THE mTIOhlAL PASTU!!PLAN
FOR HISPANIC MIIVISZRY
AS A STRATEGY KIR INCULTURATION
AMONG MEXICAN AMERICANS
A thesis submitted to the faculty of Regis College and the Pastoral Theology Department of the Toronto School of Theology in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Theology awarded by Regis College and the University of Toronto
Michael E. Connors National Library Bibliothèque. nationale 191 du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services seMces bibliographiques 395 Wdlingtori Street 395, ru8 Wellington aEawaON KtAON4 OttawaON KIAON4 CaMda Canada
The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distrriute or sell reproduire, prêter, distxicbuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la fmede microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.
The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts &om it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation, Title: 'The NiztionalPastoral Phfor Hiqmic Ministry as a Strategy for Indturation arnong Mexïcan Americans"
Director: Prof Car1 Starkloc Regis CoUege
The relationship of fâith to culture has taken on many fomover the two thousand years of Christian history, as attesteci by H. Richard Niebuhr's Christ and Culture. Muenced by modern historical consciousness and heightened awareness of cuIturaI pluralism, the Second Vatican Council gave irnpetus to critical refledon upon the nature of that relationship in the Romen Catholic communion. Much of this refiection now takes place under the theological heading "inculturation." The first movement of this project is a survey and summary of a cuntemporary theological perspective on inculturation. The study adopts the 'happing" technique of Robert Schreiter (ComtmctivgLmi Theolugies)as its basic dytical fhmework. Development of dturaiiy-sensitive pastoral praxis is an imperative for the church today. The focus of this project is a critical evaluation of a USCatholic planning document that purports to promote and guide such an inculturative pastoral praxis viz., the Naîional Pastoral Pbfor Hispanic Ministry. The projezt asks whether, to what extent, and how the NPPHM may succeed as a strategy for indturation for one Kispanic group within the United States: Mexican Americans. To achieve tbis goal the study then reaches for a coherent understanding of the MeGean American cultural milieu. The cultural values and pastoral situation of Mexican Americans are surveyed, primarily through two of that community's leading theological spokespersons, Vigil Elizondo and Man Figueroa Deck. Mer tracing the history of the plan's development through au extensive consultation proces, and reviewing the components of the plan, the project then approaches its evaluative goal by stepping through Schreiter's ''map." The NPPHM is evaluated with respect to the methodological requirernents of each of the nine steps outlined by Schreiter. Strengths, weaknesses, and omissions of the plan vis-a-vis Schreiter's method are noted, with special attention given to the leading strategy proposed by the plan: the formation of smaii desial communities. The resulttis a composite and balanced assessrnent of the doaunent with respect to the Mexicatl Amencan community. The study concludes with some brief remarks about what fùture pastoral planning efforts may leam Corn the NPPHM. The relevance of this Council for the life both of the Church and the world can hardly be emphasized enough. Vatican II will be for the Church an all- embracing, paradoxical event of joy and distress, of hope and uncertainty, of spiritual richness and unthinkable humiliations.
Marcello de Carvalho Azevedo Incul turation and the Challenges of Moderni ty LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ...... vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... vii
Chapter Page 1 . INTRODUCTION ...... 1 La. Faith and Context ...... 1
1.b. The Research Question ...... 7 1.c. Methodology ...... 11 1.d. Appendix: A Glossary of Key Terms ...... 21
2 . CULTW AS A THEOLOGICAL LOCUS ...... 29 2.a . Faith and Social Context before the Second Vatican Council ...... 28 2.b. Official Teaching: Vatican II and Its Aftermath ...... 49 2.c. Contemporary Inculturation Literature .... 95 2.d. A Theology of Inculturation ...... 132
3. THE NATION= PASTORAL PLAN FOR HISPANIC MINISTRY . . 14 3 3.a . The Mexican Arnericans ...... 146 3.a.l. History: La Raza berges ...... 146 Religion: Institutional and Popular ......
iii 3.a.3. CulturalValces ...... 183 3.a.4. Pastoral Challenges ...... 190 3.b. Fomulation of the Plan ...... 206 3.c. Review of the Plan ...... 233
4 . AN EVALUATION OF THE NATIONAL PASTORAL PLAN FOR HISPAATIC MINISTRY AS AN INSTRUMENT OF INCULTURATION FOR MEXICAN AMERICANS ...... 258 The Starting Point ...... 259 Step #1: Previous Local Theologies ...... 265 Step #2: Cultural Analysis ...... 267 Religion ...... 273
values ...... 280
Socioeconomic Location ...... 282 Step #3: Emergence of Themes ...... 290
Identity ...... -290 Liberation ...... 292 Welcome ...... 296 Steps #4 and 5: Opening Church Tradition ...299 Steps #6 and 7: Cultural Themes Meet Church Tradition and Shape Local Theology ...... 315 Steps #8 and 9: Impacts upon Tradition and Culture ...... 324
Recapitulation: The Five Criteria for Local Theology ...... 328
CONCLUSION ...... 333 SOURCES CONSULTED ...... 341
iv Inculturation ...... 341 LatinAmerica ...... 349 Methodology and Foundations ...... 352
U . S . Hispanics ...... 357 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Spirit and Gospel: Shaping the Community Context (R . Schreiterrs "Maprr of Local Theology) ...... 112 Third Encuentro Process ...... 221 Pastoral Planning Process (NPPHM) ...... 239 The prayers, encouragement, challenge, and insight of
rnany people have made the completim of this project
possible. Foremost among them 1 wish to thank Professor Car1 Starkloff, S.%, who directed the work and whose
example of intellect in service of Godrs people sustained me throughout.
1 salute as well the faculty and students of the Toronto School of Theology, especially those of Regis College. I am deeply indebted to my confreres in the Congregation of Holy Cross, and to colleagues and friends both in Toronto and at Notre Dame.
Finally, 1 dedicate this work to the Hispanic peoples of North America, whom the Roman Catholic bishops of the United States rightly hailed as 'a blessing from God."
vii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
La. Faith and Context My interest in issues of pastoral or practical theology
has been developing over a number of years. 1 entered doctoral studies in this field fresh from several years of full-time pastoral ministry in the South Bend, Indiana, area. For me, these were years of adjustment, exhilaration, fatigue, frustration, affirmation, and much persona1 and professional growth. Parish work has many different facets. Demands of varying kinds, presented through people of diverse personalities, cultural backgrounds, and religious stances, cal1 upon the minister to develop a broad spectrum of practical skills. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine an occupation which makes more wide-ranging claims upon the wits and good will of the minister, Shrinking resources and the burgeoning expectations of parishioners in the post- Vatican II Roman Catholic Church only compound the matter.
My experience of working on the pastoral team of a parish formed in me the conviction that that ministry, in particular, suffers from a lack of adequate reflection upon its goals, relationships, and strategies. That is to Say, what transpires in a Roman Catholic parish frequently just happens because 'wefve always done it that way." Repetition, canon law, and episcopal directives tend to count for more on the practical level than either discerning the pastoral needs of people in one's context, or a fresh confrontation with the classic sources of Christian tradition, The result, on an institutional level, is often that rigidity, staleness, and narrowness which customarily accompany any "applied" theory-to-practice model. At its best, on a day-to-day level, much of pastoral ministry involves listening and attending: counselling, collaborating with professional peers and volunteers, accompanying families in moments of joy and grief. Other moments invite the minister to diverse forms of speech: committee meetings, catechesis, preaching. For me personally, 1 was never more aware of the collision between the living word of Christian faith and the structures, concerns, and stresses of people's daily lives than when 1 stepped into the pulpit. The crafting and delivery of a hornily, week after week (almost day after dayl, taxed to the limit my abilities to remain accountable both to the tradition and to the real-liie social situation of the people. Over the years, parish ministry induced me to grow in awareness of the unwritten rules and the intangible
resources operative in that social milieu. That is to Say,
1 became more reflectively conscious of the culture of my people. I learned, for example, about the isolation and alienation of people in the highly individualistic environment of this society, and the concomitant hunger for authentic community. At the sarne time, 1 was forced to confront the paucity of cultural forms and supports for the cultivation of community life. It often seemed to me that al1 of us, ministexs and ordinary folk alike, were caught up in forces of which we were only dimly aware. Those forces could at some times seem to resonate powerfully with the Christian message. At other times, however, they could pose themselves as inimical to the very understanding of the message, or to the living out of the message, or both. In short, to be an American Catholic Christian at this historical moment is to be at cross-purposes with oneself, on several counts, Such matters invite an interminable amount of reflection, prayer, study -- the time for which is al1 too rare in the busy schedule of pastoral ministry. Our problem is not altogether new, Over the centuries,
Christian faith has found itself confronted by, and embedded within, a wide variety of social milieux. Inevitably the church both shapes and is shaped by the cultural forces in which it lives. The founder of the Christian rnovement himself, Jesus of Nazareth, has to be understood within the Jewish culture of lst-century Palestine. And within a short time of his death, the followers of Jesus faced a serious crisis as their Good News spread beyond Judaism and began to take up residence in the suxrounding Gentile Hellenistic culture (cf. Acts 15). The nexus of faith and culture has remained a profound and controversial challenge through succeeding generations of Christianity. In some respects, however, the theological problem of culture has grown even more acute in our tirne. The 19th and 20th centuries have some poignant lessons to teach us about culture's capacity to enlist religious sentiment in pursuit of unholy aims. Certainly one thinks of the grotesque evils of Western imperialism, colonialisrn, fascisrn, apartheid, environmental despoliation, and wax. Moreover, global communications and t ransportation, together wi th a heightened consciousness of the ambiguities of both history and language, al1 have engendered a much greaier sensitivity to the plurality of cultural realities which mark human life. But, if the times demand a more intentional and critical approach to the dynamic interaction of faith and culture, they also provide certain reflexive tools -- the very notion of "culture" itself is a peculiarly modern one - - by which the church may hope to strive toward a still more "catholic" embrace of al1 peoples in its discovery and proclamation of the divine salvific will. "A theology," wrote Bernard Lonergan, "mediates between a cultural matrix and the significance and role of a religion in that matrix. "l The theologian always both speaks from within a culturally conditioned context, and to one or more such contexts, for there is no human life, and therefore no faith and no religion, which is not so conditioned, Thus, the paradigm for al1 theological endeavour can be summed up in David Tracy's felicitous word, 'conversation," As Tracy says, "There is no intellectual, cultural, political, or religious tradition of interpretation that does not ultimately live by the quality of its conversation."' The mediating efforts we cal1 theology are an essential praxis of the church, whose faith and tradition bear the impulse of mission to the world. That the world also influences the tradition is guaranteed by the churchrs indispensable utilization of language- So the conversation continues, only today more self- consciously and critically, One evidence of the intensified
1. Method in Theology (Minneapolis: Seabury/Winston, 19721, p. xi.
2. Plurality and Ambiguity: Hermeneutics, Religion, Hope (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987), p. ix. interest in this dialogue is the introduction of a new crop of theological constructs. Two that are of central interest here are incul turation, and its cousin, contextualization. Despite the fact that both words are of relatively recent vintage, a considerable and still growing body of literature clusters around them. Both terms, of course, need to be clearly defined and understood if they are to lend any clarity to the faith-culture conversation. For the moment it is enough to note that, while the two are not quite synonymous, they both denote that the social context is to be taken seriously as a theological dialogue partner, The present project is located within the horizon of the conternporary theology of inculturation. That concept and its attendant reflection serve as fundamental points of reference and analytic toois in the generation of the studyrs conclusions. The understanding of inculturation that will be described and employed is, in short, a balanced, dialogical one that attempts to respect and mediate the demands for both adaptation to a cultural setting and prophetic critique of that setting. This understanding thus envisions a range of possible stances toward and responses to a particular culture. In two significant respects, however, this study edges to the frontiers of the theology of inculturation. In the first place, conternporary reflection on inculturation has been occasioned largely by the rapid growth of the church in the traditional societies of the so-called "Third World" of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. In contrast, the project undertaken here focusses on a minority context within a "First World" nation, viz., the Hispanic presence within the United States of America, specifically, the Mexican American community. Secondly, until quite recently the preponderance of the discussion of inculturation has tended to focus either on liturgical adaptation or on doctrinal catechesis. The purview of the present study is, rather, the whole of pastoral praxis. Here liturgy and formation are but two of a number of important concerns embraced within a comprehensive, unified perspective.
1.b. The Research Question
The relative novelty of this approach, as we shall see, is also inherent in the object under study. That object is a document known as the National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic
Ministry.) As an official attempt to reflect intelligently upon a specific arena of pastoral action, and to offer both
3. National Conference of Catholic Bishops, National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic Ministry (Washington: USCC, 1988); hereafter referred to as "the NPPHM" or "the Plan." The text first appeared in Origins 17:26 (10 Dec. 1987) 449-463. reasoned guidance and concrete strategies for that action,
the NPPHM was a path-breaking initiative. Today it remains
practically sui generis, at least for the US. Catholic
Church , But the NPPHM is noteworthy for at least two other reasons. One is that, while the final version is an official document promulgated by the US. bishops, it was informed and shaped by an extensive process of consultation, involving thousands of people -- hierarchy, religious professionals, lay leaders and grass-roots folk -- over a period of several years. The Plan may well be the most truly collaborative ecclesiastical document ever composed in Arnerican Catholicism, Secondly, the NPPHM makes an explicit effort to understand and include the cultural data of the Hispanic people in formulating its directives. Targeted at
2 cultural milieu with distinct characteristics, the NPPHM purports to be an attempt to define and promote an authentically inculturated pastoral praxis.
How well it succeeds in that attempt iç the basic question this thesis will investigate. The central thrust of this project is an analysis of the way in which culture
4. Since the NPPHM appeared in November of 1987, it has been followed by the National Black Catholic Pastoral Plan; the latter text is included in: National Conference of Catholic Bishops, Here I Am, Send Me: A Conference Response to the Evangeliza tion of African Americans and the National Black Catholic Pastoral Plan (Washington: USCC, 1989) . is handled theologically in the NPPHM, and a critique of this analysis from a perspective informed by Tracy's general correlational method and the contemporary literature on inculturation. Among the guiding questions are these: how are culture and faith, and their interaction, understood in the Plan? How does the praxis proposed in the Plan flow from its theological presuppositions about the conversation between faith and culture? How, and to what extent, are the relevant data of cultus2 honoured and allowed to shape the pastoral strategies that are endorsed? How is the NPPHM to be evaluated as an instance of contextual pastoral theology? Of particular interest here is one of the chief pastoral strategies embraced in the Plan: the development of small ecclesiai communities (SECs). This project asks: why? How was this conclusion arrived at? How does the Plan envision that SECs provide a strategic structural platform for authentic inculturation of the faith in the U.S. Hispanic context? This project is important for a number of reasons. The NPPHM is a crucial blueprint for Fioman Catholic pastoral ministry among the Hispanic population of the U.S. From many viewpoints it is manifestly clear that Catholic pastoral praxis has been failing to meet the needs of the Hispanic people in the United States. Historically, as we shall see, Hispanics have been treated as second-class citizens within the U.S. Catholic Church, and have often been marginalized or ignored. A serious hemorrhage of Hispanic Catholics has been underway for some time now, as fundamentalist and pentecostal Protestant churches, Mormons, and various sects attract increasing numbers- Moreover, most analysts believe that this already sizeable minority will become the majority within American Catholicism early in the 21st century. In addition, some of the proposals advanced in the Plan are currently being extensively pursued and giving concrete shape to the experience of the Church; this is especially the case with the widespread and burgeoning development of SECS. In sum, the Roman Catholic Church has a huge stake in the success of the Plan. But the implications of this study go far beyond the Hispanic context. On the face of it, the NPPHM represents a novel initiative within the US. Catholic Church, not only in its adoption of cultural analysis, but in its consultative method of formulation and in the very idea of pastoral planning itself. The NPPHM is already being looked to as a possible mode1 for the development of pastoral plans for other contexts. Such planning is becoming more and more common at the parish and diocesan levels, among religious communities and within particular ministries (e-g., hospital pastoral care, religious education, etc. ) . Pressure is being exerted for more such efforts at the regional, national, and even international levels. In the NPPHM the bishops called for a periodic appraisal of the Plan's implementation, but to date this has not been done in any systematic way on the national level.
Such an assessrnent would properly require both qualitative and quantitative research on a huge scale, and thus falls outside the scope of this project. However, as we have seen, on its own terms the NPPHM document involves some theological issues of fundamental importance. The Plan entails practical strategies with decisive ramifications both for the church and for peoplefs lives. The implications of these issues transcend the specific context for which the Plan is designed. For al1 these reasons, the NPPHM deserves the critical attention of the academic community.
1.c. Methodology
A complex array of methodological considerations impinge upon pastoral studies of the kind undertaken here. This makes the question of methodology in pastoral theological research an unavoidably thorny one. A plurality of methods obtains in this discipline, and consensus on appropriate method in a particular case is often impossible to achieve. In su, this project benefits from acquaintance with a variety of hermeneutical and pastoral theologies. An explicitation of its working methodology and consistent adherence to that method will be seen as crucial. On the most foundational level, it has already been made clear that the project adheres to the prêsuppositions and methodological orientations common to correlational theology. The thesis is governed by the critical, "revisionist" understanding of the correlational theological enterprise advanced by David Tracy.' As recourse will be had in this paper to sig~ificantthemes counseled by Tracy, it is worth reviewing the main lines of the author's proposals. Tracy' s most concise def inition of the critical- correlational theology he envisions for the "postmodern" age is this : Theology is the discipline that articulates rnutually critical correlations between the meaning and truth of an interpretation of the Christian fact and the meaning and truth of an interpretation of the contemporary situatiod His definition of practical theology follows upon the
5. This was examined extensively in my comprehensive project, entitled "David Tracy's Practical Theology and Its Implications for the Contextual Study of Small Communities in the Parish" (Toronto, 1993).
6- "The Foundations of Practical Theology," in Don S. Browning, ed., Practical Theology (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1983), p. 62. general one: Practical theology is the mutually critical correlation of the interpreted theory and praxis of the Christian fact and the interpreted- theory and praxis of the
contemporary situation. ! A key premise for Tracy, and for al1 correlational theology, is the daim that "the 'world' is also understood as a properly theological realityWa and "a theological locus for Christian self-understanding/"' Theology is not intra- textual only; the divine activity can and must also be sought in the world beyond the frontiers of the Church and
its sacred texts and traditions. As Tracy says, In short, the revisionist theologian is committed to what seems clearly to be the central task of contemporary Christian theology: the dramatic confrontation, the mutual illuminations and corrections, the possible basic reconciliation between the principal values, cognitive claims, and existential faiths of both a reinterpreted post-modern consciousness and a reinterpreted Christianity . The revisionist theologian is committed both to the reinterpretation of authentic secularity, and the reinterpretation of authentic Christian faith, in light of each other- In performing this task, moreover, the
7. "The Foundations of Practical Theology," p. 76.
8. The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism (N.Y.: Crossroad, l98l), p. 23.
9. The Analogical Imagination, p. 49.
10. Blessed Rage for Order: The New Pluralism in Theology (Minneapolis: Winston/Seabury, 1975), p. 32. revisionist readily embraces new resources available, including critical theory, cognitive theory, semiotics, and .- other hermeneutical tools." Tracy proposes the adoption of 'conversation" as the guiding paradigm for theology, including practical or pastoral theology. Indeed this motif makes its way into Tracy's thought numerous times. The author says bluntly: "Conflict is our actuality. Conversation is Our h~pe."~' Tracy seeks to uncover the structure of authentic conversation as the mode1 for interpretation of any religious tradition. Conversation, of course, operates within certain identifiable canons. It depends, for example, upon honesty, articulate expression of onefs own position, a willingness to listen, a willingness to let the subject matter take over and follow the inquiry wherever it . - may lead, and an openness to changing onefs mind/ Conversations are sometimes interxupted by the need for argument ,14 Attention to method, explanation, or theory through argument may provide resources by which the conversation is further advanced toward the goal of
11. Blessed Rage for Order, pp. 32-34.
12. The Analogical Imagination, p. 363.
13. Plurality and Ambiguity, pp. 18-19-
14. Plurality and Ambiguity, p. 23. 15 'relative adequacy ."" In the conversation surrounding a classic religious text, in particular, arguments may inject important data from such fields as historical criticism and literary criticisme Tracy is well aware of the radically plural nature of language and, hence, the inherently plural - character of religious cl as sic^.-^. Contemporary historical consciousness is exposed to the radically ambiguous character of history and, hence, of religious traditions.
As Tracy says, "There is no tradition that does not eventually have to acknowledge its own plurality and ambigui ty ."" The author proposes certain strategies by which to move forward. Most importantly, our historical narratives, like our conversations, must become more inclusive of the marginalized, the "interruption" of the negative (e.g., the Holocaust), and the "otherness" within ourselves, history, and the classics. Tracy counsels resistance to overly sanguine interpretations, attention to those previously left out, and the hope which arises from resistance, genuine conversation, and confrontation with the classics. Revised critical theories of the self and society can assist. A
15. Plurality and Ambiguity, p. 39 and elsewhere.
16. Plurality and Ambiguity, pp. 40-65,
17, Plurality and Ambiguity, p. ix. hermeneutics of suspicion is called for when we face systemic distortion. But, in spite of the plurality and ambiguity that condition text, interpreter, and dialogue itself, the conversation with the classics must continue and
be fundamentally trusted. '90 embrace pluralism, and to risk an interpretation of the classics -- both require self- transcendent openness to persona1 transformation. But this is the heart of the Tracy credo, the nub of his faith in conversation. The hope of David Tracy is 'a hope for freedom from the rule of the same and a hope for some enlightenment and emancipation."" Tracy proposes the mediation of an "analogical imagination" in the ongoing conversation between a critical interpretation of the Christian "classic" and a critical interpretation of the situation. Noting that there are two basic languages by which systernatic theology has historically been communicated, analogy and dialectic, Tracy proposes that a refurbished, contemporary understanding of analogy, employed through the creative imagination, can and should play a more central role in the ongoing conversation of systematic theology, as well as in the much-needed but
18- Plurality and Ambiguity, pp. 72-79- See also Hans Küng and David Tracy, eds ., Paradigm Change in Theology (N.Y. : Crossroad, 1989 ) , pp. 44f. and elsewhere.
19. Plurality and Ambiguity, p. 113. scarcely-begun conversation among religious traditions.--7 ,- Tracy's proposal for the employment of an analogical imagination is set within the context of the ongoing conversation within and among religious traditions: "Conversation remains the ideal of any analogical imagination in any tradition. "" This dissertation represents an effort to evaluate the nature and quality of the conversation between faith and culture in the NPPHM. And, because correlational theology is dialogical by nature, it is also necessarily hermeneutical. This project is thus an exercise in practical hermeneutics. It attempts to assess the meaning of a document, the NPPHM, as one moment within an ongoing pastoral praxis. To do so, it brings to bear the hermeneutical lenses proffered by Tracy, Robert Schreiter, and others. These sources suggest that praxis -- as distinguished from mere practice -- has a telos, or goal, toward which it intends to move. That goal may be
20- The Analogical ~magination, pp. 405-455. A more concise and sornewhat more lucid presentation of this proposa1 appears in Tracy's lectures, "The Arialogical Imagination in Catholic Theology" and "Analogy and Dialectic: God-Language," in D. Tracy and John 8. Cobb, Jr., Talking about God: Doing Theology in the Context of Modern Pluralism (N.Y - : Seabury, 1983) , pp. 17-28 and 29-38, respectively. See also Tracyfs Dialogue with the Other: The Inter-Religious Dialogue (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990).
21, The Analogical Imagination, p. 453- succinctly described as the "integral 1iberati0n"~~ofthe human person. The NPPHM itself puqorts to aim at that lofty goal through the strategies it adopts. Tracy, Schreiter, et al, may help us discern whether and to what degree the Plan succeeds.
To reach its evaluative goals the study must first attempt to grasp an understanding of the Mexican American cultural situation. A phenomenological description of that culture is laid out, drawing primarily from Mexican American sources. Then the NPPHM is situated within the history of American Catholicism, beginning from the tradition of Catholic social teaching which comprises the wider background out of which the NPPHM emerged. The Plan's lineage is traced from previous official statements taxgeted at the Hispanic context (especially the U.S. bishopsr 1983 pastoral letter), '3 through the consultative Encuentro processes (especially the third and last Encuentro} . In addition, there exists some secondary literature reflecting upon the NPPHM, These sources will be augmented by a small amount of interview material conducted with people who were
22. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation" (22 March 19861, esp. S63; Alfred T. Hennelly, ed. , Liberation Theology: A Documentary History (Maryknoll, N-Y-: Orbis, 1990), p. 481-
23. National Conference of Catholic Bishops, The Hispanic Presence: Challenge and Cornmitment (Washington: USCC, 1983). personally and directly involved in the process of the formulation of the Plan. Taken together, these texts should arnply illumine the nature, origins, and status of the NPPHM. There is also an analytic component to this rnethodology. The study will examine the text of the NPPHM in some detail. This includes its structure and movement, with attention to the interaction of theory and practice at work in the document. Special focus will be given to its treatrnent of culture in general, and the Mexican American cultural milieu in particular. After assessing the interna1 coherence of the text, the project evaluates the document against both the theology of inculturation and the cultural data provided, Contemporary reflection on inculturation rests upon a correlational understanding of theology. Clearly culture, and the modern sociological tools employed to study it, can only be taken with full seriousness as theological sources within a correlational approach to theology. Theologians of inculturation grapple with both the understanding of the concept of culture itself, and the rnanner in which culture is to be included in theological discourse. Diverse approaches to both are to be found. For the former, the definition and understanding of culture, this project will rely prirnarily upon the work of anthropologist Clifford Geertz. Geertz' s approach to "cultural systems" has attracted wide attention and offers important possibilities for contemporary theological reflection For the latter, the manner of including cultural data, this study will depend primarily on theologian Robert
- c Schreiter' s Constructing Local Theology. -- Methodologically, Schreiter offers the pastoral theological researcher a structure within which to bring faith and culture together as conversation partners. He begins by claiming that the contemporary rise of "local theologies" is 'pointing the way to a return to theology as an occasional enterprise, that is, one dictated by circumstances and - - imrnediate needs rather than the need for system-building."-"
Schreiter then provides a way to "map" the development of local theology as a nine-step interaction between church tradition, on the one hand, and culture on the other." The details of this model, together with the theology of inculturation it bespeaks, will be explored in the following chapter* For the present, we can note that Schreiter
24. See, e-g-, the recent two-part article of Car1 F. Starkloff, "Inculturation and Cultural Systems, " Theological Studies 55 ( 1994) 66- 81 and 274-294.
25. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1985. Schreiter himself depends heavily on Geertz; cf. especially pp. 53-56.
26. Constructing Local Theoloqies, p. 23.
27. Constructing Local Theologies, pp. 23-36. 21 intends the use of a map to serve both for orientation and for evaluati~n,'~ It is the evaluative function of this method that will be primarily engaged in this project. Schreiter's mode1 will be employed to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the NPPKM as an authentically inculturated local theology. Most of the conclusions arrived at in this study will be generated through the application of
Schreiter's mapping technique to the NPPHM. Thus, in sum, the methodology of the project is correlational and hermeneutical, and its procedure is threefold: phenomenological, analytical, and evaluative. Interpretation of the meaning of the Plan by historical narrative and analysis yields to critique of the Plan from the perspective of a correlational theology of inculturation. The evaluative conclusions of the study are suggestive of some reflections on the prospects and problems for implementation of the Plan, These remarks may indicate both further questions and study, as well as possible implications and applications for other fields.
1.d. Appendix: A Glossary of Key Terms
The following represents a small collection of terminology which will be of special importance in this
28. Constructing Local Theologies, p. 23, pro ject. In some cases (notably, 'inculturation") a more amplified definition or description will be provided in a subsequent chapter. Thus this section is intended as a kind of handy, preliminary reference aid.
Praxis. This tenu crops up frequently in works of contemporary pastoral theological reflection. Its Greek pedigree signals a long and variegated history, a history which includes the termrs modern captivity to Marxism. Such polyvalence can threaten to render its meaning too imprecise or too ideologically laden to be useful. As has been noted above, praxis is distinguished from mere practice by the additional dimension of intentionality; it is purposeful, intelligent, reflective practice, and thus denotes some conjunction of theory and practice. Tracy speaks of the "theory-laden" nature of praxis, which he def ines as "the action of moral agents guided by some goal of the good and virtuous life and directed to the development of a character possessing phronesis or practical wisdom. "'? In another place the author says:
The word praxis, by its very strangeness in English, reminds us that every worthwhile practice is inforrned by some theory. Praxis can also remind us that theoretical activity is itself a praxis -- and one to be tested by the practice it serves.30
29. "The Foundations of Practical Theology," pp. 62 and 74f.
30. Plurality and Ambiguity, p. IO. Culme. To seek a definition of culture is to thrust oneself into the fractious world of the social sciences. 1 shall follow Clifford Geertz in his preference for a 'semiotic"" concept of culture as a set of "socially established structures of meaning, ")' a 'context . .. within which social events, behaviors, institutions, or processes can be intelligently -- that is, thickly -- described."" Geertz's fuller definition of culture is: [Culture] denotes an historically transmitted pattern of meanings embodied in symbols, a system of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic forrns by means of which [humans] communicate, perpetuate, and develop their knowledge about and attitudes toward life." Religion. In a well-known essay, '' Geertz described religion as a "cultural system." His definition is worth repeating here:
Religion is (1) a system of symbols which acts to (2) establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in [people] by (3) formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and (4) clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that (5) the moods and motivations seem
31. The Interpretation of Cultures (N.Y.: Basic Books, 1973), p. 5 -
32- The Interpretation of Cultures, p. 12.
33. The Interpretation of Cultures, p. 14.
34. The Interpretation of Cultures, p- 89-
35. "Religion as a Cultural System," in The Interpretation of Cultures, pp. 87-125. uniquely realistic.'"
Inculturation. Much more will be said about this theological term. It must be distinguished from its linguistic cousins. Encul turation, for example, is an anthropological term which refers to the process by which an individual is formed or assimilated into a culture.3-
Acculturation, also drawn from anthropology, refers to al1 the phenomena associated with encounter between disparate cultures. 36 Incul turation, meanwhile, includes a theological element significant to the church. Aylward
Shorter defines inculturation simply as "the on-going dialogue between faith and culture or cultures. "" Father Pedro Arrupe's description is often cited: Inculturation is the incarnation of Christian life and of the Christian message in a particular cultural context, in such a way that this experience not only finds expression through elements proper to the culture in question (this alone would be no more than a superficial adaptation) but becomes a principle that animates, directs and unifies the culture, transforming it and remaking it so as to bring about a "new creation. ""O
36, The Interpretation of Cultures, p. 90.
37. See, inter alia, Jacques Scheuer, "Inculturation: Presentation of the Topic," Lumen Vitae 40:l (1985) 11.
38. Scheuer, 12-
39. Toward a Theology of Inculturation (Maryknoll, N. Y. : Orbis, 1988), p. If.
40. "Letter to the Whole Society on Inculturation," Studies in the International Apostolate of Jesuits 7 (June 1978) 2. The definition given by Arij Roest Crollius, though very sirnilar to Arrupe's, is the one preferred here, for reasons to be explained: The inculturation of the Church is the integration of the Christian experience of a local Church into the culture of its people, in such a way that this experience not only expresses itself in elements of this culture, but becomes a force that animates, orients and innovates this culture so as to create a new unity and communion, not only within the culture in question, but also as an enrichment of the Church universal. " Contextualization. Basically this word denotes the same reality as incul turation, viz., the dynamic interaction between Gospel message and a given milieu.
Contextualization has a bit more currency within Reformed
Chri~tianity.~' The Word-oriented nature of the Protestant tradition likely explains the preference for a term whose etymology lies in the literary sciences. Usage of con textuali za ti on would thus have some ecumenical arguments in its favour. Another strength of the term lies in the way it emphasizes particularity and historical change in every situation; Robert Schreiter, for example, prefers it for
41. "What 1s So New about Inculturation? A Concept and Its Implications, '' Gregorianum 59 (1978) 735.
42- Peter Schineller notes its appearance in documents of the World Council of Churches; A Hanàbook on Inculturation (N.Y.: Paulist Press, 1990), p. 19. See also, inter alia, Lesslie Newbigin, The Gospel in a PluraZist Society (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989); also, David J- Hesselgrave and Edward Rommen, Contextualization: Meanings, Methods, and Models (Grand Rapids : Baker, 1989 ) . just such reasons. Its weaknesses are its possible distanciation from the fruits of cultural analysis, and the possible implication of a lack of continuity or wider applicability. As one writer suggests, "the Christian message is more than a 'textr inserted into a context.""
Without prejudice to contextualization, incul turation will generally be preferred here, both because this project is lodged within Roman Catholic discourse, and because it connotes the theological effort to reap benefits from the social sciences. Culture itself is certainly not without its own ambiguities and conceptual liabilities. But, while culture can always be broken dom into ever more specific contexts, 1 believe it remains an effectua1 tool for categorizing and describing commonalities of life, language, tradition, outlook, etc., shared by people in many locations. Indeed it is just such things that politicians presume, artists express, and anthropologists study.
Nispanic. This is an umbrella term for a collection of ethnic groups, al1 of whom trace their origin in some way to one of the Latin American countries, e the modern nations which make up the former colonial empires of Spain and Portugal in the western hemisphere. The term Latino/a
43. Scheuer, n, 2, p. 12. is preferred by some; Hispanic and Latinoh will be used synonymously in this project. Hispanic is the term currently used by the US. Census Bureau. It was also used during the Encuentro process and in the plan under study here.
Mexican American. This term refers to al1 those residents of the United States who trace their ethnic identity in whole or in part to Mexico. Some are US. citizens, some are not. Some belong to families who have lived within the present borders of the U.S. from as early as the 17th century. Others trace their origins to later immigrants to the U.S., or have only recently arrived from Mexico themselves. Some speak only Spanish, some only English, while not a few are partly or wholly bilingual Mexican Americans are sometimes referred to as
Chicanos. This term was popularized during the civil rightsr struggles of the 1960s and '70s; 'Chicano Power," for example, was a frequently heard slogan. Chicano/a is of uncertain origin, and its meaning is imprecise. Usually,
44. At various points in this project the terms Hispanic and Mexican American will appear in close proximity to one another. To avoid confusion, the readex is to assume that the usage of terms is not accidental or sloppy, but intentional. Although Mexican Americans are the focus of this study, 1 have employed Hispanic where that more general term is warranted either by the context of the discussion or by the source(s) utilized, and where 1 am confident that remarks about the more general group are applicable to the sub-group of Mexican Americans. though not always, Chicano/a seems to refer to Mexican Americans of at least the second generation. Also, it is not in common usage outside of California. For these reasons, Chicanoh will generally be avoided in these pages, CHAPTER 2. CULTURE AS A THEOLOCICAL LOCUS
2.a. Faith and Social Context before the Second Vatican Council Culture is both a problem and a resource for Christians. The question of how to relate to the social context is as old as the Christian mission itself. The founder of the Christian movement was not exempt, for plainly the itinerant rabbi from Nazareth had to face a variety of situations, al1 of them conditioned by religious and social mores of the tirne. His geographic location in Roman-occupied first-century Palestine, and especially in Galilee, suggests that he rnay even have moved among several
different social and linguistic circles. Jesus was not a complete stranger to cultural pluralism. That is not saying much, howevex. One may pore over the pages of the gospel texts in the hope of isolating a singular, authoritative stance on the culture question commended by Jesus to his followers. The hope is vain, for the evidence remains fragmentary and ambiguous. However much we may be impressed by the Jewish-ness of Jesus, for example, we cannot overlook the fact that he drew upon his own cultural tradition creatively, and the daring originality of his genius sometimes made him a shock to his contemporaries. Jesus was a creature of culture, but this by no means implies that the meaning of his public ministry is reducible to the conventions of his time and place, So we are left with the need to "risk an interpretation8' of "the Christian Classic."' Scholarly christological interpreters have demonstrated that Jesus' own modus operandi in interaction with his social environment was quite complex. The intricacy of this
relationship can be amply illustrated, for example, in attempting to understand the death of Jesus. The precise relationship of his death to the proclamation and praxis that marked his life is not immediately clear. More than one modern interpreter has corne to see Jesus as himself
"marginal" in his own milieu, a voice of protest against certain elements of the dominant culture.' John Dominic Crossan points to "open commensality," i-e., non-discrirninating table sharing, as one of the central, identifying characteristics of Jesus' praxis.' The
1. David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, passim.
2. See, e. g., John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, 2 vols. (N.Y. : Doubleday, 1991, 1994) .
3. Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1994), pp, 66-74; also Crossan, The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant (San Francisco: practice of eating with anyone, regardless of usual social distinctions like gender or class, implies a radically egalitarian social vision, says Crossan. Moreover, that vision conflicts fundamentally with the ancient Mediterranean sense of honour and sharne, a cultural value in which the individual's esteem is always derived from one's peers. Alongside this table praxis is 3esusr stinging verbal critique of the Jewish religious leadership, which had been coopted economically and politically by the Roman occupation. Crossan concludes that Jesus aroused first the suspicion and soon the ire of the guardians of the established social order, thus inducing his own execution. Crossan's interpretation is just one of many that would daim that although Jesus was fully a creature of his tirne, Jesus met his death in the attempt to critically expand the cultural horizons of his contemporaries.' Those who nurtured the legacy of Jesus of Nazareth after his death were likewise confronted by the vexing challenges of their surrowidings, at first as a Palestinian
Jewish sect. In general, the infant communities of the New
HarperSanFrancisco, 1991), pp. 341-4. Cf. also Elisabeth SchUssler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her: A Feminist Theological Reconstruction of Christian Origins (N.Y. : Crossroad, 19891, esp. pp. 105-59,
4. This would be true, for example, of almost any of the theologians of liberation; see Roger Haight, An Alternative Vision: An Interpretation of ~iberationTheology (N-Y.: Paulist, l98S), pp. 104-39- 32 Testament period accommodated themselves to their cultural situation as much as possible.' As their post-Resurrection reflection deepened, the life and death of Jesus began to take on aspects of meaning which transformed and transcended
Judaism, Simultaneously, the Jewish diaspora provided ready avenues of intercourse with the surrounding Hellenistic culture. In the pages of the Acts of the Apostles, in particular, we see played out the drama of the Christian movement's own metamorphosis as it spread across the Mediterranean world.' Whether scattered by persecution or by missionary impulse or both, Christianity soon "outgrew its Jewish swaddling-clothes"' and undertook, perforce, the process of adaptation to the Greco-Roman world, But it was the sole figure of Paul of Tarsus, more than any other, who carried the Christian message and extended the Christian church beyond the frontiers of Judaism. 'Few [people] of the ancient Mediterranean world have so
5. Louis J. Luzbetak, The Church and Cultures, rev. ed. (Maryknoll, N. Y. : Orbis, 1988), p. 86f.
6. Marcel Dumais, "The Church of the Acts of the Apostles: A Mode1 of Inculturation?" in Arij A. Roest Crollius, ed., Cultural Change and Liberation in a Christian Perspective (Rome: Gregorian Univ. Press, 1987), pp. 1-24.
7. Kenneth Scott Latourette, A History of the Expansion of Christianity, Volume I: The First Five Centuries (N.Y. : Harper d Bros - , l937), p. 72. profoundly af fected the course of history. "6 By an ingenious strategy of public proclamation and community organization, Paul drew upon the linguistic and cultural resources available to his audience, skillfully exploiting those resources for explanation, metaphor, analogy. In some instances, Paul could be forceful in denunciation of idolatry and immorality as, most notably, to the community in the bawdy port city of Corinth. In other cases, however, Paul spoke respectfully of pagan customs and religious aspirations, as at the Areopagus in Athens. Moreover, he recruited native CO-workers, appointed local overseers, and insisted upon the equality of Jew and Gentile through Christ
(cf. Gal. 2:llfL.). "Paul's was a comprehensive vision,"' even to the embrace of ethnic diversity within the Church. For that vision Paul had to contest with both Judaizers and Hellenizers. While he had clearly broken with the narrow constraints of early Judeo-Christianity, he nonetheless continued to work assiduously for the unity of the new Gentile converts with the community in Jerusalem. In short, Paulrs missionary efforts, his interpretation of the gospel to the various churches, his pluricultural ecclesiology, and
8. Latourette, p. 76.
9. Latourette, p- 79. 34 his ambivalent attitude towards the milieux he encountered'" had, and continue to have, an enormous influence upon the course of Christian mission. Other parts of the Christian canon augment the sense of paradox found in the Pauline corpus. On the one hand, for example, we find in the Fourth Gospel's Logos christology an overt assimilation of Greek philosophical thought as an avenue of reflection upon the central figure of the Christian gospel. At the opposite pole lies the Book of Revelation, whose apocalyptic imagery and antagonistic identification of Rome as the "whore of Babylon" were designed to bolster faith and the uniqueness of Christian identity faced by the extreme circumstances of active persecution. Thus, Christians of the initial generations were capable of quite a variety of stances towards their surroundings. Christians' disposition toward culture depended to a great extent upon their judgment of their particular situation, especially that situation's perceived threats to and opportunities for the growth of the church and the extension of the evangelical mission. Clearly some environments and time periods were more inimical to the
10 - Aylward Shorter, Toward a Theology of Inculturation (Maryknoll, N. Y. : Orbis, l988), p. 123. Christian movernent than others. Succeeding generations of Christians have not found the issues any easier. H. Richard Niebuhr's seminal Christ and
Culturei' effectively attests to the enduring nature of the questions and the variety of responses they have received from the Christian community in various contexts. "Christian perplexity in this area has been perennia1,"'- says the author. Niebuhr delineated the basic problem in terms of a dynamic interaction between the Christ of faith and the inescapable exigencies of culture: Christianity, whether defined as church, creed, ethics, or movement of thought, itself moves between the poles of Christ and culture. The relation of these two authorities constitutes its problem.I3 The understanding of this relationship, according to the author, can shed light on many theological questions. Indeed Niebuhr discerned the theological problem of culture lurking within many another hotly debated theological issue. One example is the old question of the relationship between reason and revelation, about which the author says: When Christianity deals with the question of reason and revelation, what is ultimately in question is the relation of the revelation in Christ to the reason
11. N.Y. : Harper & Row, 1951-
12. Niebuhr, p. 2,
13. Niebuhx, p. 11- which prevails in culture." Niebuhr was among the first to employ a typological approach in theology. It is important to grasp the author's limited claims for the "models" he proposes. Niebuhr admits that the construction of models is "partly artificial," and that "no person or group ever conforms completely to a type."" However, he defends it on the grounds that it is useful in identifying recurrent themes: The method of typology, though historicall y inadequate, has the advantage of calling to attention the continuity and significance of the great motifs that appear and reappear in the long- - wrestling of Christians with their enduring problem.'" For Niebuhr this method is a dialogical tool fit for an issue that admits a plurality of solutions: The repeated struggles of Christians with this problem have yielded no single Christian answer, but only a series of typical answers which together, for faith, represent phases of the strategy of the militant church in the world .... It is the purpose of the following chapters to set forth typical Christian answers to the problem of Christ and culture and so to contribute to the mutual understanding of variant and often conflicting Christian groups.I7 The author's construction of models is intended as an aid to clarity. The definition of "typical partial answers," it is
14- Niebuhr, p. 11.
15. Niebuhr, p. 43f.
16. Niebuhr, p. 44.
17, Niebuhr, p. 2. hoped, makes it easier 'to discern some order in this multiplicity, to stop the dialogue, as it were, at certain points [so that] the course of the great conversation about Christ and culture may be more intelligently followed.""
The author sees this effort as part of an ongoing process of Christian social discernment: The belief which lies back of this effort is the conviction that Christ as living Lord is answering the question in the totality of history and life in a fashion which transcends the wisdom of al1 his interpreters yet employs their partial insights and their necessary c~nflicts.'~
Clearly for Niebuhr the models approach is not seen as a way to distance the theologian £rom the issue of faithrs relation to the world, nor as an excuse to lapse into an easy relativism. Christ and Culture is an invitation to socially committed theology. Of the five types Niebuhr presents, the first two represent the extremes. The first, "Christ Against ~u1ture~"'~rnphasizesopposition between Christ and culture, and discontinuity between the life of grace and the life of culture- Faith in Christ is viewed as a radical choice that necessarily implies maximum possible withdrawal
18. Niebuhr, p. 40-
19. Niebuhr, p. 2.
20. Niebuhr, pp. 45-82. from a world seen as thoroughly corrupt. Among the exemplars of this position Niebuhr mentions the First Letter of John, Tertullian, and Tolstoy. Its polar opposite, "The Christ of Culture/"'I claims a fundamental agreement between Christ and culture, a basic continuity between nature and grace, church and world. Here Christ is seen as the fulfillment of cultural aspirations, the mode1 human. Niebuhr traces this approach from early Gnosticism through Abelard and modern liberal Protestantism, especially Ritschl. Niebuhr describes three middle approaches to the question of Christ and culture. Collectively they represent
"the great ma jority rnovement in Christianity," or "the church of the center ."" In different ways al1 three seek to maintain the distinction between the two principles while af f irming both. The "synthetic" approach, "Christ Above Culture, "" seeks to overcome the very real gap between Christ and culture by careful study of both. Here Christ is seen as the culmination of culture, but as decisively transcending culture as well. The early Apologists, Clement of Alexandria, and, most of all, Thomas Aquinas are seen as
21. Niebuhr, pp. 83-115.
22. Niebuhr, p. 117.
23. Niebuhr, pp. 116-48. proponents of this approach, A second median way, the "Christ and Culture in ~aradox"" model, maintains a sharp dualism between the two. The transcendent holiness of God is contrasted starkly with the corruption of the human situation, Yet, unlike the "Christ Against Culture" approach, there is here a positive affirmation of
Christians' duties toward society and culture, with Godf s help, The author uncovers the dualistic motif in certain passages in St. Paul, more clearly in Marcion, Martin Luther, and Kierkegaard. Niebuhr does not endorse any one approach over the others; he affirms something valid about each one and assesses their respective liabilities. The one model which escapes extensive critique, however, is the f ifth, "Christ the Transformer of culture."" In this type the sharp distinction between Christ and culture is maintained, but there is a more hopeful attitude toward culture and creation than in the fourth group. Niebuhr calls this the 'conversionist" approach for its ernphasis upon Christian efforts to reform culture in light of the gospel. He traces the transformation motif to the Fourth Gospel, and numbers
24. Niebuhr, pp. 149-89,
25. Niebuhr, pp. 190-229- among its exponents A~gustine,~~alvin,and F. D. Maurice. Niebuhr has eloquently identified some of the major paradigms on the spectrum of Christian responses to culture. A history of Christian mission, though too long to be undertaken in detail here, would demonstrate the recurring nature of Niebuhr's motifs. A few general remarks on that history will suffice here. The first great cultural watershed for the Christian movement was its transformation from Jewish sect to Gentile religion. In the Acts of the Aposties and elsewhere we glimpse the stresses that attended this transition. For most of the patristic era Christianity rernained a srnall sect, sometimes persecuted and sometimes tolerated. Christian thinkers, however, became increasingly adept at
reflecting upon their faith in terms of classical culture.
Apologists like Clement of Alexandria, Justin, Origen,
Tertullian, to name but a few, strove to make the Christian gospel understandable according to the thought categories
26. Niebuhr admits that the dualists also find support in Augustine; cf, p. 169. Augustiner s The City of God is surely among the most influential -- and paradoxical -- patristic texts in this entire field. Niebuhr rightly points to Augustine's emphasis on human regeneration under the influence of grace in support of listing him in the fifth category; ci, Niebuhr, p. 209. Certainly The City of God demonstrates that the fabric of human history is to be taken with great theological seriousness. However, there is a basically pessimistic tone to The City of God, a work which, after all, was written in the throes of immense social upheaval. Its strong deprecation of human corruption, and the social consequences thereof, have bequeathed to Western Christianity an attitude toward the world that is more suspicious, even hostile, than would seem to characterize the conversionist approach- 41 and concerns of their contemporaries, It was Justin, for
example, who spoke of 'logoi sperrnatikoi (seeds of the Word) " among pagan writingd7 Eusebius saw evidence in Greek philosophy of "preparations" for christ .'' ~uggustine made extensive use of his education in Roman rhetoric and neo-Platonism in explanation of his conversion to Christ. The relationship between Christian faith and culture changed dramatically in the twilight years of the classical age. The so-called Constantinian settlement (actually effected by Theodosius) thrust the Christian church into a wholly new situation. Over a relatively brief historical period the Christian movement went from a dissenting minority cult to official toleration to established religion. Little had prepared the church for this startling about-face, As the Empire crurnbled, the church became the guardian of classical Greco-Roman cultiire. The Western Church, in particular, came more and more under the patronage of imperial and tribal rulers, The church allied itself with the power of the state, and in doing so the approach to mission became more coercive, less tolerant of diverse customs and cultures, and more politicized. Often ecclesiastical leaders and Christian monarchs alike did not
27. Luzbetak, p. 87.
28. Luzbetak, p. 87. hesitate to impose Christian baptism and practice on whole peoples. Of course, some instances of a more moderate praxis of linguistic and cultural accommodation are to be found. One example, especially dear to our current pope, is the 9th-century work of Cyril and Methodius in evangelizing and unifying the culture of the ~lavs.23 The early medieval age afforded little incentive to question the church-state alliance or check its excesses. The later Middle Ages were dominated by the protracted struggle with Islam, and the gradua1 rise of the city-states and national powers of the West in a rivalry with Rome. More variety in missionary approaches began to surface. While popes at times conducted crusades against the Muslims, and Jews were forcibly converted or oppressed in Spain and elsewhere, other voices like Francis of Assisi and the Dominicans stressed conversion through charity and preaching. The intellectual achievernent of Thomas Aquinas, meanwhile, produced a synthesis of Christian faith with Aristotelian thought. Thomas' contemporaries were slow to appreciate the wisdom and balance of his thought. But his profound respect for the dignity of human nature may be credited with laying the foundation for a more humane and
29. Pope John Paul II, Slavorum Rpostoli: In Commemoration of the Eleventh Centenary of the Evangelizing Work of Saints Cyril and Methodius (Boston: St . Paul Editions, 1985) - affirming approach to non-Christian cultures, The advent of the Protestant Reformation and Catholic Counter-Reformation opened a new era in the history of the faith-culture dialectic. Luther and Calvin restored the Bible to the vernacular, and in so doing affirmed the insertion of faith into popular culture. The longer-term by-product of this affirmation, however, was the rise of that virulent nationalism which has plagued the West ever since. The Roman Church, meanwhile, eventually responded to the Protestant challenge with some long-overdue reforms.
