One of the various issues to be dealt with in the theology of the Latinx community in the U.S.A is that of the role of the Bible. We begin by acknowledging that in both the Catholic and the Protestant traditions, as well as in other independent Christian communities of the Hispanic American Diaspora, that the Bible plays a very important role.. Up until the time of Vatican II, Latinos in the U.S.A. had to contend with issue of language. To begin with, up until that time, the Mass in the Catholic churches was conducted in the Latin language. Secondly, the language spoken by the majority in the U. S. A., especially by the first and second generations, was Spanish (a derivative of Latin). And thirdly, many of the Hispanic Catholic parishes were shepherded by non-Spanish speaking priests, so that the congregants heard the Mass celebrated in English, a language which they had a difficult time understanding and becoming accustomed to.
In the mainline Protestant churches (especially the Pentecostal churches), the worship services were conducted in the Spanish language. Second-generation Hispanic youth (including yours truly) learned how to read Spanish by reading the Bible. Our world revolved around the Bible and around how the particular church understood its message. In the Baptist and Pentecostal churches, Bible institutes were established to prepare pastors and other church leaders. Many of the second and third generation Hispanics (myself included) attended and graduated from these schools and were subsequently appointed, commissioned, and ordained to leadership position in the Church.
Like it happens in the churches of other cultures, ethnic groups, nationalities, and races, Hispanic churches have sometimes fallen into the trap of idolatry, i.e worship of the Bible. There is a tendency to read the Bible superficially and literally, without paying attention to the linguistic origin of the Scriptures, the context (both external and internal), the history of how we got the Bible, the issues of date, authorship, audience, reason for writing, styles of writing, types of literature in the Bible, matters of the different translations, etc. etc. The mindset has been "The Bible says so, end of story." The basic belief is that "The Bible is the Word of God," and therefore, we should not bother with all this other "razzle dazzle." As one radio preacher once said, "I believe in the Bible from cover to cover, and I even believe the cover." Added to that is the idea that in order to do theology, it is not necessary to read or study any book other than the Bible. Any reading of additional literature (with the possible exception of devotional books and commentaries), will result, according to this thinking, in having the message of Scripture clouded, distorted, misunderstood, misinterpreted, and that eventually, the authority of Scripture would be only called into question, but also undermined.
Regarding the last sentence, I will never forget, and often tend to quote an experience which I had back in the 1970's in a Hispanic church in Staten Island, New York. One Sunday morning I was asked to conduct the adult class in the Sunday School because the teacher for that class was absent. In those days, a Sunday School lesson book (a mini-commentary) was used alongside the Bible. There was a heated discussion about a particular issue. One of the students insisted that his point of view on the subject was the correct one because his position was supported by the lesson book. When I showed him how the lesson book contradicted the Scripture, his response was that "whoever inserted that into the Scripture was wrong." Needless to say, I, as that teacher for that day, was both flabbergasted and shocked! I could not believe for one single second that this individual was giving more authority and more weight to the lesson book than he was to the Scripture.
Fernando Segovia reminds us that neither the task of theologizing, nor the task of interpretation-both highly interrelated and interdependent activities-takes place in a social vacuum, independent of the social location, however defined, of the theologian or interpreter in question. Such a theoretical position is by no means new, but it came into prominence, and with much greater vehemence, in the last quarter of the twentieth century than ever before (Fernando Segovia, "Hispanic American Theology and the Bible: Effective Weapon and Faithful Ally." Roberto Goizueta, ed. We Are A People: Initiatives in Hispanic American Theology. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992, p. 21).
Since the beginning of the 1970's, theological studies have seen the explosion of a number of movements that have called into question the established theological methods, with their often implicit claims to universality and objectivity. Similarly, the end of the 1970's witnessed the displacement of the long-reigning and universally accepted paradigms with historical criticism within biblical studies, with its implicit search for a sole, definitive, and objective meaning of the biblical text-a meaning that was usually located in either the world represented by the text or in the intention of the author of the text. Both of these shifts were fundamental in character, involving profound and far-reaching theoretical and methodological change (Ibid., p. 23).
In the field of theological studies, this shift was in part, represented by a deliberate and explicit attention to the role of context in the theological task, with a wide variety of contextual theologies emerging as a result, for example, liberation theologies of the Third World, feminist theology, and so-called minority theologies of the First World (Susan Brooks and Thistlethwaite and Mary Potter Engel, "Introduction: Making the Connection Among Liberation Theologies Around the World." Thistlethwaite and Engel, eds., Lift Every Voice: Constructing Theologies from the Underside. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1990, pp. 1-15).
