One of the many issues in focusing on Hispanic-American theology is that of women. Since Liberation Theology, of which Hispanic-American theology is a part, focuses specifically on oppression and suffering, our attention here is given to women as an oppressed and suffering group. Whereas, in Latin America, women are oppressed on the basis of both gender and social class, in the U.S.A., women are oppressed on the basis of ethnic/racial discrimination as well as on the basis of gender and class. And for those Hispanic-American women who have an African background, the ethnic/racial discrimination constitutes a fourth layer of oppression.
Every kind of human thought maintains an intrinsic relation to the historical context in which it originates and to which it seeks to respond, whether to transform or to legitimize the context. Theology is not exempt from this principle, even when one acknowledges the internal structure of theology as a discipline that reflects upon the experience of faith in the light of revelation (Maria Pilar Aquino, "Doing Theology from the Perspective of Latin American Women," in We Are A People. Roberto Goizueta, ed. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992, p.79.
Theology, "try as it might to flee from historical objectivity, and to isolate itself in inter-religious discourse," almost always performs a historical function and enters into a relationship with the surrounding culture. At times, it is offering resistance to new cultural categories and legitimizing the established order against which those who struggle for a new order. At other times, it is receiving with approval the new cultural climates, reformulating the faith in accord with these new climates, exercising a critical and evangelical function, and making possible or supporting changes in the direction of greater justice (J.J. Tamayo-Acosta, Para Comprender la Teologia de la Liberacion. Estrella, Spain: Verbo Divino, 1989, p. 53).
In this sense, the theology articulated from the perspective of women commits itself to the needs, interests, and hopes of oppressed women who join their energies to those of other women and men in the construction of new social and ecclesial realities where egalitarian participation, human integrity, and life for all will be possible, and where women and men will be able to realize their full potential, thus foreshadowing the New Creation initiated by Jesus Christ. Our reflection is based on women's physical and spiritual experiences of oppression-liberation; it understands the historical present as the place where God's manifestation takes place, and it wants to respond to that manifestation within the horizon of the Christian faith. We are thus speaking here of a task that is undertaken out of these experiences of the Christian communities that struggle for their liberation and for an end to the age-old history of exploitation, colonial oppression, increasing impoverishment, and inhuman subjugation to which the great majority of Latin Americans, especially women, are exposed. The existence of these women is also affected by the patriarchal structures and the systemic machismo that relegate them to a subordinate place. This clarification will help the reader to understand the framework and emphases of women's contribution to this issue (Pilar Aquino in Goizueta, p. 80).
The second point refers to the limit and challenges one confronts when doing theology from the perspective of women. Since this is a perspective only recently explored in the history of the Church and theology, Latin Americans and Hispanics in the U.S.A believe that in our context, though there have already been significant contributions, this is a task yet to be more fully undertaken. Latin American and Hispanic-American women ought to engage in this task with all their energies alongside women from every corner of the earth, since they share the most profound longings of the oppressed in their eagerness to renew all things, i.e. to incorporate in the social and ecclesial orders, and in the processes of knowledge, the constitutive expression of humanity, women and men, both destined to enjoy the fullness of life in communion with the earth and with the whole of creation (Ibid.,p 81).
Discrimination against women in the Church is one of the most clear examples of the violation of human rights. Women make up at least half of the faithful and women religious are ten times the number of their male counterparts. However (from a Catholic standpoint), they are juridically considered to incapable of almost any leadership function, rarely present in secretariats, commissions, and sacred congregations. Due to cultural tradition as well as the historical expression of the Word of God, they are excluded from ministerial duties associated with the sacraments of orders (Leonardo Boff, Church: Charism & Power, Liberation Theology and the Institutional Church. New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1985, p.35).
In his book, A Chicano Theology, Andres Guerrero makes reference to Dolores Huerta, who at the time of writing was the vice-president of the United Farm Workers, and together with Cesar Chavez, devoted her life to the fight for justice and dignity for farm workers. She says "The Church has been responsible for a lot of the machismo because it does not do anything to counteract it. I think it is important that the Church take a role and make moral statement which has not been done. It's a male-dominated Church. The churches are all male-dominated, and the roles they have for women are all male-dominated roles, in spite of the Virgin of Guadalupe. Even in the whole idea of children-which I think is very important-the Church as done nothing in terms of helping women with these children. The Catholic Church should be number one in terms of setting up educational facilities for children, and they should be helping Latina women who have such tremendous cultural problems in this country with their kids. Yet, the Church is doing very little (Dolores Huerta in Andres Guerrero, A Chicano Theology. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1987, p. 40)."
Kortright Davis alludes to this issue of women leadership. While his focus is on the English-speaking Caribbean, much of what he says is also applicable to the Spanish-speaking Caribbean, which is culturally-speaking, part of Latin America and of the Hispanic Diaspora of the U.S.A. He says "Women are by far the more dominant sector, numerically in the life of the Church in the Caribbean, just as they are in other areas of the Christian world. The lifeblood of the church would be seriously malnourished if women were to withdraw their full participation and support. Yet church leaders continue to be ambivalent and hesitant about the significance of such participation and about the value of women in the leadership structures of the Christian movement. Can women be ordained? Some people in the Caribbean doubt it. Many more are decidedly against such a proposition. Caribbean society has been overwhelmingly a matriarchal society. Women have played the dominant and leading roles in the survival and shaping of the Caribbean. They have been the shapers of the Caribbean conscience, for they have nurtured most of these consciences singlehandedly, or carried many on their backs and cradled them in their arms (Kortright Davis, Emancipation Still Comin': Explorations in Caribbean Emancipatory Theology. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1990, pp. 90-91)."