The Council of Trent also inaugurated an unprecedented period of missionary activity. However, in rejecting the
Reformation, Trent sought to preserve church unity by means of a rigid standardization of many aspects of church life.
Trent imposed a series of previously unknown measures which, however well intended, were based on European cultural assumptions and aimed at international ~niformity.~' The cataclysmic divisions which erupted within the Western church coincided with the European "discovery" of other continents and cultures by Spanish and Portuguese navigators .'' To the Iberians, especially, relatively unscathed by the religious conflicts that wracked the rest
-
30. Shorter, pp, 153-5.
31. Luzbetak, pp. 91-6. of the continent, the CO-extension of Cross and Crown wâs regarded as normal, necessary, even providential. E'unctionally, of course, the church was relegated to the status of a junior partner, useful for conferring moral and even sacred legitirnacy upon the imperialistic and colonialist endeavours of the European states. Nonetheless, it is noteworthy that it was during this period (16th and early 17th c.) that the church became a truly worldwide institution. 32 Trent and the conquistadores combined to extond the reach of the Roman Church decisively beyond Europe, and today the Church is still struggling to corne to terms with the long-term consequences of globalization for its own life. Certainly the Church was in far too many cases a willing CO-conspirator in the suppression of native peoples and cultures. The legacy of Western domination and colonialism will not be soon forgotten in many quarters of the world. Still, even during these years there were some alternative approaches worth critical retrieval. In recent years, for example, Peruvian theologian Gustavo Gutiérrez has led the way in recovering the praxis of Bartolomé de Las
32. Luzbetak, p. 92. CasasO3' Las Casas opposed the Spanish system of forced labour by the native American peoples and sought respect for the freedom of conscience in the process of evangelization. In Asia, the Jesuits Matteo Ricci in China and Roberto de Nobili in India carried the Christian message to the ancient cultures of the East by means of deep and respectful dialogue. The Franciscan missions in California and the Jesuit Reductions in South America were, in limited ways, notable for their efforts at preserving and christianizing native cultures. Unfortunately, most of these less coercive efforts ran afoul of ecclesiastical or secular authorities and were prematurely aborted. Religious wars, the Enlightenment, and the eclipse of the Catholic states by Protestant colonial powers al1 contributed to a decline in Catholic missionary activity in the late 17th and 18th centuries." Revival began only in the aftermath of the French Revolution and Napoleonic wars, with the foundation of a number of new religious orders and missionary societied5 Women religious, in particular, took up a much greater role in the missionary efforts. Later in the 19th century the First Vatican Council and the
33. G. Gutierrez, Las Casas: In Search of the Poor of Jesus Christ (Maryknoli., N- Y. : Orbis, 1993) .
34. Luzbetak, p- 96.
35. Luzbetak, p. 99f.; Shorter, pp. 168-72. 46 condemnation of Modernism were among the factors reinforcing rigid cultural as well as doctrinal ~niformity.~~Basic ethnocentric paradigms and assumptions were largely unchanged. Throughout the 18th and 19th centuries Catholics generally continued to share with their Protestant competitors the assumption that the advancement of Christianity was inextricably bound up with the advancement of 'civilization" in mission lands.)' This implied a Eurocentric view of the world, and an attitude toward local cultures that ranged from condescension t:o outright animosity. Change came slowly and, as usual, largely under the pressure of events. The late 19th and early 20th century was a time of considerable stress for al1 the European churches, as they struggled to corne to terms with the aftermath of the Enlightenment and the new social conditions of the industrial age. The mid-20th century witnessed two horrendous world wars, and an unparalleled economic depression. Arnidst this foment a body of Roman Catholic social teaching was developing, and the first tentative steps in the direction of social analysis were taken. Papal encyclicals like Pius XIrs Quadragesimo anno (1931)
-
36. Shorter, pp, 164-7.
37. Luzbezak, p. 102. emphasized the rights of workers and the importance of economic and cultural opportunities.
Several important mission encyclicals also a~peared.
Benedict XVrs 1919 Maximum illud stressed cooperation within cultural regions, the development of local clergy, and the importance of the vernacular languages.j6 More importantly, Benedict sounded the strongest note of opposition to cultural domination to date. Pius XI'S Rerum Ecclesiae of
1926 went even further in preaching equ.ality between indigenous clergy and the rnis~ionary.~~iusXII in 1944 was the first to speak in terms of a plurality of cultures with the Church." Although practire in the field generally lagged behind, the early and middle 20th century saw important theoretical advances in the approach to culture. Moreover, the formal alliance of church missionary efforts with the European national states was being steadily eroded as colonialism fitfully tapered off. Another crucially important factor helping to midwife a change in attitude toward non-Western cultures was the developrnent of indigenous clergy in the Roman Catholic mission fields. Increased attention was being paid to the
38. Shorter, pp. 179-81.
39. Shorter, pp. 181-3.
40. Shorter, pp. 183-5. 48 recruitment and education of local clergy as early as the
17th century. The process made even more headway in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, however, and it was this period tha: even saw the first appointment of indigenous bishops in a nwer of places. The significance of this development must be recognized. Missiologist Car1 Starkloff has explored in some depth the symbolic power inherent in indigenous f orms of ministry in the church. '' Starkloff notes that the native minister is both "symbol-rnaker" and
"symbol itself of integral cultural and spiritual wholene~s."~~In addition, it is important to note that this symbolic power is double-edged. The existence of indigenous ministry, especially in its officially recognized clerical forms, also conveys to the worldwide church a certain legitirnacy or maturity on the part of the local church. In other words, the presence of native clergy cloaks the local church's inculturative efforts with a degree of authority and respect in the eyes of other local churches. Cultivation of local religious leadership has far-reaching consequences for the church on both the local and the universal levels.
41. Starkloff, "Keepers of Tradition: The Symbol Power of Indigenous Ministry," Kerygma 23:52 (1989) 3-120.
42. "Keepers of Tradition," 109. 2.b. Official Teaching: Vatican II and Its Aftermath The vigourous missionary activity undertaken by both Catholics and Protestants in the 19th century represented "both a powerful last thrust of Christendom and an important instrument in bringing about the dissolution of
Christendom,"43 By the close of the Second World War colonialism, at least in its overt political and military forms, was largely dead. Moreover, the prolonged contact with vastly different cultures, especially through the establishment of native local churches and the slow nurturing of indigenous clergy, had begun to have its effect on the "home" e,European) churches. And, as we have seen above, significant theological advances in the interpretation and approach to culture had already been made in the late 19th and first half of the 20th centuries.
It is clear, then, that politically, ecclesiastically, and theologically the stage had been set for significant change by the time Ange10 Giuseppe Roncalli ascended to the papacy in 1958. The combination of dramatically changed world circumstances and the dynamic personality and leadership of the new pontiff were to have important consequences for the evolution of the faith-culture
43. Wilbert Shenk, as quoted by Luzbetak, p. 104. 50 dialectic- John XXfII hirnself signaled what was in store in his first encyclical, Princeps Pastorum (1959), when he asserted that the Church "does not identify herself with any one culture to the exclusion of the rest -- not even with European and Western culture, with which her history is so closely linked. "" For the first time in a papal encyclical, cultural pluralism within the Church was directly invoked and af firmed.
Having stunned the world with his unexpected convocation of an ecumenical council, John XXIII then set the tone for the Councilfs efforts in his remarkable opening statement to it on 11 October 1962. After affirming that Catholic doctrine must be updated through modern research methods and re-articulated in modern language, he made the controversial claim that "the substance of the ancient deposit of faith is one thing, and the way in which it is presented is another. "'" In effect, the pope aàmitted that the Churchrs dogmatic expressions were culturally conditioned, and he implicitly invited reexamination and reformulation of that heritage in accord with a diversity of cultural perspectives. The composition and progress of the Second Vatican
44. As quoted by Shorter, p. 187,
45. As quoted by Shorter, p. 188. Council over the years 1962-65 comprise an extraordinary
story in itself. Among the 2,500 Council Fathers were significant numbers of native prelates from Asia, Africa, and Latin America, in addition to the preponderance of Europeans and North Americans. It was this representation of diverse cultures from far-flung parts of the globe that so impressed Karl Rahner and many other observers. Indeed, Rahner considered Vatican II the most significant council to be convened since the first century. He saw the Council standing at the threshold of a "third epoch" inaugurating, however partially and imperfectly, the consciousness and operation of "the world ~hurch. A cursory exarnination of the Council's major documents reveals several interesting things. The terms
"inculturation" and "contextualization" nevex appear in the documents, of course; both are neologisms of the
postconciliar era. The words "culture (s) " and "cultural" appear only three times in the document that was intended to be the centerpiece of the Councilfs work, Lumen Gentiurn, the
Dogmatic Constitution on the Church. Similarly, the terms are found only twice in Nostra Aetate, the Declaration on
46. Karl Rahner, "Towards a Fundamental Theological Interpretation of Vatican II," Theological Studies 40 (1979) 716-27. The first epoch identified by Rahner was that of early Jewish Christianity. This was followed by the second epoch, the nineteen centuries of close identification of the Church with Western civilization. the Church's Relation to Non-Christian Religions; twice in
Sacrosanctum Concili um, the Constitution on the Sacred
Li turgy; and once each in Uni tatis Redintegratio, the Decree on Ecumenism; Dignitatis Humanae, the Declaration on
Religious Freedom; and Dei Verbum, the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation. However, "culture" and its derivatives appear a fulsome twenty times in Ad Gentes, the Decree on the Church's
Missionary Activi ty, and a remarkable 84 times in what has become the Council' s most mernorable contribution, Gaudium et
Spes, the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the World of Today. It is not incidental that these latter two documents were among the last promulgated, suggesting a development of interest and thought on the importance of culture within the Council Fathers' theological and pastoral reflection. To be sure, a close scrutiny of the way 'culture" is utilized in the documents would reveal some ambiguity. In the Councilrs earlier documents, especially, a classicist definition cf culture referring mainly to the graphic and performing arts prevails. In the later documents, especially Ad Gentes and Gaudium et Spes, a richer and more anthropologically-informed usage becomes the nom. Aylward Shorter rues the Council's "fateful decision" to take up the question of liturgical reform before that of the liturgyfs ecclesial context or mission. The result, says the author, was that "liturgical renewal was sadly out of step with the Churchrs thinking on evangelization and culture. Sacrosanctum Concilium was undoubtedly a significant theological advance in its admission of liturgical pluriformity, especially in the encouragement it gave to cultural adaptation of the lit~rgy.~~owever,the Council only envisioned a rather extrinsic and decorative adaptation of the Roman rite to various cultural circumstances. Control of the liturgy remains firmly anchored in the hierarchy." Moreover, the question of the creation of new rites, which Shorter, Anscar ~hupungcojO and others believe is demanded by a full-orbed approach to inculturation, was foreclosed alt~gether.~: Despite the paucity of its overt references to culture,
47, Shorter, p. 191.
48. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 537-40,
49, Sacrosanctum ~oncilium,S22, 36, 40 and elsewhere.
50. See A. Chupungco, Cultural Adaptation of the Liturgy (N,Y - : Paulist, 1982); Liturgies of the Future: The Process and Methods of Inculturation (N,Y. : Paulist, 1989); Liturgical Incul turation: sacramentals, Religiosity, and Catechesis (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1992); and "The Roman Liturgy and Inculturation." Federation of Diocesan Liturgical Commissions Newsletter 21: 6 (Dec . 1994) 53-6.
51. Shorter, pp- 191-5. Lumen Gentium is noteworthy for the purposes under study here for at least two reasons. One is the considerable advance made in the area of soteriology. The document affirms that the divine plan of salvation embraces not only the baptized, but also those who acknowledge the Creator, and even those who 'through no fault of their own" have not yet heard the gospel or corne into contact with the Church. Divine saving grace is at work in thern also, insofar as they sincerely seelc to live rightly and know God. "For whatever goodness and truth is found in them is considered by the church as a preparation for the gospel.. . .jf 52 Here the Council envisions the work of the Church as one of infusing the Gospel into various cultural milieux: The result of [the churchfs] activity is that the good seed that is found in people's hearts and rninds, or in their particular rites and cultures, is not only saved from destruction but is made whole, raised up and brought to completion to the glory of God, the confusion of the devil and the happiness of humanity.--z 2 This affirmation of cultures includes the envisionment of a dialogical approach to non-Christian religions, a theme which was picked up a year later in the Dedaration on the
Church's Relation to Non-Christian Religions. Nostra Aetate
52. Lumen Gentium (hereafter LG), S16, Ail citations from documents of the Second Vatican Council are taken from Norman P. Tanner, ed., Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, vol, II (London: Sheed d Ward; and Washington: Georgetown U, Press, 1990).
53. LG, 517, is even stronger and more explicit in its affirmation of cultural and religious diversity, In a well-known passage, the Council said: The catholic church rejects nothing of those things which are true and holy in these religions. It regards with respect those ways of acting and living and those precepts and teachings which, though often at variance with what it holds and expounds, frequently reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens everyone ...- [The church] therefore calls upon al1 its sons and daughters with prudence and charity, through dialogues and cooperation with the followers of other religions, bearing witness to the christian faith and way of life, to recognise, preserve and promote those spiritual and moral good things as well as the socio-cultural values which are to be found among them.''
Nostra Aetate called for active cooperation and ongoing dialogue with other religions, and forcefully denounced religious persecution and di~crimination.~'
A second major contribution of Lumen Gentium was the way in which the document emphasized the primary reality of the Church's life in the "particular" churches. The unity of the whole, said the Council, is not damaged by the fact that the various local churches 'enjoy their own proper
traditions ,"5" The local churches are presumed to corne
first, and are held together in communion through the hierarchy, but each particular church is truly church and
54. Nostra Aetate, 52.
55. Nostra Aetate, S4-5.
56. LG, 513. not something less. The Petrine ministry exercised frorn Rome is construed as one of unity and primacy, but not cultural domination. The churches of the various Eastern rites, as well as the geographic episcopal conferences, both hold privileged places in this collegial view of the Church. "The variety of local churches," concludes the Council, "in harmony among themselves, demonstrates with greater clarity the catholicity of the undivided church. "j7
Lumen Gentium's introduction of the theme of the role of the particular churches merited an entire chapter a year later in Ad Gentes." To be sure, the mission document's talk of "implantation" of the Church, and its introduction of the idea of ecclesial juniority/seniority (an idea which persists in the thought of John Paul II), have been rightly criticized ecclesiologically. But this ought not obscure the fact that in speaking about the "younger churches" the Council did in fact dignify the status of the non-European churches; if they are not quite equal to the older and more established churches, still they are not seen as peripheral nor as rnere appendages of the churches which sent rnissionaries to them. Ad Gentes takes the plural reality of culture seriously and affirms it clearly, if cautiously.
57. LG, S23.
58. Ad Gentes (hereafter AG), Chap- III, S19-22. Full indigenization of the clergy, cultivation of lay ministry, and mature participation in the worldwide missionary thrust of the Church are set down as the goals toward which the churches in mission lands strive. Local ordinaries and episcopal conferences, presumably more knowledgeable about cultural matters pertaining to them, are repeatedly entrusted by the Council with increased authority for the judgments necessary to invigorate the Churchrs missionary efforts and ecclesial life in particular contexts.
At certain points Ad Gentes suggests a still more dynamic mode1 of interaction between the Gospel and culture. For example, its employment of the "seed" image, a common biblical metaphor for the spread of the Gospel, is used in at least one instance in a way that indicates that the receiving culture also gives something back: The seed which is the word of God, germinating from good soil, watered by the divine dew, absorbs moisture and transforms and assimilates it into itself, so that finally it bears much fruit. Indeed, as with the economy of the incarnation, the young churches, rooted in Christ and built on the foundation of the apostles, take over, in a marvellous exchange, al1 the riches of the nations which have been given to Christ as an inheritance. From the custorns and traditions of their own peoples, from their wisdom and learning, from their arts and sciences, these churches borrow everything which can contribute to praising the glory of the creator, to making manifest the grace of the saviour and to the due regulation of christian life." The Council then calls for theological investigation within the context of "every great socio-cultural region" in pursuit of "a more profound adaptation" of the Gospel:
In this way, it will emerge more clearly in what ways the faith can be understood in terms of the philosophy and wisdom of these peoples, and how their customs, their attitude to life and their social structure can be reconciled with the way of living proposed by divine revelation. As a result, avenues will open up for a more profound adaptation in the entire area of christian life. By this procedure every appearance of syncretism and false particularism will be excluded; the christian life will be adapted to the character and disposition of each culture.'" In such a mamer, by taking up into itself the contributions of the various particular churches, their traditions and culture, will the whole Church arrive at a fuller "catholic unity." In arriving at this incipient vision of worldwide unity in diversity the Council put considerable distance between itself and the unfortunate history of imposition of European culture as part of the missionary effort to the wider world.
"It is difficult to exaggerate the importance of Ad
Gentes for the development of modern mission theology .''G The impact of Ad Gentes was to "usher in a new epoch in
59- AG, S22.
60. Ibid.
61- Shorter, p. 195. mission ~ork.''~~ But the document has vast implications not only for rnissiology but also for the Church's own self- understanding as a faith household of plural cultural expressions . The evolution of that self-understanding came into fuller view, of course, in the lengthiest and most complex
of the Council documents, Gaudium et Spes. The Pastoral
Constitution on the Church in the World of Today is justly revered for opening new avenues of dialogue between the church and the plurality of world cultures. Its famous opening paragraph places the churchfs mission squarely in the midst of hmanity's diverse circmstances and struggles: The joys and hcpes and the sorrows and anxieties of people today, especially of those who are poor and afflicted, are also the joys and hopes, sorrows and anxieties of the disciples of Christ, and there is nothing truly human which does not also affect them. Their community is cornposed of people united in Christ who are directed by the holy Spirit in their pilgrimage towards the Father' s kingdom and who have received the message of salvation to be communicated to everyone. For this reason it feels itself closely linked to the hurnan race and its histor~.~~ Dialogue and discernment are implied in the document's well- known dictum of the churchfs 'duty in every age of examining
62. Car1 Starkloff, "Conunentary on the Decree on the Church's Missionary Activity," in George P. Schner, ed., The Church Renewed: The Documents of Vatican II Reconsidered (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, l986), p. 131.
63. Gaudium et Spes (hereafter GS) , S1. 60 the signs of the times and interpreting them in the light of the gospel."64 Thus, a sornewhat extended examination of this document in regard to its treatment of culture is in order here.
Most of Gaudium et Spesfs effort to speak to cultural concerns is located in the second chapter of Part II. That chapter is entitled "The Proper Development of Culture." One commentator says of this chapter, "The inclusion of culture as a theme and the approach taken form perhaps the most innovative section of the whole d~cument."~' The influence of 20th-century cultural anthropology upon this section is quite plain." Although the document' s attempts to define "culture" are not without some ambiguity, Gaudium et Spes avoids employing the term in its limited, classical usage." This becomes irnmediately clear when, in the first lines of the chapter, culture is referred to as "cultivating the goods of nature and values." The document continues by highlighting the human importance of culture, especially in its religious dimension:
65. Michael Stogre, "Commentary on the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, " in Schner, ed., The Church Renewed, p. 26.
66. Ibid.
67- See Lonergan, Method in Theology, pp. xi, 124, 301. The terra "culture" in general refers to everything by which we perfect and develop Our many spiritual and physical endowments; applying ourselves through knowledge and effort to bring the earth within our power; developing ways of behaving and institutions, we make life in society more human, whether in the family or in the civil sphere as a whole; in the course of time we express, share and preserve in Our works great spiritual experiences and aspirations to contribute to the progress of many people, even of the whole human race. ô6 Tt is not clear, of course, just how the Council thought that "developrnent (progressu)" and "progress (profectum)" in the cultural sphere are to be gauged. Nonetheless, the document proceeds to a crucially important recognition and affirmation of cultural diversity when it says: Human culture thus necessarily takes on a historical and social aspect, and the term "culture" often has a sociological and ethnological connotation. In this sense one can talk of a plurality of culture^.^'
This cultural heritage of each community is worthy of great respect as that group' s "inheritance (patrimonium) ." The Council then made a review of the social changes being wrought through the natural and social sciences, and through technology, industrialization, and urbanization. On this score the Councilrs view might be criticized as overly optimistic, insufficiently critical of the ernerging "uniformity" of "mass culturetfand the anti-gospel values of
68. GS, 953.
69. Ibid. that culture. But the section concludes with this poignant line: The increasing contacts between nations and groups in society are opening to each and everyone the treasures of the various forms of culture, and thus a more widespread ( universalior) form of human culture is gradually developing which is extending and expressing the unity of the human race al1 the more as it gives better recognition to the peculiarities of different cultures. The Council foresaw, and perhaps was experiencing firsthand, the richness of interaction possible among cultures. More importantly, for our purposes here, the document insists
that the pursuit of human unity must simultaneously safeguard cultural particularity; a synergistic relationship between unity and diversity is being envisioned. The document returned to this theme in a later section, which
What should be done to prevent the more frequent contacts between cultures, which ought to lead to genuine fruitful dialogue between different groups and nations, from disturbing the lives of communities, undermining the wisdom of ancestors, and endangering the native characteristics of peoples?"
No answer to this question is given, but it does at least attest that the Council Fathers were becoming aware of a dark side to intercultural contacts. In taking up the question of the relationship between
70. GS, 554.
71. GS, 556. religious faith and culture Gaudium et Spes makes some of its most important contributions to an emerging theology of
inculturation. First, the Council decisively rej ects that kind of other-worldliness which absolves the faithful from responsibility for this world or participation in its cultural processes. On the contrary, its interpretation of Christian faith "enhances the importance of [Chxistians'l duty to collaborate with al1 others in building a world of more human construction, motivating such effort and illuminating its ultimate meaning. The application of human intelligence to the arts and sciences is divinely willed in the service of truth, beauty, and goodness. The document identifies the danger of overconfidence in scientific discovery, thus neglecting the search for higher meaning. However, scientific inquiry has numerous positive values, according to the Council, among them collaboration,
"international solidarity," the improvement of life conditions. These values can "provide some preparation for receiving the announcement of the gospel. "'' The document continues by noting the "many connections between the announcement of salvation and human culture." Divine revelation is seen to be itself culturally
-- -
72. GS, 557,
73. Ibid, conditioned: In revealing himself to his people, even to the extent of showing himself fully in the incarnate Son, God has spoken in terms of the culture peculiar to different ages .74 Similarly, the Church has existed in many different milieux and
.,.bas adopted the discoveries of various cultures to spread and explain the news of Christ in its preaching to al1 nations, to explore it and understand it more deeply, and to express it better in liturgical celebration and in the life of the varied community of the faithf~l.'~ Shorter complains that the document "manages to avoid mentioning the necessity of culture as a medium for the
G~spel"'~; however, this would seem to be very nearly implied. The Council then made this all-important assertion:
The church, which has been sent to al1 peoples of whatever age and region, is not connected exclusively or inseparably to any race or nation, to any particular pattern of human behaviour, or to any ancient or recent customs, Loyal to its own tradition and at the same time conscious of its universal mission, it is able to enter into a communion with different forms of culture which enriches both the church and the various cultures. 77 Shorter notes favourably that this passage 'expresses the
74. GS, S58-
75. GS, 558.
76. Shorter, p. 201 (emphasis mine).
77. GS, S58. mutuality of the evangelization process," but he is critical of the implication that the Church itself is 'culturally disemb~died.'"~ However, again, this sort of critique is to focus on what the Council did not Say, rather than on the freshness and significance of what is being said. Given the Eurocentric history of the Church, the importance of the claim that the Church is not tied exclusively to one culture can hardly be exaggerated; the Council lays a cornerstone here for a multicultural Church. In the process of entering into a culture, the
Christian message is seen to be an interior agent of cultural renewal, purification, and elevation: The good news of Christ continually renews the life and behaviour of fallen humanity and attacks and dispels the errors and evils which flow from the ever- threatening seduction of sin. It ceaselessly purifies and enhances the ways of peoples. As if from the inside, it enriches with heavenly resources, strengthens, completes and restores in Christ the spiritual endowments and talents of every people and age .7 9 Shorter sees in this statement "more than a hint of what we really mean by inculturation. '*'O He is certainly right, although one might well wish the Council had followed this ambitious statement with a bit more elaboration regarding
-- --
78. Shorter, p. 202.
79. GS, S58.
80. Shorter, p. 202. the manner by which the gospel works as an enlivenlng and purifying principle within culture. However, on this as on many other matters the pregnant language of the Council has given birth to many fruitful theological and pastoral efforts in the succeeding thirty years. The Council, moreover, sought to place its reflections on the relationship between faith and culture in the context of its understanding of the goal of culture. The overall purpose of cultural endeavours is inteqral human
Culture should be directed to the total perfection of the human person, and to the good of the community and of human society as a whole. It should cultivate the mind in such a way as to encourage the ability for wonder, for understanding, for contemplation and for forming a persona1 judgment and cultivating a religious, moral and social sense But these lofty aims presuppose that culture enjoys a certain sphere of freedorn: Since culture flows immediately from the rational and social nature of human beings, it continually requires the just freedom to develop and the legitimate opportunity for independence according to its own principles. It rightly calls for respect and enjoys a certain inviolability, without prejudice to the rights of the person and of the particular and general community with the bounds of the common good .... This sacred synod. .. af firms the legitimate autonorny of human culture and especially of the scienced'
81. GS, S59.
82. Ibid. A further implication is that culture should be frêe from interference by civil authority. The document continues: It is not for public authority to determine the particular expressions of human culture, but to encourage the conditions and resources for promoting a cultural life for all, including minorities in any country, Hence it is of the utmost importance that culture should not be diverted from its proper purpose and be forced to serve political or economic interests .d3
Gaudium et Spes even speaks of a human "right to culture" which must be protected "without discrimination on grounds of race, sex, nationality, religion or social condition-"" This right is to be realized and enhanced through education. Here the Council mentioned in particular the importance of educational and cultural opportunities for workers and for women. Modern rneans of communication and increased leisure time should be deployed for an increased diversity of educational opportunities for all? In a final section the chapter returns to the question of the relationship of culture to "christian formation." The Fathers admit frankly that the relationship "is not always without its difficulties." The Council then went on to issue an important invitation to theologians. It said:
- -- -- 83. Ibid.
84. GS, S60.
85. GS, 561. Recent studies and discoveries in science, history and philosophy give rise to new enquiries with practical implications, and also demand new investigations by theologians. Moreover, while respecting the methods and requirements of theological science, theologians are invited continually to look for a more appropriate way of communicating doctrine to the people of their time; since there is a difference between the deposit or truths of faith and the manner in which -- with their sense and meaning being preserved -- they are e~pressed.~" The distinction between faith and faithfs culturally conditioned expression is a crucial one for the Council to have made. Indeed the invitation to theological investigation on the basis of the progress of human knowledge, coupled with this distinction, presents a veritable charter for the theology of inculturation. The Council fleshes this out by embracing the usefulness of the social sciences to pastoral theological inquiry: In pastoral care not just theological principles but also the aiscoveries of the secular sciences, especially of psychology and sociology, should be recognised and applied so that the faithful may be brought to a more refined and more mature life of faithaa7 As we shall see in the next section, the insights of sociology and anthropology play an important role in contemporary reflections on the theology of inculturation.
86. GS, 562. The document echoes the thought of John XXIII in his opening statement to the Council, 11 Oct. 1962: "The substance of the ancient doctrine of the deposit of faith is one thing, and the way in which it is presented is another."
87. GS, S62. The Council concludes that it is the task not just of theological experts, but of al1 Christians, to . . .combine the knowledge resulting from the new sciences and teaching, and from recent discoveries, with christian morality and formation in christian teaching, so that their religious worship and uprighteousness go hand in hand with their knowledge of the sciences and increasing technology, and they are thus able to test and interpret everything with full christian awarenes~.~~ In the Council' s vision, then, the impulse toward critical dialogue with culture and technology is woven into the very fabric of the life of Christian faith, The Second Vatican Council is also noteworthy for the fact that it was the first couricil at which the principle of subsidiarity was endorsed. That principle holds, in brief summary, that within a hierarchy of individuals and communities those of higher stature ought not usurp those functions and freedoms proper to the lower levels, In other words, the principle of subsidiarity resists overweening centralization of power, holding that those matters which can be handled locally should be handled locally. The Council documents contain three references to this principle, one in Gaudium et spesagand two in Gravissimum
88. Ibid.
89, S86. Educationis, the Declaration on Christian Ed~cation.~' Al1 three passages apply the principle only to civil society, making no mention of the Church. Historically the application of the principle of subsidiarity to the Church has been more hesitant and controversial, as Joseph Komonchak has show. However, subsidiarity has been invoked occasionally in support of a decentralization of the Church. Although a number of the interventions during discussions of documents relating to the Church did appeal to the prin~iple,'?~the Council never explicitly endorsed it with regard to the Church. Still, it does seem to be implied in at least one passage of Lumen
Gentium. In that section, which comments upon the office of bishops, the Council rejected the notion that episcopal authority is merely derived from the Roman pontiff and urged bishops to listen attentively to their f10ck.~~ More importantly, however, the Council set in motion a series of processes in which the principle of subsidiarity has been tacitly embraced for the Church. The 1967, 1969,
- - -
90. 53 and S6.
91. Joseph A. Komonchak, "Subsidiarity in the Church: The State of the Question," in Hervé Legrand et al., eds., The Nature and Future of Episcopal Conferences (Washington: Catholic University of America Press, l988), pp. 298-349.
92. Komonchak, pp. 309-12.
93. LG, S27. and 1974 synods of bishops al1 endorsed application of the principle in relation to various aspects of Church life? and it was adopted as one of the principles guiding the 1983 revision of the Code of Canon ~aw? More recently, however, the principle of subsidiarity in relation to the Church has been the object of some controversy- At the 1985 Synod of Bishops, for example, there was considerable discussion of this matter, and the
Final Report requested further study? Tellingly, the 1992
Catechism of the Catholic Church restricted its mention of subsidiarity only to social structures.~' The views of the present pope on this issue remain insufficiently clear to warrant comment here. The theological and pnilosophical issues which surround the principle are cornplex. It is likely that lively debate about whether and how to apply the principle of subsidiarity to the Church will continue for the foreseeable future - ''
94. Komonchak, pp. 313-8.
95. Komonchak, pp. 3l3f., 319f.
96. Komonchak, pp. 320-4.
97- (Ottawa: Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops) #1883-85, 2209.
98- See also Joaquin Losada, "Subsidïarity from an Ecclesiologistfs Point of View," in Legrand et al-, pp. 350-4; Franz- Xaver Kaufmann, "The Principle of Subsidiarity Viewed by the Sociology of Organizations," in Legrand et al., pp. 275-91; and Liliane Voyé, "Subsidiarity from a Sociologistrs Point of View," in Legrand et al., pp. 292-7, A number of very significant postconciliar developments are associated with the pontificate of Paul VI. Among the earliest was a document known as Ecclesiae Sanctae, which contained noms for the implementation of Ad Gentes. The pontiffrs directives stressed the importance of the missionary nature of the Church, and the central place which the 'theology of mission" is to occupy in seminary education. " On an even more concrete level, Ecclesiae Sanctae spurred development of regional episcopal conferences as "organic groups, according to socio-cultural areas. "lo0 Shorter identifies these conferences as major contributors to the development of the theology of inculturation in the 1970s, especially with regard to the
1974 Synod of Bishops on evangeli~ation.'~' Paul VI gave further impetus to the effort to take culture seriously when he urged the episcopal conferences . . .to set up study groups to examine the thought of the people on the universe, on man and on its attitude towards God, and to undertake theological reflection on what is good and true in their culture. Such theological study is a necessary foundation for deciding what adaptations are to be made .... These adaptations cover, amongst other things, methods of
99, Pope Paul VI, Ecclesiae Sanctae, $1; in Austin Flannery, ed., Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents, rev. ed. (Northport, N-Y : Costello Publishing Co,, 1988), pp- 857-62.
100, Ecclesiae Sanctae, 518-
101- Shorter, p. 199. evangelization, forms of worship, religious life and ecclesiastical legislation. i02 Shorter notes with disappointment, however, that the
erection of such study groups has never occurred on a regular basis, and the issuance of a new Code of Canon Law
in 1983 cut short attempts to adapt canonical legislation to
local circmstances .=O3 Paul VI has been called "the first modern pope, ""' and partly so because of his extensive world travels. Some of his greatest achievements came in his relations with Africa, where the Church has been undergoing significant growth in
recent decades. In a 1967 message to the bishops and people
went to some lengths to identify and affirm manÿ traditional African values. He said: The Church views with great respect the moral and religious values of the African tradition, not only because of their meaning, but also because she sees them as providential, as the basis for spreading the gospel message and beginning the establishment of the new society in ~hrist.'~~ A most memorable moment was a speech given by Paul VI
in Kampala, Uganda, in July of 1969. The occasion of his
102. Ecclesiae Sanctae, 918.
103. Shortex, p. 200.
104. See, e. g., Peter Hebblethwaite, Paul VI: The First Modern Pope (N.Y. : Paulist, 1993) .
105. As quoted by Shorter, p. 207. address was the closing of the Symposium of Episcopal Conferences of Africa and Madagascar. In responding to the questions of evangelization and cultural adaptation that had occupied the African bishops at that meeting, the pope firçt
affirmed strongly that the catholic unity of the faith must be protected and preserved. But he went on to Say: The expression, that is, the language and mode of manifesting this one faith, may be manifold. Hence, it may be original, suited to the tongue, the style, the character, the genius, and the culture, of the one who professes this one faith. From this point of view, a certain pluralism is not only legitimate, but desirable. An adaptation of the Christian life in the fields of pastoral, ritual, didactic and spiritual activities is not only possible, it is even favoured by the Church. The liturgical renewal is a living example of this. And in this sense you may, and you must, have an African ~hristianity."~ The Kampala Addresç is noteworthy both for its affirmation of cultural pluralism and for its advocation of the dialogue
of faith and culture in every sphere of the Church' s activity. The process optimistically envisioned by the pope was to be lengthy and thoroughgoing, mcving beyond mere liturgical ornamentation.
In his 1967 encyclical Populorum Progessio: On the
Development of Peoples, Paul VI linked the spread of the
Christian message to concern for social progress. He pleaded for an integral vision of development, one that
106. As quoted by Shorter, p. ZO9f. respected spiritual and cultural values. In the course of that document he also made a passing but nonetheless important admission, viz., that Christian mission had been too often guilty of cultural bias. He said: Without doubt [the missionariesf] work, inasmuch as it was human, was not perfect, and sometimes the amouncement of the authentic Gospel message was infiltrated by many ways of thinking and acting which were characteristic of their home country."' The leader of the Catholic communion now re-envisioned the Church as an agent of social justice and a facilitator of intercultural enrichment.
Populorum Progressio' s plea for social justice was echoed eloquently by the 1971 Synod of Bishops in a document entitled Justice in the World.'OB In a well-known passage the bishops said:
Action on behalf of justice and participation in the transformation of the world fully appear to us as a constitutive dimension of the preaching of the Gospel, or, in other words, of the Church's mission for the redemption of the human race and its liberation from every oppressive situation.IcG The bishops attributed much of the human misery evident in the world to the heritage of "colonial domination," and they
107 - Pope Paul VI, Populorum Progressio, 912. Text found in Joseph Gremillion, ed., The Gospel of Peace and Justice: Catholic Social Teaching since Pope John (Maryknoll, N. Y, : Orbis, 1976), pp- 387-415.
108. Synod of Bishops, "The Ministerial Priesthood" and "Justice in the World" [hereafter Justice in the World], (Washington: USCC, 1982) -
109. Justice in the World, p. 30, warned against ''2 new form of colonialism in which the developing nations will be the victims of the interplay of international economic forces."x0 The synod affirmed a "right to development" based upon 'a certain responsible nationalism" necessary for the new nations 'to acquire an identity of their own. ""' The bishops then went on to urge the protection of rights within the Church itself, and even called for wider participation in ecclesiastical decision- making. "' This was founded upon recognition of "everyone's right to suitable f reedorn of expression and thought ."ii3 The bishops also asked for greater spiritual and material cooperation between local churches of rich and poor regions so "that the Church may really be the sign of that solidarity which the family of nations de~ires."~" With regard to the theology of mission and the theological approach to culture, Pope Paul VI will be remembered best for his 1975 Apostolic Exhortation,
Evangelii Nuntiandi : On Evangelization in the Modern
110. Justice in the World, p. 33.
111. Justice in the World, p. 33f.
112. Justice in the World, pp. 40, 41.
113. Justice in the World, p. 41.
114. Justice in the World, p. 43, W0r1d.l'~ Shorter hails this document as "the fullest and most positive, official statement of the magisterium on inculturation," offering "an advanced theology of a multicultural Church which has probably not been surpassed by any other official statement
Evangelii Nuntiandi was composed on the basis of the discussions which took place on the theme of "Evangelization" at the Synod of Bishops Third General
Assembly in 1974. Although that Synod had issued only a
brief concluding "Declaration," it was in itself a cross- cultural event of considerable significance. The bishops noted that "communication of the Gospel is a dynamic proces~"~~'which must reckon with numerous linguistic and cultural factors. They continued: Al1 these conditions which differ widely according to different places and times, impel the particular churches towards an appropriate "translation" of the evangelical message, According to the principle of incarnation, they must devise new but faithful "ways to take root. "''' The 1974 Synod also spoke about 'the intimate connexion between evangelisation and liberation," since the Church's
115- Washington: USCC, 1975.
116. Shorter, p. 214, 215.
117. Concluding Declaration, Synod of Bishops, Third General Assembly (October 26, 1974), 59; in Gremillion, ed., The Gospel of Peace and Justice, pp, 593-8.
118. Ibid. mission aims at an "integral salvation" of al1 people."'
Paul VI thus had before bim a formidable task, but the thought ful document he produced repays careful attention Beginning from the Synodrs "integral" approach to proclaiming the Gospel, the pope speaks at some length about the evangelization of culture- He says: The Gospel, and therefore evangelization, are certainly not identical with culture, and they are independent in regard to al1 cultures. Nevertheless, the Kingdom which the Gospel proclaims is lived by men who are profoundly linked to a culture, and the building up of the Kingdom cannot avoid borrowing the elements of human culture or cultures. Though independent of cultures, the Gospel and evangelization are not necessarily incompatible with them; rather they are capable of permeating them al1 without becoming subject to any one of them. The split between the Gospel and culture is without a doubt the drama of our time, just as it was of other times. Therefore, every effort must be made to ensure a full evangelization of culture, or more correctly of cultures. They have to be regenerated by an encounter with the Gospel. But this encounter will T - not take place if the Gospel is not proclaimed. --O The pontiff is vitally concerned here to protect the integrity and independence of the Gospel message. His rejection of an exclusive link of the Gospel to any one culture is unequivocal. Moreover, the vision of evangelization as a process of deep dialogue with and permeation of various cultures is quite profound. While the
119. Declaration, Third Synod of Bishops (l974), S12.
120 - Evangelii Nuntiandi, S20. statement takes cognizance of the influence of culture on the hearers of the message, there is some validity to
Shorter's criticism of it for being insufficiently attentive to the cultural "linkage" of the evange1izer.---- lf Paul VI was also very concerned to preserve institutional unity, warning against the tendency of local churches to distance themselves from the universal Church. He flatly rejected any conception of the Church as a
"f ederation of essentially dif ferent individual ~hurches."'" The local or particular church is always the universal, Catholic Church in a particular context: This universal Church is in practice incarnate in the individual Churches made up of such or such an actual part of mankind, speaking such and such a language, heirs of a cultural patrimony, of a vision of the world, of an historical past, of a particular human substratum..-. In the mind of the Lord the Church is universal by vocation and mission, but when she puts dom her roots in a variety of cultural, social and hurnan terrains, she takes on different external expressions and appearances in each part of the world. lZ3 The context of the document, however, indicates that Paul VI was striving for a proper balance between the "two poles," the particular and the universal, a relationship which he saw as mutually enriching.
121. Shorter, p. 216-
123. Ibid. Although he did not use the term "inculturation," the pope described evangelization as a process of discrete phases: assimilation, transposition, and proclamation. The important passage is worth citing at length: The individual Churches, intimately built up not only of people but also of aspirations, of riches and limitations, of ways of praying, of loving, of looking at life and the world, which distinguish this or that human gathering, have the task of assimilating the essence of the Gospel message and of transposing it, without the slightest betrayal of its essential truth, into the language that these particular people understand, then of proclaiming it in this language. The transposition has to be done with the discernment, seriousness, respect and competence which the matter calls for in the field of liturgical expression, and in the areas of catechesis, theological formulation, secondary ecclesial structures, and ministries. And the word "language" should be understood here less in the semantic or literary sense than in the sense which one may cal1 anthropological and cultural. The question is undoubtedly a delicate one. Evangelization loses much of its force and effectiveness if it does not take into consideration the actual people to whom it is addressed, if it does not use their language, their signs and symbols, if it does not answer the questions they ask, and if it does not have an impact on their concrete life. But on the other hand, evangelization risks losing its power and disappearing altogether if one empties or adulterates its content under the pretext of translating it; if, in other words, one sacrifices this reality and destroys the unity without which there is no universality, out of a wish to adapt a universal reality to a local ~ituation.?~; Shorter finds three strengths in the foregoing. One is its description of evangelization as a dynamic, unfolding
124. Evangelii Nuntiandi, 5 62. 81 process. Second is the statement's breadth, Le., it sees this process taking place in several different fields. And, third, it embraces an understanding of language that is "anthropological and ~ultural.""~ At the same time, Shorter identifies two weahesses and one lacuna in the passage. The first weakness is the resort to a language of "essences" with regard to the Gospel. An essentialist approach runs the risk of making the Gospel too ethereal or idealistic, truncating its connection with history and the concrete structures of human life. A second weakness Shorter suggests is that the evangelization process is spoken of in a rather instrumental way, as something which the Church with its expertise does for people, rather than sornething carried on in a fully dialogical and communal way, The piece missing is any reference to the Scriptures or to biblical cultural rnilie~x.~"
A final noteworthy aspect of Evangelii Nuntiandi is the treatment of small Christian communities, referred to under their French tem, communautés de base. Paul VI identified them as both "beneficiaries of evangelization and at the same tirne evangelizers themselves .""' He noted that some
125- Shorter, p. 217.
126. Ibid.
127. Evangelii Nuntiandi, 858. such groups were linked strongly to the mission and structure of the wider Church, while others had formed in a spirit of critical opposition to the Church and often fallen prey to ideological or partisan interests. The pope then laid dom some guiding principles for the young communities,
saying :
[The communautés de base] will be a place of evangelization, for the benefit of the bigger communities, especially the individual Churches. And, as we said at the end of the last Synod, they will be a hope for the universal Church to the extent: --that they seek their nourishment in the Word of God and do not allow themselves to b2 ensnared by political polarization or fashionable ideologies, which are ready to exploit their immense human potential; --that they avoid the ever present temptation of systematic protest and a hypercritical attitude, under the pretext of authenticity and a spirit of collaboration; --that they remain firmly attached to the local Church in which they are inserted, and to the universal Church, thus avoiding the very real danger of becoming isolated within themselves, then of believing themselves to be the only authentic Church of Christ, and hence of condemning the other ecclesial comunities; --that they maintain a sincere communion with the pastors whom the Lord gives to His Church, and with the magisterium which the Spirit of Christ has entrusted to these pastors; --that they never look on themselves as the sole beneficiaries or sole agents of evangelization--or even the only depositaries of the Gospel--but, being aware that the Church is much more vast and diversified, accept the fact that this Church becomes incarnate in other ways than through themselves; --that they constantly grow in missionary consciousness, fervor, cornmitment and zeal; --that they show themselves to be universal in al1 things and never sectarian. ''' Despite the cautious and deliberate tenor of this statement, it was greeted by most observers as a positive affirmation of the potential of small communities as instruments cf evangelization and inculturation. By 1975 the development of "base communities," especially in Latin America, was already well underway, and Paul VI had prudently and gently tried to direct their growth-
We conclude this section with a brief survey of official thought with regard to faith and culture during the reign of Pope John Paul II. In spite of the tendency toward centralization and the concern for doctrinal orthodoxy which have marked this pontificate, there have been some significant developments. This pope's extensive world travels and his huge corpus of writings both evince a strong interest in questions of culture. Perhaps John Paul's most important contribution to Our study was among the earliest of his reign. The 1977 Synod of Bishops had taken up the theme of "Catechesis," and the topic had evoked considerable discussion of culture.
Because of the deaths of Paul VI and John Paul I in 1978, it fell to the present pope to surn up the Synodrs work, which
128. Ibid. he did in 1979 in an Apostolic Exhortation entitled
Catechesi Tradendae: Catechesis in Our Time, It is in this
text that the term inculturation makes its first appearance
in a papal document. The pontiff says:
The term inculturation may be a neologisrn, but it expresses very well one factor of the great mystery of the Incarnation. We can Say of catechesis, as well as of evangelization in general, that it is called to bring the power of the Gospel into the very heart of culture and cultures, For this purpose, catechesis will seek to know these cultures and their essential cornponents; it will learn their most significant expressions; it will respect their particular values and riches, In this rnanner it will be able to offer these cultures the knowledge of the hidden mystery and help them to bring forth from their own living tradition original expressions of Christian life, celebration and thought .''' The pope expresses very beautifully, and with the aid of the analogy of the Incarnation, the insertion of the Gospel into
a culture. That process requires study and listening to
that culture with great respect, and it extends beyond worship to praxis and theology, More cautiously, then, the pope noted that the inculturation process proceeds slowly through history, He also acknowledged that the Gospel cannot simply be abstracted from its original cultural situation, i.e., the milieu of Jesus of Nazareth, nor from the culturally conditioned expressions by which it has been
129. Catechesi Tradendae, as found in Austin Flannery, ed., Vatican Council II: More Postconciliar Documents, vol. II (Boston: St. Paul Editions, l982), S53, p. 794. 85 passed dom historically. The evangelical message, said the pope, "has always been transmitted by means of an apostolic dialogue which inevitably becomes part of a certain dialogue of cultures ."13" John Paul thus supplied, in the opinion of Shorter131 and others, some çubtle but important correctives to Evangelii Nuntiandi.
Later passages in Catechesi Tradendae, and some subsequent addresses and texts of John Paul, convey a higher degree of caution with regard to the incorporation of native cultural values into an inculturated witness to the faith. At times he seems to view non-Christian cultures with skepticism, even hostility, issuing repeated warnings against the dangers of a cultural dilution of the Gospel. He laid a heavy stress on the role of the hierarchy in leading and guiding the process of inculturation, a process which he sees as "the fruit of gradua1 maturity in faith... requiring a great deal of theological lucidity, spiritual discernrnent, wisdom and prudence, and also time. ""' Of ten this Polish pope has drawn upon the thousand-year history of the Slavic peoples with Christianity in speaking about
130. Ibid.
131. Shorter, p. 224.
132- Address to the bishops of Zaire, 1980; as qucted by Shorter, p. 226. 86
inculturation. In an encyclical of 1985, Slavorum Apostoli
("Apostles of the Slavs"), John Paul held up Saints Cyril and Methodius as exemplars of incul turation. Although the emphasis on Catholic identity is strong, the encyclical does embody some attempt to see the inculturation process as a two-way street by which the Church both gives something and
is enriched by receiving a culture. Alongside John Paulfs repeated admonitions to preserve the unity of faith and Church, there are some unequivocal
affirmations of cultural pluralism. Moreover, the popefs interest in the study of cultures was given concrete
expression in the foundation of the Pontifical Council for
Culture in 1982. On the occasion of that foundation, he reiterated his conviction that "the Church's dialogue with the cultures of our time [is] a vital area, one in which the destiny of the world at the end of this twentieth century is at stake." The goal, the pope declared, is a "synthesis between culture and faith," and this fusion
..As not just a demand of culture, but also of faith. A faith which does not become culture is a faith which has not been fully received, not thoroughly thought through, not fully lived out ."' John Paul's way of anchoring the inculturation process
133- Slavorum ~postoli, op. cit.; see Shorter, pp- 231-3-
134. Shorter, pp. 230, 231- theologically in an interdependent relationship pertaining between faith and culture is a crucial insight and a significant ecclesiastical advance. Magisterial teaching continues to mature. A more recent contribution to the ongoing discussion of faith and culture is John Paulrs 1990 encyclical letter Redernptoris
Missio: On the Permanent Validity of the Church's Missionary
Mandate, 13' written to mark the twenty-f ifth anniversary of
Ad Gentes. At several points in the document the pope confronted unnamed contemporary theological trends which tend to downplay the importance of the evangelical mission to non-Christians .'3"ut, more than anything, Redemptoris
Missio is a protracted rallying cry for 'a resurgence of the Church' s rnissionary activity. ""'
Redemptoris Missio includes an extended treatment of the subject of inculturation. The pope cited the 1985 Extraordinary Synod of Bishops, which had said: Since the Church is a communion, which joins diversity and unity, being present throughout the world, it takes up whatever it finds positive in al1 cultures. Inculturation, however, is different from mere external adaptation, as it signifies an interior transformation of authentic cultural values through integration into
135. Washington: USCC, 1990.
136. Cf., e-go,Redemptoris Missio §6, p. 13; 511, po 21; S17-18, pp. 29-32; 529, p- 49; S46-47, pp. 79-81.
137. ~edwptorisMissio 530, p. 50. Christianity and the rooting of Christianity in various human cultures John Paul II reaffirnted that inculturation "is not a matter of purely external adaptati~n."'~' It is, he said, 'a profound and all-embracing process," albeit a 'lengthy" and
"difficult" one. 14' John Paul conceived of a reciprocal process, for he continues: Through inculturation the Church makes the Gospel incarnate in different cultures and at the same iime introduces peoples, together with their cultures, into her own comrnunity. She transmits to them ber own values, at the same time taking the good elements that already exist in them and renewing them from within. Through inculturation the Church, for her part, becomes a more intelligible sign of what she is, and a more effective instrument of mission. 14' Inculturation must proceed slowly, deliberately, and it 'must be guided by two principles: 'compatibility with the Gospel and communion with the universal ~hurch.'""' Nonetheless, John Paul' s envisionment of the inculturation process is remarkably inclusive. The pope focussed on the central role which local churches must play
138. As quoted by Shorter, p. 236.
140. Ibid.
142, Redemptoris Missio 554, p- 92f. The interior citation is from John Paul II's 1981 Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris ~onsortio, SIO. in the process,"' and he singled out "ecclesial basic communities" for special praise as loci of "Christian formation and missionary outreach. "14' Indeed the pope insisted that
.,.inculturation must involve the whole people of God, and not just a few experts, since the people reflect the authentic 'sensus fideir which must never be lost sight of ."' Inculturation, he concluded, . . .mst be an expression of the communityrs life, one which must mature within the community itself, and not be exclusively the result of erudite research, The safeguarding of traditional values is the work of a mature faith? To that end foreign missionaries, for their part, "must immerse themselves in the cultural milieu of those to whom they are sent, moving beyond their own cultural limitations. Moreover, John Paul recognized that inculturation inherently entails commitment to both ecumenisrn"\nd inter-religious dialogue. "' And he af firmed, cautiously, the link between missionary
- --
143. Redemptoris Missio S48-49, pp. 82-5.
144. Redemptoris Missio §Sir p. 87.
145- Redemptoris Missio 554, p. 93.