In the field of biblical studies, this shift was characterized by a full return to social criticism, involving a wide range of the theoretical spectrum, e.g. sectarianism, millenarianism, social dynamics and roles, sociology of knowledge, Mediterranean studies, and literary criticism, again covering a wide range of theoretical spectrum, e.g., narratology, rhetorical theory, communication theory, feminist criticism, reader response (Mark Allan Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?: Guides to Biblical Scholarship. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990, pp. 1-21). This approach seeks to interpret and understand the Bible in its cultural and social context.
For the purpose of this segment of the essay, Hispanic Americans ae considered as a distinct and identifiable configuration of social location, specifically circumscribed in terms of both ethnic background and sociopolitical status, and on the readings of the Bible that emerge out of this group. This approach includes the following observations:
1. The issue of nomenclature is complex and should be approached with care, subject to ongoing revision. "Hispanic Americans" is used to designate those individuals of Hispanic descent, associated in one way or another with the Americas, i.e South, Central, North, and the Caribbean who now live permanently, for whatever reason in the U.S.A. (Segovia, op. cit., p. 25).
2. Members of the group hail from many different quarters, and many different cultures, usually identifying themselves in terms of their country of origin, whether immediate, as in the case of immigrants, or remote, as in the case of later generations or those born in territories annexed by the U.S.A. (Ibid, p. 26).
3. The group as a whole as experienced phenomenal growth in the last several decades-a 53 per cent increase from 1980 to 1990 alone-largely as a result of continuing immigration and higher than average birthrate. Their presence in the country is clearly significant, and now, since the end of the 20th century, Hispanic Americans have become the largest minority group in the country (Ibid. p. 28).
4. At the same time, from both a socioeconomic and educational point of view, the group as a whole shows a considerable lag with the rest of the population. This is true of such economic indexes as median income, unemployment, business ownership, and home ownership; in fact, approximately 23 percent of Hispanic Americans were found to be living in poverty in 1990, as defined by government figures. It is also true of educational attainment at all levels from primary school to university, the dropout rate among Hispanic Americans is close to a truly alarming 35 percent. In addition, from a socio-political point of view, political representation has remained meager and ineffective, a definite drawback within the American political system. Despite its significant presence and growth in American society, therefore, the group's overall situation has remained neutral (Ibid., p. 29).
5. Despite their divergent backgrounds and natural tendency to define themselves in terms of their country of origin, Hispanic American have more recently begun to see themselves as a distinctive group with common needs and goals, with a specific and urgent agenda, within the American political and cultural scene. To be sure, their social situation of marginalization, as well as the general tenor of outside reaction toward the group, marked by widespread and sustained discrimination,, have played a key role in this regard. This same development of conscientization and consolidation within the group may also be seen at work in the American theological scene. In effect, the theological voice of Hispanic Americans has begun to make itself heard as a new and ironic kind of "manifest destiny" from many different quarters, but with fundamental themes common (Fernando F. Segovia, A New Manifest Destiny: The Emerging Theological Voice of Hispanic Americans. Religious Studies Review 17, 1991, pp. 101-9).
En fin, we examine the use of the Bible in the Hispanic American community in different forms. At one point, we witness the aforementioned literal and superficial use of the Bible, without much regard to biblical history or biblical context. Normally, this particular usage of Scripture is geared towards an eschatological moment in history, i.e. "when Jesus comes." This use of the Bible is designed to help Christian prepare for the "hereafter." At another point, we witness the interpretation and use of Scripture in the Hispanic American community within a framework of socio-economic and political marginalization. The secondary and subservient role that Hispanic American play to the "powers that be" in U.S.A. society, together with all the injustices and oppression that accompany that role, constitute the biblical hermeneutic in that group. In other words, like in the case of their forefathers and foremothers in Latin America, oppression and subservience become, then, the starting point for biblical interpretation and theological reflection. In one given moment, the Bible is used to shed light on their situation. In another given moment, their understanding of the biblical message is derived from their existential reality of alienation and marginalization.
The particular biblical hermeneutical approach in the Latinx community is not monolithic. The hermeneutical approach used will depend on both geography and socio-economic condition. One thing remains for sure, i.e. the biblical hermeneutic of the Latinx community in the U.S.A. will always tend to be somewhat different than the hermeneutical approach of the Anglo-American and Euro-American society in general.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
Dr. Juan A. Carmona
No comments:
Post a Comment