Davis adds: "Caribbean women have indeed been the major preservers of the Caribbean cultural foundations. They have even provided most of the plantation labor, especially in the export crops that have provided bread for the region and profits for the wealthy outside the region. Their ministry and service in the Church and society are without question. The Church has an inescapable obligation to improve the lot of women in every possible way-not only through ordination, but also through a recognition of the significance of motherhood and feminine strength, and a determination to secure the rights and privileges of women (Ibid, p. 91)."
Latin American women doing theology of liberation attempt to recover a right that has been usurped: the right to reflect upon their unique way of expressing revelation and living their faith as a liberating force rather than as a source of oppression. They want to recover the right to express their experience of faith out of the integrity of their being so that the theological intelligence in its configuration, structure, method, and contents will promote the fulfillment of women as subjects in their own right. This enterprise, though not unique to women, is required of them in the face of the male-centered focus of theology currently articulated by men, including those who take a liberationist perspective (Pilar Aquino in Goizueta, p. 83).
Latin American feminist Liberation Theology assumes the option for the poor as its hermeneutical perspective and the social location for its theological task. This option is the fundamental and necessary principle for articulating the intelligibility of the faith in a way that will remain open to the actual reality and the divine manifestations it contains. The existence of massive poverty, the immeasurable suffering of whole peoples, and the longstanding oppression of women cannot but influence this theology at its very core. The option for the poor is demanded by reality itself and represents the necessary, honest, and appropriate response to reality. At a more fundamental level, such an option is demanded by the sources of biblical liberating traditions, the praxis of Jesus, the early Christian movement, and the prophetic movements that have occurred in the history of the Church and society. As an enterprise that articulates the language of faith, theology from the perspective of women understands itself as tied to the great current of popular movements that seek to eradicate existing inequalities; it is based on the experiences of this people in search of alternative realities, and seeks to contribute, from the horizon of the Christian faith, to this people's liberating journey (Ibid, p. 95).
En fin, what we are faced with is the reality that the Church has to address issues of oppression of women within its ranks. The Church cannot afford to "sweep under the rug" the issues of the theological justification and rationales for maintaining women in subservient roles. The Church is called to be proactive in seeking to dismantle within itself, all the structures of injustice. In order to do this, the Church needs to construct and adopt a biblical hermeneutic that will enable it to be faithful, effective, and responsible in carrying out its task of proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Visiting Professor of Theology, Tainan Theological College/Seminary
Saturday, October 21, 2017
Friday, October 20, 2017
The Role of Marianism in Hispanic-American Theology
One of the many areas that needs to be examined in both Latin-American and Hispanic-American theology is that of Marianism. Many in the Protestant tradition are hesitant to even talk about this because they believe that Marianism (veneration and respect for Mary the mother of Jesus) borders on Mariolatry (the deification and worship of Mary). In this essay, I seek to make a distinction between the two, and also to explore the role that Marianism plays in the Hispanic community in the Diaspora of the U.S.A.
We begin with the issue of the "Theotokos." In the Greek language, this word means "God-bearer." In the theology of the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches, the theology of the Theotokos is that in her human body, the Virgin Mary bore the incarnate Son of God. In some cases, this concept of "God-bearer" has been conceptually translated as "Mother of God." The concept of "Mother of God" alienates Protestant Christians, because in their minds, Mary is being elevated to the status of God, and therefore, resulting in worship of Mary. They ask "How can Mary be the Mother of God if God created us all, and in chronological order precedes us all?" In asking these types of questions, and in closing off further discussion on the matter, they fail to realize that what their Catholic and Orthodox sisters and brothers are saying is that Mary is the Mother of the incarnate God. But then, in saying this, Protestants fail to realize that the Scriptures affirm the idea of the "God-Man," that we cannot divide the human from the divine nature of Jesus. The fact that the Scriptures emphasize that "the Word became flesh" (John 1:14), and that "God was manifest in the flesh" ( 1 Timothy 3:16) is a strong indication that biblically-speaking, we cannot separate the divine from the human nature in Jesus.
In Hispanic-American theology, popular religiosity is a praxis that in reenacting the suffering of our people, simultaneously reminds us that suffering is not the last word. It is no coincidence that the crucified Jesus and the Virgin Mary are so central to U.S. Hispanic popular religiosity. By identifying with the anguish of the Crucified, we recall the anguish of our people, which like the cross, is the seedbed of our our liberation. By identifying with Mary, especially in her various manifestations, we likewise recall her special concern for the downtrodden, reflected in the fact that those whom she chooses as her messengers are usually poor people of indigenous, mestizo, or mulatto background. When we look at Mary, we see the visage of our people (Roberto Goizueta, "Rediscovering Praxis: The Significance of U. S. Hispanic for Theological Method," in We Are A People: Initiatives in Hispanic-American Theology. Roberto Goizueta, ed. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992, p. 68).
One of the examples of how Mary plays a role in the history and theology of Hispanic people (especially those of Mexican origin) is pronouncements by the Catholic Church and its leaders. In 1660, the Catholic Church declared that " Our Lady of Guadalupe is the Blessed Virgin Mary" (Helen Behrens, America's Treasure: The Virgin of Guadalupe. Mexico, 1955, p. 18). In 1574, Pope Benedict XIV said of Mexico "God has not done likewise with any other nation. We declare Our Lady of Guadalupe to be recognized, invoked, and venerated Patroness and Protector of Mexico (Ibid)."