146. Redemptoris Missio S54, p. 94.
147, Redemptoris Missio 553, p. 91.
148, Redemptoris Missi0 550, pp. 85-7.
149, Redemptoris Missio S55-57, pp. 94-8. proclamation and work for al1 forms of 'human promot ion,f'm including economic development and social justice.
Thus Redemptoris Missiofs treatment of the question of inculturation is thoughtful and well-balanced. Other developments taking place during this pontificate are more puzzling and difficult to reconcile with John Paul II's written corpus. Episcopal appointments, for example, have tended to produce regular batches of controversy. And one of the most trumpeted achievements of this period, the production of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, "' is disappointingly muted on the subject of faithfs relation to the plurality of cultures. The Catechism does provide for iiturgical adaptation according to culture'" and, in a more general way, for "the adaptation of doctrinal presentations and catechetical methods required by the differences of culture, age, spiritual maturity, and social and ecclesial condition. f'L53 But elsewhere there is only one passing
150. Redemptoris Missio 559, p. 101. There are, however, at least two passages in the encyclical which could be construed as a retreat from the "option for the poor" embraced by the Latin American bishops at Medellfn and Puebla: §37b, p.64, and S83, p. 138- For further analysis of the thought of John Paul II on inculturation, see the recent study by S. Iniobong Udoidem, Pope John Paul II on Inculturation: Theory and Practice (Lanham, Md. : University Press of America, 1996).
151. Ottawa: Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, 1992,
152. Catechism #1204-1209, pp. 262-3; also, #1232, p. 269, regarding rites of initiation.
153- Catechism #24, p. 15. reference to the need for inculturation in the missionary efforts of the ~hurch. The Catechism's extensive treatment of the Church contains only a brief affirmation of the cultural diversity held within the larger framework of ecclesial unity. 15' More troubling still are certain ambiguous statements of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, head of the Congreqation for the Doctrine of the Faith. A recent address given by
Ratzinger in Hong Kong, ''"or instance, would seem to cast a shadow of official suspicion over the theology of inculturation. Arguing that Christianity can never be separated from its Western cultural heritage, Ratzinger went so far as to urge that 'we should no longer speak of inculturation but of the meeting of cultures or
154. Catechism #854, p. 188.
155. Catechism #814, p. 179. On the problem of the relationship between the catechism and the project of inculturation, see Concilium, vol. 204: Johann-Baptist Metz and Edward Schillebeeckx, eds., World Catechism or Inculturation? (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark Ltd., 1989), especially the essays by David Tracy, Metz, and Emilio Aïberich. On a more hopeful note, the Department of Education of the U.S. Catholic Conference has recently issued a brief document intended to assist pastoral agents in using the catechism in a culturally sensitive manner: Maria de la Cruz Aymes and Maria de los Angeles Garcia, Principles for Xncul tura tion of the Catechism of the ~atholic Church (Washington: USCC, 1994). This document sees inculturation as "an ongoing reciprocal process between faith and culture." [p. Il
156. "Christ, Faith and the Challenge of Cultures," Origins 24:41 (30 March 1995) 679-86. The address, which was not an official statement of the CDF, was given in March, 1993, to the presidents of Asian bishops' conferences and the chairs of their respective doctrinal commissions. intercul turali ty."L'i The cardinalfs impulse to mint a new term places his thought in a curious relationship to John Paul II's positive understanding of inculturation in
Redemptoris Missi O, Rat zinger cont inued: Inculturation presumes that a faith stripped of culture is transplanted into a religiously indifferent culture whereby two subjects, formally unknown to each other, meet and fuse. But such a notion is first of al1 artificial and unrealistic, for with the exception of modern technological. civilization, there is no such thing as faith devoid of culture or culture devoid of faith. It is above al1 difficult to envision how two organisms, foreign to each other, should al1 of a sudden become a viable whole in a transplantation which stunts both of them? Of course, the author is certainly correct in asserting that the Christian message can never be distilled out of its cultural dress in a pure or essential form. To that extent evangelization is always a meeting of cultures.
But Ratzinger still seems unduly pessimistic about the project of inculturation. The result is cultural dualisrn. The Christian, he says, "now lives in two cultural worlds, his historic culture and the new one of faith, both of which permeate him."'5g This appears to be a classic example of a 'Christ and Culture in Paradox" approach. For reasons we shall allude to elsewhere, a dualistic solution to the
- -
157. Ratzinger, 681.
158- Ibid.
15.3 - Ratzinger, 682, theological challenges posed by cultural pluralism is not fully satisfying to the present author or to many other contemporary theologians, However, Ratzinger's thought here is not entirely of one piece. Late in the Hong Kong address he appears to move back into a "Christ the Transformer of Cultureffmode. "Conversion," he says, "does not destroy the religions and cultures but trans forms them. "'°" He continues: This transforming conservation as the fathers splendidly practiced it in the encounter between biblical faith and its cultures is the real content of 'inculturation," of encounter and cross-fertilization of cultures and religions under the mediating power of faith.16' Surprisingly, in this movement the cardinal has re-adopted language which he appeared to cal1 into question al1 along. The diverging strands of thought are difficult to reconcile. What does become abundantly clear in the Ratzinger address is that the main target of the cardinal's remarks - -- was Western, post-Enlightenment relativism.'"' As he has done so often during his Roman tenure, Ratzinger decried "the self-doubt afflicting Christianity today and the reduction of its religious substance to mere moral
160. Ibid,
6 Ratzinger, 686.
162. Ratzinger, 683. imperatives ."16' He joined Tracy in pleading for a deeper, metaphysical encounter of cultural truth ~lairns.''~ He even admitted that "Christian mission must understand and receive the religions in a much deeper way than it has until ~ow.'''~~
But this is a dialogue in which "the religions, in order to live authentically, need to recognize their own adventistic character propelling them forward to ~hrist."'~" Rat zinger enjoined his listeners strongly to guard against a dilution of Christian monotheism or a soft-pedalling of the biblical demand for conversion,=67 But, in the end, the most formidable adversary rernains elsewhere, and in that struggle the religions can even be allies: The elements Christianity has in common with the ancient cultures of mankind are greater than those it has in common with the relativistic-rationalistic world. The latter has severed itself front the common sustaining basic insights of mankind and led man into an existential vacuum threatening his ruin if no answer is f~rthcoming.'~~ Indeed one surmises that Ratzinger is more engaged in struggles taking place in the West than in matters of
163. Ibid.
164. Ratzinger, 684.
65 Ratzinger, 686.
166, Ibid,
67 Ratzinger, 685.
168. Ratzinger, 686. immediate concern to his Asian audience.
The journey of the Roman Catholic Church on the subject of faithrs relation to culture bas been a long one. A progressive unfolding of thought is obvious as one moves
from Vatican II through Paul VI to John Paul 11, In spite of manif est disciplinary concerns for the institution, a tendency toward centralization, emphases on authority and orthodoxy, and sombre warnings about the dangers of a cultural pollution of the Gospel, the regime of John Paul II has undeniably catapulted the theology of inculturation to a new level of acceptance in official discourse. At the sarne time, the gap between institutional articulation and pastoral implementation continues to widen. As the statement of Cardinal Ratzinger amply illustrates, the issues are far from settled.
2.c. Contemporary Inculturation Literature
As we have seen, the conversation between faith and culture has been going on for a long time, actually since the very inception of the Christian tradition. That conversation entered a new stage for the Roman Catholic Church at the Second Vatican Council. The Council brought new urgency and direction to this interactive process by making it more explicit and self-conscious. On an official level, the magisterium has continued to grapple with the many pastoral theological issues raised by awareness of cultural pluralism within the house of faith. Theologians, too, have increasingly turned their attention to both theoretical and practical considerations relative to the understanding of church and mission with regard to diverse cultural contexts. In this section we want to survey some of the significant achievements of theoiogians in the postconciliar era with regard to our theme.
Aylward Shorter gives much credit to the Society of
Jesus both for popularizing the term incul turation and for developing its contemporary theological ref1ection.-"" He traces the term itself to Joseph Masson, SI%, professor at the Gregorian University in Rome. For sorne years before the Second Vatican Council Masson had been developing a more culturally sensitive approach to ecclesiology and mis~iology.'~~In an article appearing just as the Council
169. Shorter, p. 10,
170. See J. Masson, "Fonction missionaire, fonction d8Eglise," two parts, Nouvelle Rewe Théologique 80 (1958) 1042-1061 and 81 (1959) 41-59. Masson drew upon the work of Pierre Charles, among others. The first appearance of the word inculturation in a theological work may have been in an article by Charles, "Missiologie et Acculturation," Nouvelle Revue Théologique 75 (1953) 15-32- But Charles had defined it as "le procédé par lequel ltindividu est contraint de s'adapter à la discipline de son groupe," a sense now generally resemed to the opened, Masson highlighted cultural diversity as one of the aspects of the contemporary situation relevant to the Councilfs work, and concluded: Aujourdrhui, alors que, tout justement, l'exigence se fait plus urgente df un catholicisme inculturé d' une façon polymorphe."' Masson's proposa1 for an 'inculturated Catholicism" appears to have been the first usage of our term in its contemporary theological sense. The 32nd General Congregation of the Society of Jesus,
1974-75, employed the word inculturation a number of times .172 But it was the Jesuit Superior General, Fr. Pedro Arrupe, who propelled reflection forward significantly in a
anthropological term enculturation.
171. J. Masson, "LfEglise ouverte sur le monde," Nouvelle Rewe Théologique 84: 10 (Dec. 1962) 1038. Cf. also J. Masson, 'La mission a la lumiere de 1' Incarnation, " Nouvelle Rewe Théologique 98: 10 (Dec. 1976) 865-90.
172. Shorter, p. 10. Arij Roest Crollius, S.J., attributes the adoption of the term inculturation by the 32nd General Congregation to the fact that in Latin, the working language of that assembly, only the form inculturatio is linguistically possible. See Crollius, What Is So New about Inculturation? (Rome: Gregorian U. Press, 1984) , n. 14, p. 5f. For fuller treatment of the history of the term inculturation, see Nicolas Standaert, S. J., "L'histoire dr un néologisme, " Nouvelle Rewe Théologique 110 (1988) 555-70; and François Guillemette, "Lf apparition du concept d'inculturation: Une réception de Vatican II," Mission 2:l (1995) 53-78. George A. De Napoli, S.J., claims that at the 32nd General Congregation inculturatio was employed merely to translate the anthropological enculturation, but that "inculturation has taken on a totally different denotation since then." De Napoli gives inculturation a variant pedigree, claiming it was coined by Protestant missionary G. L. Barney in 1973. See De Napoli, "Inculturation as Communication," in Maria de la Cruz Aymes et al., Effective Inculturation and Ethnic Identity, vol. IX of the series Inculturation cited below (Rome: Gregorian U. Press, 1987), n. 1, p. 71. memorable 1978 letter to the ~rder."~Aitrupe began with this description of inculturation often quoted in subsequent literature:
Inculturation is the incarnation of Christian life and of the Christian message in a paxticular cultural context, in such a way that this experience not only finds expression through elernents proper to the culture in question (this alone would be no more tban a superficial adaptation), but becomes a principle that animates, directs and unifies the culture, transforming it so as to bring about "a new creation.""'
Drawing upon Gaudium et Spes, Evangelii Nuntiandi, and the vast experience with cultural diversity of the Jesuit community itself, Arrupe clearly saw that the mere incorporation of native elements into the liturgy and the translation of Christian texts into the vernacular did not go to the heart of the problem. He envisioned a process far deeper, more dialogical, and more transfomative. In that process, which can include elements of confrontation, the
Gospel acts from within a culture as an agent of change and renewal. The process involves the assimilation of "universal values which no one culture can exhaustively realize,"'75 The result is not only a new cultural synthesis, but new bonds of communion among cultures in a
173- Pedro Arrupe, "To the Whole Society," Studies in the International Apostolate of Jesuits 7 :1 (June 1978) 1-9.
174. Arrupe, "To the Whole Society," p. 2.
175. Arrupe, "To the Whole Society," p. 3. "robe of many colors ."l?c Arrupe summed up the role of the Church as facilitator of the process this way: Its mission is that of searching the depths of the past with lucid discernment, whilst it opens a culture both to values that are universal to al1 human beings, and to the particular values of other cultures; it must ease tensions and conflict and create genuine communion.
Irnportantly, Arrupe saw the process of inculturation as located neither in Rome nor in the countries which send missionaries, but in the local church. As the primary agent of inculturation, it is the local church, rooted in a particular culture, which 'accepting the past with discernment, constructs the future with its present
resources ."17' Moreover, the General stressed that due to the rapid Pace of modern cultural change, the need for an inculturated faith was universal and ongoing, embracing
historically Christian cultures as well as those receiving the Gospel more recently. He thus placed the nations of the Third World, the "mission lands," on an equal footing with those of the West ."" Father Arrupe's letter was accompanied by 'A Working
- -
176. Ibid.
177. Ibid.
178, Arrupe, "To the Whole Society," p. 2.
179. Ibid. Paper on Inculturati~n."~~~This lengthier text consisted of a series of sixty-nine discrete reflections on various aspects of the theme of inculturation, compiled frorn a consultation with rnembers of the Society. Here a definition of "inculturation" is offered: [Inculturation is] that effort which the church makes to present the message and values of the gospel by embodying them in expressions that are proper to each culture, in such a way that the faith and Christian experience of each local church is embedded, as intimately and deeply as possible, in its own cultural context .
The working paper sought to explore the theological grounding for inculturation in greater depth. It found in the Incarnation "the primary motivation and perfect pattern for inculturation, and thus also the ongoing paradox of the universal resident in the particular. It looked to the inner life of the Trinity for a mode1 of mutual self-giving, and it specifically affirmed pluralism as evidence of the
Spirit' s activity. la'
Ecclesiologicaliy, the document reaf f imed the centrality of the local church, referring to the universal
180. Pedro Arrupe, ed., 'A Working Paper on Inculturation," Studies in the International Apostolate of Jesuits 7:l (June 1978) 10- 30.
181. 'A Working Paper on Inculturation," p- 11.
182. "A Working Paper on Inculturation," p. 13-
183. 'A Working Paper on Inculturation, " pp. 14-5- church as "a marvelous symbiosis of unity and diver~ity."'~~ Analysis of and insertion into a culture were seen as prerequisites of the inculturation process,'05 and it was acknowledged that people native to a particuïar cultural situation must play a key leadership r01e.'~° In addition, the close connection between inculturation and the Church's mission to spread the Gospel was recognized. The document proposed a dialogical understanding of evangelization, Le., a conversation between Church and people in which the Church discovers and makes explicit the semina Verbi ("seeds of the Word") latent in a ~ulture.'~'
The Jesuit working paper is also noteworthy for the way it encouraged reflection on the link between inculturation and social justice. "The poor and oppressed are a privileged locus of inculturation,"'a"t said, and later: If inculturation is a living process, then it clearly supposes identification with the sufferings of a people and its longing for liberation and authentic growth. Thus inculturation demands that we labor, directly or indirectly, for the poor and from the position of the poor, in the sense that evangelization has to be carried on from the perspective of the poor
184. 'A Working Paper on Inculturation," p. 15.
185. 'A Woxking Paper on Incultusation," pp. 20-1.
186. 'A Working Paper on Inculturation," pp. 21, 23.
187. "A Working Paper on Inculturation," p. 18.
188. 'A Working Paper on Inculturation," p. 17- of Yahweh .la" Thus "inculturation of the faith is a form of liberation ... [whereas] cultural domination is a form of oppression.""' The document concluded, "Incul turation and promotion of
justice are implied in each other. rrlgï Clearly the Jesuits were striving to bridge any gap threatening to open between missiologists on the one hand and liberation theologians on the other. Cultural adaptation has to be alloyed with a concern for inclusion of al1 sectors of society, most especially the disadvantaged.
Arrupe' s letter was followed rather shortly by Pope John Paul II's embrace of the term "inculturation" in
Catechesi Tradendae, as mentioned in the previous section. At around the same time, two seminal articles appeared by the Dutch theologian Arij A. Roest Crollius, S. J. In the first, "What 1s So New about Inculturation?",''' Crollius defended the terminological choice of inculturation over
189. "A Working Paper on Inculturation," p. 19.
190. "A Working Paper on Inculturation," pp. 17-8.
191. "A Working Paper on Inculturation," p. 19f.
192. Gregorianum 59 (1978) 721-738. This article was later reprinted in A, Crollius and Théoneste Nkéramihigo, What Is So New about Inculturation?, vol. V of the Inculturation series cited below (Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1984); page number citations here are from the reprint, encul tura tion (an anthropological term describing the learning process by which an individual is initiated into his/her own culture), and over acculturation (an anthropological term denoting contact between cultures) .lq3
Inculturation, while it "has also the characteristics of a process of acculturation," also bears rnissiological and ecclesiological connotations: it refers to the process whereby "the Church becomes inserted into a given culture. "194 More fully, Crollius described that process
The inculturation of the Church is the integration of the Christian experience of a local Church into the culture of its people, in such a way that this experience not only expresses itself in elements of this culture, but becomes a force that animates, orients and innovates this culture so as to create a new unity and communion, not only within the culture in question, but also as an enrichment of the Church universal.
While Crollius' description closely parallels that of Arrupe, the addition of the final phrase strengthens the view of the exchange as one of mutual enrichment. Inculturation is a two-way street upon which the Church not only gives but receives something as well. Crollius saw the process of inculturation unfolding in
193. "What 1s So New about Inculturation?", pp. 4-7.
194. "What 1s So New about Inculturation?", p. 7.
195. "What 1s So New about Inculturation?", p. 15f. 104 three interconnected and ongoing moments, The first could be called the moment of "translation," or acculturation, in which "the Church cornes into contact with a new culture, presenting the Christian message and life in the forms of another culture." In a second moment, usually characterized by the stability and growth of a local community, the Church is becoming more deeply "assimilated" to the thought and
foms of the receiving culture. In the final moment, the Church gradually assumes a more active role in the
"transformation" of the culture and, complementarily, is itself the object of tran~formation.'~" In answering the question, therefore, "What is so new about inculturation?", Crollius had begun with the admission that, on one level, nothing at al1 is new about it, insofar as Christianity has been interacting with cultures from its very beghning .sÏ However, the new elements in the contemporary situation which lie behind the neologism inculturation he identified as three. One is the greater awareness of the dialogical character of the interaction between the Church and culture, especially of the aspect by which the Church itself is affected and enhanced. The reciprocal character of the process is insufficiently
196. "What 1s So New about Inculturation?", p- 14.
197- "What 1s So New about Inculturation?", p. 1. comprehended by such formerly popular terms as adaptation and accommodation. A second factor is that the concept of inculturation more adequately recognizes and guides the pivota1 role played by the local church. It is thus a useful notion in every context, not just in the "young churches" of the Third World. Finally, incul turation reflects a more inductive, descriptive, anthropologically informed conception of culture itself.''"
Crollius wrestled with the third matter, the problem of defining culture, more extensively in a later article, "Inculturation and the Meaning of Culture.""' Guided by the theological anthropology of fellow Jesuits Karl Rahner and A. van Leeuwen, Crollius found Geertzfs definition of culture highly serviceable in al1 but one crucial respect, namely, the problern of cultural diversity and interaction. On this point Crollius turned to the work of David Tracy and C others on the concept of "analogy" to open an understanding of the possibilities of cross-cultural communication. On this view, Crollius concluded beautifully: The purpose of inculturation is not to salvage a traditional culture, but rather to render present in the galloping process of change which affects al1 cultures the light and the life of the Gospel, so that
198. "What 1s So New about Inculturation?", pp. 16-7.
199. Gregorianum 61 (1980) 253-74; reprinted in Crollius and Nkeramihigo, op. cit.; page number citations here are from the reprint. each culture may become a worthy "habitat" of Godfs pilgrim people -- a tent rather than a fortress -- and an irradiating light that adds to the splendor of the entire cosmos .:Oo The author was grasping toward a dynamic, rather than static, view of culture, one that was respectful of cultural change, originality, and particularity, yet optirnistic about the potential for intercultural conversation.
Nearly every subsequent thinker in the field has acknowledged the importance of the contributions of Arrupe and Crollius. The ensuing fifteen years have seen the appearance of a number of significant theological efforts. One important source of contributions has been the Gregorian
University series Incul turation, edited by ~rollius."' Arnong the many topics addressed in this series, a remarkable amount of thought has been devoted to the problem of inculturation as it presents itself in various Western contexts. Marcello Azevedo, S.J., first approached modernization as a 'culture" itself, and thus as a subject for the process of incult~ration.~~~Noting technology,
200. "Inculturation and the Meaning of Culture," p. 54.
201. Ari j A. Roest Crollius, ed., Inculturation: Working Papers on Living Faith and Cultures, 17 vols. (Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1982-95) .
202- Marcello de Carvalho Azevedo, Inculturation and the Challenges of Modernity, vol. 1 of Inculturation, op. cit, (1982). ideology, and secularization as the primary characteristics of modernity, Azevedo called for a Church that is both adapted to and constructively critical of contemporary conditions. This theme was picked up with even more urgency
by Peter Schineller, S.J., who went so far as to daim: The inculturation of Gospel values into the process of modernization is the most challenging and important place for inculturation to occur, more significant than Roman Catholic dialogue with other Christian Churches, with non-Christian religions, with traditional cultures and with athei~rn."~
The Inculturation serieç has also included a few Lnteresting forays into the field of inculturation within the United States. Joseph A, Tetlow, S. J., traced the course of inculturation over the terrain of U.S. religious history with the aid of Crolliusr three-stage description of the process (translation, assimilation, transformation) .'O4
203. "Ten Summary Staternents on the Meaning, Challenge and Significance of Inculturation as Applied to the Church and Society of Jesus in the United States, in Light of the Global Processes of Modernization," in Theodore F. Zuern et al., On Being Church in a Modern Society, vol. II of Inculturation, op. cit. (1983), p. 56. See also Schinellert s later A Handbook on Inculturation, (N- Y. : Paulist, 1990 1 . The multiple challenges which modernity pxesents to Christian evangelization, and strategies for meeting those challenges, constitute a vast problematic in and of itself, See, inter alia, Hervé Carrier, S. J, , Evangelizing the Culture of Modernity (Maryknoll, N. Y - : Orbis, 1993) ; John Francis Kavanaugh, Following Christ in a Consumer Society: The Spirituality of Cultural Resistance (Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1981); Lesslie Newbigin, Foolishness to the Greeks: The Gospel and Western Culture (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), and The Gospel in a Pluralist Society (Grand Rapids: Eerdrnans, 1989)-
204- "The Inculturation of Catholicism in the United States," in Zuern et al. (1983), pp. 15-50. In the same volume see Theodore F. Zuern's "The Preservation of Native Identity in the Process of Inculturation, as Experienced in American Indian Cultures," pp. 1-11. Similarly, Rodger Van Allen argued that, in spite of the significant setback represented by the condemnation of "Americanism" at the turn of the century, Catholicism in the
U.S. had become "somewhat creatively inculturated" at
present .'O5 Van Allen found evidence of this maturity in the Church's efforts on behalf of social transformation, efforts which have been increasing steadily in scope and vigour since the 1960s. And, finally, catechesis of the Hispanic
minority within the U.S. was presented as a "case study" of inculturation by Maria de la Cruz Aymes and Francis J.
Buckley, S.J.'OL
In 1985 Robert J. Schreiter's important work
Constructing Local ~heologies~~~appeared. Apparent1 y following the usage employed by Luzbetak,'" Schreiter
displayed a preference for the terminology of contextual
theology and contextualization. His hesitation about usage
205. "Catholicisrn in the United States: Some Elements of Creative Inculturation," in A. Roest Crollius et al., Creative Inculturation and the Unity of Faith, vol. VI11 of ~nculturation, op- cit. (1986), p. 57.
206- "Case-Study: Catechesis of Hispanics in the United States Today," in Aymes et al., op. cit. (1987), pp. 1-28.
207. Constructing Local Theologies (Maryknoll, N. Y. : Orbis, 1985).
208. Louis J. Luzbetak, op. cit. Although the revised edition of Luzbetak's seminal work is the one utilized here, the original edition appeared in 1963 (Luzbetak, p- xvii). 109
of tne term inculturation rests on the perception that "it
causes some difficulties in dialogue with social scientists in that it seems to be a dilettantish kind of neologism on the part of non-scientist~."~~'Although he admits that
contextual theology is also a neologism, he claims that this
term "has the advantage of not having many previous associations and of being readily used in translation into a
wide variety of lang~ages.""~ The matter is not of debilitating significance, however, for when Schreiter
speaks of contextual or local theology as the product of -- - dynamic interaction among gospel, church, and culture,-l- he
is clearly referring to the same process resulting in what elsewhere would be called an inculturated theology. Schreiter saw local theology unfolding according to three groups of models -- translation, adaptation, and contextual -- which roughly parallel the three "moments" identified by Crollius. Translation models, generally the first to be used in pastoral settings, depend upon a 'kernel and husk" understanding of Christianity in which it is thought that the core Gospel message can be separated from its cultural "husk," Schreiter objects that this both
209. Constructing Local Theologies, p. 5.
210. Constructing Local Theologies, p. 6.
211. Constructing Local Theologies, p. 20. disembodies revelation and fails to take the receiving culture seriously enougLX2 Adaptation rnodels, while they strive to understand the local culture more deeply through the use of philosophy or the social sciences, often end up forcing the data of culture into foreign categories. In addition, says Schreiter, these approaches still tend to remove the Christian message itself from its cultural settings, and they tend to operate in a one-way, rather than reciprocal, manner. ---71 i Among contextual rnodels the author identifies two dif f erent types. The f irst he calls the "ethn~graphic"~'~ approach. Here the emphasis is upon defining and defending cultural identity. Although this has obvious advantages, says the author, such an approach can also fa11 prey to cultural romanticism or over-reliance upon experts, and it may ignore conflictual factors at work in a given situation. The second type, the 'liberation""' approach, highlights oppressive aspects of a situation and focuses on the need for change, Doing so can bring to bear the salvific aspects of the gospel in a particularly powerful way in concrete
212. Constructinq Local Theologies, pp. 6-9.
213. Constructing Local Theologies, pp. 9-12.
214. Constructing Local Theologies, pp . 13-4.
215. Constructing Local Theologies, pp. 14-5. 111 social circumstances, although the liberation models can
succumb to the pitfalls of over-reliance upon Marxist analysis or other apocalyptic ideologies. "Liberation theologies," concludes the author, "are a major force, if not the major force, in contextual models of theology today -"""
Constructing Local Theologies is a sophisticated work which rewards careful reading, Fox the purposes undertaken in the present project, it is Schreiter's "map" of the developrnent of local theology that is most useful. (See illustration next page.) The mapping technique is an idealized picture of the inculturation process in nine
interwoven stages. It is helpful to local communities, the author claims, both for purposes of locating themselves in the process and for evaluating the adequacy and completeness of their theological efforts .--?l- Schreiter stresses that the construction of local theology never begins in a vacuum. Every local community bears a heritage, a lived spirituality or popular religiosity, expressed in an already-existing local theology that may be more or less explicit, complete, and coherent. The process of constructing or revising local theology
216- Constructing Local Theologies, p. 15 -
217 - Constructing Local Theologies, p. 23. Spitit and Gospek Shuping the Community Context
Church Tradition Culture
1 The Opening of Church Tradition through 1 Culture through k Analysis * Theologies (1) ! Christian. Tradition Seen as a Series of Emergence of Themes Local Theologies (5) for Local Theology (3)
Encounter of Themes with Parallel Local 9 Theologies The Impact of Church ~raditionon Local 1 + / Theologies (7) The Impact of Local _> k * - Theologies on Church c- t Tradition (8) w I r The Impact of Locd Theologies upon the - Culture (9) a
[From Constructing Local Theologies, p. 25.1 113 begins, says Schreiter, when the heritage is experienced to be inadequate, Dissatisfaction with the existing local theology can be triggered by the community's own growth in reflective awareness, by the intrusion of a social event or cultural condition, or by the comrnunity coming into contact with theological efforts from other cultures or larger ecclesial structures?
Ideally, according to Schreiter, the next step in the process consists of what he calls the "opening of ~ulture."~~~hisinvolves careful listening to a culture through any of several means of analysis. In a later chapter Schreiter makes clear his preference for a semiotic --- approach to culture, as in the work of Clifford Geertz.--- Theologically, Schreiter emphasizes that listening to culture hinges on the conviction that Christ is already present to and active in the culture, and not simply sornething the Church brings from the outside, The study of a culture results in the identification of "culture texts," signs or series of signs of pivota1 importance to that culture. These signs provide resources for the third step,
218. Constructing Local Theologies, pp - 24-8.
219. Constructing Local Theologies, pp. 28-9.
220. Constructing Local Theologies, pp- 49-74 - the emergence of key themes for local theo1ogy.---7 7 - On the other side of the dialogue is the faith
tradition borne by the Church, and in the fourth step this tradition undergoes a process of opening parallel to the --- opening of culture .--- The analysis of tradition should be not only historical but open to the plurality of cultures encompassed by the tradition. Furthemore, in the fifth rnovernent, the tradition is regarded as itself a series of local theologies to which hermeneutics of suspicion and retrieval must be applied."' As Shorter says, the Churchrs 'patrimony" is inherently multicultural, "the legacies of multiple past in cul tu ration^.""^ Or, as another commentator puts it: The whole history of the Church, the history of the Christian communities since their origins, can be considered as the history of the of the incul turation . -- Christian faith in particular societies and cultures .---8 - Later, to amplify this perspective, Schreiter explores the many different forms which theology has taken over the centuries. He groups them into four large categories: theology as variations on a sacred text, theology as wisdom,
221. Constructing Local Theologies, pp. 29-31, 61-3.
222. Constructing Local Theologies, pp. 31-2.
223. Constructing Local Theologies, pp. 32-3.
224. Shorter, p. 256.
225. Scheuer, 16. 115
-.- - theology as sure knowledge, and theology as praxis ."O The variety of forms is correlated with a wide spectrum of cultural and social exigencies, The development of local theology proper begins in the sixth step, the "encounter of church tradition and local theme s ,"L27 This is where the fruits of steps three and five corne together, Schreiter explains: "Local theologies in the church tradition are sought out that parallel the lozal theme or need, either in content, in context, in form, or in al1 three." This is followed, seventh, by the "impact of the tradition on local theology."""he encounter may offer affirmation to the local theology, and/or it may provide challenge and/or correction to what has been happening locally. Concomitantly, the local theology has an impact on
the tradition, the eighth movement .'29 'Local theologies," says Schreiter, "are vital for the development of the tradition." They may serve to remind the rest of us of segments of the tradition that we have forgotten or ignored, and they may serve to improve upon that tradition through their insights into dilemmas experienced analogously by
226. Constructinq Local Theologies, pp. 80-94.
227 - Constructing Local Theologies, pp. 33-4.
228. Constructing Local Theologies, p. 34.
229- Constructing Local Theologies, pp. 34-5 - 116 other local churches. Finally, local theologies merge into
and have an impact upon their own cultures.23a They may help to reframe certain issues or rectify certain aspects of the cultural worldview. Conversely, such theologies may also, wittingly or not, bestow other questions or problems on
subsequent generations, and these matters may form the basis for later local theological reflection. The process is thus ongoing, dynamic, and in a certain sense, circular. Throughout his work Schreiter evinces a concern for the maintenance of authentic Christian identity in the development of contextualized theology- This is evident in his description of the steps of the process. It is equally evident in the way he takes up the difficult subjects of popular religion and syncretism in relation to local theology ."' Most useful to this concern on a practical level, however, are the five criteria Schreiter proposes by which local theologies are to be evaluated vis-a-vis the tradition The first is the test of cohesiveness; a theology must manifest an overall consistency with revelation and tradition. Secondly, the theology must bear
230, constructing Local Theologies, pp. 35-6.
231. Constructing Local Theologies, chap. 6, pp. 122-43, and chap. 7, pp. 144-58, respectively; see also Schreiter, "Defining Syncretism: An Interim Report," International Bulletin of Missiondry Research 17 (April 1993) 50-3.
232. Constructing Local Theologies, pp. 118-20. 117 a positive affinity with Christian worship and ritual -- the ancient principle of lex orandi, lex credencli. The third criterion is praxis: what is the performance engendered by the theology, and is it discernibly in accord with the liberating thrust of the Gospel? Fourthly, a local theology must stand under the judgment of other local churches, not rupturing that communion which is the fabric of the universal Church. Lastly, and complementary to the previous criterion, an authentic local theology should impel a local cornrnunity outward, offering collaboration and challenge to other local churches, A local theology must pass al1 five of these tests in order to be judged affirmatively.
In the preceding pages we have already had cause to cite the work of Aylward Shorter numerous times, mainly in reference to its historical survey of missions and official documents. Towaxd a Theology of Inculturation, which appeared in 1988, is the most comprehensive and systematic
Roman Catholic treatment of our theme to date. Its chief conclusions need to be reviewed briefly here.
Shorter drew upon the work of Bernard on erg an'^^ in describing the contemporary movement from a static,
233. Method in Theology (Minneapolis: Seabury, 1972) ; çee esp. pp. 300-2, 319-30. 'classicist" view of culture to the modern, empirical approach. This shift has drarnatic consequences for the
Church's understanding of itself, its evangelical mission, and its entire tradition, As Shortex says:
Inculturation does not just mean that an empirical view of culture and cultures must now be taken. It means that the whole of Church history and the history of theology must be rewritten.:" The Church, says the author, must continue to re-read its history with a view toward excising ethnocentrism and re- envisioning itself as a multicultural body.
In addition, the Church must at the same time continue to sharpen its tools for understanding the workings of culture, with the help of social scientists, Shorter emphasizes, however, that the Churchrs approach to culture must be particularly attuned to the dynamics of cultural change as cultures corne into ever greater contact with one another and with modern technology. In the process of confrontation with modernization, for example, often so disruptive to traditional societies, culture should in fact find in the Church an "ally. ""' Theologically, Shorter asserts that "what is inculturated is Jesus Christ himself. He is the subject-
234. Shorter, p. 20.
235. Shorter, p. 56. matter of inculturation, the Christian term of the inculturation-equation."'35 But this profound truth ought not simply rest upon the "logic of the Incarnation" taken as a mode1 for inc~lturation.~" Shorter insists that inculturation must pattern itself after the Paschal Mystery, by which the Risen Christ is present to culture, both affirming a culture3 positive values and purging it of its destructive element~.~~~This view, which regards Christ as active within culture even prior to the explicit proclamation of the Gospel, implies as well a soteriology in which God's saving action is discerned beyond the visible boundaries of the Church. An important corollary here is that "evangelization and conversion presuppose the continuance of an inter-faîth dialogue as part of the inculturation process .'823" Ecclesiologically, Shorter describes the present reality as one in which the Church operates as 'a universal sub-culture ubiquitously present as a sub-system in the various cultures of hwnanity,""" But for the author this
236. Shorter, p. 61.
237. Shorter, pp. 79-83.
238, Shorter, pp. 83-7.
239. Shorter, p. 100.
240. Shorter, p. 64. state of ai f airs represents an incomplete inculturation. The Second Vatican Councilfs emphases upon collegiality and upon the centrality of the local church, he clairns, have not been fully appreciated in their implications for Church law and structures. Church mechanisms continue too often to operate according to Western assumptions, remote frorn the local context. Shorter concludes frankly: Inculturation constitutes a challenge to authoritarianism and exaggerated centralisrn in the Church. There can be no question about it; inculturation assumes the existence of a multicultural, egalitarian Church, not one in which there are junior and senior partners. Inculturation implies that the particular churches enjoy a relative autonomy -- an autonorny in everything that does not endanger the bond of faith and communion guaranteed, among other things, by the Petrine ministry. A truly multicultural Church is one in which local solutions to pastoral problems and local formulations of doctrine and worship are favoured. More than this, it is one in which the priorities are decided locally .'" However, Shorter cautiously yet hopefully embraces the grass-roots flourishing of small or basic Christian communities on several continents. He believes they offer the best locus for a creative inculturation that "safeguards human values and roots the Church in the life and culture of
the pe~ple."'~' As these srnall communities gather around the Word of God, and strive to transpose it into their own
241. Shorter, p. 259.
242. Shorter, p. 265. 121 context, Shorter hails them as 'the Churchrs conscience for inculturation-"243
By the early 1990s an impressive body of literature had grown up around the theme of inculturation. Increasingly this literature has been enanating not only from the West and Western missionaries, but also from theologians and pastoral agents of the Third World. US. theologian Stephen B. Bevans, a Divine Word Missionary, attempted a taxonomy of these burgeoning developments Following the lead of Schreiter, H. Richard Niebuhr, Avery Dulles, and other contemporary theologians, Bevans employs the use of "modelsN to characterize and group approaches to the problern of inculturation or contextual the~logy.'~~He described five such models. Bevans' first approach, the "transiation" model, corresponds closely with the translation model described by Schreiter. Like Schreiter, Bevans finds this rnodel to be
243, Shorter, p. 270.
244. Models of Contexlual Theology (Maryknoll, N. Y, : Orbis, 1992).
245. Bevans, pp. 23-9; R- Schreiter, Constructing Local Theologies, op. cit. ; H. R- Niebuhr, Christ and Culture, op, cit.; A. Dulles, Models of the Church (Garden City, N.J.: Doubleday Image, 19741, and Models of Revelation (N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983). Bevans also drew extensively upon 1. G. Barbour, Myths, Models and Paradigms: A Comparative Study in Science and Religion (N.Y. : Harper and Row, 1974 1 . common historically, especially in early phases of the process, and he praises it for its zealous guardianship of religious truth. But he judges it inadequate both for its
"propositional and quantitative" approach to divine revelation, and for the way it places culture in an
'ancillary or subordinate r~le."'~" As examples of this approach Bevans discusses the work of David es sel grave, "- a prominent evangelical Protestant theologian, and the work of Pope John Paul II. Bevans' "anthropological" model corresponds roughly to
Schreiter's "adaptation" model. This approach takes human culture as its starting point and is at pains to guard cultural identity in the encounter with religious tradition* Theologically, the anthropological approach tends to be creation-centered and robustly affirming of culture as the arena of God's activity* Bevans sees the main strength of this approach in the seriousness with which it takes culture, drawing heavily upon the methods and insights of the social science of cultural anthropology. Negatively, however, this approach can "easily fa11 prey to cultural rornantici~rn,"~~~nuncritical attitude toward a culture
246. Bevans, p. 34.
247. See D. J. Hesselgrave and Edward Romen, Contextualization: Meaninqs, Methods and Models (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989).
248. Bevans, p. 53. which can be accompanied by a defensive attitude toward interaction with other cultures. The examples of the anthropological approach given by Bevans are African-
American theologian Robert E. Hood, and Vincent J. Donovan's -. well-known Christianity Rediscovered.-'? The third approach, the "praxisf' model, "focuses on the identity of Christians within a culture as that culture is understood in terms of social change. "15' Not surprisingly, this model includes theologies of liberation. Committed to action as the responsible outcome of knowing, it is guided by the conviction that Christianity is bound to oppose every form of oppression. Bevans further praises this model for its concreteness and its grass-roots inclusiveness, calling al1 members of the community into the reflective process.
At times it has been rightly criticized for a too uncritical appropriation of Marxist thought and/or a too narrow reading of Scripture, but Bevans does not think these are endemic to the model, As illustrations Bevans discusses the work of Canadian theologian Douglas John Hall, and the recent efforts of several Asian feminist writers.
The "synthetic" model, as its name implies, seeks a
249, Christianity Rediscovered, 2nd ed- (Maryknoll, N. Y. : Orbis, 1982) .
250. Bevans, p. 63. 124 synthesis of the previous models, Bevans says it might well be called the "dialecticalf' model due to its openness to the insights of many cultures and theological expressions,---7 c:
Its great strengths are in this dialogical attitude and in its pursuit of the ideal of Christian universality. On the negative side, the method of the synthetic model is very complex and, if not used skillfully, can become fuzzy or
-.c- obscure. -&' Among the practitioners of this mode1 Bevans lists David Tracy, Aylward Shorter, Robert Schreiter, Japanese theologian Kosuke Koyama, and Filipino theologian
José de Mesa. Lastly Bevans describes the "transcendental" approach. This method goes to the cognitive operations involved in theologizing and gives central place to the processes of conversion involved in authentic subjectivity, Drawing on the work of Karl Rahner and Bernard Lonergan, the two giants of modern transcendental theology, this approach understands revelation as 'an event, not as a content While it takes seriously the historical and cultural conditioning of every person, this model operates on the assumption that a universal structure of human consciousness exists, and this
251. Bevans, p. 83-
252. Bevans, pp. 85-8.
253. Bevans, p. 99. structure can provide the basis for intercultural communication of meaning. Bevans points out that this approach is critiqued as being too abstract and that it begs further questions about the cultural conditioning of the portrait of human understanding and authentic subjectivity it presumes.254 As examples of the model Bevans examines
American theologian Sallie McFague and Cuban-American theologian Justo L. Gonzalez. Bevans does not champion any one particular model. He is as cornfortable with theological pluralism as he is with cultural pluralism, as he says: "There is no one completely adequate way of doing theology .... No model is exhaustive or applicable to al1 situations of faith."2ï5 Of course, it is clear that the author looks with more favour on the last three models than he does on the first two. But he suggests that al1 the models have value in reminding us of aspects of the process of contextual theology that we might be tempted to neglect.
We conclude this section with a brief résumé of the contributions of Car1 F. Starkloff, S. J. Starklof f draws upon considerable pastoral experience among aboriginal North
254. Bevans, pp. 99-102.
255. Bevans, p. 28. American peoples in both the United States and Canada.'" In a lengthy recent article, Starkloff sought to deepen understanding of the challenges and possibilities of inculturation through an approach to the work of Clifford Geertz on 'cultural systems. ""' The author first reviewed Geertz' s treatment of ideology, religion, common sense, and
art as cultural systems. By "cultural systems," of course, Geertz had referred to interlocking webs of meaning encoded in symbols. "A cultural system is historically constructed and subject to historically defined standards of
j udgment ,"25d Starkloff points out, and such judgment is, in part, the role of theology. In a second movement, then, Starkloff ref lects upon the ways in which the inculturation process has to penetrate and permeate these systems. "Theology must examine the systems in themselves, " he says, 'so as to chart a course in which 'the good news' might influence al1 dimensions of
256- See, e-g., his "A Different Gospel? Evangelization among 'The People,'" The Way 34: 4 (Oct. 1994) 293-303; "Keepers of Tradition: The Symbol Power of Indigenous Ministry," Kérygma 23: 52 (19891 3-120; "New Prima1 Religious Movements in North America: A Challenge to the
Churches, " Missiology (Jan. 1985) 81-101; and "New Tribal Religious Movements: A Contemporary Theological Horizon," Toronto Journal of Theology 2:2 (Fall 1986) 157-71.
257. Car1 F. Starkloff, 'Inculturation and Cultural Systems," two parts, Theological Studies 55 (1994) 66-81 and 274-94.
258. "Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 72. society,ffi59 Emphasizing that cultural systems overlap and interpenetrate, he says later: To the degree that theologians can collaborate in 'mapping" the intertwined cultural systems in their own home cultures and in the cultures of mission, to that degree the Church will possess the tools for inculturating the gospel With Lonerganfs treatment of the functional specialty of "Communications as a resource, Starkloff identifies the question of common meaning as a crucial one in striving for a deeply inculturated theology. He concludes: The task of inculturation...is that the Christian message should be proclaimed in such a way as to create common meaning, which will then establish communication between ideological systems. This point is critical, since inculturation rnust include cultural critique and not simply "belongingffat any ~ost-'~~ A brief examination of the four areas is needed. With regard to the interaction of faith with ideology, Starkloff notes the extensive work of Latin American theologian Juan Luis Segundo. He states: The possibility that Christianity may be contextualized within an ideology as a cultural system is basic to Segundo' s argument,. . , Faith needs ideologies as ways to structure the search for goals that it desires. Any faith (any particular system of meanings and values) gives rise to an ideology for its implementation in
259. "Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 81.
260, "Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 290-
261. Lonergan, Method in Theology, pp. 355-68.
262. 'Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 290f. his tory.'"'- -- Furthemore, Geertz had distinguished between 'interest" ideologies, which pursue or protect dominant power, and 'strain" ideologies, which arise among groups that experience themselves as marginated or in some way aggrieved .264 Starkloff agrees with Segundo that Christianity is inherently predisposed to favour justice- oriented strain ideologies, while at the same time placing them within a universalizing frame~ork.'~' In approaching inculturation and religious systems within a culture, Starkloff argues that the distinction between faith and religion, proposed by Karl Barth and picked up by Paul Tillich and rnany others in this century, is foundational .26" He further notes that Vatican 11 "opened up the possibility of investing traditional religious forms with new rneaning"l6' through its recognition of the divine action in human cultures, Starkloff then plunges boldly into the controversial topic of religious "syn~retism."'~~
263- "Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 276.
264. "Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 74.
265. "Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 279.
266. "Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 279.
267- "Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 280-
268. "Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 280-3. See also his "The Problem of Syncretisrn in the Search for Inculturation," fission 1 (1994) 75-94. 129 Here the author draws upon the work of Leonardo Boff, who approached syncretism sympathetically as a normal and ongoing human phenomenon, and one which has left its marks on Christian tradition as well. Starkloff proposes that we accept Boff's four criteria for adjudging legitimate syncretism -- Scripture, praxis, councils, and the prophetic liberative thrust culminating in Jesus -- 'as provisional criteria for facilitating the insertion of the gospel within cultural sy~tems.""~ StarkLoff refers to inculturation within a culture's system of "common sense" as "the most crucial dimension of
all. "27' -- 7 Supplementing Geertz with Lonergan,-,- Starklof f notes that a culture's common sense represents its most everyday kind of language, and that it is at the heart of the pastoral task to enter and speak to that realm. This it does especially through the praxis of preaching, catechesis, and sacramental celebration, al1 of which nonetheless must never be segmented from moments of reflection.27 7 'It is
269. See esp. his Church: Charism and Power (N.Y. : Crossroad, 1986), pp. 89-107.
270. "Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 282-3.
271. "Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 284.
272. See Lonergan' s Insight: A Study of Human Understanding (N.Y.: Harper & Row, 1978; first published 1958), pp. 173-244.
273. "Inculturation and Cultural Systems, " 284-5 - urgent," the author concludes, "that theology learn the art
of insertion into common-sense experience .8*z74 However, the multifarious complexity of this realrn will mean that "the pastoral theologian must be the most diversely talented of al1 who work within theological disciplines."'-' With regard to inculturation in the realm of art, Starkloff notes that the close relationship between religion and the arts is well-known, especially in traditional societies. He turns again to Lonergan' s discussion of communications. Lonergan had noted the powerful participative invitation inherent in art, and of this
Starkloff says : [The work of art] is an invitation, not only to members of the culture in which it originates, but to al1 who desire to reach beyond their own cultures and share some of the Iife of the members of other cultures, and thus to expand, at least to some degree, the experience of 'common meaning ...." For the Church to be able to proclaim the gospel in these contexts, it must recognize these acts of creativity as forms of ministry that represent the spiritual feelings of the people.'-' However, Starkloff wlsely takes note of Tillich's observation that art is not merely expressive but transfomative; its close proxirnity to "ultimate concern"
274. "Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 285.
275, Ibid-
276. "Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 288. 131 --- thus also renders it vulnerable to ideological distortion.--
The burgeoning corpus of writing on faith's relationship with culture continues to mature. Much still remains to be done. Schreiter has identified five areas of need in the ongoing discussion of inc~lturation."~ The challenge of an inculturated faith is still, in rnany places, unfulfilled, he daims. This is due both to a dearth of methodological tools and to ecclesiastical resistance to the experimentation that would be required to pursue the process. A second major issue is the analysis of culture. Current anthropological models for understanding culture and its dynamic processes may not be adequate. Thirdly, further investigation of the cultural conditioning of the tradition is needed. Although the permanent validity of that tradition is not in doubt, we do not have a satisfactory articulation of how and why the tradition speaks to cultural contexts to which it is foreign. Closely related here is the fourth issue, that of understanding cultural pluralism and the possibilities for intercultural communication. Finally, the theology of inculturation is itself only in its
277. "Inculturation and Cultural Systems," 288-90.
278. "Faith and Cultures: Challenges to a World Church," Theological Studies 50 (1989) 758-60. 132 initial stages. Its implications for Our understanding of revelation, christology, and grace -- to name only a few -- have only begun to be explored. This section has consisted of a survey of contemporary reflection on inculturation. Such surveys are never exhaustive, and the intent embodied here is merely to trace the evolution of such reflection within the theological community through the difficult process of selecting key or representative literature ."' In the following section a working synthesis of this material is attempted.
