepto “escolástico” y “no bíblico” –prefiriendo la palabra “consubstanciación”, según la cual Cristo está presente “en, con y bajo” el pan y el vino—, los diálogos modernos muestran un mayor consenso. Los católicos han aceptado la crítica a los excesos del pasado, mientras que los luteranos consideran cada vez más la eucaristía como una ofrenda de Cristo y de la Iglesia. El anglicanismo rechazó históricamente la idea de transubstanciación, en los 39 Artículos, oscilando a menudo entre las visiones metabólica y simbólica. Sin embargo, los diálogos de la ARCIC, desde 1966, han afirmado una fe común en la presencia real, independientemente de las creencias individuales. Pensadores contemporáneos, como Elisabeth Ascombe y Catherine Pickstock, abogan por un “escepticismo eucarístico” que une lo simbólico y lo ontológico, yendo más allá de la simple dicotomía presencia-ausencia.

In this article, we introduce a common good approach to development as a necessary and transformative complement to development theory and practice. Going beyond individual assessments, we distinguish a common good approach to development as one that focuses on the processes by which societies organise themselves to produce the goods that we value collectively and that bind a society together. We argue that a common good approach to development is about the quality of the social processes and institutions (i.e. the social dynamics) that promote an ever-increasing human coexistence. We then propose a theoretical framework to operationalise such an approach through a metric of common good dynamics at the local level.

Every indigenous people around the world has its own autonomy process, expressed in various relevant dimensions of daily life. This paper argues that autonomy in indigenous communities can be considered as a common good dynamic, and therefore autonomy processes can be studied within the framework of the common good approach to development. To this end, the paper first identifies the general dimensions of any autonomy process by considering the perspective of indigenous peoples – drawing partly on official documents, but more significantly on their lived experiences and explicit demands in the Mexican context. It then links these dimensions to a matrix of common good dynamics developed by the Instituto Promotor del Bien Común (IPBC). Finally, the paper explores the dynamics of the autonomy process of the Nahua community of Cuauhtamazaco in Puebla, Mexico, in the light of this common good metric. It finds that the social, cultural, and political dimensions are essential to indigenous peoples’ autonomy processes and can be inferred within the common good approach framework. However, as the important dimension of territory is missing from the approach, its incorporation needs to be evaluated.

In recent decades, there has been a surge in proposals to measure ‘good quality’, ‘decent work’ for all as an intrinsic aspect of development. This article aims to contribute to this discussion, but from the perspective of a common good approach to development in the context of Indigenous communities in southern Mexico. Drawing on specialised literature about the social and collective organisation of work in these contexts, the article offers an ethical reflection on conceptions of work. It concludes that current indicators are biased towards (1) market-mediated, (2) outcome-oriented, (3) individual-based conceptualisations of work, and therefore provide a limited understanding of the nature of work and the social mechanisms that organise it in these communities. Therefore, building on the common good approach to development, the article proposes that work in these settings is best understood as a common good; a good that is valued, produced, sustained and enriched through the participation of all, for the benefit of all.