To understand the symbol of Guadalupe is to understand the essence of being Mexican. Traditionally, this essence carried over to Chicanos in the American Southwest, where the symbol of Guadalupe exists vividly. Almost every Chicano city has a church named Guadalupe. A major river in Texas is named the Guadalupe River. Many Chicanos, both male and female, bear her name Guadalupe, who like Jesus, is very real to us. We are constantly reminded of her presence by the names of our relatives and friends ( Andres Guerrero, A Chicano Theology. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 1987, p. 96).
The claim is made that Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe appeared to Juan Diego, an Aztec, on December 9, 1531. Every Saturday after his and his wife's baptism, Juan would pass by the hill of Tepeyac as he walked the two miles from Tolpetiac to Tlatelolco to hear our Blessed Lady's Mass sung at dawn. One morning he heard music coming from the top of the hill. As he approached to investigate, a young woman, an Aztec appeared to him. She asked that a temple be built in her honor. She also said "I will give all my love and motherly compassion for those who seek my aid (Behrens, p. 18)."
La Virgen de Tepeyac is the very core to understanding the struggle of the contemporary Mexican, born out of the violent intercourse of Spain and Mexico-of the Old World father and the New World mother. Each generation of Mexicans has been able to see mirrored in tilma (cloak) the reflections of its sufferings, struggles, and ideals (Virgilio Elizondo, La Morenita: Evangelizer of the Americas. San Antonio: Mexican American Cultural Center, 1980, p. 34).
Like Mary, we suffer at the foot of the cross, and like Mary, we are emboldened by the news that "He is risen." Our solidarity with Jesus is thus, at the same time, the source of the hope that compels us to struggle for justice (Goizueta, p. 6).
Now, the above-mentioned talks about the role that Mary plays among the oppressed of Latin America in general, and the people of Mexico in particular. The information demonstrates how she is seen in Latin American Catholicism.
We might ask, "How about the role of Mary in Scripture and in Protestant theology?" In the story of the wedding at Cana of Galilee (John 2), it is mentioned that when the wine had run out, Mary took advantage of the situation to display the power of her son. After some apparent tension between her and Jesus relative to His display of power, Mary said to the people present "Do whatever He tells you." It was like she was not only exercising her role as Jesus's mother, but also assuming authority for herself by telling the people what to do. This brings us to the issue of the writer of Hebrews referring to Jesus as our "Elder Brother (Hebrews: 2: 11-15)." It raises the question that if Mary was the mother of Jesus, and Jesus is then our brother, does that not imply that Mary is also our mother? Protestants would give a resounding "No!" because in their mind, that would be elevating Mary above even Jesus. Again, they fail to differentiate between Marianism and Mariolatry. If the Scriptures inform us that Jesus is God incarnate, and that we cannot separate His two natures, can we not then make room for Mary being more than merely the earthly mother of Jesus? And in the same way that we revere our earthly mothers, a responsible biblical theology would call for us to venerate and give special respect to the Mother of God without falling into the trap of Mariolatry. As we continue to pursue how theology is done among Hispanic-Americans, we will also pursue a study of the theological implications of engaging in responsible "God-talk" in the context of a subjugated and oppressed people in the Diaspora of the U.S.A.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Visiting Professor of Theology, Tainan Theological College/Seminary
We begin with the issue of the "Theotokos." In the Greek language, this word means "God-bearer." In the theology of the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches, the theology of the Theotokos is that in her human body, the Virgin Mary bore the incarnate Son of God. In some cases, this concept of "God-bearer" has been conceptually translated as "Mother of God." The concept of "Mother of God" alienates Protestant Christians, because in their minds, Mary is being elevated to the status of God, and therefore, resulting in worship of Mary. They ask "How can Mary be the Mother of God if God created us all, and in chronological order precedes us all?" In asking these types of questions, and in closing off further discussion on the matter, they fail to realize that what their Catholic and Orthodox sisters and brothers are saying is that Mary is the Mother of the incarnate God. But then, in saying this, Protestants fail to realize that the Scriptures affirm the idea of the "God-Man," that we cannot divide the human from the divine nature of Jesus. The fact that the Scriptures emphasize that "the Word became flesh" (John 1:14), and that "God was manifest in the flesh" ( 1 Timothy 3:16) is a strong indication that biblically-speaking, we cannot separate the divine from the human nature in Jesus.
In Hispanic-American theology, popular religiosity is a praxis that in reenacting the suffering of our people, simultaneously reminds us that suffering is not the last word. It is no coincidence that the crucified Jesus and the Virgin Mary are so central to U.S. Hispanic popular religiosity. By identifying with the anguish of the Crucified, we recall the anguish of our people, which like the cross, is the seedbed of our our liberation. By identifying with Mary, especially in her various manifestations, we likewise recall her special concern for the downtrodden, reflected in the fact that those whom she chooses as her messengers are usually poor people of indigenous, mestizo, or mulatto background. When we look at Mary, we see the visage of our people (Roberto Goizueta, "Rediscovering Praxis: The Significance of U. S. Hispanic for Theological Method," in We Are A People: Initiatives in Hispanic-American Theology. Roberto Goizueta, ed. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992, p. 68).
One of the examples of how Mary plays a role in the history and theology of Hispanic people (especially those of Mexican origin) is pronouncements by the Catholic Church and its leaders. In 1660, the Catholic Church declared that " Our Lady of Guadalupe is the Blessed Virgin Mary" (Helen Behrens, America's Treasure: The Virgin of Guadalupe. Mexico, 1955, p. 18). In 1574, Pope Benedict XIV said of Mexico "God has not done likewise with any other nation. We declare Our Lady of Guadalupe to be recognized, invoked, and venerated Patroness and Protector of Mexico (Ibid)."