2.d. A Theology of Inculturation
In the preceding sections of this chapter, we have had cause to glance over centuries of Christian tradition and review a large amount of written material. In this final section our goal is to pull together some key insîghts garnered from the foregoing, by way of summary and for emphasis in relation to this project, The following list twelve points is by no means exhaustive, and only a rough logic is ascribed to the sequence in which the points
279. This survey has focussed on English-language sources. Literature in other languages, meanwhile, is similarly proliferating. Indigenous inculturative efforts are too numerous to mention here, and sorne of the best are unlikely to be published for wider circulation anyway. An important work in French is that of Achiel Peelman, LOInculturation: église et les cultures (Ottawa: Novalis, 1988). appear. The list serves to outline the theology of inculturation which guides the subsequent analysis and
evaluation of the National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic
Ministry,
1. While Christian faith is not bound exclusively to
any one culture, it is always culturally condi tioned and
expresseci; indeeà it requires culture not only for its
transmission, but to effect itself in history. In accord with the very nature of Christian belief, its mystical horizon is indissolubly linked with certain values and ethical imperatives for behaviour. This vision and its implications can only be transrnitted, however partially or inadequately, through the use of historically and culturally conditioned language and symbols . Moreover, ipso facto Christian faith both embraces and surpasses the present world. The object of this faith vision (God and God' s Reign) decisively transcends history; yet, at the same tirne, it demands its own realization, enactment, or implementation in history, i e., in the arena of culture. The "scanda1 of particularity" which stands at the heart of Christian faith raises the issue of how to understand or define claims of universal relevance for that faith. We must continue to seek a more adequate language by which to speak of the transcultural dimension of 134 Christianity. The image of "kernel and husk," for example, may at one time have served to move the whole discussion of the relationship of faith to culture forward. But today that image must be rejected as imprecise, insofar as it suggests that cultural conditioning can be dispensed with or stripped away like so much unneeded baggage. Likewise, to speak of some "essence" of Christian faith which can be distilled from culture is misleading. Even the language of distinguishing the 'substance" or "deposit" of faith from its expression -- used by John XXIII, Vatican II, Paul VI, and many others -- may have to be surpassed in the search for a manner of speaking that more carefully and completely respects the dynamic interdependence of faith and culture. We can no more transmit Christian faith apart from culture than we can dispense with the air we breathe or the flesh of Our bodies. This means, not incidentally, that Christian evangelization always involves some dimension of acculturation or meeting of cultures. In our ongoing search for a more adequate language, it must be remembered that at the center of Christian faith stands an event-person, the Crucified and Risen Jesus Christ. We might do well to follow David Tracy's lead in taking the mystery engaged by Christians as the faith datum he refers to simply as the "Christian fact." Moreover, we 135 ought to heed Tracy's admonition that al1 religious language quite properly belongs to that most paradoxical kind of language, i .e, , the language of analogy.
2. Methodologically, the theology of inculturation
belongs to a correlational understanding of theology;
moreover , in terms of Niebuhrfs typology , the theology of
inculturation will be aligned with one or more of the three
median models. For obvious reasons, the concern for
understanding the relationship between faith and culture in a way that respects both but keeps them distinct arises only within a fundamentally correlational approach to theology.
Only the three median models outlined by Niebuhr are truly correlational approaches. The "Christ Against Culture" mode1 rejects culture as a theological source, The "Christ of Culture" path tends to collapse the distinction between
the two and may lead to facile and uncritical kinds of syncretism. As will becorne apparent, the present author
shares with Niebuhr a general bias in favour of the 'conversionist" mode, "Christ the Transformer of Culture, " while nonetheless affirming the valid contributions of "Christ Above Culture" and "Christ and Culture in Paradox" approaches. The precise relationship to culture camot be predeterrnined for al1 instances, but must be carefully discerned in particular cultural circumstances. In other 136 words, Christian attitudes toward a particular culture may be more or less hostile, critical, or receptive, depending upon the character of the world-views, values, and customs of that culture. The judgments involved in this discernment are best made on the local level, though always in dialogue with other local churches.
3. The challenge to develop inculturated witness to the faith is universal and permanent. The theology of inculturation is not just for the Third World or for "mission lands"; it is equally applicable to the West and to any culture where evangelization has been underway for generations, even centuries. Inculturation is not just the concern of missionaries; it is part and parce1 of the dynamics of faith in every milieu. Moreover, because cultures are dynamic and ever-changing, the task of inculturation is never definitively consummated. It is illusory to believe that "there is such a thing as a 'Christian culture, ' that is to Say, a perfect equivalence between the Christian faith and a culture.'f280 Inculturation is not merely a matter of liturgical style; it colours al1 branches of theological endeavour and pastoral praxis, from the most particular and local situation to larger regional groupings.
280- Scheuer, 17. 137
4. Fra the point of view of the Church, inculturation
(and its siblings, evangelization and mission) must be regarded as a fully reciprocal and dialogical process. It should be quite clear from the foregoing that when the Church engages in its evangelizing mission with a given culture, both parties both give and receive something. The culture, while it receives the Good News, gives back to the Church the wealth of its arts, its customs, its wisdom. The Church is enriched by this cultural pluralism, and its apprehension of the shared mystery is deepened to the benefit of al1 the local churches. Thus, Crolliusr definition of inculturation, while it depends on the ground- breaking work of Arrupe, more adequately captures the reality of this process as an extended conversation, in which both interlocutors both speak and listen.
5. The process of inculturation necessarily implies ecumenicaï and interfaith dialogue. If inculturation is an honestly and fully dialogical process, it cannot ignore the religious dimension of extant cultures. Respectful conversation with other religious belief systems is incumbent upon the agents of inculturation at al1 levels, from the academy to the grass roots. This need for dialogue was urged most strongly by the Council in Lumen Gentium and
Nostra Aetate. It is stressed by numerous sources employed 138 here, especially Aylward Shorter. We would do well to be guided significantly, also, by David Tracy's proposa1 of an "analogical imagination," especially as he applies this to the question of interfaith dial~gue.'~'
6, The theology of inculturation is rooted in the logic of the Incarnation, but it must be directed toward the
Paschal Mystery. Through the ages Christian spirituality has held dear the mystical notion that, as the Word took flesh in Jesus, so the Incarnation in some sense continues through the residence of the Spirit in the faithful. This ongoing manifestation of the divine activity enters into the wide variety of lifestyles and cultures which comprise the human condition, But Shorter is surely correct in pointing out that this is not the end of the story, but its beginning. The Word and the Spirit are sent not only for identification with and compassion for humanity, but also for human betterment. While in process it follows the mode1 of the Incarnation, an authentically Christian inculturation holds out to humans and human culture a redemptive telos; it echoes the salvific message of the Cross and Resurrection,
7. A theology of inculturation must be attuned to the processes of cultural change; this means that it must
281 - The Analogical &agination, op. cit ,, and Dialogue wi th the Other: The Inter-Religious Dialogue (Grand Rapids : Eerdmans, 1990) . discerningly incorporate concerns for both adaptation and liberation. The Gospel message is both acceptance and challenge, companionship and purgation, Ethnographic approaches to inculturation, which stress cultural identity and continuity, must be complemented by approaches in which considerations of social justice figure pivotally. The perspective of the poor and oppressed must be central to the work of incult~ration.'~' The work of inculturation is the work of liberation, and vice versa.
8. A Roman Catholic theology of inculturation must, of course, be faithful to its own tradition; more specifidly, such a contemporary theology will see itself as responding to the directives of the Second Vatican Council to study, respect, and creatively adapt to diverse cultures and social circumstances. While the roots of the theology of inculturation go deep into the tradition, as we have seen, in a special way it responds to the pastoral mandate of the
Council, as expressed most clearly in Ad Gentes and Gaudium et Spes. Given this perspective, and the relative novelty of modern critical consciousness, the theology of inculturation has to be regarded as still in its historical
282. See, e.g., Lee Cormie, "The Hermeneutical Privilege of the Oppressed: Liberation Theologies, Biblical Faith, and Marxist Sociology of Knowledge," Proceedings of the Catholic ~heologicalSociety of America 33 (1978) 155-81. infancy .
9. Taken seriously, inculturation necessitates re- envisioning the Church as a multicultural conmunion of local churches. Obviously the local church figures very largely in the process of inculturation. In some cases local churches, indigenous pastoral agents and theologians are heard to cornplain that the work of inculturation is hamstrung by authoritarian, bureaucratic or centralizing tendencies at work in the hierarchy. The revision of the Churchrs translocal self-understanding has been underway since Vatican II or before. But the full implications of the principle of subsidiarity and of deliberate rnulticulturalism for Church structures and procedures are still unclear. Insofar as cultural pluralism might indicate changes in patterns of authority, these question remain largely unasked. With an attitude of ecclesia semper refomanda, we must continue to ask what needs to change in order for the Church to be truly "catholic," i.e., to respect and welcome cultural diversity.
10. Among Bevansf models of inculturation, this project is located within the %yntheticM model, but with a strong leaning also toward the "praxisM model. As has been indicated, this work is methodologically informed chiefly by Tracy, Shorter, and Schreiter. As a work of pastoral or practical theology, the project is undergirded by the conviction that the theology of inculturation is not merely theoretical or ideational, It must also be concrete, expressed in particular modes of praxis, e-g., small communities and catechesis. And the goal of praxis is always that of integral human liberation.
11. Schrei terfs Ynappingff technique provides one set of tools by which to evaluate the relative adequacy of any local or inculturated theology. Schreiterfs "map" of constructing local theology is the most complete picture of the process produced to date. If the process leading to a particular theology or praxis can be traced through al1 of the steps Schreiter outlines, it is more likely to be relatively adequate. Conversely, the omission or truncation of any step would indicate a negative judgment on the theology or praxis, In addition, Schreiterfs five criteria (coherence, worship, praxis, judgment of other churches, mission) provide further precision in judging the adequacy of a theology vis-a-vis the Christian tradition. Ideally, criteria for judging adequacy vis-a-vis the culture could also be outlined and utilized.
12. Starkloff s transposition of Geertz ' s approach to
"cultural systemsff provides another evaluative tool useful especially with regard to pastoral planning. As Schreiter rightly points out, theology is often an occasional enterprise, Thus, comprehensiveness is not necessarily a good to be sought in every situation, But theologizing can be proactive as wei.1 as reactive. Striving toward a broader view can be useful in sizing up a situation for purposes of pastoral planning. The Christian mission is to penetrate al1 aspects of a culture, As Starkloff demonstrates, examination of various cultural systems -- perhaps there are more than the four Geertz works out -- may highlight needs or reveal lacunae which can then be intentionally addressed through pastoral planning efforts. Current pastoral practice or planning may, for example, focus too narrowly on the religious systems within a culture, ignoring the challenge to evangelize art or comrnon sense. Attention to the interpenetration of cultural systems should foster more holistic and more successful pastoral planning, and thus a more deeply inculturated theology and praxis. CHAPTER 3. THE NATSONTAL PASTIORRL; PUW FOR HISPANIC MïNZ:SZRY
As we have seen, the dialogue between faith and culture is as old as Christianity itself. The terms of this interaction have existed al1 along, and it can be avoided by neither positivists of religion nor positivists of culture. Historical consciousness, however, and with it consciousness of cultural plurality, has flowered more fully in the modern era. The modern, scientific concept of culture has stimulated the unfolding of an appreciation that different peoples and groups view life and life's important questions in radically diverse ways. Thus, while it can trace the lineage of its fundamental issues as far back in time as one may go, the theology of inculturation is of comparatively recent origin. The sources we have employed in the preceding chapters demonstrate a contemporary search for greater clarity in the relatively uncharted territory of cultural diversity.
As awareness of the plurality of cultures and of the cultural conditioning of faith expressions grows, we can expect the theology of inculturation to continue to grow in 144 importance across al1 branches of the discipline. It will not be surprising if its influence is initially felt most profoundly in the area of pastoral praxis. Pastoral theologians have the task of reflecting upon and adjudicating many competing claims and aspects within
concrete pastoral situations, even though they often do so through diverging methods and procedures. Throughout the
Christian churches there is a growing awareness of the central place owed to cultural factors in pastoral rêflection and planning. Increasingly demands for
preaching, catechesis, styles of worship, other forms of pastoral ministry, and even ecclesial structures suited to the cultural ethos of a given people are being heard. It is admitted more readily today that inherited or customary
pastoral practice, even if of long duration and even if judged to be sound in one cultural context, may or may not be judged as adequate in another. A number of examples could be cited here by which we might see this glacial shift taking place within the Roman Catholic Church of the United States, This project focusses
on just one, the National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic
Ministry. The NPPHM reflects an attempt at an upper level of church leadership to corne to grips with the challenges and needs of a particular ethnic grouping within the panoply 145 of cultures which is the conternporary U.S.A. Evaluating how well it succeeds in that attempt, from the point of view of the theology of inculturation outlined above, is the goal of this study. Consequently, the task of this chapter is to contextualize the National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic
Ministry and grasp its major features. The first objective is to inquire into and in some way describe one of the cultural contexts toward which the plan is targeted, narnely, those Hispanics identified as Mexican Americans. This is approached in three steps. The first is a brief historical overview of the Mexican American people. This will be followed by a descriptive synopsis of the character and distinctive cultural traits and values of Mexican Americans, Closely linked to that description will be special attention paid to the characteristics of Mexican American popular religiosity. This leads to the third step, an examination of the pastoral situation of Mexican Americans in the US., calling attention to both the strengths and the current challenges. With this cultural and pastoral overview in hand, we can then proceed to take up the Plan itself. We look first at its history, the process out of which it was born and prornulgated. Then in sorne detail the document itself will 146 be examined. The strictly evaluative task, with regard to both the process and the proposals of the plan itself, is reserved to the following chapter.
3.a. The Wcan Americans
3.a.l. History: La Raza Ernerges
On a high hi11 overlooking downtown Mexico City stands an irnposing fortress dating from Spanish colonial days . Chapultepec Castle was the site of the final and most tragic engagement of the Mexican-American War. U.S. General Winfield Scott had already ravaged central Mexico and militarily brought Mexico to its knees. Nevertheless, Scott decided to break the armistice of 24 August 1847, when he suspected that the Mexicans were using the cease-fire to reinforce their positions. On 14 September U.S. forces were ordered up the steep slopes of the hi11 to capture the Mexican stronghold. Barricaded inside the thick walls were not regular Mexican forces, but military cadets, young men mostly in their teens. Although badly outnumbered, short of ammunition, and overwhelmed by superior firepower, the cadets by al1 accounts fought courageously to the last. As American troops breached the walls and stormed the fort, the surviving defenders are said to have jumped out of the castle's windows to their deaths on the rocks below rather than accept defeat and imprisonment by the invading enemy.
The blood of these nifios heroes makes Chapultepec one of Mexico's most revered patriotic shrines.' For Mexicans, and indeed for al1 Latin Americans,
Chapultepec endures as a symbol of resistance to Yankee imperialism. But, if Chapultepec stands as a reminder of one of Mexico's proudest and bravest moments, it is not far away from another site that was the scene of national humiliation. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the Mexican-American War, is named after the Mexico City suburb where it was signed on 2 February 1848. Under the terms of this treaty Mexico recognized the 1845 U.S. annexation of Texas, and it relinquished to the United States additional lands which now comprise the states of California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, and parts of
Colorado and Wyoming. The sum of the Mexican Cession was more than half of the territory which Mexico had claimed at the time of its independence from Spain in 1821. In return, the U.S. agreed to assume the claims of Americans against Mexico, and to pay Mexico a sum of money. To make matters worse, when the treaty came before the U.S. Senate for
1. Julian Samora and Patricia Vandel Simon, A History of the Mexican-American People, rev, ed. (Notre Dame: U. of Notre Dame Press, 1993), p. 97; also, Rodolfo AcuÏia, Occupied America: A History of Chicanos, 3rd ed. (N.Y.: Harper & Row, 1988), p. 18. ratification, that body unilaterally struck certain provisions from the agreement. Defeated, Mexico had little choice but to accept the terms dictated by its more powerful neighbour .' Guadalupe Hidalgo left a bitter legacy of hostility and suspicion in the relations between Mexico and the U.S. This was aggravated by the fact that sorne of the provisions of the treaty were not strictly adhered to by the United States. Most notorious in this regard was the matter of the property rights of people living in the ceded territory, rights which the U.S. had pledged to uphold- Original owners were often stripped of their lands as Mexican property laws and documentation were disregarded, or such owners found thernselves having to defend their claims in lengthy and costly litigation. In addition, despite treaty assurances, the civil rights of the former Mexicans and their descendants were often trampled, sornetimes through legal channels, other times through various methods of social pressure. Harassrnent of the practice of the Roman Catholic religion and imposition of the English language were not uncommon.3 But the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo had one other
2. Samora and Simon, p. 99; Acufia, pp. 19-20,
3. Samora and Simon, pp. 100-2. 149 important consequence: it granted US. citizenship to the former Mexican subjects. To be sure, this was for many decades thereaiter a second-class citizenship in which Mexicans, like other Hispanics and people of colour generally, have been effectively marginated from political and economic power. But henceforth the United States was to ber in fact if not yet in self-understanding, a partly Hispanic nation. Two great cultures intersected in what became the American Southwest. The progeny of their union is the Mexican American people. For their part, the Mexican Americans brought with them a rich and varied cultural history. Their very identity up to this time was the product of the often-violent collision of European and Mesoamerican cultures begun more than 300 years earlier. When Hernan Cortez overthrew the Aztec empire he brought with him not only deadly Old World diseases, new technologies, and drastically different social patterns, but an aggressive form of Christianity, Spanish Catholicism. While the native peoples were both practically and conceptually unprepared for this cultural encounter, the Spanish brought with them a ready-made distinction between barbarian and civilized peoples . They regarded the conquered peoples as of the former type and themselves as under a sacred obligation to spread civilization. This gave 150 the Spanish a religious rationale for consolidating their military conquests. In the Spanish view, the process of civilization consisted not so much in replacing existing, functioning cultural institutions, but in filling a perceived void. Thus, Spanish cultural assumptions were such that they expected the Indians to be passive, even grateful recipients of effective goverment, true religion, and European cultural refinements.' The introduction of Christianity among the native peoples of Mexico and the Southwest proceeded by various means. In sorne cases the Spaniards resorted to the application of military force and direct imposition of Spanish ways on the vanquished peoples. More often the indigenous peoples' first contacts with Christianity came about in one of two ways. The first was through the new econornic order fostered by the Spanish, centered in the colonial tom. Here the Indians were often recruited as labour for the agricultural estates and mines. Although never legally enslaved, native labour was often forced, conditions were harsh, and native people found themselves excluded from Spanish society as far as possible, In general, then, life in the colonial toms represented for
4 - Edward H. Spicer, Cycles of Conquest: The Impact of Spain, Mexico, and the United States on the Indians of the Southwest, 1533-1960 (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1962), pp. 281-2. 151 these peoples a drastic break with former cultural patterns and submission to domination by foreigners. At the same
the, however, the intermingling of races and cultures was
taking place largely between the Indians and the poorer class of Spanish immigrants.' The other avenue of cultural interaction was the mission community, and it presented a quite different social world for the native peoples. One must be very careful, of course, to avoid popular romanticization or exaggeration of the positive aspects of mission life. Conditions in the missions were often very harsh also, and white cruelty could be delivered through the hands of a Franciscan or Jesuit as well as through the mine owner or chief of the presidio.
The "reduction" of native people to the life of a compact village surrounding a church, under the autocratic rule of a missionary priest, represented a huge change in lifestyle for most of the native peoples. Still, the mission structure afforded some degree of protection from secular Spanish encroachment, and some measure of preservation of native identity and culture. Old ways were gradually modified in a communal setting. Cultural transfer took place under the coercion of mission discipline, to be sure, but also through preaching, catechesis, religious ritual,
5. Spicer, pp. 298-306. 152 and the economic benefits accruing to Spanish agricultural techniques, crafts, and trade. At their best, the mission communities provided a context for profound acculturation without obliterating native cultures altogether." The first Spanish missionary and colonizing efforts on the northern frontier of New Spain had begun before the close of the 16th century in the Rio Grande Valley- Never large in numbers, and only modestly successful in evangelizing the native peoples of the area, the colonial
communities of New Mexico persisted despite isolation and hardship. Mission communities in Texas were founded only in the last decade of the 17th century, and in upper California in the middie and latter 1700s. Among al1 these the
California communities founded by Junipero Serra (1713-1784) and other Franciscans became the most successful and economically prosperous. However, by the tirne of the Mexican-Arnerican War the entire mission system in the Southwest was in a state of serious decline. The
secularization of the missions in 1835 culminated a long period of isolation and neglect by both Spain and Mexico.' The Anglo invasion of the Southwest began early in the
6. Spicer, pp. 288-98-
7. Samora and Simon, pp, 50-7; also, Alfredo Mirandé, The Chicano Experience (Notre Dame: U. of Notre Dame Press, 1985), pp. 128-31. 19th century. A lucrative, if often illegal, trade was opened up over the Santa Fe Trail. Merchants were followed by settlers. Just as important as trade goods and hunger for land, the American merchants and settlers came armed with the aggressive ideology of "Manifest Destiny," a dream of extending U.S. territory from coast to coast. Stephen
Austin led his band of Missourians into Texas in 1821, opening twenty-five years of tumoil in that region. As events unfolded in Texas, New Mexico, and California, American subversion fueled unrest and conflict. Texas statehood and a minor border dispute were al1 it took to ignite a war that proved disastrous for Mexico. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo fulfilled the aspirations of American expansionism spectacularly.' The Anglo influx into the Southwest increased drarnatically after the American victory. It was motivated by the gold strike in California the same year as the treaty was signed, the discovery of other resources and, as always, the voracious appetite for land. That migration has continued more OP less unabated ever since. The levers of political and econornic power throughout the Southwest, as elsewhere, rernained almost exclusively in Anglo hands until the 1960s. Historically Mexicans have provided unskilled
8- Samora and Simon, pp. 69-97; Mirandé, pp- 131-7. 154 agricultural and industrial labour, receiving in return low wages, poor schools, inferior housing, and social exclusion. Their struggle for justice and self-determination forms one of the great American social narratives of the 20th century. ' What the treaty framers of 1848 likely did not foresee were the reciprocal ways in which American society would be profound;y influenced by the Mexican people remaining in the Southwest and their descendants. No doubt some Anglos expected them to simply go away or disappear into the American "melting pot" and become indistinguishable from others. But, to a rernarkable degree, through the ties of language, religion, and family, Mexican Americans have maintained their identity and culture over the succeeding fifteen decades. This perseverance is also due in no small part to the continuing migration of Mexicans and other Hispanics into the U.S. over these years. The Mexico-U.S. border has been and remains a porous frontier, despite the best efforts of the Border Patrol. Successive waves of immigrants, both legal and illegal, have crossed that border, joining family members on the other side and looking for refuge and economic opportunity. One such wave occurred during the
9. See, for example, Acufia, esp. pp. 307-62. 155 chaotic years of the Mexican Revolution, 1911-16. By one estimate, nearly ten percent of Mexico's population fled the country during those years of civil unrest . 'O Moreover, the large number of immigrants durinç those years was more than the economy of the Southwest could absorb. The result was that for the first time significant numbers of Mexican Americans began to move into other regions of the country, - - especially the large industrial cities of the North."
Tightening of immigration laws in the 1920s and the Great Depression of the 1930s slowed the tide for a time. But the labour shortages brought on by the Second World War
7 - lured another large wave of Mexicans across the border--- World War II had other important consequences for Mexican
Americans. For one thing, it accelerated the dispersa1 of
Mexican Americans throughout the country. More irnportantly, large numbers of Mexican Americans served with distinction in the armed forces, where they found a relative equality of treatment unknown in civilian life, They were exposed to educational, training and leadership opportunities from which they had largely been shut out previously- After the war, the "G.I. Bill of Rights" allowed them to enter
10. Samora and Simon, p. 130; they were relying upon Carey McWilliams, North from Mexico (Phila.: J. B. Lippincott, 1949), p. 163.
11. Samora and Simon, p. 132.
12. Samora and Simon, pp. 135-40. colleges and universities in unprecedented numbers." These experiences fueled postwar aspirations for equality and self-determination among Mexican Americans. Their struggle for identity and civil rights has been very public since the
196Os.l4
The Mexican American people of today are thus a product of a long, often conflictual, and still ongoing process of cultural contacts. Theologian Virgilio Elizondo has expounded the thesis that Mexican American identity can be understood prirnarily as the fruit of a double "mestizaje,"" a term which defies facile translation. It signifies the fact or condition of being a racial mixture or hybrid -- "the birth of a new people from two preexistent people~.""
13. Samora and Simon, pp. 155-6; also, Moises Sandoval, "Effects of World War II on the Hispanic People," in Moises Sandoval, ed-, Fronteras: A History of the Latin American Church in the USA sznce 1513 (San Antonio: Mexican American Cultural Center, 19831, pp. 341-76-
14. See David A, Badillo, "Latino/Hispanic History since 1965: The Collective Transformation of Regional Minorities," in Jay P- Dolan and A. F. Deck, eds -, Hispanic Catholic Culture in the CI. S. : Issues and Concerns (Notre Dame: U. of Notre Dame Press, 1994), pp- 50-76, esp. pp. 56-64.
15- V. Elizondo, Galilean Journey: The Mexican-American Promise (Maryknoll, N-Y,: Orbis, 1983), pp. 9-18. See also these works by the same author: Mestizaje: The Dialectic of Cultural Birth and the Gospel (San Antonio: Mexican American Cultural Center, 1978); "El mestizaje como lugar teol6gic0," in Francisco Moreno Rej&, ed., Teologia y Liberacion: Religion, cultura y ética (Lima, Perti: Instituto Bartolomé de Las Casas, 1991), pp- 13-41; The Future is Mestizo: Life where Cultures Meet (N-Y-: Crossroad, 1988); "Mestizaje as a Locus of Theological Reflection, " in A. F. Deck, ed., E'rontiers of ~ispanic Theology in the United States (Masyknoll, N. Y. : Orbis, 1992), pp. 104- 23.
16. Galilean Journey, p. 10, The first mestizaje is a reference to the melding of the
Spanish conquerors with the indigenous peoples of Mexico,
The symbolic midwife of the first mestizaje is La Morenita, the Brown Virgin of Guadalupe, whose significance we shall have cause to examine in greater depth shortly. The second mestizaje has been underway since the American defeat of
Mexico and occupation of the Southwest. Moreover, Elizondo claims that the Mexican Arnerican people have been the object of three evangelizations.' The first was by Iberian Catholicism, Secondly came the U.S.
Anglo Protestants and French, Irish, and German Catholics. More recently Mexican Americans are being evangelized by fundamentalists. 'Al1 three evangelizations have proceeded from a conquest paradigm,"'a says the author. All three tried to suppress or radically transform the culture of the people,
Since mestizo peoples tend historically to be disowned and excluded by both parent groups, Mexican Americans find themselves in a double bind, "doubly marginated and re j ected. Their history, culture, and language have
17. "Hispanic Theology and Popular Piety: From Interreligious Encounter to a New Ecumenisrn," CTSA Proceedings 48 (1993) 1-14.
18. "Hispanic Theology and Popular Piety," 6.
19- Galilean Journey, p- 20. diverged from that of old Mexico; they even find themselves the butt of derogatory terms when they visit that country. On the other hand, their skin colour, religion, and social status mean they are not accepted as "real" Americans
either. "Since the Anglos had a profound disdain for both everything Spanish and everything Indian," says Elizondo, "the Mestizo was looked upon as the mongrel who inherited
the worst of two already degenerate pe~ples."'~ Thus,
Mexican Americans have emerged as a unique ethnic entity, la
raza," as they refer to themselves. Accordingly, Elizondo and other contemporary spokespersons for Mexican Americans see their people's
history largely in terms of oppression and the str~gglefor liberation from domination? Elizondo summarizes this historical view:
As a people, we had been born as a result of the U.S. invasion and subsequent conquest of the great northern regions of Mexico from California to Texas. And before that our Mexican ancestors had been born out of the invasion and conquest of pre-Columbian Mexico. As the Spanish conquest of Mexico had tried to suppress everything native, so the Anglo conquest of northern
20. "Hispanie Theology and Popular Piety," 7.
21- See, e.g-, Andrés G. Guerrero, A Chicano Theology (Maryknoll, N.Y. : O~bis,l987), esp. pp. 128-37.
22. GaZilean Journey, pp. 23-7; also, ~hristianityand Culture: An Introduction to Pastoral Theology and Ministry for the Bicultural Community (San Antonio: Mexican American Cultural Center, 1975), pp. 129-53. This is also the perspective of R- Acufia8s Occupied America, op. cit. Mexico had tried to suppress and destroy everything Mexican. We could Say that in recent historical times, we had been twice conquered, twice victimized, and twice mesticized. Through each conquest, the native soi1 with its culture and inhabitants had been deeply penetrated but not destroyed, The conquerors had tried to destroy the natives, but in time they would be absorbed and conquered by the product of their own unsuspected creation ." However, Elizondo refuses to see this history in merely
tragic or fatalistic terms, For him the mestizo identity of the Mexican American people is both a source of richness and "prophetic mission. "" Indeed, Elizondo thinks that his people are uniquely poised to point the way toward a multicultural future, and to become active agents of evangelization in the modern world-
3.a.2. Religion: Institutional and Popular
Most Mexican Americans, like most other Hispanics, are affiliated in some way with the Roman Catholic Church, The roots of this adberence run deep historically and culturally. The lively and profound faith which so often characterizes Mexican Americans bespeaks a long and, in rnany ways, successful process of inculturation, One can observe this in liturgical celebrations, in the fiesta of Our Lady
-- -
23. The Future is Mestizo, p. 39f.
24. Galilean Journey, pp. 107-11; The Future is Mèstizo, pp. 87- of Guadalupe, and in the popular religiosity whose evidences are ubiquitous in everyday life. However, at the same time, the story of Mexican American Catholicism is to a great extent a narrative of official neglect and discrimination. The penetration of Catholicism within the aboriginal populations varied considerably among tribal groups.'5 Clergy, never numerous in the Southwest, became even scarcer
after the suppression of the Jesuits in 1767 and the
secularization of the missions in 1835. Mexican
independence followed by the conquest of 1848 completely ruptured what remained of the original alliance between Cross and Crown. Henceforth Catholicism was a minority religion associated with an ethnic group regarded by the
dominant "Anglo" Society as inf erior and backward. Moreover, U.S. Catholicism has been very slow in building structural bridges to the Hispanic p~pulation.-~
Until about 1970, despite ever greater numbers, Mexican
25. The various syncretisms which resulted from the contact of Catholicism with different tribes form a fascinating study in inculturation. See Spicer, pp. 502-16. For description and analysis of the contemporary situations among native peoples, see the works of Car1 F. Starkloff, esp.: 'Religious Renewal in Native North America: The Contemporary Cal1 to Mission," Missiology 13:l (Jan. 1985) 81-101; "New Tribal Religious Movements in North America: A Contemporary Theological Horizon," Toronto Journal of Theology 2:2 (Fa11 1986) 157-71; "A Dif ferent Gospel? Evangelization among 'The People,' " The Way 34 :4 (Oct. 1994) 293-303.
26. See, e. g, , Isidro Lucas, The Browning of America: The Hispanic Revolution in the American Church (Chicago: Fides/Claretian, 1981); chap. 3, 'A Church That 1s Not There," pp. 37-54. Arnericans were nearly voiceless in their Church at al1 levels, One historian, Moises Sandoval, put the situation this way: Although in absolute numbers the Hispanic population increased in the last half of the nineteenth century, it had declined steadily as a proportion of the total population throughout the Southwest. This trend lent authority to the hypothesis that the Hispanic, like the Indian, was destined to disappear. The Church, accepting that view, acted accordingly. It gave first priority to the Anglo American and to the immigrants f rom Europe ." Both the financial and the human resources of the Church were withheld from Hispanics well into the middle of this century, and even today this grievance has by no means been entirely redressed,
Theologian Allan Figueroa Deck calls attention to the fact that other ecclesial supports have also been missing. Immigrants from Europe arriving in America generally found enclaves of their compatriots assisted by parishes designed
for them and serving thern in their native language. These national parishes, often accompanied by parochial schools, played a huge role in the acculturation of the new arrivals
to US. society through the vast array of religious and social services they provided. Hispanics , however, Who are often not even immigrants but long-time residents of U.S.
27. On the Move: A History of the ~ispanicChurch in the United States (Maryknoll, N-Y.: Orbis, 1990), p. 41. soil, have generally not been given such national parishes of their own? Deck asserts that this remains the case today, even though the 1983 Code of Canon Law makes the erection of such parishes easier than ever by conferring upon local bishops an authority for them that previously resided in Rome. Of the importance of such communities, the author states: The lack of juridically sanctioned Hispanic parishes with strong pastors identified with their people is perhaps the single greatest reason for the ineffectiveness of Our outreach to Hispanics.-'- c In addition, Deck debunks the daim that Hispanics are under-served because they were the first to arrive without their own native clergy. Italians, too, says the author, arrived without clergy in the beginning, yet their clout in Rome was sufficient to effect change in that situation." Sandoval, however, detects the beginnings of a new awareness around the turn of the century." Some pastoral efforts among Mexican Americans began to be undertaken,
28. A. F. Deck, The Second Wave: Hispanic Ministry and the Evangelization of Cultures (N-Y,: Paulist, 1989), pp. 58-9; also A- F. Deck, "At the Crossroads: North American and Hispanic," in Roberto S. Goizueta, ed,, We Are a People! Initiatives in Hispanic American Theology (Minneapolis: Fortxess, 1992), pp. 12-4.
29. Deck, "At the Crossroads," p. 13.
30- Deck, 'At the Crossroads," p. 9.
31. On the Move, p. 41- On the early 20th-century history of Mexican Americans' relationship with the Catholic Church, see Jay P. Dolan and Gilberto M. Hinojosa, eds., Mexican Americans and the Catholic Church: 1900-1965 (Notre Dame: U- of Notre Dame Press, 1994) . 163 especially in Texas, where they were often initiated by communities of women religious. More predominantly Hispanic dioceses were erected, including Corpus Christi (19121, El
Paso ( NU), and Amarillo (1927), and San Antonio was raised to an archdiocese (1928)- A trickle of Hispanic clergy and religious began to appear. Mornentum for more profound changes in Church attitudes
and practice was set in motion in the war year of 1944.
Archbishop Robert Lucey of San Antonio convoked a seminar for the Spanish-speaking which drew some fifty delegates from several western and southwestern dioceses, Later in
the same year a second seminar was held in Denver. At these meetings the Churchrs work with Hispanics received serious and sustained reflection for the first tirne." One of the results was that many of the dioceses of the region began to set up Catholic Councils for the Spanish-speaking. The purpose of these bodies was partly spiritual in nature, addressing the urgent catechetical needs of Hispanics. But the councils also undertook to address corporal needs by sponsoring clinics and housing, and special services for migrant workers. Long-term goals to improve educational and economic opportunities and eliminate barriers of
32. Sandoval, On the Move, p- 46f. ; also, Sandoval, "Church Structures for the Hispanics," in Fronteras, op. cit., p. 413. discrimination were adopted as well. This led to the Churchrs increasingly activist stance with regard to efforts to end violence against Hispanics, attempts to organize farmworkers and other labourers, and in the civil rightsf struggles commencing in the 1950s and '60s. The annual
Campaign for Human Development collection, begun in 1969, for example, has become an important source of funding for Mexican American self-help groups Iike the Industrial Areas
Foundation. 33 Gradually councils for the Spanish-speaking began to appear in other parts of the country where Hispanics concentrated. The Second Vatican Council gave a great boost to local efforts and to a broader change of consciousness.
The postconciliar years also saw the formation of PADRES, an organization of Hispanic ciergy, and Las Hemzanas, Hispanic wornen religious, both of which played strong advocacy roles for their people. Increasingly, also, pastoral endeavours were corning to be organized and coordinated on regional and national levels. The Midwest Hispanic Catholic Commission, for example, which serves Hispanics in eight states from
South Bend, Indiana, dates from 1965. 34 Seven such regional of fices exist today.
-- --
33. Acufia, pp. 430-7.
34. Sandoval, "Church Structures.,.," p. 420. 165 The rnost influential of the regional offices, however, has been and continues to be the Mexican American Cultural
Center (MACC), founded in 1971 in San Antonio under the able leadership of Father Virgilio Eliz~ndo.'~ MACC has becorne well-known as a center not only of language studies but of liturgical, pastoral, and theological inculturation. It owes much of its vitality and financial viability to Patricio Flores. Floresf ordination as the first Hispanic bishop in the U.S. in 1970 was an event of considerable symbolic weight for Hispanics and especially for Mexican Americans. Himself a child of an impoverished south Texas family, Flores became known as a defender of the poor, including the undocumented. He was named archbishop of San Antonio in 1979, a positicln he holds to this day. Hispanic concerns have gradually found a place within the national bureaucracy of the Church as well. The 1944 seminar in San Antonio had resulted in a regional standing bishops' committee for the Spanish-speaking. Assuming national responsibility in 1964, it was finally placed under Hispanic leadership in 1967. The office moved to Washington in 1971 in the reorganization of the United States Catholic Conference. In 1974 its status was elevated to secretariat, the highest departmental rank. The Secretariat for Hispanic
35. Sandoval, 'Church Structures..,,'' pp. 431-4, 166
Affairs played a key role in the evolution of the National
Pastoral Plan for Hispanic Ministry, as we shall see, and it
continues today in a critical advisory role to the
bishops .j6 Despite the progress made in recent decades, however,
Hispanics continue to be seriously under-represented in
Church decision-making. By the early 1990s Hispanics
comprised more than one third of the total U-S. Catholic
population. However, out of a total of 402 Catholic bishops
in the U.S., only 20 (5%) were Hispanic in 1993.3- Fewer than five percent of U.S. Catholic priests are Hispanic?
Contrast these figures with those for Catholics of Irish
descent, who make up approximately 17% of the U.S. Church
but nearly half of the hierarchy and more than one third of
the clergy. 39
36. Sandoval, On the Move, p. 71, and "Church Structures. .*, " pp. 426-8. On the development of Hispanic ministry in the U.S., see also Maria Teresa Gaston Witchger, "Recent History of Hispanic Ministry in the United States," in Maria Soledad Galerh et al-, eds., Prophetic Vision: Pastoral Reflections on the National Pastoral Plan for ~ispanic Ministry (Kansas City: Sheed & Ward, 1992), pp. 183-99.
37. Gilbert R. Cadena, "Religious Ethnic Identity: A Socio- Religious Portrait of Latinas and Latinos in the Catholic Church," in Anthony M. Stevens-Arroyo and Gilbert R. Cadena, eds,, Old Masks, New Faces: Religion and Latino den titi es (N.Y.: Sildner Center for Western Hemisphere Studies, 1995), p. 37.
38. Cadena, p. 37.
39. Ibid. Although institutional arrangements do shape people's lives in important ways, the religious life of people is of course lived out essentially in everyday life. The characteristics of popular piety and religious practice give us perhaps our most indispensable information regarding the cultural ethos of a people. Mexican Americans, and Hispanics generally, have traditionally enjoyed a colourful and richly diverse faith at the levels of the local community, the family, and the individual. We turn now to an examination of that popular religiosity. Presiding over this entire realrn stands the serene Virgin of Guadalupe, patroness of Mexico. It would be difficult to overestimate the cultural significance of Guadalupe. 'One cannot know, understand, or appreciate the Mexican people without a deep appreciation of Guadalupe."'"
In south Texas and the barrios of Los Angeles her image is nearly as ubiquitous as in Mexico City; she adorns churches, homes, roadsides, workplaces, busses. She has been invoked in moments of national calamity, in the Mexican War of Independence, in the Mexican Revolution, and in Cesar Chavez' struggle to organize the farm workers of the Southwest. Her feastday, 12 December, stands at the head of
40- V- Elizondo, The Future 1s Mestizo, p. 59. Allan Deck agrees: "The Guadalupe experience is central to any understanding of Mexican Catholicism today." [The Second Wave, p- 37.1 168 the pspular religious calendar and is celebrated with grand processions and fiestas. The shrine of Guadalupe on the outskirts of Mexico City draws throngs of pilgrims every day, and seldom fails to impress visitors. The story of Guadalupe does not require a detailed recounting here." Central to that narrative is the apparition of Mary, the rnother of Jesus, to a poor young indio, Juan Diego, in the year 1531 -- just ten years after Cortez had forcibly subdued the Aztec empire. But this was no ordinary, European-looking Virgin Mary. The Virgin of
Guadalupe was not Spanish but morena, brown-skinned, and she spoke Nahuatl, the native language. She appeared on the hi11 of Tepeyac, an ancient site of pilgrimage and sacrifice to the Aztec mother-goddess, Tonantzin.'' She left behind, on Juan Diego's tilma (cloak), her exquisitely beautiful and highly symbolic image. Each element of this icon, still revered at Guadalupe today, contains particular significance
41. The focus of the present study is the rnythic power of the Guadalupe cycle in the life of the Mexican American people. The historical basis of Guadalupe is another matter, and it is the subject of some scholarly dispute, For a review of the documentary sources of the Guadalupe narrative, see Jeanette Rodriguez, Our Lady of Guadalupe: E'ai th and Rnpowelment among Mexican -American Women (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1994), pp. 16-9.
42. V. Elizondo, La Morenita: Evangelizer of the Americas (San Antonio: Mexican Arnerican Cultural Center, 1980), pp. 72-3. in Aztec mythology and culture.'' In the figure of the Lady many elements of indigenous culture were caught up, affirmed, and transformed with Christian meaning. But, as Elizondo says, "The real miracle [of Guadalupe] was not the apparition but what happened to the defeated
Indian," 4' The indigenous people of central Mexico had seen their magnificent, ancient civilization abruptly destroyed by the Spaniards. They had been robbed of their lands and subjugated to Spanish taskmasters. Although their cult had been violently suppressed, evangelization of the conquered people had not met with much success in those first twelve years of intercultural conta~t.'~ In contrast, it is estimated that in the six years following the events at Tepeyac, there were nine million converts among the native peoples of Mexico, and this despite considerable official Church opposition to the spread of the devotion. For Elizondo, the Guadalupe legend represents nothing less than the "resurrection" of an enslaved and dying people. He
43. For a detailed explanation of the symbolic meanings at work within each aspect of the icon and drama of Guadalupe, see V. Elizondo, La Morenita, pp. 83-92.
44. Galilean Journey, p. 11.
45. La Morenita, pp. 47-56.
46, La Morenita, p- 97, citing Joseph Cassidy, Mexico: Land of Mary's Wonders (Patterson, N. J. : St- Anthony's Guild, 1958), p. 20- In Galilean Journey, p. 45, Elizondo gives an estimate of eight million in the first seven years. says : Guadalupe is not just an apparition, but a major intervention of Godrs liberating power in history." The power of hope offered by the drama of Guadalupe came from the fact that the unexpected good news of God's presence was offered to al1 by someone from whom nothing special was expected: the conquered Indian, the lowest of the low?
Moreover, La Virgencita provides the very identity of a new, mestizo people. "Were it not for Our Lady of Guadalupe," the author says, "there would be no Mexican and no Mexican- Arnerican people t~day."~' Explaining the enormously powerful impact of the Lady of Tepeyac upon the psyche and spirits of the native people, Elizondo concludes, '[Guadalupe] is the first real anthropological translation and proclamation of the gospel to the people of the
Americas ."'O In sum, for Elizondo and doubtless for many others, Guadalupe has been nothing less than the very engine of inculturation fox Mexican and Mexican American Catholicism. Of course, Elizondo's enthusiasm for the cult of
47. The Future Is Mestizo, p. 59.
48. Galilean Journey, p- 12-
49. The Future Is Mestizo, p. 59.
50. The Future Is Mestizo, p. 60. For more of Elizondo's reflections on Guadalupe, see La Morenita, esp. pp. 101-20; also his recent work, Guadalupe: Mother of the New Creation (Maryknoll, N. Y. : Orbis, 1997) . 171 Guadalupe is not universally shared. In a recent article, for example, Christine Way Skinner affirms the liberating potential of Guadalupe, but she does see Guadalupe as "ambiguous . Skinner points out that Mexican society continues to endure enormous cleavages between rich and poor, criollo (white) and indio, men and women. In each case Guadalupe has at times been enlisted to reinforce a passive, even fatalistic stance not supportive of active struggle to eradicate injustice. A recent study of the relationship of Mexican American women to the myth of
Guadalupe by theologian Jeanette Rodriguez confirms this ambivalent view. Rodriguez concluded that among Mexican American women Guadalupe functions as a powerful symbol of identity, of unconditional, nurturing divine love, and of - - the ferninine, materna1 aspects of the divine itself .'- While aàmitting that the popular cult of the Virgin has contributed to keeping women in a subservient role, the author also concluded that as such women become more fully acquainted with the entire narrative and symbolism of Guadalupe, its liberatory and empowering aspects corne more
51. "The Phenornenon of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico," Mission 2:l (1995) 95-143, esp. 127-39.
52. Rodriguez, pp, 143-58. to the fore for them."-. Although the 12th of December has undisputed primacy, the Mexican American calendar of popular religion is punctuated by other feasts, too. Advent often includes the celebration of Las Posadas, the nine days bef ore Christmas when various festivities are held in honcar of the nine months Mary carried Jesus in the wornb. The statues of Mary, Joseph, and the donkey are carried from house to house seeking shelter. When they are finally admitted, a great party is held, which usually includes pifiatas. Blindfolded participants, usually children, strike at the pifiata with a stick and try to break it open, spilling candy and gifts.
Las Posadas climaxes with Nochebuena, the traditional Midnight Mass of Christmas, which is followed by a late- night fiesta. ''
One of the principal days of the calendar is Miércoles de ceniza, Ash Wednesday, the first day of Lent . Churches expect huge crowds on this day as people corne to be marked with the sign of the ashes, usually made from the burning of the palms from the previous year's Palm Sunday, For many
53. Rodriguez, pp. 159-65. For a creative re-interpretation of Guadalupe from a liberationist perspective, see also Guerrero, A Chicano Theology, pp. 96-117 and 138-48-
54. V. Elizondo, Christianity and Culture, pp. 183-5; also, Galilean Journey, pp . 34-8. 173 Mexican Americans, reception of the ashes is regarded as more important than regular attendance at Mass or reception of the Eucharist. The tangibility of this sacramental, its connection with the land, and its humble, penitential spirit hold deep appeal and express powerfully the relationship - - with God.'" Holy Week is both a solemn and a colourful tinte in Mexican American communities. The week begins with Palm Sunday, often marked with long processions accompanied by mariachis. Holy Thursday services frequently end with yet
another procession, this one marking the journey to
Gethsemane, and this is followed for many by a "holy hour" of silent devotion. Good Friday, however, is the high point of the week. Non-Hispanics may be startled by the vividness
and emotionalism with which the crucifixion and death of
Jesus are recalled. The Via Dolorosa is often quite literally reenacted. In sorne places the traditional Good
Friday services are followed later in the day by El Pésame a
la Virgen, the accompaniment of the Blessed Mother in her
sorrow, and the servicio del santo entierro, the remembrance of the burial of Jesus. In Mexico and the Southwest it is not uncommon to also find within churches a shrine to the
55- V. Elizondo, Christianity and Culture, pp. 185f.; Galilean Journey, pp. 32-4; also, C. Gilbert Romero, Hispanic Devotional Piety: Tracing the Biblical Roots (Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1991), pp. 57-70. dead Christ. This fascination with death can also be observed at funerals and on El Dia de los Muertos, Al1 Souls' Day (2 November) .'" Arnong the special moments of family life, three stand out as the object of special veneration among Mexican Americans. One is the celebration of the baptism of an infant. A peculiarly Hispanic aspect of this celebration is the importance ascribed to the relationship between the godparents (los padrinos) and the child, and between the godparents and the parents. This bond, called compadrazgo, is taken with the utmost seriousness. Another important day is the child's First Communion. Even very poor families outfit their youngsters in fine clothing, white shirt and tie for the boys, frilly white dress for the girls. A third sacred event is the quinceabera, the celebration of a girlfs fifteenth birthday. This rite of passage generally includes attendance at Mass and the renewal of baptismal promises.
Al1 of these moments are marked by great fiestas according - - to, or even beyond, the family's econornic means.' Piety also features significantly in Mexican American home and family life. Commonly, houses are richly decorated
56. V, Elizondo, Christianity and Culture, pp. 186-9; Galilean Journey, pp. 41-3,
57. V. Elizondo, Christianity and Culture, pp. l9Of .; re: the quinceafiera, see also Romero, pp- 71-82. 175 with the distinctive, vivid style of Hispanic iconography.
Many households contain an altarcito, or home altar. In a noo k or corner of a main room, a statue of Mary or Jesus is prominently displayed, often accompanied by statues or pictures of other saints or loved ones, and further adorned with flowers, candles, or other decorations. The altar is the site of family rosary or other ritual devotions, especially prayers of petition and thanksgiving. A small, sacred space in the midst of the bustle of family life, the altar symbolizes the divine presence in the home.jd A final aspect of Mexican Arnerican popular religiosity to be mentioned here is the various spiritual associations and apostolic movements which have crossed the religious landscape, Historically Latin American Catholicism has been marked by a large number of lay religious confraternities, e-g., nocturnal adoration societies and Guadalupana associations, Since Vatican II these traditional cofradias have been joined by several new mass movements, Generally lay-led, these movernents and associations often attract large numbers of Hispanics with their highly affective and strongly cornnuna1 spiritualities . Three such postconciliar movements are worth special mention. One that has had enormous influence among
58, Romero, pp. 83-97. 176 Hispanics generally, and also among English-speakers, is the
Cursillo de Cristiandad, introduced £rom Spain in the 1960s.
