Before moving on to the next essay which will focus on the Cuban-American community, I would like to briefly address a movement that has had an impact on the Puerto Rican-American community. I am referring to the group known as FALN which stands for Fuerzas Armadas de Liberacion Nacional (Armed Forces of National Liberation). This was a paramilitary group whose focus was taking direct action to achieve the independence of Puerto Rico. I will not go into much detail on this essay concerning this group because my focus is on the issue of how we evaluate the issue of ethnic and racial discrimination within the framework of Scripture and theology. The reader is encouraged to do her/his own research on this group and draw her/his own conclusions. I would also encourage the reader to read my previous essay on Puerto Ricans in the diaspora in the U.S.A. and determine for herself/himself if the role played by FALN is a legitimate one by biblical/theological standards.
As mentioned before, FALN was a paramilitary organization that focused specifically on the independence of Puerto Rico, and to a lesser extent, on the democratic rights of Puerto Ricans living in the U.S.A. It is said that they were guided by a Marxist ideology, and they did believe in resorting to armed struggle as part of the mission to achieve the goal of political indepence. They claimed responsibility for many acts of ¨terror¨ in both the U.S.A. and in Puerto Rico. I personally witnessed one of these ¨terrorist¨ acts when I was working as a teletype operator for Thompson-Mckinnon, a brokerage house in lower Manhattan. The year was 1975. While I was I was typing, I heard an explosion which came from across the street. Suddenly, I saw people running in different directions and within minutes of the explosion, many police cars and firetrucks arrived on the scene. The building in which the Fraunces Tavern was located had been bombed and several people had died as a result of the bombing. FALN claimed responsibility for this ¨terrorist¨ act.
The reader may want to know why I place the word ¨terrorist¨ within quotes. The reason for this is because the terms ¨terrorists¨ and ¨freedom fighters¨ are relative depending on whose perspective is the dominant one. The American revolutionaries fighting against England for national independence were considered ¨freedom fighers,¨ and Palestinians and other Arabs who have fought against Zionist Israel and their lackeys are designated as ¨terrorists.¨" The issue is not so much whether armed struggle should or should not be used, but rather whether the cause for which armed struggle is used is a justified one.
My issue is a different one. Is armed struggle, which usually resorts in bloodshed, a valid way of achieving justice according to the Christian tradition? The answer to this question will depend on who one asks. Christians on both sides of the issue will give different answers according to not only their personal conviction, but also according to which interests they are trying to promote and reserve. Many American Christians will vehemently defend the method of armed struggle used by the American revolutionaries who fought against England, but then turn around and condemn those who use similar methods to defend what they consider their legitimate rights.
My question would be, whose particular biblical hermeneutic (interpretation) is the correct one in terms of addressing the issues of war and peace? Is the correct hermeneutic determined by those in power or should it be determined by those who believe and consider themselves to be oppressed?
I invite you, the reader to join this dialogue by sharing your perspectives and views. No answer is ¨right¨ or ¨wrong¨ in and of itself. Your participation is most welcome and appreciated.
In the Name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer. Amen.
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona
No comments:
Post a Comment