Reading Reflections:
Hispanic/Latino Theology pp. 134-166
Chapter seven, “Sources of a Hispanic/Latino American Theology: A Pentecostal Perspective” by Samuel Solivan, is quite possibly my favorite reading in Hispanic/Latino Theology so far. At the very least, it is the most practical. Solivan outlines the foundation of Hispanic/Latino Pentecostal theology, specifically focusing on the five main sources of theological truth in the Hispanic community (140). He begins by acknowledging the unique location of Hispanic/Latino theology, which is not a theology for the marginalized from the center, but rather a theology that “emerges from the margins and speaks on behalf of those on the periphery to those at the centers of power” (137). He contrasts this with many popular liberation theology movements, saying that the “premodern perspective [of Hispanic Pentecostals] often offends the ideological sensibilities of the elite who seek to liberate the poor” (139). Solivan points out that the unique premodern hermeneutic of the “disenfranchised” often stands in stark contrast to that of professional theologians, even liberation theologians (139). Yet he is hopeful that an exploration of theology through this premodern perspective will be fruitful (140).
As the article continues, Solivan lists five sources of Hispanic/Latino Pentecostal theology. In my experience, Hispanic/Latino religious expression is largely Pentecostal even in mainline denominations such as The Methodist Church of Mexico (which is a different denomination than The United Methodist Church). So, this theology seems to be accurate for a wide range of denominations, not simply a small percentage of “Pentecostal” ones. The five sources are spirituality (140), personal and communal experience (142), Scripture (143), preaching/pastoring/teaching (144), and the Holy Spirit (148). The first source, spirituality, emphasized the importance of el culto, the weekly worship service as the place that ties together all sources of Hispanic theology (140). Next, personal and communal experience, including “the experience of life in the Spirit” (143), is foundational in Hispanic theological understanding. Further, Scripture “[constitutes] the highest norm” (143) in Hispanic theology, and Scripture is interpreted, taught, and lived by the pastor(s) and leader(s) of the church (145). Yet ultimately, all of these things are guided by and the Holy Spirit, which “illuminates, directs, and discerns the sources used” in Hispanic theology (148).
Solivan’s chapter reminded me very much of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral, which shapes the theology of my tradition. For United Methodists, Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience serve as our sources of theology, with Scripture being primary. I saw many commonalities between Solivan’s five sources and the Wesleyan Quadrilateral, with Scripture and experience being the most obvious two. His statement that “in light of [Scripture] one’s religious experience is informed and interpreted” sounded like something straight from the Quadrilateral. And our Wesleyan emphasis on tradition relates to Solivan’s sources of spirituality and preaching/pastoring/teaching— these are the experiences and the people that make up our tradition. While the commonalities are interesting, perhaps most telling are the differences: the Wesleyan Quadrilateral’s source of reason in contrast with Solivan’s source of the Holy Spirit. This difference illuminates the contrast between the premodern theological perspective of Hispanic Pentecostals and the modern (or even postmodern) perspective of United Methodist theology. While Hispanic Pentecostals trust in the Holy Spirit to interpret Scripture and guide theology, United Methodists have chosen to emphasize and affirm reason as a source for theological insight. As someone who enjoys the rigorous academic study of religion, I am very comfortable with reason as a source of United Methodist theology. However, I realize that my perspective places me in Solivan’s category of the “elite” and ultimately at odds with the way that Hispanic Pentecostals understand theology (139). I do not view this as a negative thing; this is who I am, and acknowledging that is the first step toward building bridges and doing theology with, not for, the Hispanic community.