This "short course in Christianity" consists of an intensive weekend retreat and is geared toward conversion of the individual toward greater closeness with Christ and more generous service in the Church. "Unabashedly affective"" in character, the Cursillo continues to exercise a profound influence on many individuals, especially in virtue of its emphasis on lay leadership and faith witnesseiO
A second important movement among Mexican Arnericans is the charismatic renewal, Strongly biblical and christocentric, the renewal also emphasizes lay witness and belief in the miraculous power of the Holy Spirit both in the meeting and in everyday life. Deck explains its striking popularity among Mexican Americans in two ways. For one thing, he says, "The Hispanic people find [the charismatic renewalrs] warmth and conviviality familiar -- familiar to the popular religion they have left behind in
Mexico ."61 Secondly, the author believes this movement, like the Cursillo and like the fundamentalist sects which have been growing rapidly among Hispanics, supplies an
59. The Second Wave, p. 68.
60. The Second Wave, pp. 67-9; Sandoval, On the Move, pp. 84-5.
6 The Second Wave, p. 69. 177 important sense of communal belonging, 'the possibility of finding real fellowship. "°' A third movement which has steadily gained in popularity and importance is the development of basic ecclesial communities (BECS). BECs were being formed in
Brazil in the 1960s and soon thereafter in much of Latin
America, including the US. Southwest, Affirmed by Paul VI in Evangelii Nuntiandi in 1975 and by the bishops of Latin
America gathered at Puebla in 1979, the BECs began to receive official encouragement in the U.S. as well in the mid-1980s. Deck reports that there has been 'a general conviction that the effective pastoral service of Hispanics must give priority to whatever process leads to the creation of viable small communities e"63 Srnall communities have grown rapidly among Hispanics in the U.S. as well, although they generally have not enjoyed the same level of official encouragement that they have received in Latin America." There is no doubt that these and other movements continue to play a crucially important role in the faith life of very many Roman Catholic Hispanics. Allan Figueroa
Deck even says of their importance, "These movements have at
62. The Second Wave, p. 70.
63, The Second Wave, p. 71.
64, Sandoval, On the Move, pp. 86-7. times rivaled the parish as the basic unit or organizational
force among Hispanic peoples in Mexico and the United States,"65 The mvements have not only nourished the faith life of Hispanic Catholics, they have also served as crucial "schools of leadership," Le., settings in which lay Hispanic leaders are recruited, trained, and given responsibility.'' However, the movements have often been given an ambivalent reception by the institution. This may be due in part to the strong cornmitment to the parish which has marked the U.S. Catholic Church throughout its history. The parish structure, whatever its strengths, is not easily reconciled with the activities and interests of the free-standing movements. But, no doubt, the ambivalence is also due in
part to cultural and linguistic prejudices. Bryan O. Walsh, one-time episcopal vicar for the Spanish-speaking, commented on the relationship of the movements to the official Church:
Many of the difficulties but not al1 can be traced to what 1 would cal1 a reluctant acceptance by the Church of cultural and language differences as a necessary evil during a limited period of adaptation."
65. The Second Wave, p. 63.
66. Edmundo Rodriguez, "The Hispanic Community and Church Movements: Schools of Leadership," in Dolan and Deck, eds., Hispanic Catholic Culture in the U.S., pp. 206-39.
67. Quoted by an do val, On the Move, p- 87. Popular religion bas innumerable intricacies and subtleties, and so interpreting it in any given context is always a delicate task. Much of the current discussion about this cornplex subject lies beyond the horizon of the present project, In the preceding paragraphs 1 have followed the lead of Elizondo, Deck and others who approach the matter with a fundamentally sympathetic attitude- In this view the elements of popular religiosity are seen as expressing both group identity and, at times, protest or resistan~e.'~ Ricardo Ramirez, a Basiiian priest, now bishop of Las Cruces, New Mexico, summarizes this perspective. Ramirez admits that popular religion can produce ...fatalism whereby a person feels helpless in view of forces that control bis life.,.. Popular religion can be utilized to keep a people dom. Oppression can set in by making of religion a slave, a pacifier - The oppressed peoples can be convinced that God wills that they remain as they are .69 However, the author continues by identifying the positive aspects of popular religion as these: Popular religion provides answers and gives meaning to the gaps in human questioning .... Popular religion aids
68, See, inter alia, V. Elizondo, "Popular Religion as Support of Identity: A Pastoral-Psychological Case-Study Based on the Mexican American Experience in the USA," in Norbert Greinacher and Norbert Mette, eds., Popular ~eligion(Concilium, vol. 186; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1986), pp- 36-43,
69- Fiesta, Worship and F'amily (San Antonio: Mexican American Cultural Center, 1981), p. 25. in the search for self-identity .... Popular religion can be a sign of resistance; it can be a political and social protest against the status quo .... For the people themselves popular religiosity can mean both a search for the true God and integral liberation and hope that their aspirations can and will be fulfilled?
Thus, popular religion is neither to be dismissed nor to be accepted uncricically. In every case a theological evaluation of popular religiosity is only possible once its function in the life of a people is thoroughly studied and unders tood . Deck emphasizes that the data of popular religion and culture are one of the two essential points of departure for any discussion of evangelization or pastoral planning for
70. Fiesta, Worship and Family, p. 26. The complex vitality of popular religion is finally begiming to receive the serious attention it deserves from the academy. In addition to the resources already mentioned, my perspective on popular religion has been influenced by the works of Orlando O. Espin, especially these articles: "Popular Catholicism among Latinos, '' in Dolan and Deck, eds., Hispanic Catholic Culture in the U.S., pp. 308-59; "Popular Religion as an Epistemology (of Suffering) ," Journal of Ifispanic/Latino Theology 2: 2 (Nov- 1994) 55- 78; "Pentecostalism and Popular Catholicism: The Poor and Traditio," Journal of Hispanic/Latino Theology 3 :2 (Nov. 1995) 14-43; "Tradition and Popular Religion: An Understanding of the Sensus Fidelium," in A. F. Deck, ed., Frontiers of Hispanic Theology in the United States (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1992), pp. 62-87. See also Michael R. Candelaria, Popul ar Religion and Libera tion: The Dilemma of Libera tion Theology (Albany: SUNY Press, 1990); Diego Irarrazaval, "Catolicismo popular en la teologia de la liberacion," in V. Elizondo et al., Teologia y Liberacion: Religion, Cultura y Ética (Lima: Institut0 Bartolomé de las Casas, 1991), pp. 71-105; Arturo Pérez, Popular Catholicism: A Hispanic Perspective (Washington: Pastoral Press, 1988 ) ; Segundo Galilea, Religiosidad Popular y Pastoral Hispano-Amerzcana (N.Y.: Northeast Catholic Pastoral Center for Hispanics, 1981); S. Galilea, "The Theology of Liberation and the Place of 'Folk Religion,'" in Mircea Eliade and David Tracy, eds., What Is ~eligion?An ~nquiryfor Christian Theology (N.Y. : Seabury, 1980), pp. 40-45; Enrique Dussel, "Popular Religion as Oppression and Liberation: Hypotheses on Its Past and Present in Latin America," in Greinacher and Mette, pp. 82-94. Mexican Americans." The second is the larger socio- cultural situation in which Mexican Americans find themselves, Le., the mostly urban and culturally Anglo environment of the U.S. We shall turn to the second shortly.
The foregoing sketch suggests a few summarizing remarks about the Mexican American religious situation in relation to pastoral planning efforts. The religiosity native to Mexican Americans can be characterized as vivid, intensely affective, spontaneous, extroverted, and demonstrative, It places a high value on the tangible, e.g., sacramentals, iconography, and shrines. It is thus a deeply Catholic spirituality, insofar as it affirms the created order and enfleshes the sacramental principle. It is integrally rooted in the rhythm of family and home* It is strongly communal and participative in style, as one sees in the numerous processions, fiestas, and movements. At the end of the day, however, the relationship of Mexican American popular religiosity to ecclesial structures is equivocal. On the one hand, Mexican Americans are surprisingly loyal to a Roman Catholic identity, especially
71. The Second Wave, p. 117. 182 when one considers the long history of officia1 bias and indifference. On the other hand, rnuch of Mexican American popular religion often displays only a tenuous connection to the institution. The rnovements and devotions, for example, often tend to operate parallel to, outside of, or even in opposition to the parish, The image of Guadalupe captures much of the paradox which runs through Mexican American popular religion. Once rejected by the colonial Church, she now adorns most Mexican American churches. Later identified as the Mother of the Saviour, her cult has been officially embraced. But, for al1 that, she remains a curiously non- Roman, extra-hierarchical figure, at once affirming gift and prophetic challenge to the Church. Thus, pastoral planning for Mexican American Catholics will have to deal with the contours of popular religion in ways that both affirn cultural identity and, at times, reinterpret or reshape that spirituality in the direction of liberation, Moreover, such planning will labour under the additional burden of having to overcome a history which has wrought many points of divergence and suspicion between the
"off icial" and the "popular ." The prospects for bridging that gap would appear to be uncertain, at best."
72. Robert E. Wright, 'If ItOs Official, It Can* t Be Popular? Reflections on Popular and Folk Religion, " Journal of HispanidLatino Theology 1:3 (May 1994) 47-67. 3.a.3. Cultural Values
Both in its institutional affiliation and especially in its many popular manifestations, religion plays a tremendously important role in the life and culture of
Mexican Americans. One cannot neatly separate the religious dimension from al1 other dimensions of Mexican American culture, for religious values suffuse these aspects of life as well. One can attempt, however, to identify and describe some of the other cultural values which characterize Mexican Americans, even as these values may be closely allied with the religious ones we have already explored.
La familia. Mexican Americans are a strongly family- oriented people. Family life provides not only the structures for meeting physical needs, but nurturance, convivial socialization, and faith formation. Many pastoral ministers comment upon the centrality of family in Mexican American group identity, and upon the cohesiveness and durability of that family7bven in the face of sometimes extremely difficult social and/or economic conditions in the
US. 1 myself have witnessed the remarkable warmth of the
73, Rdrez, pp. 39-40; Elizondo, Christianity and Culture, pp. 158-64; Mario J. Paredes, ed., The Hispanic Community, the Chuxch and the Northeast Center for Hispanics (N.Y.: Northeast Catholic Pastoral Center for Hispanics, 1982), p. 17. 184 Mexican American family and the tenacious loyalty to family by Mexican Americans on many occasions. According to Elizondo, the Mexican American emphasis on
family is closely linked with the value of hospitality."
Visitors, both kin and friends, are frequent in the home, and their needs are given a high priority. The tradition of
hospitality helps to explain the fact that many Mexican American households shelter a large number of people, often including recent arrivals from Mexico. Moreover, although the nuclear family is the standard among Mexican Americans, they also retain a strong identification with the extended family. Both family loyalty and the habit of hospitality forbid turning immigrants away, however inconvenient or unexpected their presence may be. Elizondo notes that in this extended farnily structure particular respect is given
to the ancianos (the elderly), especiaEy the abuelitos (grandparents), who play a vital role in the bearing and transmission of tradition and culture. Typically, one might even Say ideally, members of the extended family live in geographic proximity to one another in the same barrio." Loyalty to the family is closely allied with the
Mexican American sense of el honor. It is not too strong,
74. Christianity and Culture, p. 159; Ramirez, p. 20.
75, Christianity and Culture, pp. 158-64. 185
claims Ricardo Ramirez, to say that for Mexican Americans 'an individual exists for the family, for its name and honor."'"ear of the consequences of tarnishing the family -- name plays a role in maintaining faniily unity, ' Interestingly, however, neither Elizondo nor Ramirez
makes mention of machisrno as a cultural trait of Mexican
Americans. The typecast aggressive, dominating Latino male has been extensively portrayed in the mainstream Anglo media. One Hispanic sociologist claims that machismo has been the object of very serious distortion both in the media and even in the treatment accorded it in most social scientific literature. This source admits that the Chicano family, like the family in most cultural groups, is male- dominated, But he rebuts the belief that the Hispanic self- understanding of machismo is necessarily pathological or violent. Indeed, he claims, the woman is typically accorded a distinct, elevated dignity in the family. On this view, the chivalrous macho as titular head bears and defends the whole family's identity and honour. In so doing he even serves to combat the assirnilative and disintegrative forces of the dominant Anglo ~ulture.'~ There can be little doubt
that the Mexican American family is often experienced by wornen as oppressive. However, the link between machismo and preservation of Mexican American cultural identity is
probably deserving of more attention and study than it generally receives. Elizondo claims that Mexican Americans are heir to a
culture which embraces a deep sense of the tragic." The
author traces this to the many collisions and conquests
through which Mexican and Mexican American culture have been formed, and the acceptance of suffering and death as
integral parts of the present life." He contrasts this predisposition toward tragedy with the Anglo American sense of the epic, especially the epic narrative of the "self- made" individual heroically (and stoically) battling long odds. For the Mexican and the Mexican American, says Elizondo, "to live is to suffer without allowing suffering
78. Alfredo Mirandé, The Chicano ~xperience (Notre Dame: U. of Notre Dame Press, 1985), pp. 146-81. For a more nuanced, if somewhat less flattering, description of machismo, see Earl Shorris, Latinos: A Biography of the People (N.Y. : Avon Books, 1992), esp. pp- 430-8- Another penetrating analysis of the Hispanic farnily, including its male-dominance patterns, is that of David T. Abalos, Latinos in the United States: The Sacred and the Political (Notre Dame: U- of Notre Dame Press, 1986), pp. 62-80,
79. Christianity and Culture, pp- 156-7; cf - also Nobel prize- winning author Octavio Paz, The Labyrinth of Solitude (N- Y - : Grove, 1961).
80. christianity and Culture, p- 171. to conquer life. In contrast, the Anglo is geared more toward persona1 success measured in possessions. At its worst, of course, the Mexican Arnerican sense of the tragic can collapse into passivity and fatalism. But we would do better to regard passivity and fatalism as aberrations which have been unfairly used as warrant for a pejorative stereotype of the Mexican and Mexican American. Elizondo also makes this assertion: One of the fundamental characteristics of the Indo- Hispanic is that he is a humanist who places the primary importance in the person, Nothing is more important than the person, and he is recognized alrnost intuitively as existing in community."
The importance of the person is one of the primary observations consistently made by Anglo pastoral workers who work among Mexican Americans. As Elizondo suggests, this sense of personalism is not the "Marlboro man" individualism of Anglos. It is a value placed upon the person as part of a group, upon persona1 relationships and upon time given over to the cultivation of those relationships. This value contrasts sharply with the Anglo stress on institutions, structures, efficiency and function. Catholic sociologist
Joseph P. Fitzpatrick explains that tbis personalismo means
81. Christianity and Culture, p. 157. Shorris sees this attitude surmned up in the Spanish verb aguantar, "to bear, to endure, to stand, to tolerate, to put up with." (Latinos, p. 105. )
82- Christianity and Culture, p. 157; cf. also Paredes, p. 17-9. a preference for "relating to persons rather than to organized patterns of behavior efficiently carried OU~.~'~ The difference can be clearly seen in the approach to law, for example, as Elizondo observes." For the Mexican American, law is an abstract ideal toward which one strives, The person-centred quality of Mexican American culture leads Elizondo to some interesting reflections upon the nature of communication in the ~ulture.~becauseof the emphasis upon persons and relationships, Elizondo describes communication as slow, unfolding gradually. Communication is "not just words of information," but aims at sustaining relationship and building common experience. It is also often indirect, especially with regard to communicating a negative answer. Saying no directly is not an accepted nom in many situations, particularly if the questionex is regarded as of a higher station in life, e.g., a boss, a wealthy person, an elder, a priest or religious,
Communication is "totalist, " Le., it attempts to grasp experience in its totality through not only words but emotions, gestures, sounds, actions- It is thus both rational and bodily rather than merely cerebral. Quite
83. One Church, Many Cultures (Kansas City: Sheed & lard, 1987), p. 133.
84, Christianity and Culture, pp- 164-5,
85. Christianity and Culture, pp, 166-71. 189 naturally, then, the Mexican American is very much at home in the world of symbol and ritual, and communication with regard to the mysterious or spiritual aspects of reality is not eschewed. Al1 of these qualities can be readily observed in the public devotion of Mexican Americans to the graphic arts, music, poetry and dance. Another cultural characteristic Elizondo points to is the acceptance of the limitations of the. The author laments the Anglo caricature of Mexican Americans as -1azy.
He clairns that repetition of the word "mafiana" ("tomorrow") has been misunderstood by outsiders. The Mexican American is a hard worker, says Elizondo, but is realistic about time and its limitations, and realistic about the possibilities of human accomplishment in time. The present has claims and joys and sorrows enough; pragmatic movement toward a future (e.g., retirement) is less important than today. '' Finally, Elizondo describes the robust Mexican American sense of fiesta.d7 Occasions of celebration punctuate daily life, church life, social life, Poignantly, however,
Elizondo interprets the fiesta as an act of resistance and hope : The Latino does not party because things are going
86. Christianity and Culture, pp. 171-2; Paredes, p. 17.
87. Christiani ty and Culture, pp. 172-3; Ramirez, pp. 21, 50-2. well, or because there are no problems or dif ficulties; he celebrates because he is alive. He celebrates because of his sense of the tragic, accepting the many different forces of life and yet realizing there is the ultimate happiness which has already begun. He does not allow himself to be swallowed up by the many tensions and problems, the moments of sickness and death that are part of life, but he rises above them and celebrates life. This is why the fiesta is such a symbol of the Latino world?
There is more than ïneets the eye in the parties for which Mexican Americans are renowned. Love for life, deep faith, personalism, strength in the face of difficulty -- al1 of these are reflected in the fiesta.
3.a.4. Pastoral Challenges
The U.S. Catholic Church has been slowly corning to recognize the pastoral crisis it faces in its Mexican American and other Hispanic rnembers. The magnitude of the challenge can be approached in a preliminary way through consideration of a few basic demographic statistics. The Hispanic population of the United States is large and it continues to grow rapidly, both in absolute numbers and relative to other racial and ethnic groups as well. According to the latest governrnent estimates, in 1995 there were approximately 26.8 million people of Hispanic origin in
88. Christianity and Culture, p- 172. the United tat tes ." This figure represents an 83.6% increase over the 1980 decennial census count of 14.6 million? In 1980 the Hispanic population represented 6.4% of the total U.S. population; by 1995 that figure had risen to just under ten percent. It is estimated that there will be 31.2 million Hispanics by the year 2000,'i and that sometime in the first half of the next century Hispanics will surpass African Americans as the nationrs largest minority group. The Hispanic population is also quite Young; median age among Hispanics in 1992 was 25.8 years, contrasted with 33.4 for the population as a whole? Only 7% of Hispanics are over 60 years of age, while 17% of non-Hispanics are over 60
89. Louise L. Hornor, ed., Hispanic Americans: A Statistical Sourcebook (Palo Alto, CA: Information Publications, 1995), p. 8. Al1 statistics employed here are drawn from U.S. Federal Goverrunent sources, primarily the Bureau of the Census. U-S- government statistics are generally considered conservative in their counting of Hispanics and other urban minorities. One source, for example, cites the daim that the 1980 census may have undercounted Hispanics by as much as 7%. [Schick, below, p. 11 Another source estimates that between two and six million Hispanics were missed by the 1990 census. [Cadena, p. 55, n. 191
Hornor,
92. Marlita A. Reddy, ed., Statistical Record of Hispanic Americans (Detroit: Gale Research Inc., 1993), p, 190.
93. Hornor, p. 3.
94. Frank L. Schick and Renee Schick, eds., Statistical Handbook on U.S. Hispanics (Phoenix: Oryx Press, 1991), p, 2. 192 Although Hispanics are found in al1 fifty states, they are not distributed evenly. More than half of them live in either California or Texas; 88% live in the nine states of California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, Axizona,
5; Colorado, New Mexico, and New Jersey. -- Moreover, in contrast to their earlier agrarian roots, they are an urban people, indeed more urbanized than any other U.S. population group except Asians. 88% of Hispanics live in cities, and
58% of urban Hispanics live in the inner cities." Not surprisingly, then, we find that crime victimization rates among Hispanics are higher than among white Americans (100.1 per 1000, vs. 88.7 per 1000) ." And, while crime rates among whites have generally been decreasing over the last ten years, rates among Hispanics are climbing, especially for violent crimes." Within the Hispanic population, people of Mexican origin (which includes a spectrum from those newly arrived from Mexico al1 the way to those whose family roots in the
Southwest predate 1848) are the most numerous group by far. Those of Mexican origin are about 62% of al1 Hispanics; the
95. Schick, p. 8 (1989 figure) -
96. Deck, The Second Wave, p. 11; Schick, p. 2.
97. Hornor, p- 189.
98. Ibid, next largest cohorts are Puerto Ricans (13%), and Cubans
(5%).99 The Puerto Ricans are generally concentrated in New York and New Jersey, the Cubans in south s lori da.'^' The Mexican-origin growth rate of 54.4% during the decade of the 1980s, although less than the rate for some Asian groups
(Chinese, Filipinos, Asian Indians, Koreans, and Vietnamese), made them the fastest-growing Hispanic group."'
Hispanics, Mexican Americans among them, continue tc face serious economic disadvantages. The 1993 civilian
unemployment rate xas 10.6% among Hispanics, 6.0% among
whites, 6.8% ~verall.'~~Per capita income among Hispanics
in 1992 stood at $8,874, well off the overall U.S. average
of $15,033. 'O3 By some measures conditions for Hispanics have been worsening. Over the period from 1980 to 1992, median family income among al1 Hispanics fell from $25,087 to $23,901 when adjusted for inflati~n.'~' The percentage of
Hispanics below the government's statistical poverty line
climbed over the same period from 25.7 to 29.3; among the
99. Schick, p. 7.
100. Deck, The Second Wave, p. lof.
101. Reddy, p. 185.
102. Hornor, p- 131,
103. Hornor, p. 171; al1 figures in US dollars-
104. Hornor, p. 154 (1992 dollars) , 194 --- population as a whole it rose from 13.0% to 14.5%.'"' The poverty rate among Hispanic children rose from one third to nearly four in ten, almost twice the national rate.Io6 In breakdowns of these economic figures among Hispanic groups, Mexicans generally fare slightly better than Puerto Ricans but lag far behind Cubans. For example, 1992 median family incorne among Mexicans was $23,714, among Puerto Ricans $20,301, and among Cubans S31r015.'07 Educational figures paint a similar picture. Although high school dropout rates among Hispanics have been falling, they rernain about 150% the rate among whites.''' While the high school completion rate among whites rose from 1975 to 1989, approaching 90%, the rate among al1 Hispanics leveled off below 60%. 'O3 1990 figures show that 21.9% of the total
U.S. population had completed an undergraduate degree; this included 22.6% of whites, 9.0% of al1 Hispanics. Among those of Mexican origin the figure was even more dismal: only 5.4% had completed college or university, cornpared with
-
105. Hornor, p. 178,
106. Hornor, p. 179-
107. Hornor, p. 161,
108. Hornor, p. 69.
109. Hornor, p. 68. - - 9.7% among Puerto Ricans and 20 -2% among Cubans. --c Hispanics have become not only more numerous but more visible in a variety of professions and more influential in
the political sphere. Prior to the 1994 elections, for example, the number of Hispanic elected officials had been increasing steadily."' Meanwhile, however, figures show that both the percentage of Hispanics registered to vote, and the percentage actually voting, declined significantly
from 1972 to 1992."= Based on the above figures, we can estimate that there
are approximately 16.6 million Mexican Americans in the
United States. A median estimate is that 80% of Mexican
Americans are baptized Roman Catholics, or 13.3 million.--'-+ -
A majority of al1 Catholics in California, Texas, Arizona and New Mexico are Hispanics; in the populous Archdiocese of
Los Angeles the figure exceeds 70%. Hispanics are now the largest ethnic group within the U.S. Catholic Church. It is
estimated that in 1980 28% of al1 U.S. Catholics were
110. Hornor, pp. 90-1.
111. Hornor, p. 97.
Hornor, p.
113. Deck, The Second Wave, p. 12. Estimates as to the percentage of Mexican Americans who identify themselves as Catholic range as high as go%+. On the other hand, a study reviewed by Andrew Greeley suggests that the figure could be as low as 71% and falling: "Defection among Hispanics," America 159:3 (July 30, 1988) 61-2. Hispanic; by 1990 they had grown to 35% of the total.-''- If present trends continue, early in the 21st century Hispanics will comprise a majority of the total U.S. Catholic population. "5 Catholics comprise about one fourth of the total U.S. population, a figure that has held fairly constant over the last 50 years. While the number of Euroamerican Catholics continues to decline, high Hispanic fertility and immigration make up the loss. 71---" Allan Figueroa Deck suggests that it is pastorally useful to understand the various histories, intentions, and social situations at work within the Mexican American population. In addition to those native-born to the U.S., he sees three different typologies of immigrants. The first is the short-term immigrant, mostly male and mostly undocumented, who cornes to the U.S. seeking work, stays three months or less and then returns to Mexico, A second group, the cyclical immigrant, also cornes without family, stays longer, but returns to Mexico on a regular basis.
114. Cadena, p. 36, The estimate was made by Ron Cruz, director of the NCCB/USCCSecretariat for Hispanic Affairs in Washington. [Cadena, p- 55, n. 191
115. Deck, The Second Wave, p. 12.
116. Cadena, p. 48, For more on the social situation of Hispanics in the U.S., see Joan Moore, "The Social Fabric of the Hispanic Community since 1965," in Dolan and Deck, eds., Hispanic Catholic Culture in the U-S,, pp, 6-49; esp. pp. 11-20 on the Mexican American community . Thirdly there are the permanent immigrants, generally families who cross the border, often legally, intending to remain in the U. s .IlÏ Obviously the church-related interests and needs of these different groups of people may Vary widely, Deck states that the patterns of Mexican immigration to the United States differ from earlier immigrant groups in at least two important ways. One is that the Southwest U.S., the destination of choice for most of the new immigrants, already has an historically well-established Mexican population and association with the Spanish language, Catholic faith, and Mexican culture. The other is the highly mobile character of the short-term and cyclical immigrants. "' Moreover, the most recent Hispanic immigrants are entering the country at a time when cultural pluralism and toleration are more accepted features of US. society than was ofteri_ the case for earlier immigrants.---:Ir, Minority rights are enshrined in civil rights laws, for example, and bilingual education is available in many places. In spite of this, however, Deck claims that the homogenization of ethnic groups continues to be a powerful force in American
-- -. .
117. Deck, The Second Wave, pp, 12-7.
118. Deck, The Second Wave, pp. 18-9,
119. Deck, The Second Wave, p. 19- society: "The data indicates that assimilation continues to be the long-term pattern."120 In short, the Mexican American community finds itself in the throes of a struggle to corne to terms with the often subtle assimilative pressures, to find a place within US. society while retaining its distinctive cultural identity and ethos.
As we saw previously, Deck claims that the ethnic or national parish was a largely successful strategy employed by the American Catholic Church for dealing with earlier waves of immigrants. Although de facto national parishes remain corrunon, due to the fact that Hispanics tend to congregate in their own barrios or neighborhoods, Deck is dismayed that the national parish was abandoned as a strategy just when it would seem to have been most needed by the large number of Hispanic immigrants since World War II. He concludes, The Hispanic community was to some extent deprived of the strong local institutional base that national parishes provided for generations of Catholic ethnics. The policy of trying to integrate the people of whatever ethnic background and language in a territorial parish promoted unity when it succeeded, but also deprived the less assimilated, less influential group (in this case, Hispanics) of the security and clarity that cornes from having oners own
120. Ibid. turf , Deck even questions whether the contemporary promotion of mu~ticulturalismin the Church only fwictions as "an excuse to close more churches" or an excuse to ignore specific cultural contexts within the typically large US, parisho----1' Paired with this withering of the national parish Deck places the continuing dearth of Hispanic clergy. The author traces this, in part, to an historic condition in Mexico and al1 of Latin America, But he also sees it as emblematic of the Hispanic struggle within the U.S. church: Hispanic vocations have not been vigorously recruited, and the existing Hispanic clergy have often faced tensions and difficulties within an Anglo-dominated presbyterate and hierarchy.
With few of their own in the clergy, few among the Anglo clergy who understand Hispanic culture or who speak
121. Deck, The Second Wave, p. 59. On the role of national parishes in buffering immigrant groups to the U.S. from the pressures of cultural assimilation, see Joseph P- Fitzpatrick, One Church, Many Cultures: The Challenge of Diversity (Kansas City: Sheed & Ward, 1987), pp. 103-11. Fitzpatrick fundamentally agrees with Deck's assessment that the absence of national parishes is a critical liability for Hispanics. [One Church, Many Cultures, p. 1561 Fox a brie£ overview of the history of national parishes in the U. S. Catholic Church, see Jay P. Dolan, The American Catholic Experience (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1985), esp. pp. 158-220. More extended treatment can be found in Dolan's two-volume The American Catholic Parish: A History from 1850 to the Present (N.Y.: Paulist, 1987).
122. "The Crisis of Hispanic Ministry: Multiculturalism as an Ideology," 35.
123. Deck, The Second Wave, pp. 59-60, 200 Spanish, few parishes to serve thern, in an era marked by an overall contraction of both human and financial resources, the institutional base for serving Hispanic people rernains
weak. True, there are a few bright spots in the current
picture. Among them Deck notes the proliferation of Spanish-language catechetical and leadership formation programs, 12' the staunch public defense of the undocumented given in recent years by the U.S. bishops, and the work on behalf of both legal and illegal immigrants rendered by Catholic agencies p5 But very many pastoral needs among Hispanics still go unnoticed or unattended. Hispanics are seldom made to feel welcome or invited to ownership of their Church. Worse yet, too often, intentional or not, "the promotion of assimilation or Arnericanization is put before evangelization."""
But others are quite eager to fil1 the pastoral gap and engage in an energetic proselytization of Hispanics. Evangelical, fundamentalist, and pentecostal Christian churches, and various sectarian movements are growing rapidly among Hispanics, especially Mexican Arnericans. In
any Hispanic barrio these days one can observe the
124. Deck, The Second Wave, pp. 75-8.
125. Deck, The Second Wave, pp. 83-7.
126, Deck, The Second Wave, p. 61- 201 burgeoning number of storefront churches. Andrew Greeley estimates that a million Hispanics left the Catholic Church from 1973 to 1988, three fourths of them to become Baptist or fundamentalist .i27 Another source claims that the number of Protestant Hispanic pastors, seminarians and other
religious leaders is now far greater than the number of their Catholic counterparts ."' Greeley terms the attrition phenomenon "an ecclesiastical failure of unprecedented proportions. ""' While some officia1 hand-wringing over the hemorrhage has begun, deeper appraisal of the reasons for the shift is needed. Greeley sees the phenomenon, in part, as an aspect of the upward mobility of a new Hispanic middle class seeking respectability in American s~ciety.'~~But Greeley' s analysis would seem to address only the outermost layer of the phenomenon. Elizondo offers a more penetrating analysis, He notes that, on the one hand, Protestant fundamentalism is often accompanied by a certain iconoclasm with regard to the images and practices of Hispanic popular
127. "Defection among Hispanics," p. 61.
128. Cadena, p- 49,
129. "Defection among Hispanics," p. 62.
130- Ibid, 202 piety.lX Thus the shift from Catholicism to fundamentalism can result in a certain amount of violence done to Hispanic culture. On the other hand, he says, the Pmbrace of fundamentalism is often experienced as 'a great experience of liberation" in that it frees Hispanics 'from the tutelage and control of foreigners" they must endure in Roman Catholicism, Allan Deck, for his part, has repeatedly tried to sound the alarm about the departure of large numbers of Hispanics from the Catholic fold."' Deck attributes the departure of
Hispanics for other churches to three factors: 1) the dearth of Catholic ministers who speak Spanish and who respect Hispanics' cultural values; 2) the lack of 'small, receptive, faith-sharing community contexts"; and 3) the absence of a mission orientation in most US. Catholic parishes .13' Moreover, Deck believes that there is an "unanalyzed affinity" between Hispanic popular Catholicism
131. "Hispanic Theology and Popular Piety, " 9-10.
132. "Hispanic Theology and Popular Piety," 10.
133. The Second Wave, pp. 138-41; "The Challenge of Evangelical/ Pentecostal Christianity to Hispanic Catholicism in the United States" (Unpublished lecture, Cushwa Center for the Study of American Catholicism, University of Notre Dame, 1992); nFundamentalism and the Hispanic Catholic," America 152 (Jan. 26, 1985) 64-6; **Proselytisrnand Hispanic Catholics: How Long Can We Cry Wolf?" America 159 (Dec. 10, 1988) 485-90.
134. "The Crisis of Hispanic Ministry: Multiculturalisrn as an Ideology," America 163 (July 14-21, 1990) 34. and evangelical and pentecostal foms of ~hristianity.:'' Deck describes Hispanic piety as ,,.captivating and graphic, dramatic and motive. It eschewç the cognitive in its effort to appeal to the senses and the feelings .... Its main qualities are a concern for an immediate experience of God, a strong orientation toward the transcendent, an implicit belief in miracles, a practical orientation toward healing, and a tendency to persorialize or individualize one's relationship with the divine
A11 of these cultural characteristics find a congenial home in evangelical and pentecostal churches. Deck takes a dim view of both mainline Protestantisrn and 'normative
Catholicism," and he concludes:
The point 1 want to make here is that the movement from popular Catholicism to some fom of evangelical or pentecostal Protestantism is not as strange and drastic as it may seem. In a certain sense the movement of Hispanics to evangelical religion is a way to maintain a continuity with their popular Catholic faith which in the period both before and after the Second Vatican Council has been disparaged, opposed, dismissed,. --or ignored by many off icial teachers of the Church. -' Deck protests that even in the postconciliar Church the efforts of theologians, pastoral agents and religious educators have too often been culturally uninformed, viewing
"popular religiosity as a problem to be uprooted, not a
135. "The Challenge of Evangelical/Pentecostal Christianity to Hispanic Catholicism," in 3ay P. Dolan and A. F. Deck, eds., Hispanic Catholic Culture in the U. S. (Notre Dame: U. of Notre Dame Press, 1994) , p. 421.
136. "The Challenge of Evangelical/Pentecostal Christianity..,," p- 422.
137, Ibid. strength upon which to build. "'" Kenneth Davis, another theologian well versed in the Hispanic reality, concurs with Deck's estimation. Davis suggests that the cultural discontinuities involved in the transfer of affiliation are to some extent more apparent than real. In Davis' view, the emotionally charged climate
and emphasis upon participation found in pentecostal churches, for example, is in large rneasure congruent with the culture and religiosity of Hispanics. In the longer view, Davis sees the shift as another manifestation of a protracted struggle between a lay-led system of popular
religion among the marginated on the one hand, and a rigid, standardized, official religion promoted since Trent on the
other ,'j9
Thus, the pastoral challenges facing the U.S. Catholic Church in its Hispanic component might appear to be overwhelrning. The Hispanic population is large and growing rapidly. It is relatively young; youth and young families with children are abundantly in evidence in Hispanic neighborhoods and churches. It is a highly mobile, urban
138, Ibid.
139. Kenneth Davis, "The Hispanic Shift: Continuity Rathex than Conversion?" Journal of Hispanic/La tino Theology 1 :3 (May 1994 ) 68-79. Aiso, O. Espin, "Pentecostalisrn and Popular Catholicism: The Poor and Traditio," Journal of ~ispanicf~atinoTheology 3 :2 (Nov. 1995) 14-43. population. Hispanics, Mexican Americans in particiilar, are mired in poverty and not well served by the educational system. Hispanics struggle to overcome a history and present reality of prejudice and marginalization within U.S. society. They find themselves within a Church which does not understand their language, customs, or popular religiosity, a Church which in tact often does violence to their culture through subtle pressure to blend into the Arnerican melting pot. Despite the long and intimate association of Mexican culture with Roman Catholicism, some observers openly question whether Mexican Americans will remain much longer within a Church that seems institutionally so unresponsive to their needs and aspirations. Beading off a potentially disastrous future will be the most important task faced by the U.S. Catholic Church in the next century.
Surveying these daunting pastoral challenges, Jesuit sociologist Joseph P. Fitzpatrick concludes that Hispanic Catholicism in the U.S. faces a "current crisis of inculturation." The author continues: Hispanics are aware of the experience of European immigrants- Most of the descendants of European immigrants have lost the characteristics of the European culture from which they have come and have been absorbed into the dominant culture of the United States. This becomes the preoccupation of Hispanic religious and comunity leaders: will this happen to them? Will they become part of a homogeneous population of Americans or American Catholics as they lose the characteristics which give them a specific identity as a people and a specific identity as Catholics? Or will they be able to become an influential part of American life while still retaining their own cultural identity? 1s this kind of cultural pluralism possible?':'
3.b. Formulation of the Plan
The pastoral movement which would eventuate in the
National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic Mïnistry began at a meeting in New York City in September of 1971. The director of the Hispanic Apostolate for the Archdiocese of New York, Father Robert Stern, invited some local leaders to a meeting with Father Edgard Beltran. Beltran had recently joined the staff of the United States Catholic Conference's Division
for the Spanish-speaking. With the others, he was invited to discuss the possibility of forming a plan for Hispanic ministry in the region. In one of the discussions, Beltran
suggested the calling of a national encuentro (encounter, gathering, assembly) of Church leaders concerned with Hispanic ministry. The idea was received warmly. Soon, spearheaded by Pablo Sedillo of the Division for the Spanish-speaking, the proposa1 obtained the endorsement of Bishop Joseph L. Bernardin, the general secretary of the
140. One Church, Many Cultures, pp- 125-6. USCC . Edgard Beltran also represented an important connection with the Church in Latin America. He had previously worked
with the Latin American Episcopal Conference (CELAM), and
had been involved with CELAMrs 1968 assembly in Medellin, C-olombia. It was the Medellin conference which set the Latin American Church decisively on a new course. Called to consider the coordinated implementation of Vatican II, the
Medellin conference responded to the directive of Gaudium et
spes to examine the "signs of the times" in the lived social
reality of Latin America. In this method, as one participant observed, Medellin was 'a great breakthr~ugh."'~' Profoundly influenced by the work of educator Paulo ~reire"' and others, Medellin took a strong stand on behalf of social
141. "Genesis and Statement of Purpose of the Planning Cornmittee for the First National Hispano Pastoral Encounter," £rom Planning Cormittee records, 1971-72, in Antonio M. Stevens-Arroyo, ecl., Prophets Denied Honor: An Anthology on the Hispanic Church in the United States (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1980), pp. 181-2; also Sandoval, On the Move, p. 79, and "Church Structures for the Hispanics," pp. 428-9. Cf. also Robert L. Stern, "Evolution of Hispanic Ministry in the New York Archcfi~cese,'~in Hispanics in New York: Religious, Cultural and Social Experiences, vol. 2 (N.Y.: Office of Pastoral Research, Archdiocese of New York, 19821, pp. 283-366. On the history of Hispanic ministry in the U.S. up to and including the Encuentros, see also M. Sandoval, "The Organization of a Hispanic Church," in Dolan and Deck, eds., Hispanic Catholic Culture in the U.S., pp. 131-65.
142. Archbishop Marcos McGrath, "The Impact of Gaudium et spes: Medellin, Puebla, and Pastoral Creativity, " in Joseph Gremiïlion, ed., The Church and Culture since Vatican II: The Experience of North and Latin America (Notre Darne: U, of Notre Dame Press, 1985), p- 68.
143- Aifred Hennelly, Theology for a Liberating Church (Washington: Georgetown University Press, 1989) , p. 72. Freirer s best- known work is Pedagogy of the oppressed (N.Y.: Seabury, 1973). justice for the poor, and spoke approvingly of the growth of
1. base communities ,-*' The theological and pastoral ferment which
characterized the Latin Arnerican Church in the late 1960s
and early '70s did not go unnoticed in the U.S.'45 The theology of liberation had burst ont0 the scene after the
close of the Council , Gustavo Gutiérrez' seminal Theol ogy
of Liberatiod4hade its first appearance in Spanish in the same year as the New York gathering. The planners of the First Encuentro in the U.S. were keenly aware of the developments taking place in Latin America. Following the bold lead of the bishops at Medellin, the planners stated that their goal was "to begin to develop a pastoral plan for the Hispanic American community"; to that end, they would "analyze the present pastoral situation in the Hispanic
144. Hennelly, Theology for a ~iberatingChurch, pp. 97, 83. The major documents of the Medellin conference can be found in English in Joseph Gremillion, ed., The Gospel of Peace and Justice (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1976), pp. 445-76. The complete texts, in English translation, were published as The Church in the Present -Day Transformation of Latin America in the Light of the Council, vol- 2, Conclusions (Washington: USCC, 1970).
145. Robert S, Pelton, From Power to Communion (Notre Dame: U. of Notre Dame Press, 1994)- See also: Marina Herrera, "The Context and Development of Hispanic Ecclesial Leadership," in Dolan and Deck, eds., Hispanic Catholic Culture in the U. S., pp- 166-205; Roberto S. Goizueta, "The Preferential Option for the Poor: The CELAM Documents and the NCCB Pastoral Letter on U.S. Hispanics as Sources for U.S- Hispanic Theology," Journal of Hispanic/Latino Theology 3:2 (Nov. 1995) 65-77,
146. Teologia de la liberadon (Lima: CEP, 1971); the first English edition appeared two years later (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis)- 209 American community and discuss possible solutions to the
many problems that exist ."L47
The planning group may have succeeded beyond their own expectations. Two hundred fifty people, mostly clergy and religio~s,~~gathered in Washington in June of 1972. Considerable anger attached to a long list of historical grievances was expressed at the meeting. Many of the interventions urged the Church to move swiftly from a policy of assimilation to one of cultural plurali~rn.'~? Virgilio Elizondo, addressing the group, sized up the increasing Hispanic self-consciousneçs of their unique identity, and urged the delegates to strive toward a coordinated plan for addressing Hispanic pastoral needs.'" Bishop Flores, who described the Hispanic situation as "desperate," recounted the bitter history of discrimination in the Church and called the Church to task for attitudes and structures that continued to exclude Hispanics ."' In the end, the First Encuentro issued a staternent of
147. "Statement of Purpose," Stevens-Arroyo, Prophets Denied Honor, p- 182.
148. Sandoval, On the Move, p. 82.
149. Sandoval, On the Move, pp, 79-81.
150. Stevens-Arroyo, Prophets Denied Honor, pp . 183-7.
151. Stevens-Arroyo, Prophets Denied Honor, pp . 187-95- 210 78 'conclusions, " or demands ."' Most of them were implicit in a principle articulated repeatedly at the gathering: "There must be greater participation of the Spanish speaking
in leadership and decision-making roles at al1 levels within
the American Ch~rch."'~' Some of the demands eventually were met in whole or in part, e.g., that the USCC office for Hispanics be elevated in stature, that more Hispanic bishops be named, and that more regional pastoral offices for Hispanics be ere~ted.:~' Others were flatly rejected: the fostering of base communities as a pastoral priority, the ordination of married men to the priesthood and of women to the diaconats, the inclusion of training in Spanish language and Hispanic culture in the formation of priesthood candidates in al1 dioceses .15' Although Archbishop Furey of San Antonio remarked that the conclusions comprised a "Magna Carta'' for Hispanic ~atholics,"~the demands of the Hispanic leaders received, on the whole, a tepid response from the
152. "Conclusiones: Primer Encuentro Nacional Hispano de Pastoral" (Washington: USCC, 1972).
153. "Conclusiones," Preface, p. 1
154. "Conclusiones" #1, 5 (also 23), and Il, respectively; Sandoval, On the Move, p. 8Of.
155. "Conclusiones" #19, 26, 39, and 46, respectively; Sandoval, On the Move, p. 81.
156- Sandoval, "Church Structures for the iiispanics," p. 429, citing an interview with P. Sedillo, June 1974. bishops .15' Still, within the Hispanic community, the First Encuentro had generated a definite momentum, and the process moved forward. In the wake of the national meeting a few regional and diocesan encuentros were held. Some of these .-- proved to be angry and contentious, others less so.'" In spite of their hesitations, the bishops approved a second national gathering. The Second National Encuentro, convened in Washington in August 1977, was a significantly different affair than the first. The method of the first was basically "top- dom," Le,, the bishops and a group of well-known Hispanic leaders brought together an elite gathering of Church professionals. By contrast, the laity played a much larger role in the Second Encuentro. The method used in the second began with a remarkably wide consultation of Hispanic
Catholics in local communities. The aim of the planning group in this process was this :
No one would take part in the Segundo Encuentro who had not first participated in a group "de base" in a srnall community. Achieving this would itself be a historic contribution of the Segundo Encuentro to the renewal of
157. See, e,g,, the May 1973 report of the bishops8 Ad Hoc Cormnittee for the Spanish-speaking, responding to the conclusions of the First Encuentro; in Stevens-Arroyo, Prophets Denied Honor, pp. 201-7; Sandoval, On the Move, pp, 81-2.
158- Sandoval, On the Move, p. 81; Sandoval, "Church Structures for the Hispanics," p. 430. the Church in the whole ~orld.~~" It is estirnated that about 100,000 people joined in the process, '" which sought to determine from the people themselves what their needs were and how those needs might be addressed by the Church. The fruits of this consultation were gathered at the diocesan level and chameied to the national meeting through working documents prepared by six regions. Five hundred delegates came to Washington, accompanied by another seven hundred observers. There was a significant youth representation, and some of the delegates were even migrant farm labourers. A few bishops had attended the First Encuentro; thirty-four attended in
1977 .Ib=
The agenda of the Second National Encuentro consisted almost entirely of workshop discussions of various topics. The overall theme was evangelization, chosen in light of
Paul VI' s 1975 encyclical Evangelii Nuntiandi . Unli ke the first meeting, the second was conducted completely in Spanish. Certainly the choice of language was a statement of Hispanic unity and identit~.'~' However, it was felt by
159. Maria Luisa Gastbn, ed,, Proceedings of the II Encuentro Nacional Hispano de Pastoral (Washington: USCC, 1978), p. 65.
160. Proceedings of the II Encuentro, pp. 65-6.
161. Sandovai, On the Move, p. 82.
162. Proceedings of the II Encuentro, p. 66. some that it gave an advantage to the more conservative Cubans and other recent immigrants, while diminishing the
influence of Mexican Americans, many of whom were second- generation or more and more accustomed to ~nglish."~ There were forty-five conclusions in the final document of the Second Encuentro. Many of the goals of the First Encuentro were reiterated. The formation of base communities was reaffirmed as a high priority by the delegates.lO' Many of the conclusions outlined ways in which injustices both in the Church and society might be
attacked. 16" Some observers, however, complained that the social and political analysis ernployed was weak and that
. -- parliamentary procedure rnuted the voice of the POO~.-O" The assembly also gave strong support to lay ministries and lay . -- formation efforts, especially among women and youth*-" Moreover, the Second Encuentro offered a powerful vision of an evangelizing church based on collaborative ministry
(pastoral de conjunto) and unity amid cultural pluralism.
163. Sandoval, On the Move, p. 83.
164. Proceedings of the II Encuentro, pp. 68, 70.
165. Proceedings of the II Encuentro, pp. 71, 73-81.
166 Editorial, Cara a Cara 4 (Sept. -0ct- 1977); in Stevens- Arroyo, Prophets Denied Honor, pp. 325-6.
6 Proceedings of the II Encuentro, pp. 70-2, 76-9.
68- Proceedings of the II Encuentro, pp. 69, 82-3. 214 While the tone of the statements which emerged in 1977 was somewhat milder than in 1972, it was nonetheless prophetic. More importantly, the Second Encuentro could more truly claim to be representative of the varieties of Hispanic experience and viewpoints. As one commentator said, "The 11
Encuentro recommendations express the desire of grassroots Hispanics for a more responsive, rnulticultural, spiritually alive, united and creative church."lég A few new initiatives followed the Second Encuentro.
One was the formation of a National Youth Task Force (Comité
Nacional Hispano de Pastoral Juvenil) to advise the
Secretariat for Hispanic Affairs and the bishops on the needs of Hispanic youth."' More regional offices were opened, and cooperation among them increased. The National Institute for Hispanic Liturgy, which has been an important resource for inculturation of the liturgy, was founded in
1979.:" By 1988 the number of Hispanic bishops reached twenty. Spanish-language television programming and diocesan newspapers, almost non-existent befoxe, became more common, especially in large urban areas.
169. Maxia Teresa Gaston Witchger, "Recent History of Hispanic Ministry in the United States," in Soledad Galsron et al-, eds., Prophetic Vision: Pastoral Reflections on the National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic Ministry (Kansas City: Sheed & Ward, 1992), p. 192.
Witchger, p.
171- Witchger, p. 193. Events in Latin America continued to command the attention of U.S. Hispanics and, to a lesser extent, the U.S. Catholic hierarchy. While much of Central and South America endured military dictatorship and civil upheaval, the bishops of CELAM convened again at Puebla, Mexico, in 1979. In spite of bitter feuding and the strenuous efforts of conservative prelates to derail the commitments made at Medellin, the Puebla conference reaffirmed the direction taken ten years earlier, especially the option for the poor .17'
Prodded by the First and Second Encuentros and by the Latin American example at both Medellin and Puebla, the U.S. bishops responded in 1983 with a pastoral letter, The
Hispanic Presence: Challenge and c'ommi tment ."' The letter was received with some disappointment in that it failed to forthrightly confess the history of bias and neglect which have so often characterized the Hispanic experience in the U.S. church. However, it did proceed from the perspective
172. John Eagleson and Philip Scharper, eds., Puebla and Beyond: Documentation and Commentary (Maryknoll, N. Y. : Orbis, 1979); contains the Final Document of the conference (pp. 122-285), the addresses of Pope John Paul II, and commentaries by Penny Lernoux, Moises Sandoval, Virgilio Elizondo, Archbishop Marcos McGrath, 3on Sobrino, Joseph Grdilion, and Robert McAfee Brown.
173. National Conference of Catholic Sishops, The Hispanic Presence: Challenge and Commi ment (Washington: USCC, 1983 1 . of respect for Hispanic culture,"' and it began with an honest appraisal of Hispanicsr socioeconornic standing."' After applauding the recent achievements in Hispanic rnini~try,'~~the bishops turned to the many urgent pastoral challenges the Church faced among Hispanics. They affirmed the pastoral de conjunto approach, adding: "Implicit in a pastoral de conjunto is the recognition that both the sense of the faithful and hierarchical teaching are essential elements in the articulation of the faith. "17' They called for liturgy, preaching, catechesis, lay formation, schools, .- and use of the media adapted to Hispanic culture.-'" The bishops committed thernselves to fostering Hispanic vocations to the priesthood and religious life, and admitted that the paucity of Hispanic clergy and religious owed in part to neglect and cultural conflict ."' They voiced objection to the "anti-Catholic spirit" found in the proselytizing of "Protestant sects" and "fundamentalist groups . Al though
174- The Hispanic Presence, pp. 3-5.
