Priscilla Cagnoni Garcia,
Cambridge University
Powerful Words: How Evangelicals symbolise their religion in Brazilian parliaments
In 2017, a 20-foot panel featuring the Ark of the Covenant, a holy dove, and an open Bible was installed at the Bahia State Parliament hall in Brazil. The artefact, conceived by then-state deputy Pastor Sargent Isidório, a retired military police officer turned Pentecostal pastor and later politician, ignited a heated debate among state deputies, the media, and the public. Called a “holy war” by some state deputies, the debate polarised public opinion. Many critics argued that the piece violated Brazil’s federal laws of secularism. In contrast, supporters of the panel pointed out the presence of a 40-year-old mural in the assembly hall depicting the Catholic feast of Lord Jesus of Navegantes (Bom Jesus dos Navegantes) alongside orishas and Greek mythological deities, arguing that the new panel was just one more religious symbol in a myriad of others already displayed in the house. At a stalemate, both artworks continue to adorn the Bahian Parliament today.
The Bahia case represents the most blatant attempt by an Evangelical politician to display an “Evangelical symbol” in a state building in Brazil. What stands out from this case is Pastor Isidório’s efforts to “materialise the Bible” by creating and displaying a distinctively “Evangelical artefact” in and for the parliament. In his most recent book, James Bielo (2022) defines “materialising the Bible” as the ways in which Christians turn Biblical narratives and places into objects of contemplation and experience, from miniatures to Biblical-themed amusement parks. In a similar fashion, Brazilian Evangelicals have been keen to “materialise the Bible” throughout the country: it is not uncommon to find in most Brazilian cities monuments celebrating the Bible, often called “Bible Square” (Praça da Bíblia) or “Bible Monument” (Monumento à Bíblia). While these sites vary in size and aesthetics, they often share the same basic elements: a large open Bible featuring a verse inscription displayed on a structure that the faithful may use for religious gatherings. In state buildings, however, Evangelicals have been less inclined to “materialise the Bible” in the terms Bielo defines or in the way Bondy discusses in his piece on the Canadian parliament. Instead, Evangelicals create and display “Evangelical symbols” in Brazilian state buildings primarily by institutionalising and performing Bible readings in parliament. By reciting the biblical text in the official assemblies, Evangelicals close the gap between the material and the immaterial and reorder, albeit momentarily, the boundaries between the religious and the political. Through language, they uniquely create, display, and position “Evangelical symbols” within the state.
Let me clarify what I mean by “Evangelical symbols”. With the explosion of Pentecostalism in Brazil, Christianity became immensely diversified, but it can be roughly divided into two main groups according to historical and theological origins: Roman Catholics and Evangelicals (Evangélicos). The label “Evangelicals” encompasses all non-Roman Catholic Christians, regardless of denomination and the differences this entails. It is a label commonly used by everyday Brazilians that has proven to be particularly productive for scholars of religion working on Brazil (cf. Mafra 2001). When we examine “religious symbols in government buildings” in light of this heuristic distinction, some important aspects of what “Evangelical symbols” are and do become apparent. “Evangelical symbols” are primairly about positionality. As such, “proper Evangelical symbols” must first do the work of properly separating Evangelicals from Catholics.
The afterlife of Brazil’s colonial past is particularly visible through the powerful imbrications of the Catholic Church with the state. The massive presence of crucifixes in state buildings, from the office of the presidency to the Supreme Court to the smallest of city council buildings, is perhaps the best example of this (see Giumbelli 2011; Ranquetat Junior 2011; Rezende 2021 and Sá Leitão’s piece). Although Evangelicals do not oppose the presence of the crucifix in state buildings, as they have in the past (Ranquetat Junior 2011, p. 98-99), adopting it as a material symbol of their religion evokes not only the problem of positionality I just discussed but also the “problem of presence” (Engelke 2007). Pentecostals, the majority of Brazil’s Evangelicals and the most influential in politics, embrace a religious and linguistic ideology that privileges immaterial experiences over material ones. They also follow a strict form of iconoclasm that prohibits the use of images, especially depictions of Jesus and other heavenly beings. For Brazilian Evangelicals, the crucifix is too “fetishized”, to put in Webb Keane’s words (Keane 2007), as it materialises Christianity perhaps a bit too much, rending it disingenuous (Engelke 2007; Keane 1997a).