To understand the symbol of Guadalupe is to understand the essence of being Mexican. Traditionally, this essence carried over to Chicanos in the American Southwest, where the symbol of Guadalupe exists vividly. Almost every Chicano city has a church named Guadalupe. A major river in Texas is named the Guadalupe River. Many Chicanos, both male and female, bear her name Guadalupe, who like Jesus, is very real to us. We are constantly reminded of her presence by the names of our relatives and friends ( Andres Guerrero, A Chicano Theology. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 1987, p. 96).
The claim is made that Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe appeared to Juan Diego, an Aztec, on December 9, 1531. Every Saturday after his and his wife's baptism, Juan would pass by the hill of Tepeyac as he walked the two miles from Tolpetiac to Tlatelolco to hear our Blessed Lady's Mass sung at dawn. One morning he heard music coming from the top of the hill. As he approached to investigate, a young woman, an Aztec appeared to him. She asked that a temple be built in her honor. She also said "I will give all my love and motherly compassion for those who seek my aid (Behrens, p. 18)."
La Virgen de Tepeyac is the very core to understanding the struggle of the contemporary Mexican, born out of the violent intercourse of Spain and Mexico-of the Old World father and the New World mother. Each generation of Mexicans has been able to see mirrored in tilma (cloak) the reflections of its sufferings, struggles, and ideals (Virgilio Elizondo, La Morenita: Evangelizer of the Americas. San Antonio: Mexican American Cultural Center, 1980, p. 34).
Like Mary, we suffer at the foot of the cross, and like Mary, we are emboldened by the news that "He is risen." Our solidarity with Jesus is thus, at the same time, the source of the hope that compels us to struggle for justice (Goizueta, p. 6).
Now, the above-mentioned talks about the role that Mary plays among the oppressed of Latin America in general, and the people of Mexico in particular. The information demonstrates how she is seen in Latin American Catholicism.
We might ask, "How about the role of Mary in Scripture and in Protestant theology?" In the story of the wedding at Cana of Galilee (John 2), it is mentioned that when the wine had run out, Mary took advantage of the situation to display the power of her son. After some apparent tension between her and Jesus relative to His display of power, Mary said to the people present "Do whatever He tells you." It was like she was not only exercising her role as Jesus's mother, but also assuming authority for herself by telling the people what to do. This brings us to the issue of the writer of Hebrews referring to Jesus as our "Elder Brother (Hebrews: 2: 11-15)." It raises the question that if Mary was the mother of Jesus, and Jesus is then our brother, does that not imply that Mary is also our mother? Protestants would give a resounding "No!" because in their mind, that would be elevating Mary above even Jesus. Again, they fail to differentiate between Marianism and Mariolatry. If the Scriptures inform us that Jesus is God incarnate, and that we cannot separate His two natures, can we not then make room for Mary being more than merely the earthly mother of Jesus? And in the same way that we revere our earthly mothers, a responsible biblical theology would call for us to venerate and give special respect to the Mother of God without falling into the trap of Mariolatry. As we continue to pursue how theology is done among Hispanic-Americans, we will also pursue a study of the theological implications of engaging in responsible "God-talk" in the context of a subjugated and oppressed people in the Diaspora of the U.S.A.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Visiting Professor of Theology, Tainan Theological College/Seminary
Issues in Hispanic-American Theology: The Role of Scripture Among Hispanic Americans
One of the various issues to be dealt with in Hispanic-American theology 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, Hispanics in the U.S.A. had to content with the issue of language. To begin with, up until that time, the Mass in the Catholic churches was conducted in Latin. Secondly, the language spoken by the majority of Hispanics in the U.S.A. especially by those of of the first and second generations was Spanish. And thirdly, many of the Hispanic Catholic parishes were shepherded by non-Spanish-speaking priests, so that the congregants celebrated in English, a language which they had a difficult time understanding and becoming accustomed to.
In the 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 (including yours truly) attended and graduated from these schools and were subsequently appointed, commissioned, and ordained to leadership positions 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 bibliolatry, i.e. worship of the Bible. There is a tendency to read the Bible superficially, and literally, without paying much attention to the linguistic and cultural origins 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 different translations, 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." 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 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 will not only be 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 Pentecostal 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 devotional commentary) was used alongside the Bible. There was a heated discussion about a particular issue. One of the members of the church 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 that the lesson book contradicted the Scriptures, his response was that "whoever inserted that in the Bible was wrong." Needless to say, I as the teacher for the 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 Bible.
Fernando Segovia reminds us that neither the task of theologizing, nor the task of interpretation, both highly interrelated and interdependent activities take place in a social vacuum. Such a theoretical position is by no means new, but it came into much greater prominence, and with much greater vehemence, in the last quarter of the twentieth century than ever before (Fernando F. Segovia, "Hispanic-American Theology and the Bible: Effective Weapon and Faithful Ally," in We Are A People: Initiatives in Hispanic-American Theology: Roberto Goizueta, ed. 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 of 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 changes (Segovia, 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 Mary Potter Engel, "Introduction: Making the Connection Among Liberation Theologies Around the World," in Lift Every Voice: Constructing Theologies from the Underside. Thislethwaite and Engel, eds. 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 purposes of this segment of the essay, Hispanic-Americans are 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 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. The term "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, p. 25).
2. Members of the group hail from any 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 annnexed by the U.S.A. (Segovia, p. 26).
3. The group as a whole has experienced phenomenal growth in the last several decades-a 53% increase from 1980-1990 alone-largely as a result of continuing immigration and a higher than average birthrate. Their presence is clearly significant, and now, since the end of the 20th century, Hispanic-Americans have become the largest minority in the country (Segovia, p. 28).