175, The Hispanic Presence, pp.5-7.
176. The Hispanic Presence, pp. 9-11,
177. The Hispanic Presence, p. 13.
178- The Hispanic Presence, pp- 14-19,
179. The Hispanic Presence, p. 17.
180. The Hispanic Presence, p. 19. affirming that ecumenical cooperation was important, they staked out Hispanics as Catholic turf: In the Hispanic context, however, the Catholic Church and its tradition has [sic] played the major historical role of inculturation of the Gospel; the Church is committed to continuing this mission,'e1 The bishops called for greater pastoral attention to
Hispanic youth and fa mi lie^,'^^ and they objected strongly to the mistreatment of migrant farm labourers, especially the ~ndocumented.'~~Basing itself on the tradition of Catholic social teaching, the letter made a strong appeal for Hispanic civil rights, and for the elimination of prejudice, racisrn, and poverty ld4
The bishops also acknowledged the close link of U-S. Hispanics with Latin America, and pledged their own continued interest and support of the Church there, They said:
The Church in the United States has much to learn from the Latin Arnerican pastoral experience; it is fortunate to have in the Hispanic presence a precious human link to that experience. la' The bishops took a positive view of Hispanic popular
181. The Hispanic Presence, p. 20, This appears to be the only use of the word "inculturation" in the text.
182. The Hispanic Presence, pp. 20-2.
183. The Hispanic Presence, pp. 22-3.
184- The Hispanic Presence, pp. 23-5.
185. The Hispanic Presence, p, 26. 218 religiosity, but they called for 'a closer dialogue between popular and official practice In addition, the bishops spoke with surprising enthusiasm about the cornunidades eclesiales de base springing up in Latin America and the
U.S. Calling them 'a ray of hope in dealing with dehumanizing conditions," and noting that they have brought "a revitalized sense of fellowship," the bishops concluded,
"We highly encourage their development .'"s7 Significantly, in this section the bishops drew extensively on the document of Medellin. And they reenvisioned the U.S. parish as a "community of communities," a structure comprised of f lourishing base comunities . In concluding their letter, the U.S. bishops committed the Church to respond to Hispanic pastoral needs as part of a laxger cornmitment to "catholicity" and "pluralism," and they called on their Catholic flock to embrace this vision of church.lag They asked al1 U.S. Catholics "to work not just for Hispanics but with them" in order to deepen the common "preferential option for the poor.ffiroAdmitting that
186. The Hispanic Presence, p. 26.
187. The Hispanic Presence, p. 27-
188. The Hispanic Presence, p. 27- The phrase has been attributed to Cardinal Joseph Bernardin,
189. The Hispanic Presence, pp, 29-30.
190. The Hispanic Presence, p. 30; the Puebla document is cited. the Chürch's present commitment of financial resources to Hispanic ministry was inadequate, the bishops committed themselves vaguely to change and further study. '?' Finally, the bishops called for a Third Encuentro, whose process was to go forward "from cornunidades eclesiales de base and parishes, to dioceses and regions, and to the national le~el/"'~= The conclusions of this encuentro, the bishops promised, would serve as 'a basis for drafting a National
Pastoral Plan for Hispanic Ministry. "13' Much of the bishopsr pastoral letter might have been easily dismissed as well-intentioned, if belated, rhetoric. But the affirmation of the base communities and their explicit inclusion in a process leading into collaboration with the hierarchy in forming a national pastoral plan reverberated powerfully through the Hispanic cornmunity. Preparations began imrnediately for the Third Encuentro. The consultation which led up to the next national meeting was astoundingly ambitious in scope. The bishops' Ad Hoc Cornmittee for Hispanic Affairs had wisely proposed four objectives for the process: 1) that it be, in itself, an experience of evangelization; 2) that it cal1 forth and
191. The Hispanic Presence, pp. 31-2.
192. The Hispanic Presence, p. 32.
193. The ~ispanicPresence, p. 32. 220 form leadership; 3) that it develop from the grass-roots level; 4) that it strengthen the diocesan and regional meetings .Iy4 To accomplish these goals, and to achieve the end result of promulgating a pastoral. plan, the process had to be carefully designed. (See diagram next page.) The process began with formation of diocesan "promoter teams." Their task was to publicize and facilitate the consultation process at the local level, seeking the advice of the grass-roots folk as to the pastoral priorities which should be brought to the national meeting. One commentator calls the role of these promotion teams 'the key to successful implementation of the design."'?' At the same time, "rcobile teams" were formed to conduct a broad, door- to-door canvass of Hispanics who were alienated from the
Church. In Miami alone, 11,000 households were said to have been visited.'" Following these efforts, many dioceses held their own encuentros to gather and unify the local input.
In April of 1984 diocesan directors of Hispanic ministry (mostly clergy and religious) and representatives of the promoter teams (rnostly lay) met to review the preliminary
194. Pablo Sedillo, ed., Prophetic Voices: The Document on the Process of the III Encuentro Nacional Hispano de Pastoral (Washington: O.S. Catholic Conference, 1986) p. 5.
195. Witchger, p. 196-
196. Sandoval, On the Move, p. 83. III NATIONAL ENCUENTRO PROCESS 221
p-- --
[Frorn Prophetic Voices, p- 4. ] results of the consultation and tu select a theme for the national assembly. Since the bishops, in convoking the Tercer Encuentro, had called on Hispanics to "raise their prophetic voices to us once again,""' the group chose the
theme 'Pueblo Hispano: Voz Profetica. "la' A second round of consultation then commenced. Base communities and parish groups engaged in study and response to the theme. These reflections were synthesized at diocesan meetings, which were in turn followed by regional encuentros. The regional meetings, large events in
themselves, were held in the winter and spring of 1985. The regional conclusions were then sent to the Secretariat for Hispanic Affairs in Washington. That office edited them
into a working document for the national encuentro. '?" In all, more than 200,000 people had taken part in a process stretching over some eighteen m~nths.'~* 1,148 people, representing 134 dioceses, arrived at Catholic University in Washington for the Third Encuentro,
15-18 August 1985. The planners established formulas to
197 - The Hzspanic Presence, p. 32.
198, ~ropheticVoices, p. 5.
199. Consuelo Tovar, ed., Documenta de Trabajo: III Encuentro Nacional Hispano de Pastoral, Edicion Bilingue (Washington: U.S . Catholic Conference, 1985).
200. Deck, The Second Wave, p- 89. ensure fair representation and participation by marginated groups, and the resulting identity of the delegates demonstrates that the quotas were largely successful. Fifty-six bishops and major superiors were in attendance,
168 priests, 125 religious, and 799 laity. Slightly less than half of the participants were women, surpassing the minimum goal of 40%. About 13% of the attendees were youth, ages 18-25, falling short of the goal of 20%. 17% of the delegates were farm workers, labourers, or unemployed.--- -r - The ethnic and regional balance of the assembly was similarly impressive, though not perfect. The Northeast region was home to 28% of the delegates, followed by 19% from the Midwest. Only about 20% of the delegates hailed from the Southwest, meaning this region was considerably under-represented. 78% of the attendees clairned U.S. citizenship, 17% said they were documented aliens, and two percent undocumented. About 41% of the participants identified themselves as either Mexican or Mexican American.
Puerto Ricans made up 15%, Cubans 9%, and South and Central
Americans more than 11%. Although there appears to have been some difficulty in self-identification for those responding to the demographic survey (19% marked "Other"),
201. Prophetic Voices, p. 5; and David S. Blanchard, "The III Encuentro: A Theoloqical Reflection on a Classic Church Event, " in Galerh et al., Prophetic Vision, pp. 204-5. the ~exican/MexicanAmerican segment was probably under- represented by as much as 19% .'O2 The Third Encuentro also drew together an assembly of people with strong leadership credentials. 21% had attended the Second Encuentro in 1977. Over 90% had actively participated in al1 phases of the consultation process, and an overwhelming majority were regularly active in their local church comunities .'O3 The parliamentary procedure followed at the Second Encuentro had been found to be somewhat tedious and stiff. Planners of the Third Encuentro set out to improve the structure, hoping to maximize participation and the reaching of agreement on concrete propos al^.^'^ Brazilian priest José Marins, well-known for his pathbreaking work with base communities in Latin America, and for his rnediation skills at Puebla in 1979, was enlisted to help facilitate the process .'O5 Delegates were divided into five halls of 230 people each, then into groups of about 45 and sub-groups of twelve to fifteen- Work was coordinated by a system of secretaries reporting to a steering committee. In spite of
- - - -
202. Blanchard, "The III Encuentro, " pp . 205-6 -
203. Blanchard, "The III Encuentro," pp. 206-8 -
204. Witchger, p- 196f-
205. Sandoval, On the Move, p. 83. the unwieldy numbers and the breathless Pace of the schedule, the process aimed at the building of consensus, 'which was reached in practically al1 the decisions .''"' The Third Encuentro issued 68 conclusions. The first nine, called "Prophetic Pastoral Guidelines," provided the foundation upon which thirty-f ive more specific "Cornmitments" were built. The final twenty-four points, "The Follow-up," were intended to ensure the implementation of the Encuentro' s conclusions. The "Pastoral Guidelines," although very general, represent the assemblyrs broad consensus on Hispanic values and needs. They are worth quoting here:
1. We, as Hispanic people, choose the family in all its expressions as the core of our pastoral ministry. 2. We, as Hispanic people, make a preferential option for and in solidarity with the poor and rnarginalized. 3. We, as Hispanic people, make a preferential option for Hispanic youth so that they will participate at all levels of pastoral ministry. 4. We, as Hispanic people, want to develop and follow a pastoral de conjunto that responds to Our reality. 5. We, as Hispanic people, want to follow the pastoral approach of an evangelizing and missionary Church.
6. We, as Hispanic people, want to follow the pastoral approach of promoting Hispanic leadership that is incarnated and committed.
7. We, as Hispanic people, want to follow a line of
206. ~ropheticVoices, p- S. integral education sensitive to our cultural identity.
8. We, as Hispanic people, want to follow the Une of a Church that promotes and exemplifies justice.
9. We, as Hispanic people, wish to follow an approach of valuing and promoting women, recognizing their equality and dignity and their role in the Church, the family, and s~ciety.'~'
The "Commitments" which followed were intended to "reflect a change from being objects to subjects in pastoral ministry and from being recipients to agents of pastoral action, "'O" They were grouped into five areas. Discussions on the theme of "Evangelization" noted that
An evangelization incarnated in a given culture is essential for al1 peoples, but it is especially important for the Hispanic people in this country. The ternptation to cultural assimilation is constantly present, and in many cases it ceases to be only a temptation and becomes reality.20" Analyzing their own reality, the delegates complained of the perception that the Church was "cold, without fraternal love or a cornmunitarian dimension [and] without a missionary dimension,""O They felt that Hispanics had received short shrift from the hierarchy, that there was a lack of planning and coordination among pastoral ministers, and too few invitations to participation. The result they saw was that
207. Prophetic Voices, p. 6.
208, Prophetic Voices, p. 5.
209. Prophetic Voices, p. 7.
210. Prophetic Voices, p. 7. Hispanics did not "feel welcomed, accepted, or listened to in the ~hurch.""' They pleaded for more priests, religious, catechists and other ministers who understood their culture, and more use of the media in Spanish. They claimed that the
centrality of the family and the contributions of women, youth and agricultural labourers were often ignored.
To remedy this situation, the first strategy they proposed was to make creation of base communities a high priority. They said:
We, as Hispanic people, commit ourselves to create and maintain srna11 ecclesial communities in order to foster and share the Christian gifts incarnated in the Hispanic culture, developing the ecclesial awareness of our people, promoting a Church that is prophetic, evangelizing, communitarian, and missionary; in order to attract those alienated and separated from the ecclesial structures; in order to continue catechesis in accordance with the needs of Our people; and in order to encourage prayer and reflection, sharing our faith, customs, and material and spiritual resources.--- -1 7 They sought a "more personal" style of evangelization
"oriented toward the formation of small communities .""3
They asked for diocesan planning, in the spirit of pastoral de conjunto, that would take their culture seriously, and for more pastoral centres and offices with more authority
211. Prophetic Voices, p. 7.
212. Prophetic Voices #lof p. 8-
213, Prophetic Voices #14, p. 8- and resources .2i4 The delegates pledged themselves to consciousness-raising about the mass media, to creation of more television and radio programming geared to Hispanic needs and interests, and to be themselves "authentic evangeli~ers."~" The following section focussed on "Integral Education," which was described as 'a global formation in the economic, political, social, cultural, family, and church aspects of li fe ,~216 The assembly decried the 'great shortage of educational resources and programs that are adequate and respectful of [Hispanic] cultural values. 'f2'i The Church was excoriated for "still lacking full awareness of her responsibility with the Hispanic people insofar as she does not provide enough help or denounce concrete and institutionalized injustice^."^'" The deleqates longed for more Hispanic clergy 'as a defense against assimilation and a remedy for the lack of integral education," and for more centres for the work of evangelization and lay formation.---y- ,;
214. Prophetic Voices #Il-13, p. 8.
215. Prophetic Voices #15-17, p. 8.
216. Prophetic Voices, p. 8,
217. Prophetic Voices, p. 9.
218. Prophetic Voices, p. 9.
219. Prophetic Voices, p. 9. 229 In turn, they committed themselves to the development of integral education programs that would give priority to the family, to CEBs, to youth, to women, and to the poor and marginali zed. Additionally, they pledged to work for raised awareness of cultural factors among pastoral leaders, for educational centres and mobile teams, for increased use of the rnass media, and for greater involvement in both the public and Catholic school systems ."' Turning to "Social Justice," the Third Encuentro condemned a long list of injustices in U.S. society, in the
Church, and in U.S. relations with Latin America.---7-- The assembly committed themselves to continue to denounce violence, the arms race, and other injustices, and to continue to work for human rights, especially the rights of workers, refugees, and immigrants ."' Within the Church, they pledged "to work so that the Church may set an example in practicing her own social doctrine. "'-' They also demanded "the renewal of the traditional parish in order
220, Prophetic Voices #18, p- 9-
221. Prophetic Voices #19-22, p. 9.
222. Prophetic Voices, p - lof,
223. Prophetic Voices #23-26 and 29, p- Il.
224. Prophetic Voices #27, p. 11. 230 that it be open and effectively multi~ultural."~~"Perhaps understandably, this section was short on specific actions to be taken. The conditions of Hispanic youth received considerable attention from the encuentro. The pastoral needs in this area seemed particularly pressing and intractable: while more than half of the Hispanic population is youth, '99% [of youth] are estranged frorn the ~hurch.""~ The delegates reviewed a litany of problems with drugs, violence, schools, materialism, cultural adjustrnent, etc., and noted sadly that the Church is doing far too little to help. Still, they looked to their youth to be "bridges between the Hispanic and the North American cultures, thus integrating the good from both cultures. "'" The commitments which followed, however, were somewhat nebulous: creation of a national office, greater efforts and more programs at the local and - - diocesan levels, and work for change in school systems .--"
No mention was made of youth involvement in CEBs. In the final area, "Leadership Formation," the Third Encuentro asserted that Hispanics very much want to
225. Prophetic Voices #28, p. 11.
226. Prophetic Voices, p. Il.
227. Prophetic Voices, p. 12.
228. Prophetic Voices #30-38, p. 13. participate in leadership in church and society, but generally find themselves "far from the centers" of b~th."~ The assembly rued the dearth of both ordained and lay Hispanic leadership, mentioning the leadership needs of the
CEBs in particular .'3G It felt that the inadequate education of the leadership that does exist served to "keep [Hispanics] marginalized in the face of the dominant culture . "'31 The delegates committed themselves "to discover, motivate, support, promote, and foster leaders who corne from the people, know the people, and live with the
w232 They pledged to continue to seek ways to participate in decision-making, to bring leadership programs where they were needed most, to promote vocations to the priesthood, diaconate, religious life, and lay ministries, to foster a collaborative style of leadership, and to raise social consciousness through civic o~treach-~~~ In terms of the follow-up, the first conclusion was to maintain the diocesan promotion teams which had played such a key role in the consultation process of the Third
-- -.
229 Prophetic Voices, p. 13.
230. Prophetic Voices, pp. 13-4 -
231, Prophetic Voices, p. 14.
232, Prophetic Voices #39, p, 14.
233. Prophetic Voices #40-44, p, 14. ~ncuentro.234 Calling for the development of diocesan pastoral plans based on the Encuentro con~lu~ions,the delegates urged the teams and regional offices to publicize and direct the implementation of the plans .'35 In particular, the delegates repeated their strong appeal for the formation of CEBS.'~" They committed themselves to "take the process to the grass roots again" by sharing their experience of the Third Encuentro and its conclusions upon returning home ."' They asked dioceses and parishes to oversee the launching of a vast though hazily defined evangeli zation pro ject for the unchurched, a pro j ect which was to be directed toward integrating newcomers into srnall communities.--i 76 The National Secretariat for Hispanic Affairs was requested to direct publicity, to conduct an evaluation of the Third Encuentro three years hence, and to organize future national assemblies every f ive years .--- '3C The assembly closed with an appeal to the bishops for leadership and collaboration in implementing the conclusions on al1
234 - Prophetic Voices #45, p. 15.
235, Prophetic Voices #46-50, p- 15.
236. Prophetic Voices #51, p. 15.
237. Prophetic Voices #52-54, p- 15.
238. Prophetic Voices #59, p. 16.
239, Prophetic Voices #60-65, p- 16- 3 c Review of the Plan
After the close of the Tercer Encuentro, it took the
US. bishops more than two years to write and prornulgate the
National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic Ministry. The
Secretariat for Hispanic Affairs, directed by Pablo Sedillo,
brought the results of the encuentro to the bishops and
facilitated work on the Plan. A writing committee was
appointed, chaired by Fr. Mario Vizcaino of ~iami.'~' The
writing committee worked closely with the drafting
subcommittee of the bishops' Ad Hoc Committee for Hispanic
Af fairs,'42 Numerous drafts and amendments were produced over this period of months . Sedillofs assistant, Fr
Vicente Lopez, who served as secretary to the writing committee, played a crucial role, in part because of
240. Prophetic Voices #55 and 66-68, pp. 15, 16.
241. Other members of the writing committee were Sr. Doforita Martinez, Sr, Dominga Zapata, Rev. Ricardo Chaney, Sr. Soledad Galeron, Rev. Juan Diaz Vilax, and Rosalva Castafieda; consultants were Rev. José Marins, Sr. Teo Trevisan, Sr. Carolee Chanona, Maria Luisa Gaston, Rev. Domingo Rodriguez, and Rev. Sabine Griego. [Source: a letter from V. Lopez to the participants, dated 31 Oct. 1985, shown to me by Mario Vizcaino in an interview at the South East Pastoral Institute, Miami, 3 Jan, 1996.1
242. The drafting subcommittee consisted of Bishops Ricardo Ramfrez, chair, and Peter Rosazza, and Archbishops Roberto Sanchez and Roger Mahoney. [Source: Abp. Sanchez, in a video of the presentation and debate of the NPPHM by the NCCB at their Nov. 1987 meeting, produced by the South East Pastoral Institute, Miami.] Sedillo's il1 health over much of this time period. Clearly among the bishops there were some hesitations about the encuentro process and the construction of a plan, though the project also had some important supporters. In presenting the plan to the bishops, Archbishop Roberto Sanchez of Santa Fe, New Mexico, addressed the comments and questions of bishops submitted during the process. These subrnissions revealed confusion and reservations in four areas. The first had to do with the precise nature of the plan in its relation to diocesan and regional structures. Sanchez responded that no diocesan prerogatives were being
challenged, and that the marner of implementing the plan would be left to the discretion of local bishops. The second area had to do with the stated purpose of integrating
Hispanic Catholics into the life of the Church. Sanchez replied that Hispanics sought full participation in the Church. He stressed that Hispanics wanted to avoid being swallowed up by the dominant Anglo culture of the U.S. Church. However, while preserving their identity and culture, they did not want isolation, either. A third area of concern was the priority given to the encouragement of small comrnunities. Sanchez ernphasized that the comrnunities were to be linked firmly to the existing parish structure. Fourthly, there was the matter of finances. Sanchez 235 explained that the committee had avoided putting a price tag on the implernentation but preferred instead to see the plan effected through existing structures and processes."' In addition, one source repeated to me the story that Pope John Paul II was so impressed with the number and fervour of Hispanics during his visit to the Southwest U.S. in 1987 that he intervened directly with the bishops to get the Plan f inished-'j4 Although the literal veracity of this account is d~ubted,'~~the suspicion lingers in many quarters that it took sorne form of pressure from the Vatican to finally get the plan completed and appr~ved."~ Whatever their misgivings and Rome's role may have been, the bishops unanirnously promulgated the Plan we now have at their November 1987 meeting in Washington. It is a concise document, the English text running a mere twenty- nine pages. Although the Plan was written in response to the pastoral needs of Hispanics, it was 'addressed to the entire Church in the United States,... challenging al1
243. Abp- Sanchez, S-E.P.I. video, Nov- 1987.
244. Rosa Maria Icaza, interview by author, tape recording, at MACC, San Antonio, 21 May 1995.
245. Vicente Lopez, interview by author, Notre Dame, 31 Oct. 1995.
246. Kenneth Davis, interview by auth01, tape recording, at the Oblate School of Theology, San Antonio, 21 May 1995. Catholics as members of the Body of Christ.""' The bishops acknowledged their debt to the Hispanic people themselves, calling the Plan "the result of years of work involving thousands of people who participated in the III: Encuentro [and] a strategic elaboration based on the conclusions of that Encuentr~.""~ Additionally they prefaced the document with 'a sense of urgency," at the same time cautioning that it must be implemented "with due regard for local adaptation.""' The "Introduction" set forth the goal of the Plan, namely, to assist the Hispanic people "in their efforts to achieve integration and participation in the life of Our Church and in the building of the Kingdom of ~od. The meaning of "integration" is made more precise . Assimilation, the so-called American "melting pot," is categorically rejected, and the bishops continue to Say: By integration we mean that Our Hispanic people are to be welcomed to Our Church institutions at al1 levels. They are to be served in their language when possible, and their cultural values and religious traditions are to be respected. Beyond that, we must work toward mutual enrichme~tthrough interaction among al1 our cultures. Our physical facilities are to be made accessible to the Hispanic community. Hispanic
247. NPPHM, #1, p. 1,
248. NPPHM, #1, p. 1.
249. NPPHM, #2, p. 1.
250. NPPHM, #3, p. 2. participation in the institutions, programs, and activities of the Church is to be constantly encouraged and appreciated. This plan attempts to organize and direct how best to accomplish this integrati~n.'~' Turning to the methodology of the Plan, the bishops first traced the Plan's origins to their own pastoral letter of 1983. No mention is made of the processes of the First and Second Encuentros, which had been so important in the coming of age of the Hispanic community. But with regard to the Third Encuentro, they reiterated their aim to take its conclusions seriously and to irnplement them by rneans of a "synthesis" of that gathering's prophetic pastoral g~idelines.~~~Although they did not explicitly aver a theology of inculturation, they did claim that the NPPWM "takes into account the sociocultural reality of our
Hispanic people and suggests a style of pastoral ministry and mode1 of Church in harmony with their faith and culture ."253 Moreover, they recognized that this daim "requires an explicit affirmation of the concept of cultural pluralism in our Church within a fundamental unity of doctrine. "254 This affirmation in turn led the bishops to embrace the method of a "Pastoral de Conjunto," Le., a
- - -- -
251. NPPHM, #4, p. 2.
252. NPPHM, #5, p. 2.
253. NPPHM, #5, p. 2.
254. NPPIfM, #5, p. 2. coordination of al1 pastoral efforts within the common vision and common objectives set forth in the Plan, The Plan was to be 'at the service of the Pastoral de Conjunto, " and the elements of planning for this collaboration include: analvsis of realitv wherein the Church must carry out her mission; reflection on this realit~in light of the Gospel and the teachings of the Church; cornmitment 119 action resulting from this ref lection; pastoral theoloaical reflection on this process; development of a pastoral plan; -; -; ongoing evaluation of what is being done; and, the celebration of the accomplishment of this life experience, always within the context of prayer and its relationship to life.'5' The document provided a simple diagram of this process. (See illustration next page.)
The bishops then turned to the "Framework of Hispanic Reality." A rapid review of the history of the Americas highlighted the mingling of peoples, 'a true mestizaj e. ""° Unfortunately there was no attempt at differentiation among the various Hispanic groups. The section contains only a brief admission of the Churchrs failures in service to the indigenous peoples- Likewise, there is only an oblique
reference to Anglo cultural oppression of Mexican Americans after Guadalupe Hidalgo. The two Americas were summed up as
255. NPPHM, #6, p. 2; emphases mine.
256. NPPHM, #7, p. 4. PASTORAL PLANNING PROCESS
[From NPPHM, p, 3.1 'a 'a hemisphere of many cultures and three dominant lang~ages,"'~~Le., Spanish, Portuguese, and English. The bishops concluded:
Since the Church is the guardian of the mission of Jesus Christ, it must forever accommodate the changing populations and shifting cultures of mankind. To the êxtent the Church is impregnated with cultural norms, to that extent it divides and separates; to the extent it replaces cultural norms with the primacy of love, it unites the many into the Body of Christ without dissolving dif f erence or des troying identi ty .'" Although the tragic mistakes of the past are dealt with gingerly, the bishops clearly wanted to situate themselves today within a heightened consciousness of the plurality of cultures. Turning to culture, the bishops noted the continuing vitality of Hispanic culture in the United States. They signalled respect for the theological significance of culture when they stated: Culture primarily expresses how people live and perceive the world, one another, and God. Culture is the set of values by which a people judge, accept, and live what is considered important within the community .259 They then reviewed the cultural values they had previously identified in their 1983 pastoral letter: respect for the person, deep love for farnily, sense of community,
--
257. NPPHM, #9, p- 4-
258, NPPHM, #9, p. 4.
259, NPPHM, #IO, p. 4. 241 appreciation for the gift of life, and authentic devotion to Mary. The document's look at the Hispanic situation concluded
with a glance at other aspects of the social reality. Here
the bishops found a young population with many recent immigrants, suffering from poor education and unernployment.
Numerous problems beset the Hispanic family. Despite vital popular religious practices and evident interest in
spirituality, the bishops noted sadly that 88% of Hispanics are not active in Catholic parishes, with participation
sparsest among the poor, among men, and in the generations beyond the first."' The bishops then followed with some comments on the 'Doctrinal Framework." The section actually opens with remarks on the situation of the Hispanic people within the larger context of US. society. "The Catholic heritage and cultural identity of Hispanics," said the bishops, "are threatened by the prevailing secular values of the American society ."'°- Denouncing the poverty and marginalization which have been the lot of Hispanics, the bishops now looked
260. NPPHM, #10, p. 4f. ; see The Hispanic Presencc, op. cit - , #3.
261. NPPHM, #II, p- 5; the document relies on Roberto Gonzalez and Michael LaVelle, The Hispanic Catholic in the United States: A Socio-Cultural and Religious Profile (N.Y.: Northeast Catholic Pastoral Center for Hispanics, 1985).
262. NPPHM #12, p. 6. 242 to this people as 'a prophetic presence in the face of the materialisrn and individualism of society" and 'a source of renewal within the Catholic Church in North ~merica.'~'~~ Ecciesiological foundations were then laid. The Churchfs mission, in the authors' view, is to continue the work of Jesus, e "to announce the Kingdom of God and the means for entering it."'" The Church does so "by entering into the cultural, religious, and social reality of the people, becoming incarnate in and with the people."'65 In its "prophetic voice" denouncinq sin and announcing hope, "the Church continues to make an option for the poor and the marginali zed. "26" In its "identity with the risen Christ" the Church looks to 'a new social orderf' and even "a new style of Church as lea~en.'~~~'The bishops traced the Church' s "solidarity" and the "coresponsibility" shared by - -- al1 for the mission to the action of the Holy Spirit.-"" The doctrinal section was followed by a very brief section on spirituality, or mistica. The bishops gave this
263. NPPHM #12, p- 6-
264- NPPHM #13, p- 6-
265. NPPHM #13, p- 6; this is followed by a short quotation from Gaudium et Spes, 942.
266, NPPHM #14, p- 6-
267. NPPHM #14, p. 6. definition of spirituality:
Spirituality is understood to be the way of life of a people, a movement by the Spirit of God, and the grounding of one's identity as a Christian in every circumstance of life. It is the struggle to live the totality of oners persona1 and communitarian life in keeping with the Gospel; spirituality is the orientation and perspective of al1 the dimensions of a person's life in the following of Jesus and in continuous dialogue with the Father .269 They then affirmed, in a general way, the prophetic pastoral guidelines of the Third Encuentro as an authentic expression of and contribution to the spirituality of the Hispanic people at this time in history. Curiously, the matter of spirituality was taken up again at somewhat greater length in a concluding section of the document Here the authors identified f ive prominent aspects of Hispanic spirituality. The first was a vital "sense of the presence of God" that is at once transcendent and imminent. Secondly they noted Hispanics' lively devotion to the Virgin Mary; surprisingly, there was no consideration of the special importance of Our Lady of Guadalupe. In the third place the bishops saw that this spirituality is woven into the fabric of everyday life through the importance ascribed to home, family, relationships, and comrnunity. Fourthly, one of the sources
269. NPPHM #16, p- 7; italics in the original.
270, NPPHM #93-101, p. 21. of this spirituality is identified as the "pre-Hispanic cultures," elements of which have been assumed into Hispanic popular devotions and culture. Finally, the bishops praised
the rich panoply of Hispanic popular religious expression. They expressed the belief that these custorns both fortify one for lifers difficulties and inspire the struggle for justice. The bishops further stated their hope that the
NPPHM can serve as a "source of evangelization" for popular religion and an impetus for the enrichment of liturgy with
appropriate cultural expressions. They then affirmed what they saw as a growth beyond "persona1 and family spirituality" into a more "communitarian and ecclesial" and socially-conscious spirituality through the Third Encuentro. And they closed by reiterating that the NPPHM is rooted in
the history and reflection of the Hispanic people themselves. Having laid some concise, foundational remarks on the history, culture, spirituality and social reality of the Hispanic people on the one hand, and on the mission of the Church on the other, the document then set forth its "General Objective." It reads:
To live and prornote by means of a Pastoral de Conjunto a mode1 of church that is: communitarian, evangelizing, and missionary; incarnate in the reality of the Hispanic people and open to the diversity of cultures; a promoter and example of justice; active in developing leadership through integral education; leaven for the Kingdom of God in ~ociety.'~: No explanatory remarks accompany this fecund statement. Its ambitious program is worked out in four areas of more specific objectives and programs.
The first dimension is entitled "Pastoral de Conjunto:
From Fragmentation to Coordination." The bishops admitted that common vision and coordination are often lacking among laity, clergy and religious ."' The objective, they said, is to assist the Hispanic people in living "Church as communion ."273 They called upon the Secretariat for Hispanic Affairs to lead the wa.y in integrating the vision of the
NPPHM in the structures of the NCCB/USCC, and upon bishops, diocesan and parish officiais to do the same on their levels They called for more Hispanic leadership to participate in decision-making at al1 levels, and for the promotion of greater understanding and communion among cultural groups.-77 j They saw a need for the creation of more
271. NPPHM #17, p. 7.
272. NPPHM #19, p. 9.
273. NPPHM #20-21, p. 9. Unfortunately, the bishops never spell out the meaning they attach to the pregnant word "communion." On communion ecclesiology, see Jean-Marie Roger Tillard, Church of Churches: The Ecclesiology of Communion (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1992).
274- NPPHM #22-23, p. 9.
275. NPPHM #24-25, p. 9- diocesan Hispanic pastoral offices, and for improved
cooperation among these of fices .276
The bishops also made a significant cal1 upon each
diocese to move toward pastoral de conjunto by creating its own diocesan pastoral plan for implpmenting the NPPHM "according to its own reality."'" They even hoped for area or parish pastoral plans for implementing the diocesan plans. L78 They made a specific plea for "diocesan and area coordination among small ecclesial communities" through meetings of coordinators designed to foster a shared missionary vision."? The bishops asked for more pastoral and theological formation and training programs for Hispanic pastoral agents at al1 level~.'~" Finally, they called for increased communication among groups, movements, and SECS through leadership gatherings, cornmon projects, newsletters, and increased use of the mass media.''' The second dimension of the Plan was entitled
"Evangelization: From a Place to a Home." In a background
276. NPPHM #26, p. 10,
277. NPPï-ïM #27, p. 10.
278- NPPHM #28, p. 10.
279. NPPHM #29, p. 10.
280. NPPHM #3O-32, p. lof,
281. NPPHM #33-36, p. 11. section, the bishops began by admitting that "the great majority of our Hispanic people feel distant or marginated from the Catholic Chur~h."'~~While stressing that the parish remains "the basic organizational unit of the Church," the U.S. bishops also affirmed that "conversion and a sense of being Church are often best lived out in smaller communities within the parish which are more personal and offer a greater sense of be10nging."~@~ The bishops took note of the Third Encuentro' s efforts to promote srna11 communities, and of the efforts of "many apostolic movements and church organizations" which have provided spiritual enrichment in small group settings over the years, and they affirmed al1 of these as effective tools of evangeli~ation.~~~Then, for the second of four times in the document, they took note of the urgent need for efforts to respond to the proselytism of various sects and fundamentalist groups.'6' The background was followed by a 'specific objective": To recognize, develop, accompany, and support small ecclesial communities and other Church groups (e.g., Cursillos de Cristiandad, Movimiento Familiar Cristiano, RENEW, Charismatic Movement, prayer groups,
282. NPPHM #37, p. 11.
283. NPPEIM #37, p. 11.
284. NPPHM #38, p. 11.
285, NPPHM #39, p. 11; also #5, p, 2; #44, p. 12; and #83, p. 18. etc.), which in union with the bishop are effective instruments of evangelization for the Hispanic people. These small ecclesial communities and other groups within the parish framework promote experiences of faith and conversion, prayer life, missionary outreach and evangelization, interpersonal relations and fraternal love, prophetic questioning and actions for justice. They are a prophetic challenge for the renewal of our Church and humanization of our society .X" This objective is the centerpiece of the entire section on evangelization; indeed its influence over the other three sections can be detected as well. Two concerns on the part of the prelates are immediately evident here. One is to be as inclusive as possible, respecting the various movements and spiritualities and styles of small communities that exist within the Bispanic community. A second is to keep al1 these groups in some way related to the institutional structure, particularly the parish. Given these understandable concerns, the very positive embrace of the SECs and other groups as a "prophetic challenge" to both Church and society is even more remarkable. To achieve this objective of fostering evangelization through SECs and other groups, the Plan envisioned several programs and projects. It called for a "think tankffof pastoral agents with SEC experience to write a workbook of guidelines and practical aids for development of SECS.'~- This was to be followed by a "national training session" for leaders from al1 regions, the purpose of which would be "to develop a common vision and methodology in the formation and support of small ecclesial ~ommwiities.'~'" Dioceses were also urged to sponsor theological reflections on evangelization and SECS ?' On the local level, the bishops called for parishes to be "missionary" in character primarily through promotion of SECS .''' This amounted to re-envisioning the parish as a
'community of communities ."'?' Such parishes would exude 'a welcoming and inclusive atmosphere that is culturally sensitive to the rnarglnated."2'' They would offer ongoing formation for evangelization to existing groups, and place a high priority on organizing visitation to homes of the marginalized, drawing them into SECS .'?3 This new umbrella
287. NPPHM #41, p. 12. Such a symposium was in fact held in 1989 unde the auspices of the Secretariat for Hispanic Affairs. A scaled- down version of the workbook has only recently been approved by the NCCB entitled Communion and Mission (Washington: USCC, 1996) .
288, NPPHM #42, p. 12-
289. NPPHM #43, p. 12.
290. NPPHM #44, p. 12.
291. NPPHM #47, p. 13- The phrase has been attributed to the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin.
293. NPPHM #46 and 48-9, pp. 12-3. mode1 of parish was also to cultivate the connections between faith and social justice as an integral cornponent of its evangelizing thrust in al1 parish programs, but especially through SECS.'?' The missionary and social-justice orientation of the
Church received further attention in the third area of the Plan, "Missionary Option: From Pews to Shoes." Here the bishops took up and affirmed the missionary priorities embraced at the Third Encuentro: the poor and marginalized,
the family, women, and youth. After reviewing the obstacles faced by each of these groupsf2" they endorsed this 'specific objective": To promote faith and effective participation in church and societal structures on the part of these priority groups (the poor, women, families, youth) so that they may be agents of their own destiny (self-determination) and capable of progressing and becoming organized."' Ten specific steps were endorsed for the purpose of achieving this broad objective of participation and self-
determination. The USCC Office of the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Refugees was to have one full-time person coordinate and evaluate ministry to migrant farmworkers through semi-annual meetings with representatives of al1
294. NPPHM #SO, p, 13.
295. NPPHM #SI-55, pp. 13-4.
296. NPPHM #56, p. 14. regions.--? 17 More vaguely, the bishops promised to step up social justice and community organizing efforts at al1 levels .296 They called for greater attention to the large number of Hispanics found in the armed services-----00 With regard to families, the bishops promised to organize a national forum which would analyze family needs, assist in setting pastoral goals, and issue materials usable in SECS and other local groups ."O On the subject of women, the NPPHM envisioned a series of regional meetings for those engaged in ministry to women. Four goals were given for these gatherings. They were to: Analyze the situation of Hispanic women to manifest more clearly their gifts of intelligence and compassion, which they share with the Church; Identify a mode1 of Church that nourishes and fosters ministries by women; Value the role of the small ecclesial community in the promotion of women; Examine, in light of the process of the 111 Encuentro, the reality of the Hispanic woman and consider which ministries should be maintained and which should be created?" Nothing further was specified about the number of such meetings, nor about how they were to go about achieving this
297. NPPHM #57, p. 14.
298. NPPHM #58, p. 14.
299. NPPHM #59, p. 14.
300- NPPHM #60-62, pp. 14-5,
301. NPPHM #63, p. 15. ambitious agenda. Three steps were addressed to the area of Hispanic youth ministry. The first was a nebulous encouragement of "organisms of coordinationN at al1 levels to cultivate greater participation of Hispanic youth in the Chur~h.'~' The second asked for more networking among youth ministers
in order to share successful strategies (SECS mentioned among them) by which youth can be welcorned and offered
formation and o~portunitiesfor service.'O3 The last called for the convocation of a national youth encuentro to take up broad issues related to the direction of ministry among Hispanic youth. The final area addressed by the NPPHM was "Formation:
From Good Will to Skills." The bishops saw a critical lack of both pastoral ministers -- so critical that it made "uncertain the survival of the Catholic faith among ~ispanics''~~~-- and of programs of spirituality and catechesis. 'O6 Their "specif ic objective" was : To provide leadership formation adapted to the Hispanic culture in the United States that will help people to
302- NPPHM #64, p. 15-
303. NPPHM #65, p. 15-
304. NPPHM #66, p. 15.
305. NPPHM #67, p. 16.
306. NPPHM #68, p. 16. live and promote a style of Church which will be a leaven of the Kingdom of God in society. Fifteen projects and programs were proposed. The bishops wanted to foster heightened "conscientization" through increased "theological-pastoral reflection" at the local and regional leveldo8 They also called for more scientific study of the "socioeconomic, cultural, religious, and psychological aspects" of Hispanic life, especially the family, youth, women, popular religion, and the poor .30"~ achieve this goal they promised to seek graduate research scholarships. Four steps were endorsed for the fostering of Hispanic vocations to the clergy and religious life. The bishops promised culturally-sensitive vocation promotion, especially through involving Hispanic lay men and women in the recruitment process. 'Io They sought to get the topic of vocations on the agenda of Hispanic lay organizations."' They recognized a special need for more training of diocesan
7 - and religious vocation directors for work among Hispanics."-
307- NPPfiM #69, p. 16.
308. NPPWM #70-71, p. 16.
309. NPPHM #72, p. 16.
310. NPPHM #73, p. 16.
311. NPPHM #74, p. 16,
312. NPPHM #75, p. 17. In addition, they asked for wider implementation of an existing parish-based program by which parishioners are
asked to identify possible vocation candidates. jl' Five of the steps sought to address the needs for leadership formation among Hispanics. The first of these specifically addressed the need for leaders to "create, encourage, and coordinate small ecclesial ~ornmunities."~" A second step sought developrnent of a program of education on the dignity of wornen, to be implemented among the SECS."' A task force was to be named to design a formation program for adult youth ministers and youth leaders,31b The bishops asked seminaries, religious communities, and formation programs for the permanent diaconate to incorporate the
conclusions and vision of the II1 ~ncuentro, They also pled for more education of both Hispanic and non-Hispanic pastoral ministers in the history, culture, needs, and
"pastoral principles" of ~ispanics.jIb
Finally the bishops addressed the relative dearth of
313. NPPHM #76, p. 17.
314. NPPHM#77, p. 17.
315. NPPHM #78, p. 17.
3.NPPm #79, p. 17-
317, NPPHM #80, p. 17.
318. NPPHM #81, p. 17. materials and programs for various needs among Hispanics. They asked publishers and pastoral institutes for more popular materials written for Hispanics in the SECs in a variety of areas: Bible study, social analysis, SECs, immigration, political rights and participation, parenting and family planning, popular religion, and liturgy."' They promised a national meeting of pastoral ministers to reflect on and prepare a response to non-Catholic proselytism among Hispanics . This national gathering was to issue materials and prepare mobile teams to address this issue with pastoral agents on the local level. In al1 four areas, after each specific project or program the "responsible agents" for that item were listed. These range from local pastoral agents and collaborators to parishes, dioceses, regional pastoral institutes, several organs of the USCC and the bishops themselves, and various combinations thereof. The question of the timing for fulfilment of the cornmitment is addressed in each case in the same way: "When: In accordance with the normal channels for plans and programs and budget procedures of the respective entities involved." In his presentation of the Plan to the NCCB at the November 1987 meeting, Archbishop
319. NPPHM #82 and 84, pp. 17-8.
320. NPPHM #83, p. 18. Sanchez had addressed the concern raised by some of the prelates about funding for the Plan's implementation in a time of financial constraint. He explained that the drafting committee had decided against seeking special funding, preferring instead to work through existing channels, at least for the time being. Clearly Sanchez' remarks were designed to allay fears about approving the Plan on account of its possible financial implications. The possibility of revisiting the national funding question at a later time was, however, left open. A concluding section of the document addressed the issue of evaluation. It began, "Evaluation is an integral
part of pastoral planning, " and envisioned the future possibility of "reshaping the Plan in the light of ongoing pastoral experiences."~~ It cautioned that such evaluation must take place within the same kind of constructive atmosphere or mistica that marked the Third ~ncuentro."' The "specific objective" of such evaluation was: To determine if the general objective of the plan is being attained and whether the process faithfully reflects what the Church is and does in relation to the Kingdom. '''
321. Abp. Sanchez, S.E-P-1. video, Nov- 1987.
322. NPPHM #85, p. 19.
323. NPPHM #86, p. 19.
324. NPPHM #87, p. 19. 257 Five steps follow. A "National Advisory Cornittee" was to be appointed to facilitate the evaluation effort and compile its results. 325 Educational workshops on the value and method of the evaluation process were to be held for diocesan personnel. "" Then evaluation meetings at the diocesan, regional, and finally national levels were to be held. "- The diocesan meetings were to be comprised of parish and SEC representatives, and the regional meetings of diocesan representatives. The national meeting was to gather representatives of al1 regions and issue a written evaluation report.
325. NPPHM #88, p. 19 -
326. NPPHM #89, p- 19.
327. NPPHM #90-92. CHAP- 4. AN EVALUATION OF TBE NATION= PAÇ!IDRRL PLAN FOR HISPANXC MINIS!l!RY AS AN INSTRUMENT OF INCULTURATION FOR MEXICAN AMERICANS
Can the National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic Mïnistry lead to an authentically inculturated pastoral praxis in the Mexican American cultural milieu? That is the question to be explored in this chapter, It has to be admitted at the outset that neither a definitive nor a completely comprehensive answer can be rendered to the question, This is so in part because inculturation by its own nature remains an open and ongoing process. In addition, an evaluation of the NPPHM could not be definitive without an enormous amount of field research. One would have to study in considerable breadth and detail the pastoral praxis which is actually being engendered by the Plan in local Mexican American communities across the country in order to reach a verdict. And, even if one were to garner such huge amounts of field data, the complex nature of pastoral practice and the multitude of local circumstances which impinge upon it would preclude any illusions about a truly cornprehensive judgment. 259 So the ambition of this chapter is Tracy's more modest goal of "relative adequacy. "' 1 hope to give some necessarily provisional but nonetheless relatively adequate critical reflections on the NPPHM in relation to the Mexican American community and its aspirations for an inculturated Catholic Christian faith. This chapter's goal will be approached by adverting again to Schreiter's "map" for inculturated local theology. Bearing in mind the twelve-point summary of our theology of inculturation, we trace the NPPHM and its formulation through the steps outlined by Schreiter, and evaluate the
Plan in terms of the demands of each step. I take up in more depth the leading specific strategy endorsed by the
Plan, the formation of small ecclesial communities (SECS), and offer some reflections on that particular strategy in relation to the issues of inculturation among Mexican
Americans. After we have stepped through Schreiter's map, our findings may be summarized by a brief return to the evaluative criteria Schreiter suggested, inquiring into the adequacy of the NPPHM with regard to those criteria.
The Starting Point
1- As Tracy says, "What we know, we know with relative adequacy, and we know it is bounded by the realities of language, society, and history-" [Plurality and Rmbiguity, p. 61. ] 260 Schreiter points out that local theological reflection and pastoral praxis do not begin "de novo"' in a vacuum. Communities reach toward new theological understandings which help them make better sense out of local circumstances or challenges. Often, says the author, the process of local theology is set in motion by one of three things. First, a community may grow in self-awareness of their cultural and/or their religious identity, and so begin to cal1 into question the existing theologies they have received. Schreiter cites the example of an African religious leader who wishes to develop a more inculturated liturgical style, but who must confront an established popular predilection for Latin hymnody.
A second triggering factor could be an event or development in the culture, such as a political or economic cxisis, a labour strike, or the reality of some form of oppression by a foreign power or an elite or both. A third possibility is that a local community confronts theological developments taking place in other local churches, or on a wider ecclesial scale, and a response is prompted. The directives of the Second Vatican Council would be one obvious example of this. Thus, as Schreiter says, "beginning points can arise from previous theologies, from
2- Constructing Local Theologies, p. 26- the culture, or from church tradition."" In the case of the Hispanic community in the United
States, including the Mexican Americans, I believe that one can observe al1 three of these starting points. In the first place, there is more than ample evidence that Latinos, and especially Mexican Americans, have been becoming increasingly conscious of thernselves as a people through most of this century, This growth in awareness has patently resulted in increasing dissatisfaction with being second- class members of their own Church, Mexican Americans perceive a serious disjunction between the theologies embedded within their own popular religiosity and cultural values, and the theology which governs the structures of the
U,S. Catholic Church down to and including the parish level. The reigning theology has more and more been felt to be inadequate, foreign, Anglo, and ignorant of Hispanic needs and aspirations, Unfortunately, this heightened awareness finds only a muted voice in the Plan itself, which does little to admit the cultural failures of the Church in the past. However, there is no doubt that the cry of dissatisfaction with the received theology made itself kno~ vociferously through al1 three of the national Encuentro processes.
3. ~onstructingLocal Theologies, p. 26. Secondly, 1 believe there are three interrelated cultural crises which Mexican Americans have confronted which have spawned new theological thinking. One is the
growing awareness that they have been and still are a marginated people within the wider scope of US. society. They have learned their own oppressive history, and the tools of the social sciences have revealed with abundant clarity that they lag behind the majority in nearly every
category. On this point the Plan is somewhat stronger, retelling the historical narrative in more accurate fashion.
