This is not ancient history!

Rating: Null/10 (25 April 2003)

The Mission can be read as a recounting of an early version of a strain of Catholicism which gained in popularity in Latin America during the 60's, 70's and 80's, called Liberation Theology by some and a Preferential Option for the Poor by others. It taught that the Church's primary responsibility lay in solidarity with those who suffered most in this life, and that salvation did not lie simply in acts of faith, but also in acts of justice. Grassroots priests and lay pastors who, by virtue of their contact with the lives of their congregations, came to identify with their daily struggles, much as the Irons and De Niro characters did in the film. The Mission is a clearly political film, and probably one that is intended to be so by its Director and Writer. It's undoubtedly a moving film, especially with its decidedly non-Hollywood ending, but I think that it's greatest political force is derived from its implicit commentary on the political climate into which it was released in 1986, and by extension, the political climate today.
In 1985, the year before this film was released, Reagan declared that he would ignore a ruling of the World Court, the highest judicial body on the planet, and one whose judgements the US is bound to uphold. The ruling in question was one which ordered on the US to cease its "Illegal use of Force" (which is another term for international terrorism) and to pay $17 billion in reparations. The plaintiff in the case was Nicaragua, which was under attack by a proxy army armed, organized, and managed by the US. The Congress, for its part, announced immediately that our proxy army, the Contra, were explicitly authorized to attack what were called "soft targets", namely undefended civilian targets such as schools, clinics, and churches. That is, our response to the charge of International Terrorism was to increase our International Terrorism.
Nicaragua at the time was one of the few places in Latin America where the State actively supported Liberation Theology, which by then was very prevalent amongst lay Jesuit pastors throughout Central America. It's hardly a coincidence that so many Jesuits were killed by US proxies, especially in El Salvador, where we even had the temerity to kill a conservative Archbishop who had dared to do his job and defend the pastors of his order. Far fewer died in Nicaragua, where the army actually acted to defend the population instead of attacking it.
So while it's nice to admire the film for its various technical and artistic achievements, and it makes us feel good to lament the past history it purports to tell, for the film to become truly relevant, we'd need to make the connection to what is going on in the present, and more importantly, what we can do about it.
The attack on Nicaragua succeeded, like most of the violent undertakings of the Home of the Brave. If we're honest, we'll take a look at the rest of the world and see where we're continuing to play the role of the Portugese soldiers; if we're decent we'll do something to stop it.