Evangelicals have sought then to display and circulate an “Evangelical symbol” that does not only resolve the problem of positionality and fetishism but realises the paradoxes of Evangelical language ideology. That is, the idea that language is seen as immaterial and, therefore, “proper” to engage the sacred. Yet, they are also aware that language offers enough robust physical and performative qualities that allow it to shape an entire social context (see Cavanaugh & Shankar 2017). Bible readings, in this way, become a particular kind of “thing” (see Coleman 1996; Keane 1997b; Tambiah 1968), powerfully linking the material and the immaterial. Distinctively from crucifixes, which have been part of a central debate about secularisation for the last 130 years in Brazil, but yet are present in most state buildings, the institutionalisation, as well as the prohibition of Bible readings in parliament, have been on the rise for the last 15 years. This is because the symbolism of Bible readings operates differently from what people expect to see in religious symbols used in the state buildings in Brazil.
The crucifix is a tacit symbol. It is a religious symbol that is materially present but yet unable to shape the situational context in the way Bible readings do. Crucifixes are primarily aesthetic interventions; they rely on conventional semiotic properties that convey different messages to different publics. As Giumbelli (2011) and Rezende (2021) show, crucifix displays in state buildings in Brazil have been interpreted quite differently. To some, they are a representation of “Brazil’s national culture”, part of the country’s “historical memory”, or a form of “national belief”, which represents “the beliefs of the majority of Brazilian society”. Bible readings, on the other hand, embody the main tenets of Evangelical ideology I have discussed (e.g. positionality, language ideology, and so on). They also operate across semiotic and material dimensions. As such, they are not only indexical of the religious ideas conveyed by the biblical text but also represent the conservative political ideologies and alliances attached to the category “Evangelical politician” that circulate in Brazilian society. As a linguistic intervention, institutionalised Bible readings build on both semiotics and the materiality of language and transcend the symbolic and material qualities of traditional religious symbols. By infusing the parliament, albeit momentarily, with the objectified “Word of God”, Bible readings transform politicians and participants of the assemblies into listeners of the Word, pushing the boundaries between the religious and the political. This is why, as an “Evangelical symbol”, Bible readings are extremely effective and so powerfully dangerous.
3 April 2025
Works Cited
Bielo, J. (2022). Materializing the Bible: Scripture, sensation, place. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Cavanaugh, J., & Shankar, S. (2017). Language and materiality: Ethnographic and theoretical explorations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Coleman, S. (1996). Words as Things: Language, aesthetics and the objectification of protestant Evangelicalism. Journal of Material Culture 1(1), 107–128.
Engelke, M. E. (2007). A problem of presence: Beyond Scripture in an African church. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Giumbelli, E. (2011). Crucifixos invisíveis: Polêmicas recentes no Brasil sobre símbolos religiosos em recintos estatais. Anuário Antropológico 36(1), p. 77-105.
Igreja Batista Caminho das Árvores. (2017, August 28). Assembleia Legislativa da Bahia inaugurou painel em homenagem ao Deus de Israel [Video file]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=vGQZ0wVZHzo&ab_channel=IGREJABATISTACAMINHOSDAS%C3%81RVORES.
Keane, W. (1997a). From Fetishism to Sincerity: On Agency, the Speaking Subject, and their Historicity in the Context of Religious Conversion. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 39(4), 674–693.
_______. (1997b). Religious Language. Annual Review of Anthropology 26(1), 47–71.
_______. (2007). Christian moderns : freedom and fetish in the mission encounter. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Mafra, C. (2001). Os evangélicos. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar Editor.
Ranquetat Júnior, C.A. (2011). A Presença do crucifixo nos tribunais brasileiros: Laicidade e símbolos religiosos em discurso. Debates do NER 20, p.97-120.
Rezende, M.P.L. (2021). Crucifixos em Repartições Públicas: Os limites da garantia da liberdade religiosa no Estado laico brasileiro. Belo Horizonte: Editora Dialética.
Salles, E. (n.d.). Praça do Milênio passa a chamar Praça da Bíblia. A Cidade De Itupeva. https://www.elissalles.com.br/blog-conteudo/4333/praca-do-milenio-passa-a-chamar-praca-da-biblia.
Souza, L. (2012, May 4). Leitura bíblica agora é obrigatória nas sessões ordinárias da Assembleia Legislativa de Goiás. 03/05/2012 – UOL Notícias. https://noticias.uol.com.br/politica/ultimas-noticias/2012/05/03/leitura-biblica-agora-e-obrigatoria-nas-sessoes-ordinarias-daassembleia-legislativa-de-goias.htm
Tambiah, S. J. (1968). The Magical Power of Words. Man 3(2), 175–208