It firmly endorses ongoing efforts on behalf of social liberation. At some basic levels the Plan is clearly not ignorant of the fruits of social scientific research. A second cultural crisis derives from the assimilative
constraints of the dominant culture. Hispanics, Mexican Americans among them, continue to experience considerable
pressure to conform to Anglo culture in a myriad of ways, in the media, on the job, in the marketplace, and even in their religious beliefs and practices. Undeniably assimilation
has been occurring, especially among the younger generations who have lived their whole lives in the US. The Spanish language is lost, Mexican family cohesion and customs are weakened, and religious patterns change. In the NPPHM the
U.S. bishops issue a strong, if belated, protest against this cultural tyranny. A third cultural crisis is being provoked by the inroads made among Hispanics by fundamentalist, pentecostal and sectarian religious groups. Mexican American Catholic leaders view the success of these groups in winning converts with considerable alam, The concern is due in part to the fact that the religious migration exposes the inadequacy of Catholic pastoral praxis. As Allan Deck continues to remind US, Mexican Americans are finding something in the storefront churches that they are not finding in Catholic pari~hes.~But the alarm also stems from the fact that Catholicism and Mexican culture have a longstanding marriage and so have been viewed as inseparable from one another. Rightly or wrongly, a threat to ethnic religious identity is thus also assumed to be a threat to cultural identity. In the NPPHM this alarm becomes a reechoed theme for the bishops too. As to Schreiterrs third starting point, one can readily observe the transparent influence of theological developrnents taking place in the wider Catholic Church upon both the Encuentro process and the resulting planning document. Vatican II -- especially the affirmation of
4. See, e-g., Deck, "Proselytism and Hispanic Catholics: How Long Can We Cry Wolf?" America 159 (10 Dec, 1988) 485-90. 264 cultural pluralism in Gaudium et Spes and Ad Gentes, and
Gaudium et Spesf s calls for engagement with the problems and hopes of the world and for a more participative and collaborative style of ministry -- spawned an enormous amount of fresh and creative theological and pastoral reflection in wide sectors of the Church. The Councilfs impact can be traced in the actions of the U,S. bishops themselves in devoting greater attention to Hispanic concerns. Similarly, it is reflected in the spontaneous efforts of groups like PADRES and Las Hermanas and in the
First Encuentro itself. The very notion of an inculturated pastoral plan would surely not have been possible in the Church were it not for the ways in which, as we have seen, the Council called for serious and respectful study of and dialogue with culture, The Third Encuentrofs repeated cal1 for a pastoral de conjunto, endorsed in the Plan, reflects the rnarked influence of the "People of God" ecclesiology of both Lumen Gentium and Gaudium et Spes. In addition, developments taking place in Latin Arnerica have been well known in the US. Hispanic community, as we have also seen, In the conclusions of the Third Encuentro and in the NPPHM as well one finds the language of liberation and the preferential option for the poor, themes sounded insistently by Latin American theologians over the 265 past thirty years. These same themes have resonated on an official level at al1 of the CELAM conferences from Medellin to Santo Domingo. Liberation theology, Medellin and Puebla have al1 been powerful forces on the U.S. Hispanic scene, and one does not have to look far in the NPPHM to trace their influence. Al1 of the factors mentioned so far interlock with one another. One can see this most vividly in even a cursory examination of the documents produced by al1 three
Encuentros. While one or the other of them may have predominated at one time or event or stage in the process, or in the motivation of particular participants, al1 of them converge in spurring a process of doing theology in an inculturated or contextualized way. That process resulted in, among other things, the NPPHM. Admittedly the capstone document does not reflect each of these motivating factors or starting points equally well. But there can be little doubt that the Plan is indebted to al1 of them,
Step #l: Previous Local Theologies
The first movement of Schreiter's map is to take note of previous local theologies. This means taking stock of the theologies already operative in the environment. As we have seen, the Hispanic community, including the Mexican 266 Americans, found themselves confronted with an entrenched, authoritative theology in the Anglo church, a theology which, for the reasons listed above, was found to be inadequate. We have also noted the existence of previous theology encoded within the popular religiosity and culture of the Mexican American community itself, and the discontinuity and conflict experienced between this theology and the one officially in place. Nor is the theology held by Mexican Americans themselves immune to criticism. In the writings of Allan Deck, for example, and to a lesser extent Virgilio Elizondo, one detects some ambivalence toward what prevails among their own people. There is strong attachent to and defense of that heritagers positive values and the way it makes Mexican American identity distinct. At the same time there is admission that Mexican Americans have too often been passive, even complicit, in the face of their own oppression. This can perhaps be traced both to a degree of tacit acceptance of the dominant culture's theology, and to the irenic aspect of the Mexican temperament itself. One sees the ambivalence clearly, for example, in the treatment of popular religion by Deck, Elizondo, Rodriguez and other
Mexican American writers. Some equivocation is to be expected, of course, not least because we find it mirrored in the larger discourse of Latin American liberation theology .'
Step #2: Cultural Analysis
Schreiter's second step asks us to consider the opening of culture, A few points have already been made. As we saw, consciousness of cultural identity has been growing steadily among al1 Hispanics in this century, and especially since the civil rights struggles of the 1960s. The fact of cultural pluralism and the need for a more penetrating grasp of culture have corne into vogue in many quarters, including the Church. Much has been written and said about Mexican American culture in recent years, and an enormous fund of cultural insight fed into the efforts of the three Encuentros. The structure of the Second and Third Encuentros, especially the wide net of participation they cast, ensured to some extent that comrnon Hispanic values were identified and honoured, as were common experiences of margination. Statistical population studies and other forms of sociological data have been widely disseminated, and they are evident in both the Encuentro documents and the final Plan. The Encuentros and the formulation of the Plan form a single, continuous narrative. This narrative is an
S. See, e-g., M. Candelaria, Popular Religion and Liberation, op. cit, 2 68 enormously powerful experience of cultural analysis and affirmation, as many participants in these events attest. But, despite these very significant advances, and with the assistance of hindsight, there remain reasons to judge that the cultural analysis behind the NPPHM is still somewhat superficial and imbalanced. One can see this, for example, in the brevity of the documentfs "Framework of Hispanic Reality" section.bOf course, this section is intended to be merely suggestive, a quick summary of a much larger body of cultural reflection having taken place through the Encuentro process. But the historical background given is so rapid that it appears almost facile. Moreover, its treatment of the Churchrs role in that history is extremely selective. It highlights the positive accomplishments while overlooking both the Church's complicity in colonialism and the Church's own tarnished record of discrimination and neglect. It is difficult to see how this legacy can be overcome without a greater degree of official candor, The sections on culture and the social reality are even less adequate. Although some important Hispanic values are noted, as are some of the salient features of the Hispanic social situation, they are listed tersely and only rarely appear elsewhere in the document. Once again, it is undoubtedly true that cultural and social assessment do inform the document, at least indirectly, through the Encuentro process. But the debt is not sufficiently acknowledged. One cannot help but notice the striking contrast on this score between the NPPHM and the document of the Third Encuentro. The latter document alludes to the relevant cultural and social data repeatedly. In fact, the Third Encuentro waç methodical in doing so: each major area of the "Commitments" section opens with a subsection labeled
"Looking at Our Reality8' or the 1ike.- From the vantage point of the theology of inculturation, "thick description" of the cultural systerns is methodologically indispensable. At no stage of the process culrninating in the NPPHM does there appear to have been a truly thorough, systematic atternpt at social or cultural analysis, The result is that even in the document of the Third Encuentro the social and cultural segments retain a fragmentary and anecdotal quality. The NPPHM is hobbled by a more serious liability of this omission: the descriptions of the cultural and social reality, together with the description of Hispanic spirituality or mistica, can appear as mere ornamentation, marginal to the overall
7. Prophetic Voices, pp. 7, 9, 10, 11, 13-4. project. Thus, the process should have included a more thoroughgoing, scientific study of both the cultural identity and social reality of Hispanics. In short, the NPPHM does not benefit from al1 the help it should get from the social sciences. Moreover, it does not even respect, in an explicit and deliberate way, the sources that it does in fact utilize and depend upon, e.g., the participants in the
consultations leading up to the Third Encuentro. It might also have mentioned gratefully the pioneering work of Elizondo, Deck and other prominent Hispanic writers who have described the Hispanic reality and brought it to the Churchrs attention.
Part of the difficulty, it would seem, inheres in the generic, one-size-fits-al1 character of the very term
Hispanic. Hispanic (the same can be said for Latino/a) is an adjective applied to anyone whose ethnic origin can be traced to a Latin Arnerican country. Thus, it includes a very broad ethnic panoply: Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, Cubans, Dominicans, Spaniards, Guatemalans, Nicaraguans,
Panamanians, Colombians, etc. As one historian writes, 'It is a mistake to lump al1 Latin Americans together, since they have separate histories that must be respected."' Furthemore, among the Mexican cohort one finds still more diversity. They run the gamut from recently arrived immigrants, both legal and illegal, many of whom speak only Spanish, through second-generation folk and beyond. Indeed
some of them are people uhose families have lived in what is now the Southwest United States for nearly four centuries and who speak only English. What justification can there be for bundling al1 these people together? On a number of informal occasions I have posed this very question to Hispanic leaders thernselves. Consistently they respond first by defending the term
Hispanic and its ernployment, and the parameters it defines,
in the pastoral planning process and elsewhere. They cite powerful cornmonalities of language, religion, values, and customs. They speak of common experiences of immigration, discrimination, poverty, and minority status . Defense of the univocal meaning of Hispanic seems to be even more vigourous among those who have participated in the consensus- and coalition-building experiences of the regional and national Encuentros.
But, when pressed, these same sources will often admit that the pluralism embraced by the term Hispanic has been and often still is problematic. The history of the Encuentros and of the Plan itself is, in part, a complex story of compromise among ethnic groups whose interests and needs, while convergent in the main, diverge in some nonetheless important ways. Only once does the Plan itself acknowledge this, when it identifies a need "to forge unity among al1 Hispanics who have corne from the entire spectrurn of the Spanish-speaking world. "' Significant differences of values, style, and custom Üo exist among these groups.
Mexican aericans and Cuban Americans, for example, whatever they may have in common, are quite different culturally, economically, and socially -- even a superficial acquaintance of these two peoples learns that early on. Understandably, some of the dif ferences had to be ignored or papered over in order to achieve the vital objectives embodied by the national pastoral plan, However, one has to question whether sorne factors of critical value to the project of a fully inculturated theology and pastoral praxis may have been lost along the way,
Cultural analysis is a many-faceted task. In section a. of chapter 3 we identified some of the religious patterns, cultural values, and socioeconomic realities which shape Mexican American life. We may now inquire as to whether these factors are adequately encompassed by the NPPHM.
9, NPPHM #12, para- 4, p. 6. Religion
Turning first to the religious dimension, perhaps the most poignant question to ask is this: does the Plan redress the neglect and discrimination which we have identified as main characteristics of the Mexican American experience within the U.S. Catholic Church? To a great extent the answer to this question can be in the affirmative. Taken as a whole, as we have seen, the Encuentro process gradually migrated from a spontaneous movement at the margins into the Church' s official embrace . The resulting Plan, although not perfectly consonant with the conclusions of the final Encuentro, does demonstrate that those conclusions were taken with a high degree of seriousness by the bishops. Both the encouragement of the process and the promulgation of a document which promises so many new pastoral initiatives do bespeak a strong cortunitment at high levels to attend to Hispanic needs and to incorporate Hispanic Catholics more closely into the Church. If al1 of the strategies of the NPPHM are implemented, or even most of them, the Catholic Church in the United States may yet become a much more solicitous faith home for Hispanic Catholics, including Mexican Americans. They will be served more often in their language, catechized in ways more attuned to their culture, and invited to greater participation and leadership within a more collaborative style of rninistry. Inculturated evangelization of Mexican Americans will be a high priority, and Mexican Americans will find in their Church a powerful ally in their struggle for social equality. Mexican American youth, women, migrant workers, and immigrants can al1 expect to receive greater respect and attention from the Church because of the Plan. There is no doubt that the NPPHM represents a huge stride forward for Hispanics grnerally, and for Mexican
Americans in particular. This is seen most clearly when one considers the Plan as almost a creatio ex nihilo, and in two ways. For one, whereas certain improvised or provisional local methods for addressing ethnic needs had been the rule for previous waves of immigrants to the U.S. (e-g., national parishes, sodalities, etc.), Hispanics have largely been deprived even of those. Their experience has consistently been one of being ignored on al1 levels, so that the Plan represents a radically new attitude on the part of the Church. Secondly, it is clear that nothing like the Plan has been attempted before; the very genre is new. The NPPHM is a first venture -- at least for the U.S. Roman Catholic Church -- into concerted pastoral planning respecting the parameters and contours of a given cultural milieu. AS such, the Plan has to be acknowledged and applauded as a break with past practice, an initial step into a quite
different modus operandi. The hope expressed by the present author for greater methodological sophistication and thoroughness in future such planning efforts in no way diminishes the affirmation that the NPPHM represents a promising departure into new territory. However, with regard to the Mexican American context, a hoçt of questions remains. One doubts, for example, whether the Plan does enough to reform parish structures to meet the needs of Mexican Arnericans. The Plan does make a clear cal1 for the parish to become more welcoming, more evangelizing, and more pluralistic as a "comrnunity of c~mmunities."~~But does this go far enough, especially for a population whose traditional ties to the parish structure are not strong? However well intentioned, is it not still tantamount to inviting Hispanics to blend into the Anglo church, rather than letting Hispanics have and be their own church? How can Mexican American identity be respected and preserved in
this setting? Recall Deck's cornplaint about the omission of national parishes for Hispanics. Why was this strategy, so
successful in aiding earlier ethnic communities in the U.S., passed over both in the Plan and in the Third Encuentro? No answer is given. 276 One strongly suspects that at least one piece of the answer to that question is the severe clergy shortage. The bishops simply do not have the personnel to staff new parishes -- at least not in the traditional marner, which insists, among other things, upon celibate men only. Even laying aside the question of qualifications for priestly ministry, and the question of erecting national parishes, one may ask whether the Plan goes far enough in addressing the urgent need for more Hispanic vocations. Hispanics voiced a strong desire to be served by their own. Indigenous ministry performs a profoundly important symbolic function in every cultural community. The NPPHM acknowledges the need for more Hispanic clergy, but makes only rather vague appeals for greater recruitment efforts. It offers little help in identifying or overcoming existing obstacles to such efforts, nor incentive for more men to accept that call. Earlier we identified a number of religious customs and movements integral to the faith of Mexican Americans. The relationship of this popular religiosity to the aims of the Plan is not at al1 clear. In fact, the whole treatment of spirituality in the Plan is puzzling. Two sections on this
11. See Starkloff, 'Keepers of Tradition: The Symbol Power of Indigenous Ministry, " esp. pp, 53-92. subject, as we saw, are used to bracket the whole, but in between there is little that draws water from this well. There are also some noteworthy lacunae. Where, for instance, is Guadalupe? In the entire document 1 can find only one invocation of the Mother of Jesus under the title most dear to Mexican Americans," and only two other very brief mentions of the importance of Mary for these Christiand3 A possible explanation for this glaring omission lies in the tact that, again, the Plan is aimed at al1 Hispanics rather than at Mexican Americans only. Perhaps this is one of the places where the peculiarities of the Mexican American element were lost in the process of melding their voice with the voices of other groups for whom Guadalupe is not so central to their identity and faith.
But we must still ask, how can one hope to construct an inculturated theology or praxis for mestizo Mexican
Americans without speaking about the Brown Virgin of Tepeyac? One is similarly disappointed with regard to other aspects of popular piety. The Plan offers few insights into its relationship to Las Posadas, quinceafieras, devotions to the saints, home altars, etc. Its conspicuous intent to
12. NPPHM #2, p. 1.
13. NPPHM #IO, p. 5, and #94, p. 21. 278 bolster family life offers some irnplicit support, but that
is all. The same goes for the movements (Cursillo,
charismatic renewal, etc.) which play such 3 large role in
the faith lives of so many Mexican Americans. There is neither affirmation of the positive values of these practices, nor any attempt to address the need we recognized earlier for some appropriate guidance or correction to their
excesses. There is simply no direct attempt to integrate the goals and strategies of the Plan with these aspects of
popular religion. In an earlier section we summarily characterized Mexican American religiosity as vivid, affective, spontaneous, communal, participative, and sacramental. In many respects the Plan seerns an ill-suited kind of instrument for this target group. The document has an institutional, even bureaucratic, flavour that is in marked contrast to the spontaneous, affective, and non- institutional character of Mexican American culture and religiosity. As one observer put it, to some extent "the means are at odds with the ends" in the Plan.'+ The bishops and many Mexican American leaders both have pinned their hopes on the cultivation of small communities to provide a context within which a culturally authentic
14. Roberto Goizueta, interview by author, 30 Jan. 1997, Chicago. 279 - - style of spirituality may be expressed and developed.-' As small, informal, flexible spaces, SECs certainly nurture many of the things dear to Mexican Americans: personal contact, af fectivity, communality, and participation. SECs represent one means of cultivating relationships and a sense of belonging, giving the Church the welcoming, intimate, personal face for which so many Mexican Americans long. On the other hand, however, SECs also represent a spiritual path that in some respects xould seem to run counter to the cultural predispositions of Mexican
Americans. SECs axe more Word-centred than is common within any of the Latino groups. They utilize discussion as a means of connecting biblical texts with everyday life. The style of Hispanic piety generally, including that of Mexican Americans, is neither discursive nor heavily reliant on scriptural texts. It rnay be that SECs will be most successful among Mexican Americans when they find ways to integrate reverence for the centrality of the Word with the various devotionals and sacramentals which are the ordinary staples of Mexican American piety. If SECs can meet this challenge, their counter-cultural aspect might even provide sorne helpful corrective and complementarity to the usual temper of Mexican American spirituality.
15. E.g., NPPHM #45, p- 12. 280 We also identified one of the larger challenges facing the Church with regard to Mexican Americans as the huge chasm that continues to exist between the whole realm of the "popular" and the "official." It seems reasonable to hope
that SECS may also provide a context within which the popular and the official may interact and be reconciled. But neither this hope nor the grounds for it are spelled out clearly in the Plan, And there may well be other, better strategies by which the gap may be closed. The Plan does, for example, have a lot to Say about evangelization and catechesis, We might have expected the issue of bridging the popular and the official to be addressed under those headings, but it is absent.
Values
In section 3,a,3, we identified some of the characteristic cultural traits of Mexican Americans: love of family, hospitality, honour, machismo, a sense of the
tragic, personalisrn, a sense of the limitations of time, and celebration, Most of these values were quite clearly, even eloquently, articulated in the final document of the Third Encuentro. Presumably they also informed the bishops directly through the Third Encuentro. But there is disappointingly little to point to in the 281 Plan itself that would indicate to us how seriously those values were taken or the precise manner in which they were incorporated. One is surprised, for example, to find no mention whatsoever of fiesta. Nor do we encounter any thought on the difficult pastoral challenges presented by the prevalence of passivity and fatalism (the underside of the tragic) . Indeed 1 can find only three of these factors explicitly mentioned in the document. Family life is recognized as a value, and the Plan addresses the needs of families twice. '"achismo receives only one mention, an entirely negative reference in connection with the problems faced by women." Nowhere does the Plan specifically address the needs of men, nor the relative absence of Hispanic males in the pews of the Church. The only Hispanic value which receives somewhat sustained recognition in the NPPHM is the centrality of the person and persona1 relati~nships.'~Most significantly, this personalism is cited both as the cause for a pervasive feeling of alienation from Church structures, and as the reason why
6 NPPHM #IO, p. 4f.; #53, p. 13f, and #60-62, pp. 14-5.
17- NPPHM #54, p. 14.
18. NPPHM #IO, p. 4. small communities are urgently needed. '' On balance, however, taking the document alone as it stands, even the references to these three cultural value structures are somewhat dilute and superficial. The NPPKM could have benefited greatly from a more sustained and systematic reflection on the full range of values which characterize the Hispanic peoples.
Socioeconomic Location The document is somewhat more astute in taking into account the socioeconomic realities faced by Mexican Americans. We noted, for example, that as a group Mexican
Americans face serious economic disadvantages in U.S. society. Recognition of poverty and its relationship to a history of social discrimination are evident at several points in the document .-"Th urgent needs of families, women, and migrant workers receive special attention. Pastoral ministers and al1 the faithful are called to greater conscientization and cornmitment to work for social justice . Closely related to poverty in our Mexican American profile was the reality of educational disadvantage. This
19. NPPHM #37-38, p. 11; also #44-50, pp. 12-3.
20. NPPHM #7-8, 49-54, 56-63, 70-72. 283 factor too was recognized by the bishops. Indeed it is probably not too much to Say that the single strongest aspect of the NPPHM is its insistent cal1 for the Church to undertake dramatically increased educational initiatives among al1 Hispanics . Educational, training, and formation efforts are promised in at least 39 of the document's 101
7 7 sections. -& These paragraphs seek improvement in a striking variety of areas, from ordained ministry to lay leadership skills to formation for SECS to social analysis to pastoral and theological reflection. The NPPHM envisions a very ambitious educational program. Earlier we observed the fact that the Mexican Arnerican population as a group is quite Young. We also noted that the needs of youth and families received considerable attention by the Third Encuentro. The Plan embodies murh of that assemblyrs concern, for it addresses the needs of .- families and youth in twelve separate sections.-- (By way of contrast, there is no mention anywhere in the document of the needs of the Hispanic elderly.) The problems of families and youth are, on balance, sized up accurately and with an appropriate urgency. Most of the programs proposed in response to these needs have to do with education and
21- NPPHM #23, 30-32, 35, 40-48, 50, 59-63, 67-84, 89.
22, NPPHM #IO-11, 53, 55, 60-62, 64-66, 79, 84. 284 networking. Of course, the big innovation with regard to youth was the proposed national youth En~uentro.'~Al1 of these, but especially the last, could represent significant new pastoral departures for the Church if implemented. Still, the Plan does seem to have truncated the emphasis given to youth at the Third Encuentro. The Encuentro had adopted a "preferential option for Hispanic youth"" as one of its overall "prophetic pastoral guidelines." It followed this by devoting one entire segment of its work to this area, proposing nine separate "commitments" to Hispanic youth, These included a national office, work to change educational systems, and leadership formation,=' In the NPPHM, cn the other hand, we find this topic mainly in three fairly brief subsections of the major 'Missionary Option" heading .'"wo of those subsections merely encourage greater youth participation in the Church and greater networking among those engaged in youth ministry, while the third calls for a national youth Encuentro, something the Third Encuentro had not even asked for. The Third Encuentro's demand for greater investrnent in
23. NPPHM #66.
24. Prophetic Voices #3, p. 6.
25- Prophetic Voices, pp, 11-13.
26, NPPHM #64-66, p. 15- youth leadership formation was included within a later subsection of the NPPHM which called in a more general way
,, ? 7 for "elaboration of a program of youth pastoral ministry. - Most of the Encuentro's youth goals were sirnply mislaid in the transition to the Plan, In the profile of the Mexican American people given earlier we also noted that a sizeable segment of that cornrnunity is composed of various types of migrant workers and immigrants. The organizers of the Third Encuentro had
taken pains to ensure that these groups were represented at that assembly, and their voices are reflected numerous times in its final document 2 The NPPHM, however, evinces only scant sensitivity to the needs of these special groups- In
an early section, the 'continuous f low of immigrants" is recognized as one of the factors of Hispanic social realitya2"he Plan calls for increased attention at the
national level to the needs of migrant farmworkers thxough additional staff in the Office of the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Refugees.'O It also targets migrants as one of
27. NPPHM #79, p. 17.
28, cf., e-g,, Prophetic Voices, pp. 9-12.
29. NPPHM #Il, p. 5.
30. NPPHM #57, p. 14. - - the groups requiring further scientific research. '- But attention to migrants and immigrants is noticeably missing elsewhere in the Plan. Again, most of the Third Encuentro's concerns seem to have been excluded. In addition, we must conclude that neither the NPPHM nor even the Third Encuentro demonstrates a very nuanced understanding of the situation of migrants and immigrants, In neither source do we discern an awareness of the differing types of migrants and immigrants," nor the patterns peculiar to the Mexican cohort, Since the needs of these people differ significantly according to ethnicity, family condition, length of stay, etc., the Plan seems unprepared to grasp and deal with the full spectrum of existing pastoral situations. Three other social factors characterizing Mexican Arnericans were identified in our earlier profile: mobility, urbanization, and geographic concentration. Surprisingly, 1 can find no mention at al1 of these factors in the document of the Third Encuentro. A few brief references to the first two appear in the NPPHM," but there is no concerted effort to integrate them into the Plan's conclusions. These are
31- NPPHM #72, p. 16.
32- Deck, The Second Wave, pp. 12-9.
33- NPPHM #Il, p. 5; #53, p. 13. among the NPPHMrs most glaring omissions. Mobility and uxbanization are two of the salient features of this population, and they distinguish Mexican Americans rnarkedly from the populace of Mexico itself. Mexican immigrants to the U.S. often corne from smaller toms and rural areas of Mexico. Even if they corne from larger Mexican cities, they are unprepared for the extremely fluid condition of the North American cities in which they make their new homes. The new arrivals are far from their geographic origins and, usually, from their extended (and sometimes also their
immediate) families. The high motility of U.S. society only exacerbates their experience of rootlessness, lack of belonging, and instability. The constant movement of people and the urban distances to be overcome both pxesent formidable challenges for local evangelization efforts, such as the organization of ongoing small Christian communities.
How did the U.S. bishops envision implementing the ambitious goals of the NPPHM within a mobile, urban environment? We do not know. The NPPHM tells us more about what the Church hopes to do to preserve the cultural heritage of Hispanics than it does about how the Church will assist its Hispanic flock in confronting the challenges of the larger U.S. culture . Nor is it clear how the Plan may be adapted for the 288 differing geographic locales of this population. The vast majority of Mexican Americans, as we saw, live in just a handful of states. In many areas of the Southwest they represent a large minority of the total population, or even the majority. But small, widely scattered Mexican American communities can be found in nearly cvery part of the country. The socioeconomic and cultural challenges which confront such communities as a tiny rninority in a small city in the Midwest might be in many ways the same as the challenges faced by a well-established community in New Mexico, for example, but they might also be quite different. Likewise, the cultural resources and institutional supports with which each confronts their respective situation might be similar, but would more likely be dissimilar in some important ways. To put it another way, the rural Rio Grande valley borderland of Texas is not the agricultural Central Valley of California, and both differ imrneasurably from the west side of Chicago. Moreover, contrasts between urban centers in the US, cannot be overlooked either. Los Angeles is not San Antonio; the crowded, noisy, bustling barrio of East L.A., where undocumented immigrants abound, stands in marked contrast to the quiet, stable west side of San Antonio. The two cities, and their Mexican American populations, have different characters, each presenting 289 different challenges and opportunities to their inhabitants, and thus different challenges and opportunities to the
Church's pastoral ministry. The NPPHM is not reflective of an investigation into these diverse social locations within the United States and their implications for the Plan's strategic goals.
The foregoing critique of the Plan's cultural lacunae does have to be mitigated to some extent by taking seriously the Plan's own cal1 for local adaptation. '' Diocesan and parish planning efforts should afford opportunities for many of the discrete characteristics of local contexts, including those not mentioned in the Plan, to be discovered, considexed, and incorporated. Failure to draft local plans informed by the national document not only contravenes the NPPHM's express directive, but aborts the overall process the document seeks to advance. The NPPHM may be faulted for failing to give clearer guidance to these local efforts, and its omission of some factors which cross diocesan boundaries is not easily excused. It might have gone much further than it did in supplying local planners with the kind of critical social analysis that helps them to situate local efforts within a larger picture. However, despite these
34. NPPHM #27-28, p. 10. 290 limitations, there are indications that where such diocesan and parish plans have been undertaken, the NPPHM has been found to be very useful. Thus the NPPHM remains, at least to some extent, a living document rather than something cluttering the ecclesiastical shelL3'
Step #3: Emergence of Themes
Schreiter's third step asks for the identification of themes which emerge from the opening of culture. With
regard to the Mexican American community and the NPPHM, a plurality of answers to this question might be given. However, three overlapping themes emerged clearly frorn our earlier study of Mexican Arnerican culture: identity, liberation and welcome.
Identity
The first two themes arise from the vicissitudes of Mexican American history, and they are closely related- We have already traced in some detail the Mexican American quest for identity, especially through the writings of Virgilio Elizondo, Mexican Americans have been ignored, their very existence overlooked by the larger cultures on
35. Mario Vizcaino, interview by author, tape recording, the South East Pastoral Institute, Mid, Florida, 3 Jan. 1996. 291 both sides of the Rio Grande. Today when Mexican Americans
speak of themselves as la raza (sometimes, la raza cosmica), they disclose a long and painful process of coming to self- consciousness about their identity and place in the world- Elizondo even describes this as the birth of a people. He speaks eloquently for the Mexican Americans' desire to know who they are, where they came from, and how to tell their story theologically.
As we saw, Elizondo approaches this challenge by tracing Mexican American lineage through what he calls a
'double mestizaje, "'"the marriage of aboriginal peoples
with Spaniards to form the Mexican identity, followed by the marriage of Mexico and the Anglo-Arnericans in the Southwest United States. For Elizondo this is a story of creation, a graced history to be celebrated, an unfinished narrative of intermarriage and divine adoption. It supplies Mexican Americans with a sorely lacking sense of pride, ethnic solidarity, and hope for the future.
One does not have to look far in the NPPHM to hear the echoes of this brilliantly successful search to locate and describe a place in the created order. Hispanics' "language, culture, values, and traditions" are explicitly
36. Galilean Journey, pp. 9-18, and elsewhere. 2 92 and heartily affir~ned.~' Even the laquage of mestizaje is employed in an atternpt to define who these Hispanic people of today are? From start to finish the NPPHM seeks to promote and enhance authentic cultural identity. Its only apparent limitation in this regard is the overly generalized nature of the term Hispanic, as we have seen. Mexican Americans and other groups beneath this umbrella term will have to take the document as a charter for pursuing the identity peculiar to them.
Libration
The theme of liberation comes to the fore specifically as a response to that dimension of the history of the Mexican American people characterized by conquest, subjugation, and discrimination. That history issues in a present reality marked by struggle to overcome contivued poverty and marginalization. Plainly, any theology suited to the Mexican American context will have to be, in sorne measure, a liberation theology. Similarly, any pastoral praxis which is authentically inculturated for the Mexican American people must be a liberatory praxis. Both Deck and Elizondo insist on this, as we have seen.
37. NPPHM #4, p. 2; cf, also #17, p. 7, and elsewhere.
38. NPPHM #7-8, p. 4. Thus, with regard to the theme of liberation, the question for our consideration becomes: does the NPPHM represent, aim at, engender a pastoral praxis of liberation? Our reply will have to be nuanced. On the one hand, to a great extent this question can be answered affirmatively.
The NPPHM does evince a concern for the total welfare of the Hispanic people, albeit without ever resorting to the language of liberation. As we have seen, both the Plan and the Encuentro process were grounded in the social reality.
Overt concern for social justice can be identified in at least thirteen sections of the doc~ment.~'The social ministries of the Church are specifically affirmed and encouragement is given to growth in social consciou~ness.~' Moreover, the Plan even identifies the Hispanic people as themselves 'a prophetic presence in the face of the materialism and individualism of [American] s~ciety."~' At the same time, however, we may question whether the NPPHM goes far enough in its cornmitment to the liberation of Hispanics, including Mexican Americans. We have already seen how the document's reading of history is quite selective. We have also seen how its assessrnent of the
39- NPPHM #13-14, 34, 50-58, 84.
40- NPPHM #58, p. 14.
41. NPPHM #12, para. 2, p. 6. 294 social reality is too brief, incomplete, and unsystematic,
While the NPPHM does contain important affirmation for liberation efforts, it falls short of an all-out effort by the Church to help the Mexican American people surmount a history of social bias and a present reality of denied access to full participation in US. society.
Our earlier study, especially under the tutelage of Schreiter, suggested that concern for identity and concern for liberation are both essential ingredients in contextual theology. '' That study also forewarns us, however, that these two preoccupations may also be in cornpetition with one another, and perhaps even conflict. One can see the sometimes uneasy alliance of identity and liberation perspectives in the NPPHM, At many points of the document the bishopsr concern to conserve the cultural heritage of
Hispanics outweighs their concern for liberation. Calls for safeguarding the Catholicity of Hispanics against the incursions of fundamentalist sects, for example, are given more often and more strenuously than calls to reform unjust social structures, though the latter are present as well.
One sometimes detects in the Plan some defensiveness about Hispanic identity. Interestingly, this was not generally the posture of the Third Encuentro. The Encuentro document
-- -
42. See #7, chap. 2.d. conveys a more robust sense of pride and confidence in identity, and an eagerness to build a future even freer of constraints. The difference in tone is subtle, but noticeable. In terms of Schreiter's two basic models of contextual theologies," we may conclude that the NPPHM tends more toward the ethnographie than the liberation approach, and that it sacrifices something of the latter to the former. This is consistent with a critique made by Allan Deck of the U.S. approach to pastoral planning efforts. Deck notes that U.S. pastoral planning generally has a different intentionality and philosophical foundation than its Latin American counterparts. He says: Pastoral planning in the U.S. context reflects the prevailing milieu, stresses continuity, and tends to become an exercise in efficiency, in rnaking affairs run more smoothly. Thus it becomes an instrument in promoting the modern, progressive agenda of personal freedom and well-being. But pastoral planning in the Hispanic context more appropriately ought to deal with the "material factors of domination" that are grasped principally through structural analysis, Pastoral planning, therefore, in the context of U. S. Hispanics and other rnarginated groups properly promotes a critique of the status quo and stresses evangelization as struggle for socioeconomic and political change.44
The author goes on to note that at the CELAM conference in Puebla the themes of "communion," "participation" and
43. ~onstructingLocal Theologies, pp. 12-5.
44. Deck, The Second Wdve, pp. 151f. 296 'liberation" emerged. He argues that while "communionr and 'participation' will appear to provide a more immediately relevant framework for pursuing pastoral planning," this could have the unfortunate result of relegating "liberation" to " third place. "" Something like this appears to have happened in the formulation of the NPPHM. Communion and participation are appealed to frequently in the Plan. The social justice concern is psesent also, but it is in partial eclipse.
Wel corne The theme of welcome ernerged primarily in regards to
Mexican Americans' place within the Church itself. We saw earlier that the Catholic Church in the United States is guilty of a long history of discrimination and neglect with regard to its Mexican American members. Mexican Arnericans, consequently, have not felt their Church to be a welcoming faith home. In spite of the fact that the NPPHM is not completely forthright about this historical reality, it does represent a major advance on the score of making the Church more hospitable to Latinos. The mass participation in the Second and Third Encuentros under official sponsorship by the hierarchy, and the very existence of a plan which
45. The Second Wave, p. 152. demonstrates that their efforts in the Encuentro process paid off, are profoundly important signs to many Mexican Americans that they have finally corne of age in the U.S. Catholic Church. In nearly every section the Plan itself sounds the therne of welcome to a participative, pluricultural ecclesial communion. It promises this, for example, through promotion of SECS'° and through "creating a welcoming and inclusive atmosphere that is culturally sensitive to the marginalized" in its parishes .'' In addition, the Plan promises massive Church outreach to the alienated and the marginated.'" All of the interviews 1 conducted with Hispanic leaders and al1 of the written sources 1 consulted are marked by hope for Mexican Americansr future within the Church. There is wide agreement that the Catholic Church in the U.S. has made real strides in the direction of embracing and valuing its Mexican American and other Hispanic mernbers. Nearly always this hope is explicitly based on the above-mentioned series of events. At the same time, there is also widespread agreement that much remains to be done. The general consensus seems
-
46. E-g., NPPKM #40, p- 12-
47. NPPHM #45, p. 12.
48. NPPHM #37-66, pp. 11-5. to be that the implementation of the Plan, which would be the most potent sign of welcome of all, has been lagging."
Many pastoral agents feel that a more constrictive ecclesiastical climate has been taking hold. Worries are expressed that the NPPHM might even be relegated to the
status of a handsome but non-functional showpiece. The last decade has seen a levelling off of Hispanic appointments to the hierarchy, together with increased Roman preoccupation with doctrinal orthodoxy and centralized discipline. Put these factors together with the contraction of financial resources facing the U.S. Church, and new pastoral initiatives are rare, Allan Deck is the rnost critical voice in this regard. Deck has been especially disparaging of the lack of funding for implementation of the Plan.'" Some of the other issues raised most vehemently at the Second and Third Encuentros with regard to Hispanic participation in the Church, such as the shortage of Hispanic clergy, have not won the attention of the bishops, by and large. Ali in all, the outlook is cloudy for continued progress toward a
49. The possible exception here is the southeastern region, where the efforts of Fr. Mario Vizcaino, director of the South East Pastoral Institute of Miami, are universally acclaimed. Vizcaino and S.E.P.I. have made outstanciing contributions in assisting dioceses in the southeast U.S. region to inplentent the NPPHM. Vizcaino himself told me that to date 22 of the 26 dioceses in this eight-state region have promulgated their own diocesan Hispanic pastoral plans based on the NPPHM- (Interview with the author, 3 Jan, 1996. )
50. Deck, "Proselytism and Hispanic Catholics: How Long Can We Cry Wolf?" America 159 (10 Dec. 1988) 485-90. church more welcoming of Mexican Americans.
Steps 14 and 5: Opening Church Tradition
The next three movpments of Schreiterrs map shift us from the "Culture" side of the contextual dialogue to the side of "Church Tradition," Step Four prescribes "The Opening of Church Tradition thxough Analysis-" Like its counterpart Step One, the opening of culture through analysis, this step demands critical reflection. In the ideal, it utilizes critical "theory of the role of tradition in communities ."51 Step Four is closely allied with Step
Five, "The Christian Tradition Seen as a Series of Local Theologies." In Schreiter's idealized "mapf' of contextual theology, the fifth step functions as a kind of hermeneutic through which the fouxth step operates. That is to Say, when one analyzes the tradition one does not see it as monolithic and static, but as comprised of various pieces each of which has to be contextualized in a local, historical situation in order to be understood. Thus, Steps Four and Five invite us to examine these questions: how does church tradition function in the NPPHM?
How is the Plan informed by, and normed by, church tradition that is always historically conditioned by the context(s) of
51- Constructing Local Theologies, p. 32. 300 its formation? In approaching these questions, it will not surprise us to find that the NPPHM is not entirely explicit about its theological perspective or assumptions. Moreover, some of the evidence will suggest that conflicting theological assumptions can be discerned within the document, The NPPHM is the result of masterful compromise, but it is not perfectly coherent in the way it understands or utilizes Christian tradition. We turn, then, to an examination of the theological substrats of the NPPHM. The prefatory paragraphs set the document in the context of a "spirit of faith" in God, in - - the whole "People of God," and in Hispanic Catho1ics.'- The understanding of faith, and of divine action, is inseparable from the church. But the employment of a familiar image from Gaudium et Spes is not by chance. 'People of God" sets a tone and establishes a connection with Vatican II. It suggests an understanding of church that is personal, participative, and cornmunitarian,
The document's understanding of church is also warmly embracing of cultural pluralism. The bishops cite themselves in referring to the Hispanic community in the
-
52- NPPHM #2, p. 1. 301 U.S. as 'a blessing from ~od."~' Although the document is addressed to the pastoral needs of Hispanics, 'it challenges
al1 Catholics as members of the Body of Christ."54 Unfortunately, the nature of this challenge to non-Hispanic
U.S, Catholics is never spelled out. But the intent seems to be to set an ecclesiological context in which diverse cultural interests coexist. This is strengthened in a subsequent introductory section, in which the bishops state that their aim is the "integration" of Hispanics in al1 church institutions. Their hope is for "mutual enrichment through interaction among al1 our culture^.^^^ The ecclesiology expressed in the document is also strongly collaborative. The bishops emphatically affirm the pastoral de conjunto, which they cal1 "not only a methodology, but an expression of the essence and mission of the Church, which is c~mmunion."'~ Unfortunately, again, this pregnant statement is not elaborated; we do not know precisely what the bishops had in mind in their choice of
"communion" as the preeminent terminology for the churchfs 'essence" and 'mission." We do know that it was deliberate,
53. NPPHM #2, p. 1; citing the 1983 pastoral letter, The Hispanic Presence, op. cit.
55. NPPHM #4, p. 2. for the "communion" theme is reiterated at least twice more.'' In addition, the eighteen sections which deal with pastoral de conjunto dernonstrate that this communion ecclesiology has real substance? Frankly admitting that "the Hispanic Catholic experiences a lack of unity and communion in the Church' s pastoral ninistry, " the bishops state that "the challenge here is for the laity, religious, and clergy to work together."" Subsequent sections strongly promote a participative, coordinated style of ministry at al1 levels of the Church, from the hierarchy to the grass roots. And, in doing so, the text is remarkably devoid of cautionary reminders about episcopal or clerical prerogatives. The "Doctrinal Framework,'fi"nother of the introductory sections preceding the actual proposals, adds several more elements to the theological mix. The bishops take a sharply critical stance with regard to the larger culture of U.S. society when they begin by asserting: "The Catholic heritage and cultural identity of Hispanics are threatened by the prevailing secular values of the American
57. NPPHM #20 and 21, p. 9-
58. NPPHM, #19-36, pp. 9-11.
59. NPPHM #19, p. 9.
60. NPPHM, p. 6. ~ociety."~' They view the Hispanic people as a "prophetic presence" standing over against those non-Gospel value^.^' As such, Hispanics are an ally of the "prophetic" ~hurch,'' a Church which engages in a 'critique of society from the perspective of the poorrN6' and which "continues to make an option for the poor and the rnarginali~ed."~'
The larger context here is the Churchrs kerygma:
The mission of the Church is the continuation of Jesusr work: to announce the Kingdom of God and the means for entering it. It is the proclamation of what is to corne and also an anticipation of that plenitude here and now in the process of history. The Kingdom which Jesus proclaims and initiates is so important that, in relation to it, al1 else is relative.'' Proclamation necessitates the Churchfs incarnation in the multiplicity of human contexts: The Church, as community, carries out the work of Jesus by entering into the cultural, religious, and social reality of the people, becoming incarnate in and with the people, "in virtue of her mission and nature she is bound to no particular form of human culture, nor to any political, economic, or social systern. " Therefore, she is able to preach the need for conversion of everyone, to affirm the dignity of the human person, and to seek ways to eradicate persona1 sin, oppressive
6. NPPHM #12, para. 1, p. 6.
62. NPPHM #12, para. 2, p. 6.
63. NPPHM #14, p- 6.
64. NPPHM #12, para- 3, p. 6.
65. NPPHM #14, p. 6.
66. NPFHM #13, p. 6. structures, and foms of injustice." Moreover, the Church "identifies with the risen Christ," whose announcement of the Kingdom "implies a new social order" and 'a new style of Church as leaven. Finally, the Church is seen as the community of 'the indwelling Spirit of Christ." That Spirit is the source of the Churchrs "solidarity," its "prophetic commitment to justice and love," and the "coresponsibility" shared by "the People of God: the Pope and the bishops, priests, religious, and laity" in the work of Jesus.'" What are we to make of these various elements? What is clear is that the bishops are working from within a "Christ the Transformer of ~ulture"'~perspective. In broad tems this approach is certainly consonant with the Third Encuentro and with al1 the leading Hispanic voices exarnined in preceding chapters. However, closer scrutiny reveals that the theology expressed in the NPPHM fias a staccato quality. Discrete perspectives are expressed in compressed fashion, and juxtaposed with one another with little attempt at integration. The result is, at best, only a rough
67. NPPHM #13, p. 6; the quotation is from Gaudium et Spes, S42.
68. NPPHM #14, p. 6.
69. NPPHM #15, p. 6.
70. H. R. Niebuhr, Christ and Culture, pp. 190-229. harmony of overall theological perspective, To be sure, there are some genuinely positive elements in this theological picture. For one thing, we rnust conclude that the NPPHM is a genuinely theological enterprise. Whatever cornplaints one may have about the shortcomings of its theological rnethodology, as we shall see below, the Plan does take Christian tradition seriously as a source for human life in the Hispanic cultural context. It engages the tradition both as positive source of Hispanic Christian identity and, to a real though lesser extent, as source of challenge, redemption, liberation, The NPPHM stands squarely within the churchrs pastoral theological tradition, informed both by the tradition of faith and by the context it addresses, Perhaps the strongest and most coherent dimension of the NPPHMrs theology turns out to be its advancement of an ecclesiology of communion, This is a remarkable feature of the Plan, and one that stands in striking contrast to what one finds in most other Roman Catholic ecclesiastical documents, We have already lamented the fact that the bishops never define what they mean by "communion." But some of its features can be deduced from various points in the document. As we have seen, pastoral de conjunto is one of the cornerstones of the documentrs ecclesiological 306 perspective. This means that roles are differentiated, but there is remarkably little emphasis in the NPPHM upon authority or law. In the bishopsr usage of the term, an ecclesiology of communion connotes collaboration, teamwork, communication among pastoral agents, planning, and evaluation. This perspective assumes that al1 voices need to be heard and that everyone plays a part in the common mission. Moreover, it is an ecclesiology that is respectful of culture. It not only respects Hispanic culture, but even reaches toward a broader vision of a multicultural ecclesial communion in which cultures enrich, mutually support, and reciprocally challenge one another. The NPPHMfs portrait of the unity of the church -- always a theme so central to Catholic ecclesiology -- is seamlessly linked to an embrace of diversity.
The theological grounding of the NPPHM also has a decidedly contemporary caste in at least four other respects worth mentioning. First, it demonstrates an acquaintance with modern biblical scholarship, especially in the way it identifies the "Kingdom of God" as the most central theme in its understanding of the life and mission of Jesus. It places the divine reign, and not the church nor the Bible, as the point of reference for al1 pastoral activity. Moreover, that reign is understood to be both 'not yet" and 307 "already," both beyond human grasp and history, and at the same time breaking into human experience in the present. So the reign is not solely reserved to a future eschaton, but has meaningful implications for the present world, including the social order. Secondly, the NPPHM is also quite contemporary theologically in its social doctrine. It presumes the tradition of Catholic social teaching. As we saw in an earlier chapter, that body of teaching has evolved dramatically in this century, especially since the Second Vatican Council, The advances in biblical scholarship mentioned in the previous paragraph have contributed to that evolution significantly. Catholic social teaching continues to develop, particularly under the influence of political and liberation theologies, Undertones of liberation theology are not difficult to discern in the document. When the bishops embrace the "option for the poor and the marginalized, "" for example, they are following the bishops of Latin America, who were so profoundly influenced by the theology of liberation at their Medellin and Puebla conferences. In short, the targeting of a particular disadvantaged group as the beneficiary of special material and pastoral attention can be attributed both to the
71. NPPHM #14, p. 6. 308 official social teaching of the Catholic Church and to the social concern marking so much of the wider discourse of contemporary theology . Thirdly, the document attends to the Third Person of the Trinity. In the Spirit the bishops find the ground of the Church's unity, the plurality of gifts in al1 the members, the shared responsibility for the mission, and the empowerment for service to, and solidarity with, the poor and marginalized. Historically Roman Catholic theology has often tended to locate the Spirit almost exclusively within the hierarchy and the sacraments. But such is not the case with the NPPHM. Though still too brief on this point, the Plan clearly recognizes that the Spiritfs activity fills the entire church. Fourth, and closely related to the third, is the document's recognition of spirituality. Both Spirit and spirituality are themes that are finding their way into current theological scholarship with increasing frequency, Although we have seen that the NPPHMrs treatment of spirituality is still somewhat awkward and structurally marginal to the main body of the document, its presence is nonetheless important and it is remarkably contemporary. Recall, for example, how the document def ines spirituality: "the way of life of a people, a movement by the Spirit of God, and the grounding of one's identity as a Christian in every circumstance of life."" This is not far from the approach of one eminent contemporary scholar in the field, Walter Principe, Principe gives spirituality this definition at the existential level for Christians: "Spirituality is life in the Spirit as brothers and sisters of Jesus Christ and daughters and sons of the ~ather."" On a more general level, Principe describes spirituality as ...the way in which a person understands and lives within his or her religion, philosophy or ethic that is viewed as the loftiest, the noblest, the most calculated to lead to the fullness of the ideal or perfection being sought .74 Additionally, the Plan evinces a quite contemporary sensitivity to the ways in which history and culture shape people's lived spirituality. This theme has been corning to the fore more and more in scholarly circles, both in the current interest in popular religion and elsewhere." The Plan respects the practices of Hispanic popular piety,
73. "Toward Defining Spirituality," Sciences Religieuses/Studies in Religion 12:2 (Spring 1983) 135.
74. "Toward Defining Spirituality," 136. See also the definitions offered by Sandra Schneiders, "Theology and Spirituality: Strangers, Rivals, or Partners?" Horizons 13:2 (1986) 264-7; also, Schneiders, "Spirituality in the Academy," Theological Studies 50 (1989) 676-97.
75. See, e-g-, the important work by Philip Sheldrake, Spirituality and History: Questions of Interpretation and Method (N.Y. : Crossroad, 1992) 310 though not uncritically, and it fully embraces plurality of expression in the realm of spirituality. It may not carry this historical and cultural sensitivity to its logical, hermeneutical conclusion, but its incorporation into the document is an extraordinary achievement. There are, to be sure, some serious inadequacies in the NPPHM with regard to what Schreiter demands in Steps Four and Five. We have already mentioned the lack of coherence and integration in the theological perspective. To this we can add the observation that at times the theology of the
NPPHM is proposed in a top-dom, deductive marner. Its doctrinal foundations are asserted rather baldly, without reference either to the context or to any process by which these particular convictions entered into the reflection on ministry in the Hispanic context. One of the convictions guiding this study is that theology rnust be self-conscious of its own dependence upon culture, i.., of the fact that - - faith requires culture for expression and actualization.'" The doctrinal assertions of the NPPHM, whatever their considerable merits, do not betray a satisfactory sensitivity to the fact of their own historico-cultural conditioning. Put another way, there is too little in the way of connecting material here. It may seem obvious
76, See #1, chap. 2.d. 311 enough, for example, why an ecclesiology of communion or the preferential option for the poor are relevant to the needs of Hispanics at this point in tirne, and certainly both are to be listed among the document's strengths. But there is scant articulation of the rationale for this relevance. By way of contrast, the theological approach Schreiter recommends has a more inductive method- It demands a conscious and explicit searching of the tradition for themes and convictions that are relevant to a given context.
However, this is not to Say that the document does not rest upon such a process of searching the tradition. When one studies the Plan by also examining the document of the Third Encuentro, it becomes clear, at least implicitly, why certain theological themes emerged. The NPPHM would be a stronger document if it more explicitly articulated how it represents the fruit of an extended process of theological reflection on reality. To press this point further, we can recall how earlier we saw that the NPPHM does not forthrightly confront the Churchfs own history of discrimination and neglect with regard to Hispanics. One result of this oversight is that the document does not name and repudiate the inadequacies of the previous theologies which used to govern the Hispanic community. The Third Encuentro, like the First and Second Encuentros before it, 312 did exactly that. The bluntly stated historical grievance aired by the Encuentro deleqates was laundered out of the final document, Indeed the NPPHM does not evince a really consistent awareness of the local nature of theology, even though the
Plan's very existence is predicated on that fact. The "Catholic heritage" of Hispanics which the bishops see as "threatened"" is viewed univocally, even monoli thically, at least in the formal doctrinal segment. Similarly, wher, the bishops speak of the church and the church's mission, they almost always mean the universal, Roman Catholic Church. Mention of the local church is hard to find, and even when present, the sense in which it is used is mainly derivative of the larger ~cclesiology. In short, if we consider the NPPHM on its own face, we would have to judge that it largely fails the test of
Schreiter's fifth step. That is to Say, it does not explicitly and critically view the Christian tradition as a series of local theologies. However, we need to once again place the Plan in the context of the total process, and doing so mitigates this negative judgment sornewhat. If we view the NPPHM as a logical, though flawed, outgrowth of the Encuentro process, we can judge that the Plan does to some
77. NPPHM #12, p. 6. extent rest upon the implicit conviction that previous theologies need to be subjected to a hermeneutics of suspicion based on contextual factors. In the documents of the Encuentros we can see something of this critical rethinking at work. Thus, while the final language of the NPPHM itself leans in a deductive direction, we can have some confidence that it was the fruit of a more bidirectional process of dialogue with Christian tradition. Another weakness of the NPPHM is that it 3s not guided by a clearly articulated theology of inculturation. The document would be greatly strengthened methodologically by more explicitness in this area. Instead, one is left to infer the document's theological underpinnings with regard
to the faith-culture dynamic. The terms inculturation and
contextualization are never used, though, as we have already
seen, many fragments of their meaning are surely present. The only reference to the challenge of inculturation is when the bishops observe that the churchfs task is "to enter into the cultural, religious, and social reality of the people, becoming incarnate in and with the pe~ple."'~ In a previous section we concluded that, while the incarnation image as a mode1 for inculturation has some obvious strengths, it ultimately must be rejected as too one-sided, not fully
78. NPPHM #13, p. 6. mutual, reciprocal, or dialogical . In general, however, the incarnation image does seem to
fit the understanding of the faith and culture dynamic actualiy operating in the document, That is to Say, the dialogue is somewhat one-sided in favour of the church,
rather than "fully reciprocal and dialogical. "'? ~hereare no commitments made to ecumenical or interfaith dialogue." Indeed, the document' s ref erences to other churches leave an impression of unremitting cornpetition, even hostility, In the bishops' view, the church inserts itself into various contexts, including the Hispanic, The church is the initiator, and it bears a timeless message of truth and praxis of love. To be sure, there are allusions to what the church receives from culture in return, but culture always seems to be the junior partner. The vision is not broad enough to include the possibility that local theology in the Hispanic context can not only enrich the church but even, potentially, shape and transform the tradition. Finally, we note again that another limitation of the document is that it is very Word-centred. Proclamation
(kerygma) figures heavily in the understanding of the churchrs mission. The topics that dominate the Planrs
79- See #4, chap. 2.d.