4. At the same time, from both a socioeconomic and educational point of view, the group as whole shows a considerable lag with the rest of the population. This is true of such economic indexes such as median income, unemployment, business ownership, and home ownership. In fact, approximately 23% 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%. In addition, from a socio-political point of view, political representation has remained meager and ineffective, a definite drawback with the American political system.. Despite its significant presence and growth in American society, therefore, the group's overall situation has remained neutral (Segovia, p. 29).
5. Despite their divergent backgrounds and natural tendency to identify themselves in terms of their country of origin, Hispanic-Americans 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 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 different quarters, but with fundamental themes in common (Fernando F. Segovia, "A New Manifest Destiny: The Emerging Theological Voice of Hispanic-Americans," Religious Studies Review 17, 1991, pps. 101-109).
En fin, we examine the use of the Bible in the Hispanic-American community in different forms. At one point, we witness the aformentioned 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 Christians 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 the Hispanic-Americans play to the "powers that be" in U.S.A. society, together with all the injustices and oppression that accompany that role, constitute the basic biblical hermeneutic in that group. In other words, oppression and subservience become, then, the starting points for biblical interpretation and theological reflection. In one given moment, the Bible is used to shed light on their situation. In the next moment, their understanding of the biblical message is derived from their existential reality. Like in other oppressed communities, both of these hermeneutical approaches will continue to operate simultaneously in the Hispanic community, and in turn determine how the Hispanic church makes use of the Scripture in its task of proclaiming the message of the Gospel.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona
In the 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 (including yours truly) attended and graduated from these schools and were subsequently appointed, commissioned, and ordained to leadership positions 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 bibliolatry, i.e. worship of the Bible. There is a tendency to read the Bible superficially, and literally, without paying much attention to the linguistic and cultural origins 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 different translations, 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." 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 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 will not only be 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 Pentecostal 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 devotional commentary) was used alongside the Bible. There was a heated discussion about a particular issue. One of the members of the church 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 that the lesson book contradicted the Scriptures, his response was that "whoever inserted that in the Bible was wrong." Needless to say, I as the teacher for the 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 Bible.
Fernando Segovia reminds us that neither the task of theologizing, nor the task of interpretation, both highly interrelated and interdependent activities take place in a social vacuum. Such a theoretical position is by no means new, but it came into much greater prominence, and with much greater vehemence, in the last quarter of the twentieth century than ever before (Fernando F. Segovia, "Hispanic-American Theology and the Bible: Effective Weapon and Faithful Ally," in We Are A People: Initiatives in Hispanic-American Theology: Roberto Goizueta, ed. 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 of 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 changes (Segovia, 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 Mary Potter Engel, "Introduction: Making the Connection Among Liberation Theologies Around the World," in Lift Every Voice: Constructing Theologies from the Underside. Thislethwaite and Engel, eds. 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 purposes of this segment of the essay, Hispanic-Americans are 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 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. The term "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, p. 25).
2. Members of the group hail from any 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 annnexed by the U.S.A. (Segovia, p. 26).
3. The group as a whole has experienced phenomenal growth in the last several decades-a 53% increase from 1980-1990 alone-largely as a result of continuing immigration and a higher than average birthrate. Their presence is clearly significant, and now, since the end of the 20th century, Hispanic-Americans have become the largest minority in the country (Segovia, p. 28).
4. At the same time, from both a socioeconomic and educational point of view, the group as whole shows a considerable lag with the rest of the population. This is true of such economic indexes such as median income, unemployment, business ownership, and home ownership. In fact, approximately 23% 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%. In addition, from a socio-political point of view, political representation has remained meager and ineffective, a definite drawback with the American political system.. Despite its significant presence and growth in American society, therefore, the group's overall situation has remained neutral (Segovia, p. 29).
5. Despite their divergent backgrounds and natural tendency to identify themselves in terms of their country of origin, Hispanic-Americans 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 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 different quarters, but with fundamental themes in common (Fernando F. Segovia, "A New Manifest Destiny: The Emerging Theological Voice of Hispanic-Americans," Religious Studies Review 17, 1991, pps. 101-109).
En fin, we examine the use of the Bible in the Hispanic-American community in different forms. At one point, we witness the aformentioned 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 Christians 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 the Hispanic-Americans play to the "powers that be" in U.S.A. society, together with all the injustices and oppression that accompany that role, constitute the basic biblical hermeneutic in that group. In other words, oppression and subservience become, then, the starting points for biblical interpretation and theological reflection. In one given moment, the Bible is used to shed light on their situation. In the next moment, their understanding of the biblical message is derived from their existential reality. Like in other oppressed communities, both of these hermeneutical approaches will continue to operate simultaneously in the Hispanic community, and in turn determine how the Hispanic church makes use of the Scripture in its task of proclaiming the message of the Gospel.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Constructing a Diasporic Theology
We might begin this essay by asking "How can theology (God-talk) take place in the context of an exiled community living in a different country and under difficult conditions?" The answers to that are quite complex and difficult. Our history is a complex one. The factors leading to our presence here are numerous. The Hispanic community in the U.S.A. is not monolithic by any stretch of the imagination. There is diversity among our Hispanic people, i.e. different customs and traditions, as well as different mindsets. We are one, yet many.
I make an analogy between the historical situation of the Hebrew/Jewish people in both Egypt and Babylon, as depicted in the books of Exodus, Daniel, Nehemiah, and Ezra on the one hand, and on the other, the historical situation of Hispanics in the U.S.A. The Hebrews had left Canaan for Egypt be cause of a famine in the land. Jacob's descendants settled in Egypt after migrating from Canaan. Initially for them, Egypt was the "house of abundance" because of the resources and the amounts of food available there. Eventually, because of the xenophobic mindset of the Egyptian king, the "house of abundance" became the "house of bondage." Because of this xenophobic hysteria, the Hebrews were enslaved and subjected to agony, cruelty, and misery. They were eventually, through the liberating and salvific acts of Yahweh God, mediated through the leadership of Moses, liberated from that bondage and returned to their land.
The Hebrews/Jews were exiled to Babylon. They spent 70 years in that new country. There they were exposed to a new language (Aramaic, a cognate language of their own Hebrew). There is no doubt that the religious mindset of the Babylonians had an impact on Jewish theology, even extending to the writings of the Hebrew Scriptures. Issues such as angeology and demonology crept into their sacred texts.
During their time in Babylon, the Jews also came under the rule of the Persian and Greek Empires. Under the Greeks, they were exposed to philosophy, especially to the philosophy of Plato, which undoubtedly had the result of their engaging with the mindset of the "immortality of the soul."
The Hispanic colonial and diasporic experiences carry certain similarities with the diasporic experiences of the Jews. For one, Hispanics, among all things, have come here as a result of U.S.A. imperialistic activities in their countries of origin. This imperialistic activity has in turn, generated economic, political, and social conditions that have made it necessary for Hispanics to migrate to the "house of abundance (the U.S.A.). Eventually, as we shall see later, the "house of abundance" becomes the "house of bondage" for Hispanics in the U.S.A.
Now, there is a caveat in understanding Hispanic migration history. Hispanic roots in what is now the U.S.A. are more ancient than the Anglo-American ones. To the extent that the immigrant analogy is appropriate, it must be nuanced by such significant facts as the symbiotic relationship of Hispanic immigrants, at least the largest groups of them-the Mexicans and the Puerto Ricans-with their homeland (Allan Figueroa-Deck, S. J. "At the Crossroads: North American and Hispanic," in We Are A People, Roberto Goizueta, ed. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992, p. 3).
It is also relevant to note that the Spanish language, unlike the language of other immigrant or migrant groups is not "foreign." Spanish is the second language of the U.S.A. and has been continuously spoken in the American Southwest from the sixteenth century onwards (Alfredo Mirande, The Chicano Experience: An Alternative Perspective. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1985, pp. 185-200).
The marginality of Hispanics within North American society is a complex matter that needs to be understood at the outset. Certainly, one of the factors is the strong anti-Hispanic bias of Anglo-American culture. Linked to this, of course, were the bitter polemics of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation of the sixteenth century. Spain herself had become marginalized from the modern world through the strident identification with Catholicism, especially the distinctive Spanish brand from the Reconquest. Hispanic Catholicism, moreover, rooted itself to the indigenous cultures of the Americas in the sixteenth century before Anglo-American Protestants or Catholics set foot on North American soil. Already, in the sixteenth century, Spain and Portugal were importing slaves from Africa. Another important branch of Hispanic-American culture was born in the Antilles and the Coast of Central and South America as the Spaniards and the Africans forged a new mulatto race. Such an intense miscegenation never occurred in the Anglo-American colonies, where colonization involved the transfer preexisting European patterns upon a wilderness. In Hispanic America, by contrast, a complex hybrid was being forged. Hence, the starting points for these two cultures-the Hispanic-American, and the Anglo-American are drastically different (Deck, in Goizueta, p. 4).
A key issue in doing theology from the Hispanic-American standpoint is to know and understand that theology has to take into account the history of land-grabbing colonization and exile. This theology or discourse about God has to emerge from and be constructed by those who have been victims of colonization and forced exile. It cannot be a theology which is imposed by the conquering colonizer.
Liberation Theology, both Latin-American and Hispanic-American begins with the assumption that oppression and suffering (in this case, colonization and exile) are the starting points for biblical interpretation and theological reflection. In subsequent essays, we will discover how this theology is done and carried out in the Hispanic-American community.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona
I make an analogy between the historical situation of the Hebrew/Jewish people in both Egypt and Babylon, as depicted in the books of Exodus, Daniel, Nehemiah, and Ezra on the one hand, and on the other, the historical situation of Hispanics in the U.S.A. The Hebrews had left Canaan for Egypt be cause of a famine in the land. Jacob's descendants settled in Egypt after migrating from Canaan. Initially for them, Egypt was the "house of abundance" because of the resources and the amounts of food available there. Eventually, because of the xenophobic mindset of the Egyptian king, the "house of abundance" became the "house of bondage." Because of this xenophobic hysteria, the Hebrews were enslaved and subjected to agony, cruelty, and misery. They were eventually, through the liberating and salvific acts of Yahweh God, mediated through the leadership of Moses, liberated from that bondage and returned to their land.
The Hebrews/Jews were exiled to Babylon. They spent 70 years in that new country. There they were exposed to a new language (Aramaic, a cognate language of their own Hebrew). There is no doubt that the religious mindset of the Babylonians had an impact on Jewish theology, even extending to the writings of the Hebrew Scriptures. Issues such as angeology and demonology crept into their sacred texts.
During their time in Babylon, the Jews also came under the rule of the Persian and Greek Empires. Under the Greeks, they were exposed to philosophy, especially to the philosophy of Plato, which undoubtedly had the result of their engaging with the mindset of the "immortality of the soul."
The Hispanic colonial and diasporic experiences carry certain similarities with the diasporic experiences of the Jews. For one, Hispanics, among all things, have come here as a result of U.S.A. imperialistic activities in their countries of origin. This imperialistic activity has in turn, generated economic, political, and social conditions that have made it necessary for Hispanics to migrate to the "house of abundance (the U.S.A.). Eventually, as we shall see later, the "house of abundance" becomes the "house of bondage" for Hispanics in the U.S.A.
Now, there is a caveat in understanding Hispanic migration history. Hispanic roots in what is now the U.S.A. are more ancient than the Anglo-American ones. To the extent that the immigrant analogy is appropriate, it must be nuanced by such significant facts as the symbiotic relationship of Hispanic immigrants, at least the largest groups of them-the Mexicans and the Puerto Ricans-with their homeland (Allan Figueroa-Deck, S. J. "At the Crossroads: North American and Hispanic," in We Are A People, Roberto Goizueta, ed. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992, p. 3).
It is also relevant to note that the Spanish language, unlike the language of other immigrant or migrant groups is not "foreign." Spanish is the second language of the U.S.A. and has been continuously spoken in the American Southwest from the sixteenth century onwards (Alfredo Mirande, The Chicano Experience: An Alternative Perspective. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1985, pp. 185-200).
The marginality of Hispanics within North American society is a complex matter that needs to be understood at the outset. Certainly, one of the factors is the strong anti-Hispanic bias of Anglo-American culture. Linked to this, of course, were the bitter polemics of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation of the sixteenth century. Spain herself had become marginalized from the modern world through the strident identification with Catholicism, especially the distinctive Spanish brand from the Reconquest. Hispanic Catholicism, moreover, rooted itself to the indigenous cultures of the Americas in the sixteenth century before Anglo-American Protestants or Catholics set foot on North American soil. Already, in the sixteenth century, Spain and Portugal were importing slaves from Africa. Another important branch of Hispanic-American culture was born in the Antilles and the Coast of Central and South America as the Spaniards and the Africans forged a new mulatto race. Such an intense miscegenation never occurred in the Anglo-American colonies, where colonization involved the transfer preexisting European patterns upon a wilderness. In Hispanic America, by contrast, a complex hybrid was being forged. Hence, the starting points for these two cultures-the Hispanic-American, and the Anglo-American are drastically different (Deck, in Goizueta, p. 4).
A key issue in doing theology from the Hispanic-American standpoint is to know and understand that theology has to take into account the history of land-grabbing colonization and exile. This theology or discourse about God has to emerge from and be constructed by those who have been victims of colonization and forced exile. It cannot be a theology which is imposed by the conquering colonizer.
Liberation Theology, both Latin-American and Hispanic-American begins with the assumption that oppression and suffering (in this case, colonization and exile) are the starting points for biblical interpretation and theological reflection. In subsequent essays, we will discover how this theology is done and carried out in the Hispanic-American community.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Thursday, October 19, 2017
Hispanics in the U.S.A.
This is the first of a series of essays designed to help us explore what it means to do theology from the standpoint of Hispanics (or Latinos/as) living in the Diaspora of the U.S.A. There are certain issues that come along with dealing with Hispanic-Americans. We will explore some of these issues. A discussion of these issues entails the following:
1. Who are Hispanic-Americans? Himilce Novas says "Over the centuries many people from Spanish-speaking Latin America have either made their way to the United States to forge a brand-new life or found themselves citizens due to shifting U.S. borders and imperialistic pursuits. For the sake of clarity, Spanish-speaking Latin America is comprised of Cuba, Puerto Rico (which is a U.S. commonwealth, not a sovereign nation), the Dominican Republic, Mexico, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Panama, Venezuela, Columbia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay. All U.S. citizens and residents of the United States who originated from these nations, or from the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or whose ancestors did, are known as Hispanics. The U.S. Census Bureau also includes Spanish-speaking Americans, i.e Americans whose forebears came directly from Spain among Hispanics, but many scholars limit the definition only to include those of Spanish-speaking Latin American origin (Himilce Novas, Everything You Need to Know About Latinos. New York: Penguin Group, 2008, p. 3).
2. Why are people of Latin American origin present in the U.S.A.? There are no easy answers to that question as there are a variety of factors that contribute to that reality. Among the factors are the following:
a. Land-grabbing. There was land-grabbing by the Spaniards in the 15th century, and then by the U.S.A. in the nineteenth century. Much of what now constitutes the southwestern part of the U.S.A. at one time belonged to Mexico. As Novas informs us, "The history of Mexico and that of the United States are so inextricably linked that these nations have been compared to Siamese twins who, before enduring a radical and painful separation, shared the same heart. Mexican-Americans are not an ethnic minority who merely crossed the U.S.-Mexico borders and then by slow assimilation, become incorporated into the great American mosaic. They have ancestral roots in part of the territory within the boundaries of what now constitutes the United States, that is, the areas that formerly belonged to Mexico. As the saying goes among Tejanos, i.e. Texans of Mexican origin, 'we never crossed a border: the border crossed us." (Novas, p. 49). We can also add to this history, the neo-colonization of the three nations of the Caribbean, i.e. Cuba, Dominican Republic, and Puerto Rico, two of which were taken over by the U.S.A. in the aftermath of the Spanish-American War of 1898.
b. U.S.A. imperialism-When James Monroe was elected President of the U.S.A. in 1817, U.S. industry prospered, and the concept of Manifest Destiny reared its head beyond the nation's borders. On December 2, 1823, he delivered a message to Congress, in which he declared that the United States would not tolerate European intervention and expansion in the Americas. The issuance of this declaration, which became known as the Monroe Doctrine, was motivated by the concern that certain European nations wee planning to use military force to restore to Spain the colonies that recently gained their independence. There was also concern that England was flexing too much muscle in the hemisphere, having seized territory by nibbling off Belize and the Mesquito Coast of Nicaragua, and that France, under Napoleon the III, had designs on Mexico and intended to turn it into a client state. The Monroe Doctrine sent a clear message to the empires of Europe to cease and desist (Novas, p. 138).