Chapter eight, “Notes toward a Sociology of Latina/o Religious Empowerment” by Otto Maduro, turned out to be one of my least favorite readings in the book so far. The chapter explored the “actual and potential role of religious tradition in the empowerment of Latino/a communities in the United States” (166). While Maduro made several interesting points throughout the chapter, I struggled with the basis for his overarching argument. For example, he says things such as, “we are a people, but not quite yet,” and describes the identity of Hispanic people as “vulnerable and frail” (162). Further, he states that the “individual and collective, material and spiritual” existence of Hispanic people is “possibly more endangered than ever before” (163). These statements strike me as a rather negative place to begin an argument for the church’s role in Hispanic empowerment. First, it seems like he wants to create one “Hispanic” culture, one “people” (162), which is not practical let alone empowering. Next, he focuses far too much on the “weaknesses” of the Hispanic culture instead of emphasizing the unique gifts and strengths of the Hispanic community. It seems to me that a theology of empowerment should begin in an affirming place, and Maduro instead focuses on oppression and weakness.
The one part of the Maduro reading that I really appreciated was his discussion of “see/judge/act” circles (160). The UMC uses the see-judge-act method in its national plan for Hispanic ministry, and I have been through extensive training for that program. One thing that I learned from the Maduro reading, however, was the idea of this process being cyclical, not linear. He emphasized the fact that “research and action are likely to stimulate and influence each other” (161), which was a reminder of this continuous, cyclical process of seeing, judging, acting, and repeating.
Journal Article Reflections:
This article, by Gilberto Ruiz, focuses on the themes of movement and migration as embodied by Jesus in the Gospel of John. Ruiz argues that “John articulates fundamental aspects of Jesus’ mission and identity in terms of movement and migration.” Ruiz uses Segovia’s “hermeneutical model of otherness,” and thus allows the text to “be an independent and self-defining construct.” He describes the incarnation of John 1.14 in terms of migration, saying that “the Logos/Son…is a migratory being who leaves his home to reside elsewhere, at least for a time.” He also points out that in the Gospel of John depicts Jesus traveling oven, “more…than he does in the Synoptic Gospels.” For Ruiz, this is an argument for movement and migration as a central theme of Jesus’ life. Finally, he discusses “the alienation or disconnectedness that the Johannine Jesus experiences in the world,” illustrated by Jesus’ cleansing of the temple in John 2.13-22. Jesus not only experiences this alienation, but his followers do also, as they “become like Jesus, not quite ‘fitting in’ the world, the world they formerly took to be their home.” All of these factors lead Ruiz to argue against the popular belief that John’s Gospel is concerned with religion rather than social and political issues; rather, he “[insists] on the political and social ramifications of John’s Christology.”
Overall, this article pointed out many patterns in Johannine Christology that are worth exploring and applying to Hispanic ministry. While Ruiz approaches the text with a definite bias, he acknowledges his bias throughout the article. I especially appreciated the connection he made between incarnation and immigration, which proved for me to be a fruitful way to think more about both issues. Also, I enjoyed his pointing out that the word “way” in “I am the way” (John 14.6) can also be translated as “road, path, highway, trip, or journey.” I am especially drawn to the concept of Christ as “the journey,” which I suppose emphasizes movement and migration! Ultimately, this serves as a reminder that faith in Christ is a journey, not a one-stop, one-time event.
Vocational Discernment:
This week, I thought I would reflect a bit on internship options. My hope is that whatever I do this summer will grow out of this class; just as I am exploring peacemaking as vocation this semester, I hope to continue that exploration through the summer. So far, I have looked at many options, and will start applying soon. Some of the options I am most excited about include internships at the Metta Center for Nonviolence, Prison Fellowship International, and opportunities to create internship/discernment programs through the Lilly Summer Discernment Institute or Bluffton’s summer dreaming grant. I have also looked at the possibility of interning in DC through either GBCS (UMC) or MCC, but these options are a bit more complicated since it is not an internship program with housing arrangements, etc. Another option would be the West Ohio Conference Next Generation internship, but this is focused rather narrowly on pastoral/local church ministry, which is not where I feel God calling me. These are options— good options— but I am also open to suggestions! Ultimately, my hope is that this summer I will have the opportunity to not just study peace, but to engage in peacebuilding and explore vocational calling.
No comments:
Post a Comment