Don Samuel Ruiz died 15 years ago, at the age of 86, on January 24th, 2011. El Tatic, as he was known in Chiapas, gave his life not only for the indigenous people of Mexico but also for Central Americans subjected to centuries of exploitation, marginalization, and contempt. He left millions of indigenous people orphaned, whom he defended with social passion and religious fervor. This stance made him an uncomfortable figure, especially for the wealthy in positions of secular power and religious authority, such as Girolamo Prigione, Norberto Rivera, and Juan Sandoval Íñiguez. And for high-ranking Vatican officials, such as Angelo Sodano, Secretary of State, who sided with the Legionaries of Christ and with Augusto Pinochet.
Samuel Ruiz was born in Irapuato in 1924, in the heart of the Bajío region, a region steeped in Catholic conservatism. His religious journey is remarkable, ranging from the Cristero faith of his childhood to the avant-garde renewal of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), in which he participated at the young age of 37.
He embraced the boldness of the Medellín Conference (1968), the preferential option for the poor, and the staunch defense of indigenous human rights. Samuel Ruiz is an heir to Fray Bartolomé de Las Casas, the Dominican friar who defended the indigenous people in the 16th century, to the Council, and to liberation theology. Given such clerical opacity, his example should inspire new generations, but today’s priests remain entrenched in the conservatism imposed by Karol Wojtyla and Joseph Ratzinger.
Don Samuel belongs to a golden generation in the history of the Latin American Church and shares the pursuit of social justice alongside legendary bishops such as Hélder Câmara (Brazil), Juan Landázuri (Peru), Leonidas Proaño (Ecuador), Jesús Silva Enríquez (Chile), Óscar Arnulfo Romero (El Salvador), and Sergio Méndez Arceo himself.
It is no coincidence that on February 15th, 2016, Pope Francis, during his visit to Mexico, went to visit his tomb in the Cathedral of San Cristóbal. He brought flowers and prayed silently for several minutes. This gesture undoubtedly reaffirmed and vindicated the legacy of the indigenous bishop.
Let’s return to the timeline. Following the armed uprising in Chiapas in January 1994, numerous media outlets, political and religious figures, and commentators were quick to point to Samuel Ruiz as the main instigator of the insurrection. This is denounced by Carlos Fazio in his book, ‘’Samuel Ruiz, the Wanderer’’ (1994). In his defense, we recall that Don Samuel himself, during the Pope’s brief visit to Mérida in August 1993, warned about the explosive situation in Chiapas; he gave John Paul II a report documenting his concern about an uprising.
The warning was ignored, even labeled as exhibitionism by his own fellow bishops. The historian Jean Meyer, in his book ‘’Samuel Ruiz in San Cristóbal’’ (2000), states that while the Zapatista uprising cannot be attributed to Don Samuel, it also cannot be explained without his historical contribution as head of the Diocese of San Cristóbal. The pastoral work of the diocese trained nearly 100,000 catechists, who undoubtedly swelled the ranks and nurtured the Zapatista movement.
Samuel Ruiz was a man of the Church. He rarely clashed publicly with his fellow bishops, despite profound differences. Don Samuel insisted that the dynamism of his diocese was not the merit of a single person, but of a broad group of religious and lay people.
The Diocese of San Cristóbal de Las Casas experienced a remarkable surge thanks to three factors: a) the priority given to the formation and quantitative growth of catechists, deacons, and indigenous pastoral agents with an inculturation approach; b) the establishment of an open and participatory diocesan governance, moving beyond the rigid, traditionally authoritarian structure; and c) the Diocese of San Cristóbal became a refuge for a significant number of priests, religious, and lay people who, due to their social stances, had been expelled or marginalized from other dioceses.
Samuel Ruiz’s moral authority led him to mediate between the government and the EZLN, preventing further bloodshed. It also aroused resentment and suspicion from both the government and a conservative sector of the Church.
In that fateful year of 1994, fraught with assassinations, succession intrigues, and the crisis of the Salinas administration, Samuel Ruiz was the target of an intense media smear campaign, the epicenter of which was located at the nunciature, then occupied by the nuncio Girolamo Prigione, a sworn enemy of the indigenous bishop.
“What goes to Rome arrives to Rome,” goes the ecclesiastical adage; indeed, Prigione almost succeeded in his removal. On the other hand, there were other sectors within the Mexican Episcopal Conference (CEM), such as Ernesto Corripio, Sergio Obeso, and Bartolomé Carrasco, who supported him. Samuel Ruiz was an exceptional man of the Church. However, despite his passionate social commitment to defending justice and the poor, Samuel Ruiz was conservative in moral matters. Out of conviction and a sense of ecclesial discipline, it must be said, he followed Rome’s dictates on issues such as abortion, homosexuality, and same-sex couples.
His greatest contribution was promoting indigenous theology; that is, the inculturation of the Gospel in the indigenous world and constructing models and figures that prevail as innovative proposals. Don San, we still miss you.
Original article by Bernardo Barranco, La Jornada, January 28th, 2026.
Translated by Schools for Chiapas.