When we speak of democracy, we think of the founding experience of the Greeks, in whose cities the citizens exercised directly the power of decision, in accordance with the principle of majority rule. As much as we may idealize it, especially after the theorizing of Plato and Aristotle, Greek democracy was, in reality, very restricted. The city-states were small and only 1/6 of the population participated in the democracy, specifically, the free citizens. Women, slaves, artisans, foreigners and immigrants were excluded. But the Greek experience became the reference point for all subsequent political reflection. However, another democratic experience, much more radical than the Greek, was lived by the first two generations of Christians. This is paradigmatic for all subsequent utopic thinking, even though it has been abandoned by present day Christianity, which was organized in a contrary manner. It did not become a basis for present political discourse because it was developed within the framework of a religious experience, considered of little or no value to lay or laicist thinking. Now, notwithstanding its religious flavor, we see that the early Christian democracy, like any other social phenomenon, merits consideration, especially when one seeks radical democracy, to be brought to bear in all areas of human experience, in the social movements and the economy; this is, a total democracy. The source of that radical democracy was the example of Jesus: absolutely anti-discriminatory, anti-hierarchical and of universal fraternity. Saint Paul summarizes it all: «No longer is there either Jew or Greek, slave or freeman, man or woman, for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.» (Gal 3, 28.) The result was that slaves, free men and women, sailors, merchants, lawyers, soldiers ... independent of their social status and of their gender, formed fraternal communities that lived in «koinonia» (communion), a word that expresses the radical communism of «having everything in common», sharing material goods «according to the needs of each». It is said in praise: «there were no poor among them» (Acts 2 and 3). That democracy was truly radical because the whole community took part in the decision making processes. Their basic law was: «what matters to all, must be decided by all». That was also the way bishops and presbyters were appointed. Such community was called «ekklesia» in Greek, «ecclesia» in Latin and «iglesia» in Castilian. The original meaning of «ekklesia» was not religious, but political: the popular assembly. That secular name was chosen to distinguish the democracy of the followers of Jesus from other religious expressions of the time. This memory has been lost to the Catholic Church. The late Pope John Paul II was once asked if the Catholic church was a democracy. He replied: "No, it is a «koinonia.»" Now, «koinonia» is synonymous with radical democracy, which certainly is not what John Paul II was thinking. In fact, as the Catholic Church is now structured, it is not «koinonia.» It is a spiritual absolutist monarchy organized in accordance with the heritage of past European monarchies. As such, it shuts its doors to the democracy of the early followers of Jesus of Nazareth. Or it just accepts it as an innocuous form of spirituality. It is important that we rescue the revolutionary memory hidden in the word, «Church». Perhaps it may inspire another way of being Christians and of being citizens? - Leonardo Boff. Theologian. Free translation from the Spanish: REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas