The final tendency presented here among liberationist Christians during the period of state terror is the turn to the politics of human rights. While a significant sector of the movement de-politicised and sought greater integration into ecclesial structures, and some others refused to renounce revolutionary politics, the emergent human rights movement offered a third option. Although human rights discourse in Argentina occupied a marginal position in the political scene up until the mid-1970s, it was thrust into the foreground during the period of state terror (1974–1983). As will be noted, this was not merely a natural consequence of the unprecedented scale of state violence, but the result of contingent developments in the national and international context.

For liberationist Christians, as with much of the political left, human rights offered a form of political resistance and opposition to the regime; but one that pre-empted the accusations of Marxist subversion levelled by the military. In this discourse, opposition to the dictatorship was expressed primarily in terms of the violation of internationally recognised rights, rather than the revolutionary overthrow of a system or the conquest of power. As such, it was frequently couched in a juridical lexicon and appealed to legal authorities, deliberately attempting to position itself within hegemonic notions of political legitimacy. To some extent, this discursive shift among revolutionary Christians can also be understood as moving from positive freedom (freedom to) to negative freedom (freedom from): revolutionary Christianity had affirmed liberation in terms of the positive conquest of freedom, and the ability of the people/working classes to shape their own world; human rights, in contrast, emphasised liberation in terms of freedom from repression and violence. Nevertheless, the participation of liberationist and popular Christianity also carried through some social demands and identification with popular classes. As Jennifer Adair notes in her study of the diocese of Quilmes, whose bishop, Jorge Novak, was a key human rights leader, state terror ‘prompted the remaking of popular politics’ and enabled the reframing of ‘social citizenship around a new language of human rights’.

After a discussion on the emergence of the human rights movement, the chapter explores in more depth the relationship between liberationist Christianity and human rights in Argentina. Subsequently, it recounts the ecumenical experience in Mendoza, where a vibrant movement received and assisted refugees fleeing from the dictatorship in Chile.