However, the Monroe Doctrine did not contain any language about the United States doing the same thing, i.e. refraining from interfering in colonies and nations in the Americas that were not its own. In fact, the Monroe Doctrine clearly implied that the United States had designated itself "protector" of the Americas. Thus, while it appeared, at first glance, to be a straightforward exercise in isolationism and good-neighbor policy toward the fledgling new republics to the south, such as Mexico, the Monroe Doctrine actually paved the way for the free ride U.S. imperialism was to take throughout the Western Hemisphere for many decades to come. Puerto Rico was one of those stops along the way (Novas, pp. 138-139).
c. Economics- U.S.A. imperialism, together with land-grabbing, contributed to the present day economic problems of Latin America. Many, if not most of those problems were generated by the foreign economic policies of the U.S.A. Those policies wreaked havoc in the Latin American countries, widening the chasm between rich and poor, creating dire misery and poverty for the masses of these countries. These conditions, in turn, generated massive immigration to the north (U.S.A.). I refer the reader to the book "Open Veins in Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of the Continent," by Eduardo Galeano, for further and more extensive research on these matters.
How then, is theology in the Diaspora supposed to be done and carried out? The three above-mentioned factors, in turn, generated certain living conditions for those Hispanics who migrated to the U.S.A. The socio-economic and political conditions of Hispanics in the U.S.A., and the theology emerging from those conditions will be addressed in the subsequent essays.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona
1. Who are Hispanic-Americans? Himilce Novas says "Over the centuries many people from Spanish-speaking Latin America have either made their way to the United States to forge a brand-new life or found themselves citizens due to shifting U.S. borders and imperialistic pursuits. For the sake of clarity, Spanish-speaking Latin America is comprised of Cuba, Puerto Rico (which is a U.S. commonwealth, not a sovereign nation), the Dominican Republic, Mexico, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Panama, Venezuela, Columbia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay. All U.S. citizens and residents of the United States who originated from these nations, or from the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or whose ancestors did, are known as Hispanics. The U.S. Census Bureau also includes Spanish-speaking Americans, i.e Americans whose forebears came directly from Spain among Hispanics, but many scholars limit the definition only to include those of Spanish-speaking Latin American origin (Himilce Novas, Everything You Need to Know About Latinos. New York: Penguin Group, 2008, p. 3).
2. Why are people of Latin American origin present in the U.S.A.? There are no easy answers to that question as there are a variety of factors that contribute to that reality. Among the factors are the following:
a. Land-grabbing. There was land-grabbing by the Spaniards in the 15th century, and then by the U.S.A. in the nineteenth century. Much of what now constitutes the southwestern part of the U.S.A. at one time belonged to Mexico. As Novas informs us, "The history of Mexico and that of the United States are so inextricably linked that these nations have been compared to Siamese twins who, before enduring a radical and painful separation, shared the same heart. Mexican-Americans are not an ethnic minority who merely crossed the U.S.-Mexico borders and then by slow assimilation, become incorporated into the great American mosaic. They have ancestral roots in part of the territory within the boundaries of what now constitutes the United States, that is, the areas that formerly belonged to Mexico. As the saying goes among Tejanos, i.e. Texans of Mexican origin, 'we never crossed a border: the border crossed us." (Novas, p. 49). We can also add to this history, the neo-colonization of the three nations of the Caribbean, i.e. Cuba, Dominican Republic, and Puerto Rico, two of which were taken over by the U.S.A. in the aftermath of the Spanish-American War of 1898.
b. U.S.A. imperialism-When James Monroe was elected President of the U.S.A. in 1817, U.S. industry prospered, and the concept of Manifest Destiny reared its head beyond the nation's borders. On December 2, 1823, he delivered a message to Congress, in which he declared that the United States would not tolerate European intervention and expansion in the Americas. The issuance of this declaration, which became known as the Monroe Doctrine, was motivated by the concern that certain European nations wee planning to use military force to restore to Spain the colonies that recently gained their independence. There was also concern that England was flexing too much muscle in the hemisphere, having seized territory by nibbling off Belize and the Mesquito Coast of Nicaragua, and that France, under Napoleon the III, had designs on Mexico and intended to turn it into a client state. The Monroe Doctrine sent a clear message to the empires of Europe to cease and desist (Novas, p. 138).
However, the Monroe Doctrine did not contain any language about the United States doing the same thing, i.e. refraining from interfering in colonies and nations in the Americas that were not its own. In fact, the Monroe Doctrine clearly implied that the United States had designated itself "protector" of the Americas. Thus, while it appeared, at first glance, to be a straightforward exercise in isolationism and good-neighbor policy toward the fledgling new republics to the south, such as Mexico, the Monroe Doctrine actually paved the way for the free ride U.S. imperialism was to take throughout the Western Hemisphere for many decades to come. Puerto Rico was one of those stops along the way (Novas, pp. 138-139).
c. Economics- U.S.A. imperialism, together with land-grabbing, contributed to the present day economic problems of Latin America. Many, if not most of those problems were generated by the foreign economic policies of the U.S.A. Those policies wreaked havoc in the Latin American countries, widening the chasm between rich and poor, creating dire misery and poverty for the masses of these countries. These conditions, in turn, generated massive immigration to the north (U.S.A.). I refer the reader to the book "Open Veins in Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of the Continent," by Eduardo Galeano, for further and more extensive research on these matters.
How then, is theology in the Diaspora supposed to be done and carried out? The three above-mentioned factors, in turn, generated certain living conditions for those Hispanics who migrated to the U.S.A. The socio-economic and political conditions of Hispanics in the U.S.A., and the theology emerging from those conditions will be addressed in the subsequent essays.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)