80. See #5, chap. 2.d. attention -- catechesis, leadership formation, and evangelization -- are al1 closely aligned with this proclamation perspective. Diakonia and koinonia are also mentioned, but in minor keys. Leitourgia is scarce, unless one considers the bracketing sections on spirituality in that way. Why is there so little to Say about liturgy, prayer, celebration, ritual, popular religion? Earlier, after examining Starklofffs appropriation of Geertzfs work on "cultural systems," we concluded that authentic inculturation ultimately has to penetrate al1 cultural systems, not just the formally "religious ."" Where are art, common sense, ideology? The NPPHM does not seem to envision an inculturation that infiltrates and transforms al1 aspects of Hispanic life in a holistic way. "Words are cheap," goes the saying. And that goes double for Mexican Americans, if those words are not accompanied by action, relationship, and symbols that appeal to the full range of human sensibilities.
Steps 96 and 7: Cultural Themes Meet Church Tradition and Shape Local Theology Much of what we have said in the preceding pages of this chapter already speaks to Schreiterrs sixth and seventh
81. See #12, chap. 2.d. 316 steps. In the sixth step the themes of the local cultural situation encounter church tradition, This involves, on the part of the local church, a searching of the tradition for local theologies that "paralle1 the local theme or need, either in content, in context, in form, or in al1 three.""
This leads to the seventh step, the impact of the tradition upon the shape of local theologies. This represents the creative moment in which the wider tradition becomes resource for the construction of new contextual theology. We consider these two steps together here because they are integrally connected, While conceptually distinct, in practice they are not easily separated. Earlier we identified the three overarching thernes arising from reflection on the Mexican American situation as identity, liberation, and welcome. Actually our study recognized that Mexican Americans have been engaged in a search for what they lack in each of these areas: to discover who they are, to free themselves from a condition of rnarginalization and oppression, and to make their home in the faith community. We saw clearly the yen for each of these in our examination of the three Encuentros- And we have already discussed in some detail the strong and weak points of the presence of these themes in the capstone
82, Constructing Local Theologies, p. 33. 317
document, the NPPHM. It may suffice here to of fer just a few further observations on the Mexican American communityrs
mining of the tradition for theological resources which respond to its needs in these three areas. The Mexican American quest for identity, liberation, and welcome can be seen vividly through its preeminent spokesperson, Virgilio Elizondo. Among Elizondo's many
written works, probably his The Future 1s Mestizo and
Galilean Journey most clearly document the encounter of this search with the faith tradition. Elizondo speaks
autobiographically in the former work. He recalls, for example, the identity confusion of his growing up years in the borderlands of south Texas. As a young Mexican Arnerican
Elizondo had numerous "experiences of non-being, "d3 i.e., experiences which reinforced that he was neither truly Mexican nor truly American, but lived in a twilight region between the two. This led Elizondo and others like him on a search for "ro~ts."~~He studied the history of his own region and people, discovering aspects that were previously unknown or suppressed. This led him, as we have already seen, to see Mexican American identity as the fruit of a
double conquest and double mestiza je.
83. The Future Is Mestizo, p. 20.
84. The Future 1s ~estizo,p. 38. 318
Turning to the tradition, then, the author began to reinterpret the Mexican American history as a narrative of divine creation. Be acquired new appreciation for the profound theological affirmation of mestizo-ness represented by Our Lady of Guadalupe. He also gained insight into the life and mission of Jesus as the prophet £rom Galilee. Elizondo saw that Galilee, like the American Southwest, was an ethnic and religious borderland. Jesus' Galilean origin was despised by the cultural and religious elite in Jerusalem. Elizondo even calls Jesus 'a cultural mestizo, "" and thus in his own identity a symbol of rejection by the dominant culture. Elizondo's re-appropriation of Jesus' identity as a rejected Galilean prophet opened new doors to affirming Mexican American identity theologically. Moreover, the understanding of that identity in these terms began to assume the aspect of divine election" and mission. Jesus as symbol of rejection becomes source of redemption for the rejected Mexican American. An identity that formerly seemed to be a handicap and a cause of humiliation becomes the source of pride and identification with Jesus. More than that, it even positions the Mexican American people to
85- The Future 1s Mestizo, p. 79.
86- Galilean Journey, pp. 94ff. 319 themselves participate in the mission of Jesus by playing a prophetic historical role in bringing about a multicultural future, what the author calls "universal mestiza je. "a' Moreover, the Jesus that Elizondo discovered positioned himself on the side of the liberation of the poor and marginalized. The discover of identity in Jesus also addressed the search for liberation. Elizondo's christology unfolded dynamically. The Galilean Jesus became for him the source of identity and, increasingly, the spring of social critique and struggle. A similar transformation came over his view of Guadalupe; its identity-giving aspects once secured, its redemptive and liberatory power began to be unleashed. Although certainly influenced and enriched by Latin American liberation theology, Elizondofs encounter with the tradition bore a distinctive fruit, cultivated in Mexican American experience. As the author journeyed into the tradition in search of help in understanding his people's experience, he appropriated that tradition in fresh ways.
In doing so he made the church his home in a way it had not been previously. In his youthful years Elizondo had found the Catholic school, the parish, and later the seminary to be places of cultural alienation, even
87. The Future Is Mestizo, p. 87. rejection. In his mature years, through both his writing and his active engagement in pastoral ministry as rector of the cathedral in San ~ntonio,~"e has played an active role in making the Church a more welcoming place for Mexican
Americans, and he continues to do so. Elizondofs journey is paradigrnatic. His enduring popularity over the past three decades attests to his symbolic importance as a leader within the Mexican American community. The NPPHM bears the stamp of Elizondo's labours and the labours of others on parallel journeys as well. While it was a joint effort of U.S. Hispanics, the Plan does represent the fruit of the Mexican American search for theological resources that address the needs of the Mexican American reality. The three Encuentros and the Plan itself would not have happened if Elizondo and others had not put themselves to the task of rethinking the Hispanic situation in light of the tradition-
Of course, that is not to claim that the NPPHM gathers the good fruit of that rethinking perfectly. We have already reviewed many of the ways in which the NPPKM does, and sometimes does not, well represent the process of dialogue between Mexican American culture and church
88. V. Elizondo, interview by author, tape recording, San Antonio, 31 May 1995. Fr. Elizondo8s term as rector of the cathedral ended in June, 1995. tradition. Some further illumination may be gained by examining briefly just one of the major strategies proposed by the NPPHM, namely, small ecclesial communities (SECs). The praxis of formation of SECs originated in Latin America* The hopes of many Latin American liberation theologians have been pinned on base communities. An overall appraisal of their success is not possible, but it likely would prove mixed. They seem to have been quite successful in some contexts, especially where episcopal support has been strong, but also something less than their most ardent proponents have claimed for them. Be that as it may, the importation of this strategy into the UA. Mexican
American context raises a number of questions. Although strongly endorsed in the Second and Third Encuentxos, enthusiasm for SECs is not universal. They are not a major theme in the work of Virgil Elizondo. Allan Deck concurs in the generally perceived need for "small, receptive, faith- sharing community contexts ."89 But Deck also expresses some critical reservations with regard to SECs, and his position is not unfounded. The author questions whether both the efficacy and the extent of the SECs have at times been
89. "The Crisis of Hispanic Ministry: Multiculturalism as an Ideology," America 163 (July 1990) 34. exaggerated? Deck also cites recent research which suggests that SECs are a less significant influence in Latin America than the attraction of evangelical and pentecostal Chri~tianity.?~SECs are perceived as politicized, according to Deck, and ordinary folk 'instinctively resist moving from symbolic to overt forms of protest."" The social situation of the U.S. is not that of Latin America, and the NPPHM reflects disappointingly little in the way of grappling with the particular obstacles and challenges facing the SEC strategy in the U.S. context. The question as to why this strategy fits this context is not answered directly, and the answer cannot be inferred fully. SECs are not a pastoral panacea, and grandiose claims attached to them must be subjected to rigourous scrutiny. Still, there are reasons for the emphasis placed on
SECs by the Encuentros and the NPPHM, and the reasons do go deeper than mere imitation of U.S. Hispanicsf Latin American cousins. Small community settings have been a facet of the Christian movement since the first century, and they have
90, The Second Wave, pp. 71-3.
91, "Reasons for Our Hope," in Deck et al., eds., Perspectivas (Kansas City: Sheed & Ward, 1995), p. 134; originally published in Aroerica 170 (23 April 1994) 12-5. The research Deck cites is that of Jorge E. Maldonado, "Building 'Fundamentalismf From the Fdly in Latin America, " in Martin Marty and R. Scott Appleby, eds ., Fundamentalisms and Society, vol, 2 (Chicago: U. of Chicago Press, 1993).
92- "Reasons for Our Hope," p. 134. often been associated with renewal movements. They have traditionally provided, to a greater degree than typically found in larger church structures, fora for experiences of communal prayer, formation and catechesis, intensive study of the scriptures, community identity, mutual support and intirnacy, collaborative action and political resistance. While some such smaller ecclesial groups have failed outright, splintered away from the larger community, or maintained a parallel existence, others have been accepted into the mainstream of the tradition and institutionalized.
Among the latter one can point to many of the varied forms of vowed religious life. Many of these historical experiences of local communities in smaller contexts hold a quite obvious attraction for contemporary U.S. Mexican Americans. To the desire to cul tivate and maintain cultural identity, SECs offer a setting in which that identity can be discovered, supported, and affirmeci. To a marginalized people SECs offer the promise of defending boundaries too long invaded by the dominant culture, and the possibility of joint action to effect change, To a relationship-oriented people who experience the larger church as colcl and unwelcoming, SECs offer a sense of belonging and a setting for a very persona1 hospitality. If the pastoral priorities for Hispanic ministry are collaboration, evangelization, and formation, as the NPPHM identified them, SECs would seem to be one reasonable, historically tested charnel for efforts to those ends. Local adaptation, which the Plan itself calls for, should serve to address some of the shortcomings of the introduction of this strategy into the US. context. Moreover, it is important to note that the attraction of SECs for many U.S. Hispanics was not merely theoretical. By the time of the Third Encuentro SECs were blossoming in many places, prompting some of the delegates to promote this strategy based on persona1 experience. F'urther harvesting of that experience will be needed in order for the SEC strategy to succeed in its aims.
Steps and Impacts upon Tradi and Cultue
Schreiterfs final two steps complete the circle by recognizing that local theologies impact both the church tradition and the culture. Religious tradition is a dynamic, ongoing process, and its development continues by means of local theological efforts. Similarly, cultures change under the influence of various forces, including the currents of theology in religious communities situated within the cultural context. In both cases our address of these steps with regard to the impact of the NPPHM can presently be little more than impressionistic and speculative.
Opinions Vary as to the impact of the NPPHM on the
pastoral praxis of tne U.S. Catholic Church. It is widely agreed that the Encuentro process engendered tremendous good will, hope, and a sense of ownership among Hispanics, including Mexican Americans. Presently in some quarters these seem to be giving way to discouragement in the face of official sloth in implernenting the Plan. One fears that the opportunity for the Plan's irnplementation through collaboration with those most invested in it may in some
places be slipping away.33 There is no evidence to suggest that the attrition of Hispanic Catholics to other faith
communities or to secularization has been stemmed at al1 in the years since the Plan's promulgation. Some are convinced that the document is already passé, or soon will be, as the forces of reaction and stricter discipline tighten their grip on the Church. Many point to the history of the Church's production of documents that quickly disappear into institutional archives and library shelves, and such criticism is not entirely cynical. Such observers are apt to also point to the fact that the bishopsf conference has
93. Allan Deck fears that the Third Encuentro is being "rendered a dead letter in many places throughout the U.S. church-" ["The Crisis of Hispanic Ministry," 34.1 326 failed to appropriate any funding for implementation of the do~urnent.'~ They may also note sadly that no other national Encuentros have been held, nor are any planned. Some have found the tenor of recent officially sponsored Hispanic
gatherings (like the 1995 celebration of 50 years of Hispanic ministry in San Antonio) to be quite different, more clerically controlled and merely exhortatory rather than dial~gical."~Lay participation and serious grappling with pastoral issues at such events seem to be waning. Some simply dismiss the Plan as well-intentioned but too general to be of much real assistance to pastoral agents. There is little doubt that the implementation of the Plan has been, at best, spotty. Even some large Hispanic dioceses like San Antonio and Los Angeles have not undertaken implementation in a concerted way, But where the next step has been taken -- Le, the formulation of a diocesan plan based on the national document -- there are some encouraging signs, In those places the NPPHM appears to be fostering a positive ongoing reflection on pastoral praxis in the Hispanic context. Fr. Mario Vizcaino, the director of the South East Pastoral Institute, has devoted
94- As Allan Deck observes drily, "Funds to Ucqilement the much- touted National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic Ministry were never allocated by the U-S. bishops." ["The Crisis of Hispanic Ministry," 34.1
95. Fr. Vicente Lopez, interview by author, Notre Dame, 31 Oct. 1995. enormous energies to assisting dioceses with implementing their own plans. Vizcaino is sanguine about the credibility of these local efforts. He rernains optimistic about the Plan's future prospects, and is undeterred by the absence of special funding.?"n such places the NPPHM is still being read and taken seriously for the guidance it affords pastoral praxis. I personally know of at least two theology schools where the Plan is being studied regularly by ministry students.'' The fact that the NPPHM has been followed by national pastoral plans for black Catholics and for young adults suggests that the NPPHM remains influential in at least some leadership circles of the U.S. Church.
And, the Plan may be serving an important function already as a publicist for the presence of Hispanics within the Church, serving notice that multiculturalism is here to stay.
On balance, the viability of the NPPHM remains in doubt, and so the documentrs impact on the tradition is an open question- Some leaders seem to be dernonstrating that implementation can be done and that it pays off handsomely. But too often the will to do so seems to he lacking- Hispanic Catholics may be collectively holding their breath,
96. Interview, Miami, 3 Jan. 1996.
97. The University of Notre Darne, and the Oblate School of Theology, San Antonio. as it were, to see what will happen in the years ahead. If it is difficult to evaluate the Plan's impact on the church and its tradition, it is even more difficult to project how the Plan may impact the cultural situation of Mexican Americans in the United States. That may well depend in large measure on the degree to which the Plan is implemented, and its efficacy in achieving its pastoral goals. There is, again, little reason to believe that the social, economic, or cultural situation of the average Mexican American has been affected yet in any significant way by the commitments of the NPPHM. Perhaps in some srna11
way the NPPHM has contributed something to the cultural self-respect of Mexican Americans, and to their determination to maintain their identity and overcome the discrimination they face. The Plan certainly encourages
resistance to assimilation, Perhaps, too, in some small way it serves notice that cultural diversity will be a permanent
feature of U.S. society. One hopes that the NPPHM may yet have such a positive influence on the culture.
Recapitulation: The Five Criteria for Local Theology Finally, we summarize our conclusions of this chapter by turning briefly to the five criteria Schreiter suggests for evaluating local theologie~.~~Schreiter emphasizes that these work in consort, and that a given local theology must pass al1 five tests to be judged positively as an authentic local expression of Christian identity. The first criterion is cohesiveness within the tradition. Our judgment has been that the NPPHM rnanifests only a rough interna1 theological coherence. The document is wanting in terms of making explicit its theological method and in its integration of theological commitments. Despite these real limitations, it was also our judgment that the document is situated well within the bounds of the tradition. It is motivated and guided by a reading of the Gospel that is at once anchored in the tradition and yet contemporary. The NPPHM passes the test of cohesiveness. Criterion two is the rule of belief following the rule of worship, We concluded that a weakness of the Plan is its lack of reference to worship, prayer, popular devotion, and other aspects of cultural life, giving the document an imbalance in the direction of proclamation and verbosity, Despite these conclusions, however, it is clear that the NPPHM emerged from authentic spirituallty within the Hispanic communities, Clearly the Encuentros were, among other things, great events of prayer. The major themes we
98. Constructing Local Theologies, pp. 117-21. identified -- identity, liberation, and welcome -- are patently themes that have been brought to a prayerful encounter with the tradition. Moreover, some of the strategies of the Plan are clearly intended to facilitate prayer and root themselves in the worshipping community.
SECS are perhaps the most obvious example of this. To Say that the law of prayer is leading the law of belief in the Plan is perhaps overreaching. But we have identified an openness to spirituality and, at least, a relationship of mutual enrichment between the two operating in the document. We conclude, cautiously, that the NPPHM is not at odds with lex orandi, lex credendi. The third criterion is judgment of the praxis generated by the local theology. We have already stated that this question cannot be definitively answered without more information £rom the field. We have also admitted that, unfortunately, it is possible that the Plan will remain words on a page, not translated into action. We have scrutinized the document carefully and concluded that the praxis it commends is stronger in affirming identity than it is in producing liberation, insofar as those two poles can be separated. But we have also concluded that a Christian community guided by the document in its praxis would definitely be a liberating community for Mexican Americans. 331 While imperfect, the NPPHM represents a positive expression of the liberating praxis we find in the Gospel. The fourth criterion asks for the judgment of other local churches. Although a complete answer to this question is not possible either, we can note several factors in the
NPPHM's favour. We have seen that the NPPHM was born through a process that was open to the theological contributions of other local churches, especially Latin Arnerica. Some representatives of those churches -- e.g.,
Edgard Beltran, J,xé Marins -- even participated in the process in advisory capacities. In addition, we saw as one of the document's strengths its ecclesiology, a view of church that is respectful of cultural diversity. Finally,
we note that the NPPHM was supported by Roman authorities, who bear the ministry of unity in a special way, and was
endorsed by the U. S. hierarchy, the off icial representatives of other local churches in the Roman Catholic communion.
Al1 of these factors support the conviction that the NPPHM is being judged positively by other local churches, and thus
we render a provisional positive judgment on this criterion. Similarly, no more than a provisional answer can be given in reply to the fifth criterion, the challenge to other local churches. The Mexican American church has not generally been a missionary community; its history of 332 marginalization and uncertainty about its own identity have militated strongly against that. But perhaps that is
changing. In their 1983 pastoral letter the U.S. bishops affirmed the presence of the Hispanic people and urged them to raise their voices. Through the Encuentro process the prophetic voices of Mexican Americans and others were indeed
heard by the rest of the church. The NPPHM continued this
line by affirming that Hispanics are a "prophetic presence"" within U.S. society. In short, the process of which the NPPHM is the culmination represents a new stage of developrnent in Hispanics' assertion of themselves as challenge and gift to other local churches. It is to be hoped that that process will contribute still more to the mutual enrichment of the churches in the years to corne.
99. NPPHM #12, p. 6, CONCLUSION
Coming to the close of this project, 1 am reminded once again of the truism that theology remains an ongoing and
open process. Reflection on pastoral praxis is an
undertaking whose facets seem to multiply at every turn. Constructing local theology involves a dynamic which cannot
hope to be exhaustive or conclusive. Nonetheless, a few concluding remarks need to be hazarded. First we glance retrospectively at a few points of the work undertaken here, and then briefly turn our gaze forward toward the future.
In many ways, the National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic
Ministry accurately reflects the status quaestionis in the Roman Catholic Church with regard to the issue of faith and culture, There are strengths and weaknesses, gaps, uncertainties, and yet much cause for celebration and hope. Viewed from the perspective of the past, the NPPHM represents a huge advance toward a pastoral praxis that takes culture as a serious dialogue partner. Viewed from the perspective of the current thinking on inculturation, the NPPHM falls short of the best that we might hope for
from the Church' s ministry. 334
It is well to remember at this point that the NPPHM is a clerical, hierarchical document. It was promulgated by the U.S. bishops as the ultimate and quite distinct phase of a long gestation process. Taken by themselves, the three Encuentros represent a rernarkable chapter in U.S. Catholic history, a chapter that has yet to be fully chronicled. Outside of the Hispanic community the Encuentro process is practically unknown, much less appreciated for its full significance. Within the Hispanic community, as far as 1 have been able to ascertain, few serious cornplaints about the process have been registered. On the contrary, the Third Encuentro, in particular, is more often recalled wistfully as a kind of golden moment in the life of the U.S. Hispanic Catholic community. But, beneath the surface, the relationship between the
NPPHM and the Third Encuentro remains sornewhat tenuous and uneasy. We may well question whether the writing of the Plan should have been as distinct from the consultation process as it was. Why did the bishops not choose simply to endorse and adopt the final document of the Third Encuentro? Acthoring a separate document, no matter how well rooted in the fruits of the Encuentro, lends at least the appearance of a distrust of the laity, or of Kispanics generally, or both. To be sure, the NPPHM has many strengths, and its 335 very existence is a remarkable achievement, a positive sign to the Hispanic community and a source of encouragement for a culturally sensitive and diverse church. But, from the point of view of the theology of inculturation proposed here, the document of the Third Encuentro could be judged somewhat more favourably than the Plan as we have it today. The NPPKM has the stamp of episcopal authority behind it, but its content is not an improvement on the Third Encuentro . One issue this raises, of course, is the role of the episcopal ministry in the total process of formulating the Plan. It would seem that the process rnight have been strengthened by having the bishops more actively involved at al1 steps along the way. To be sure, there was a srnattering of Hispanic bishops who were deeply involved in the Encuentro and/or the actual writing of the final document. But collectively the hierarchy only becarne an active partner in the process once the Third Encuentro was over. If the bishops had been invested personally in the process earlier on, the need for a separate document might have been obviated. The final Plan, then, would have been more surely a product of consensus among al1 levels of the Church. This would have had the additional advantage of strengthening solidarity between laity and leadership. 336 Some of the weaknesses identified here indict both the Plan and the Encuentro process. The absence of a thorough and coherent cultural analysis is the most obvious example. In particular, Hispanic popular religion and the attraction of fundamentalist and pentecostal churches are both treated with too little sophistication. We could add to this the absence of a self-critical moment with regard to Hispanic culture. While the Encuentro and the Plan rightly affirm and celebrate Hispanic identity, too little attention is paid to the culture's shadow side, Le., the ways in which that culture needs to be challenged, purified, or liberated by the Gospel. Of course, we have seen that cultural analysis remains a pressing frontier issue for the inculturation field as a whole, But this does not entirely excuse the weakness of both the Encuentro process and the Plan in this area. Future efforts need to do better. Implementation appears to be another weak area of the NPPHM. Although a full-scale appraisal of the current state of the Plan's implementation has not been undertaken here, we have suggested anecdotally that it is, at best, a mixed bag. This forces the question of whether the Plan itself is defective in this area. The bishops not only have yet to appropriate the financial resources appropriate to the Plan, they have never endorsed a plan or tirnetable for proceeding 337 with the implementation. Putting the NPPHM into practice is left to the conscientiousness and good will of the local bishop. There is no system of accountability in place which would ensure that the Plan is implemented on the diocesan or local levels. Questions remain too abcut the Plan's relationship to
other segments of the US. Catholic communion. Although the Third Encuentro and the NPPHM lay out ambitious goals for
the Hispanic community, relatively little is demanded of the
rest of us, If the Plan were taken seriously and implemented vigourously, how might the rest of the U.S. Catholic Church have to change? We can only conjecture that it would entai1 a fairly sweeping transformation, from the parish al1 the way to the national level. The Plan certainly affirms that a rnulticultural church is the goal, and the symbolic importance of this affirmation is not to be underestimated. But the NPPHM does not expose the responsibilities which that vision would impose on the structure and life of the whole. Morecver, the Plan fails to meet the issue of power head-on, It does not take seriously enough the symbolic significance of indigenous ministry, especially at the episcopal level. As long as Hispanics continue to be grossly under-represented in the chambers of ecclesiastical authority, there will be little 338 reason to believe that the dominant Euroamerican segments of the U. S. church will be asked to change, adjust, make roorn, be inconvenienced, or even enter into true and extended dialogue. To this extent, therefore, rhetoric notwithstanding, the NPPHM does not project an inculturation process which is truly reciprocal.
Can the NPPHM serve as a mode1 for future culturally sensitive pastoral planning efforts? My answer will be cautiously and partially affirmative, 1 do believe the Encuentro process, in particular, despite its shortcomings, has rnuch to teach us. Wide consultation of those who are the intended beneficiaries of the churchfs ministry is both theologically essential and politically wise. The history of the Encuentro demonstrates that such consultation can indeed bear much good fruit. The process could be improved, of course, as 1 have suggested above, e-g,, with regard to cultural analysis, the participation of the hierarchy, etc . Learning from past mistakes is part of the way forward, But the strengths of the process and even of the final document are manifest. US. Hispanics have demonstrated that collegial decision-making can be an enterprise that is at once loyal to the tradition, respectful of the church and its official leadership, and responsible to culture. This is no mean feat.
In another sense, however, it is doubtful that the NPPHM will be allowed to serve as a mode1 for future efforts. If the Plan goes unfunded, unimplemented, ignored or circumvented, neither inculturation nor pastoral planning will be taken seriously. Both will be discredited in the eyes of the faithful, and one can rightfully then expect only cynicism and disaffection. Indeed a process and plan that promise much and deliver little might be worse than no process or plan at all. Finally, lurking behind so many of these factors is the question of the role of Rome. The ministry of central authority in the Catholic Church has enormous potential for stimulating, guiding, coordinating and unifying local theologies. Conversely, it also has the power to thwart and dampen and frustrate the very efforts it should be supporting and calling forth. In this case, Rome clearly seems to have had a positive hand in pressing the process forward to its conclusion by the bishops. But there has been a curious silence since then. No evidence suggests that the pope or curial officials have provided leadership or encouragement for the implementation of the Plan. Indeed some would assign to Rome a share of the blame for the slow progress toward the Plan's goals, saying that the current 340 ecclesiastical clirnate strongly inhibits pastoral creativity and favours only maintenance of the status quo. We simply do not know how seriously Roman authorities take the NPPHM or the needs it seeks to address.
One senses that the current moment may be nearing a juncture for U.S. Hispanics. Will the road ahead lead to continued defection from the Catholic Church, continued assimilation to the dominant culture, and continued frustration of Hispanic cultural aspirations? Or might it yet lead to a more hopeful future, in which Mexican Americans and other Latinos assume a place of dignity as full partners in a rnulticultural church and society? The answers to these questions rnay well be determined by whether the National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic Ministry turns out to be a dead end or a step in the right direction. SOURCES CONSULTED
Alberich, Emilio. "1s the Universal Catechism an Obstacle or a Catalyst in the Process of Inculturation?" In Johann-Baptist Metz and Edward Schillebeeckx, eds., World Catechism or Inculturation? (Concilium 204). Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark Ltd., 1989. Pp. 88-97.
Arbuckle, Gerald A, Earthing the Gospel: An Inculturation Handbook for the Pastoral Worker. Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1990.
Arrupe, Pedro. "To the Whole Society." Studies in the International Apostolate of Jesuitç 7:l (June 1978) 1- 9.
, ed. "A Working Paper on Inculturation." Studies in the International Apostolate of Jesuits 7:l (June
Aymes, Maria de la Cruz, et al. Effective Inculturation and Ethnic Identity. Vol. IX, Incul turation: Working Papers on Living Faith and Cultures, Ari j A. Roest Crollius, ed. Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1987. Aymes, Maria de la Cruz, and Maria de los Angeles Garcia. Principles for Inculturation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Washington, D.C. : United States Catholic Conference, 1994.
Azevedo, Marcello de Carvalho. Incul turation and the Challenges of Modernity. Vol. 1, Inculturation: Workin~Papers on Living Fai th and Cul turcs, Arij A. Roest Crollius, ed. Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1982.
Bate, Stuart C. Evangelisation in the South African Context, Vol. XII, Inculturation: Working Papers on Living Faith and Cultures, Arij A. Roest Crollius, ed. Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1991. Beauchamp, Paul, et al. Bible and Inculturation. Vol. III, Incultura tion: Working Papers on Living Fai th and Cultures, Arij A. Roest Crollius, ed. Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1983.
Bevans, Stephen B. Mode1 s of Con textual Theol ogy. Maryknoll, KY.: Orbis, 1992- Biernatzki, William E, Roots of Acceptance: The Intercultural Communication of Religious Meanings. Vol. XIII, Incul turation : Working Papers on Living Faith and Cultures, Arij A. Roest Crollius, ed. Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1991.
Bosch, David J. Transfolining Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission. Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1991,
Carrier, Hervé Evangelizing the Cul ture of Moderni ty. Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1993. . Gospel Message and Human Cultures: From Leo XIII to John Paul II. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1989,
Catechism of the Catholic Church. Ottawa: Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, 1992.
Charles, Pierre. "Missiologie et Acculturation*" Nouvel1 e Revue Théologique 75 (1953) 15-32.
Chupungco, Anscar J. Cultural Adaptation of tne Li turgy. N.Y. : Paulist, 1982. Liturgical Knculturation: Sacramentals, Religiosi ty, and Catechesis. Collegeville, Minn. : Liturgical Press, 1992. . Liturgies of the Future: The Process and Methods of Inculturation. N.Y. : Paulist, 1989. . "The Roman Liturgy and Inculturation." Federation of Diocesan Li turgical Commissions Newsletter 21:6 (Dec. 1994) 53-6. Costa, Ruy O., ed. One Faith, Many Cultures: Inculturation, Indigenization, and Contextualization. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1988.
Crollius, Ari j A. Roest, and Théoneste Nkéramihigo. What 1s So New about Incul turation? Vol. V, Incul turation: Working Papers on Living Faith and Cultures, Ari j A. Roest Crollius, ed. Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1984.
Crollius, Arij A. Roest, et al. Creative Inculturation and the Unity of Faith. Vol. VIII, Inculturation: Working Papers on Living Faith and Cultures, Ari j A. Roest Crollius, ed. Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1986.
Donovan, Vincent J . Christianity Rediscovered, 2nd ed. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1982.
Ducruet, Jean, et al. Faith and Culture: The Role of the Catholic University. Vol. XI, Incul turation: Working Papers on Living Faith and Cultures, Ari j A. Roest Crollius, ed. Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1989.
Dumais, Marcel, et al. Cultural Change and Liberation in a Christian Perspective. Vol. X, Inculturation: Working Papers on Living Faith and Cultures, Arij A. Roest Crollius, ed. Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1987.
Fitzpatrick, Joseph P. One Church, Many Cultures: The Challenge of Diversity. Kansas City: Sheed & Ward, 1987 .
Geertz, Clif ford. The Interpretation of Cultures. N. Y. : Basic Books, 1973.
. Local Knowledge. N.Y.: Basic Books, 1983,
Gilbert, Maurice, et al. L'Inculturation et la Sagesse des Nations, Vol. IV, Inculturation: Working Papers on Living Faith and Cultures, Arij A. Roest Crollius, ed. Rome : Pontifical Gregorian University, 1984.
Gittins, Anthony J. Gïfts and Strangers: Meeting the Challenge of Incul turation. N.Y. : Paulist, 1989. Gremillion, Joseph, ed. The Gospel of Peace and Justice: Catholic Social Teaching since Pope John. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1976. Guillemette, François. "L'apparition du concept df inculturation: Une réception de Vatican II ." Mission 2:1 (1995) 53-78.
Hardawiryana, Robert, et al. Building the Church in Pl uricul t ural Asza . Vol. VI 1, Incul t ura tion : Working Papers on Living Faith and Cultures, Ari j A. Roest CrolIius, ed. Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1986, Kesselgrave, David J., and Edward Romrnen. Context ualiza tion: Meanings, Methods, and Mode1 S. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1989. International Theological Commission. "Select Themes of Ecclesiology on the Occasion of the Eighth Anniversary of the Closing of the Second Vatican Council (1984)." In Michael Sharkey, ed., International Theological Commission: Texts and Documents, 1969-1985. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1989. Pp. 267-304; especially §IV, "The People of God and Inculturation, pp. 278-82; and SV, "Particular Churches and the Church Universal," pp. 282-6,
John Paul II, Pope. Catechesi Tradendae: Catechesis in Our Time. In Austin Flannery, ed., Vatican Council II: More Postconciliar Documents, vol. f 1. Collegeville, Minn.: The Liturgical Press, 1982. Pp. 762-814, . Redemptoris Missio: On the Permanent Validity of the ChurcYs Missionary Mandate. Washington, D.C. : United States Catholic Conference, 1990. . Slavorum Apostoli: In Cornernoration of the Eleventh Centenary of the Evangelizing Work of Saints Cyril and Methodius, Boston: St. Paul Editions, 1985.
Kavanaugh, John Francis. Following Christ in a Consumer Society. Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1981. Komonchak, Joseph A. "Subsidiarity in the Church: The State of the Question. " In Hervé Legrand, Julio Manzanares, and Antonio Garcia y Garcia, eds., The Nature and Future of Episcopal Conferences. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1988. Pp. 298- 349.
Kraft, Charles H. Christianity in Culture: A Study in Dynamic Biblical Theol ogizing in Cross-Cul tural Perspective. Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1979 . Kroeber, A. L., and Clyde Kluckhohn. Culture: A Cri tical Review of Concepts and Defini tions. N. Y. : Vintage Books, 1963.
Lane, Dermot A. "Faith and Culture: The Challenge of Inculturation," in Dermot A. Lane, ed., Religion and Culture in Dialogue: A Challenge for the Next Millenim. Dublin: Columba Press, 1993. Pp. 11-39.
Luzbetak, Louis J. The Church and Cultures: New Perspecti ves in Missi01 ogical Anthropol ogy, rev. ed. Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1988. Mannion, M. Francis. "Agendas for Lituxgical Reforxn." America 175:lÏ (30 Nov. 1996) 9-16.
Masson, Joseph. "L' Eglise ouverte sur le monde. " Nouvel1 e Rewe Théologique 84:10 (Dec. 1962) 1032-43.
"Fonction missionaire, fonction d' Eglise" (2 parts). Nouvelle Revue Théologique 80 (1958) 1042-61, and 81 (1959) 41-59.
. "La mission à la lumière de 1'Incarnation," Nouvelle Revue Theologipe 98: 10 (Dec. 1976) 865-90 . Mayers, Marvin K. Chri stiani ty Confron ts Cul t ure: A Strategy for Crosscul tural Evangelism, rev. ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987. Metz, Johann-Baptist. "Unity and Diversity: Problems and Prospects for Inculturation." In Johann-Baptist Metz and Edward Schillebeeckx, eds ., World Ca techism or Inculturation? (Concilium 204). Edinburgh: TI & T. Clark Ltd., 1989, Pp. 79-87, Neckebrouck, Valeer . Resistant Peoples: The Case of the Pastoral Maasai of East Africa. Vol. XIV, Inculturation: Working Papers on Living Fai th and Cultures, Arij A. Roest Crollius, ed, Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1993.
Newbigin, Lesslie. Foolishness to the Greeks: The Gospel and Western Cul ture. Grand Rapids : Eerdmans, 198 6, . The Gospel in a Pluralist Society. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989.
Paul VI, Pope* Evangelii Nuntiandi: On Evangelization in the Modern World. Washington, D.C. : U. S. Catholic Conference, 1975. . Populorum Progressio: On the Development of Peoples, In Joseph Gremillion, ed, , The Gospel of Peace and Justice: Catholic Social Teaching since Pope John. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1976. Pp, 387-415.
Peck, M. Scott, The Different Drum: Community Making and Peace. KY.: Simon and Schuster, 1987. Peelman, Achiel, LfIncul turation: LfEglise et les Cultures. Paris : Desclée, 1988 . Poggi, Vincenzo, and Patrick J. Ryan, Islam and Culture. Vol. VI, Incul turation: Working Papers on Living Faith and Cultures, Arij A. Roest Crollius, ed. Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1984. Poupard, Cardinal Paul. église au défi des cultures: Incul turation et Evangelisation. Paris : Desclée, 1989, Ratzinger, Cardinal Joseph. "Christ, Faith and the Challenge of Cultures." Origins 24:41 (30 March 1995) 679-86. Scheuer, Jacques. "Inculturation: Presentation of the Topic." Lumen Vitae 40:1 (1985) 10-18.
Schineller, Peter . A Handbook on Incul turation. N. Y. : Paulist, 1990. "Inculturation as the Pilgrimage to Catholicity." In Johann-Baptist Metz and Edward Schillebeeckx, eds., World Catechism or Inculturation? (Concilium 204). Edinburgh: T. & Te Clark Ltd., 1989. Pp. 98-106. Schner, George P., ed, The Church Renewed: The Documents of Vatican II Reconsidered. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, 1986. Schreiter, Robert J. "Communication and Interpretation across Cultures: Problems and Prospects." International Review of Mission 85: 337 (1996) 227-39. . "The Comrnunity as Theologian." Unpublished translation of French original: "La Communauté -- Théologien," Spiritus (1987).
. Constructing Local Theologies. Maryknoll, N. Y. : Orbis, 1985. . "Defining Sycretism: An Interim Report." International Bulletin of Missionary Research 17 (April 1993) 50-3. "Faith and Cultures: Challenges to a World Church." Theological Studies 50 (1989) 744-60.
Shorter, Aylward. Toward a Theology of Incul turation. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1988.
Standaert, Nicolas. "Lfhistoire dfun néologisme." Nouvelle Revue Théologique 110 (1988) 555-70. Starkloff, Car1 F. "Beyond the Melting Pot: An Essay in Cultural Transcendence." In Donald L. Gelpi, ed,, Beyond Individuali sm: Toward a Retrieval of Moral Discourse in America. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1989, Pp. 157-87. . "A Different Gospel? Evangelization among 'The People. '" The Way 34:4 (Oct. 1994) 293-303, . 'Ecclesiology as Praxis: The Use of Models in Planning for Mission and Ministry." Pastoral Sciences 9 (1990) 175-98. . "Inculturation and Cultural Systems" (2 parts) . Theological Studies 55 (1994) 66-81 and 274-94. . 'Keepers of Tradition: The Symbol Power of Indigenous Ministry." Kérygma 23: 52 (1989) 3-120. . "New Tribal Religious Movements: A Contemporary Theological Horizon," Toronto Journal of Theology 2 :2 (Fall 1986) 157-71. . "The Problem of Syncretism in the Search for Inculturation." Mission 1 (1994) 75-94 . . 'Religious Renewal in Native North America: The Contemporary Cal1 to Mission." Missiology 13: 1 (Jan. 1985) 81-101, Synod of Bishops (Rome, 1971) . 'The Ministerial Priesthood" and "Justice in the World. " Washington, D. C. : National Conference of Catholic Bishops, 1982.
Tanner, Norman P., ed. Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, vol. 2. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1990. Documents of the Second Vatican Council, pp, 817-1135. Tracy, David. "World Church or World Catechism: The Problern of Eurocentrism." In Johann-Baptist Metz and Edward Schillebeeckx, eds., World Catechism or Inculturation? (Concilium 204). Edinburgh: T. 6 T, Clark Ltd., 1989. Pp, 28-37.
Udoidem, S. Iniobong. Pope John Paul II on Inculturation: Theory and Practice. Lanham, Md. : University Press of America, 1996,
Vandenakker, John Paul. Small Christian Comuni ties and the Parish : An Eccl esiol ogi cal Analysis of the North American Experience. Kansas City: Sheed & Ward, 1994. Villaman, Marcos J. "Church and Inculturation: Modernity and Culture in Latin America." Journal of HispanidLatino Theology 1:3 (May 1994) 5-46.
Zuern, Theodore F., et al. On Being Church in a Modern Society. Vol. II, Inculturation: Working Papers on Living Faith and Cultures, Arij A. Roest Crollius, ed. Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University, 1983.
Latin America
Azevedo, Marcello de Carvalho. Basic Ecclesial Cornmuni ties in Brazil. Washington, DX,: Georgetown U, Press, 1987.
. "Basic Ecclesial Communities: A Meeting Point of Ecclesiologies ." Theological Studies 46 (1985) 601- 620.
Barbe, Dominique. Grace and Power: Base Communities and Nonviolence in Brazil. Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1987.
Barreiro, Alvaro. Basic Ecclesial Communities: The Evangelization of the Poor. Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1982-
Berryman, Phillip . Liberation Theol ogy. N. Y, : Pantheon, 1987 .
Bof f, Leonardo . Eccl esiogenesis: The Base Conununi ties Reinvent the Church. Translated by Robert R- Barr. Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1936.
. Church: Charism and Power. Translated by John W. Diercksmeier. N.Y.: Crossroad, 1985.
Candelaria, Michael R. Popular Religion and Liberation: The Dilemma of Liberation Theol ogy. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1990.
Comblin, Jose. The Haly Spirit and Liberation. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1989.
Conferencia General del Episcopado Latinoamericano (CELAM II: Medellin, Colombia, 1968) . The Church in the Present -Day Transformation of Latin America in the Light of the Council, 2 vols. Bogota: General Secretariat of CELAM, 1970-73.
Conferencia General del Episcopado Latinoamericano (CELAM II: Puebla, Mexico, 1979) Evangelization at Present and in the Future of Latin America: Conclusions. Washington, D.C.: National Conference of Catholic Bishops, 1979.
Conferencia General del Episcopado Latinoamericano (CEW III: Puebla, Mexico, 1979). Vision Pastoral de Amexica La tina : Equipo de Refl exion, Departamentos y Secciones del CELAM. Bogota: Consejo Episcopal Latinoamericano, Conferencia General del Episcopado Latinoamericano (CELAM IV: Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, 1992) . Documenta de Consul ta : Nueva Evangelizaci6n, Promocion Humana. Bogota: Consejo Episcopal Latinoamericano, 1991. Conferencia General del Episcopado Latinoamericano (CELAM IV: Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, 1992). Concl usions : New Evangel i za tion, Human Developmen t , Christian Culture. Washington, D,C. : U. S. Catholic Conference, 1993.
Cook, Guillermo. The Expectation of the Poor: Latin American Base Ecclesial Communi ties in Protestant Perspective. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1985. Dussel, Enrique. "Popular Religion as Oppression and Liberation: Hypotheses on its Past and Present in Latin Arnerica." In Norbert Greinacher and Norbert Mette, eds., Popular Religion (Concilium l86), pp.82-94. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1986.
Eagleson, John, and Philip Scharper, eds, Puebla and Beyond: Documentation and Commentary. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1979.
Galilea, Segundo. Religiosidad Popular y Pastoral. Madrid: Ediciones Cristiandad, 1979.
. Religiosidad Popular y Pastoral Hispano- Americana, N.Y.: Northeast Catholic Pastoral Center for Hispanics, 1981. . 'The Theology of Liberation and the Place of 'Folk Religion.'" In Mircea Eliade and David Tracy, eds., What 1s Religion? An Inquiry for Christian Theology (Concilium l36), pp. 40-45. N.Y. : Seabury, 1980.
Gutiérrez, Gustavo. Las Casas: In Search of the Poor of Jesus Christ. Translated by Robert R. Barr. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1993.
. A Theology of Liberation, rev. ed. Translated and edited by Sister Caridad Inda and John Eagleson. Maryknoll, N.Y, : Orbis, 1988 . . We Drink from Our Own Wells. Translated by Matthew J. O'Connell. Maryknoll, N.Y .: Orbis, 1984.
Haight, Roger. An Alternative Vision: An Interpretation of Liberation Theology. N.Y. : Paulist, 1985. Hebblethwaite, Margaret . Base Communi ties: An Introduction. Mahwah, N.J.: Paulist, 1994.
Hennelly, Alfred T. Theology for a Liberating Church: The New Praxis of Freedom. Washington, D. C. : Georgetown University Press, 1989. , ed. Liberation Theology: A Documentary History. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1990. , ed. Santo Domingo and Beyond: Documents and Commentaries from the Fourth General Conference of Latin American Bishops. Maryknoll, N. Y. : Orbis, 1993.
Hewitt, W. E. Basic Christian Communities and Social Change in Brazil. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1991.
International Ecumenical Congress of Theology. The Challenge of Basic Christian Communities. S. Torres and J. Eagleson, eds. Trans. by John Drury. Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1981. Irarrazaval, Diego. "Catolicismo popular en la teologia de la liberacion." In V. Elizondo et al ., Tsologia y Liberacion: Religion, Cultura y Ética. Lima, Peru: Institut0 Bartolomé de las Casas, 1991. Pp. 71-105.
. Religion del pobre y liberacion en Chimbote. Lima, Peru: Centro de Estudios y Publicaciones (CEP), 1978 . Levine, Daniel H. Popular Voices in Latin American Catholicism. Princeton, N. JI: Princeton University Press, 1992.
Mainwaring, Scott, and Alexander Wilde, eds. The Progressive Church in Latin America. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Darne Press, 1989. McGrath, Marcos. 'The Impact of Gaudium et Spes: Medellin, Puebla, and Pastoral Creativity." In Joseph Gremillion, ed., The Church and Culture since Vatican II: The Experience of North and Latin America. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1985. Pp. 61-73.
Pelton, Robert S. From Power to Communion: Toward a New Way of Being Church Based on the Latin American Sxperience. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1994.
Richard, Pablo. The Church Born by the Force of God in Central America. N.Y. : Circus Publications, 1985.
Sobrino, Jon. Spirituali ty of Liberation: Toward Poli tical Holiness. Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1988 .
. The True Church and the Poor, Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1984.
Methodology and Foundations
Badham, Paul. Review of The Analogical Imagination. Religious Studies 19 (Dec. 1983) 552-553.
Bernstein, Richard J. Praxis and Action. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1971.
. "Radical Plurality, Fearful Arnbiguity, and Engaged Hope. " (Review of Pl urali ty and Ambigui ty. ) Journal of Religion 69 (Jan. 1989) 85-91.
Bof f, Clodovis. Theology and Praxis: Epistemological Foundations. Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1987.
Boff, Leonardo, Salvation and Liberation. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1984.
Browning, Don S. A Fundamen ta1 Practical Theol ogy: Descriptive and Strategic Proposal S. Minneapolis : Fortress, 1991.
. Practical Theology. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1983. . "The Revival of Practical Theology." The Christian Century 101:134-6+ (Feb- 1-8, 1984) - Cormie, Lee. "The Hermeneutical Privilege of the Oppressed: Liberation Theologies, Biblical Faith, and Marxist Sociology of Knowledge ." Proceedings of the Catholic Theological Society of America 33 (1978) 155-81. Crowe, Frederick E. "Son of God, Holy Spirit, and World Religions: The Contribution of Bernard Lonergan to the Wider Ecumenism." Toronto: Regis College, 1984 . Dawe, Donald G. "The Slender Thread of Hope." (Review of Plurality and Ambiguity. ! Interpretation 43 (Oct. 1989) 412-414.
Dulles, Avery. The Craft of Theology: E'rom Symbol to System. N.Y. : Crossroad, 1992.
Dunne, Tad. Lonergan and Spiri tuali ty: Toward a Spiri t ual Integration. Chicago : Loyola University Press, 1985. Evans, James H., Jr. "Liberation, Authority, and the Cognitive Crisis in the Theology of David Tracy." Union Seminary Quarterly Review 39: 1-2 (1984) 47-62.
Farley, Edward. Ecclesial Reflection: An Ana tomy of Theological Method. Philadelphia : Fortress, 1982.
Farley, Edward. Theologia: The Fragmentation and Uni ty of Theological Education. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983.
Fiorenza, Elizabeth Schüssler. In Memory of Her: A Feminist Theological Reconstruction of Christian Origins. N.Y.: Crossroad, 1983. Giurlanda, Paul. "Inclusive Conversation." (Review of Plurality and Ambiguity.) Cross Currents 38 (Fall 1988) 352-353. Greeley, Andrew M. "Theology and Sociology: On Validating David Tracy." Journal of the American Academy of Religion 59: 4 (Winter 1991) 643-652.
Gregson, Vernon, ed. The Desires of the Human Heart: An Introduction to the Theol ogy of Bernard Lonergan. N.Y. : Paulist, 1988 . Hall, Douglas John. Thinking the Fai th: Christian Theology in a North American Context. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989.
Hellwig, Monika. Whose Experience Counts in Theological Reflection? Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 1982.
Hiltner, Seward. Preface to Pastoral Theology. Nashville: Abingdon, 1958.
Imbelli, Robert P., and Thomas K. Groome. "Signposts toward a Pastoral Theology ." Theological Studies 53 :1 (March 1992) 127-137.
Lamb, Matthew L. "The Challenge of Critical Theory." In Gregory Baum, ed., Sociology and Human Destiny. N. Y, : Seabury, 1980,
. 'The Dialectics of Theory and Praxis within Paradigm Analysis." In David Tracy and Hans Küng, eds., Paradigm Change in Theology: A Symposium for the Future. N.Y. : Crossroad, 1989.
. Solidarity with Victims: Toward a Theology of Social Transformation. N.Y : Crossroad, 1982.
. "The Theory-Praxis Relationship in Contemporary Christian Theology. " Proceedings of the Ca tholic Theological Society of Amexica (1976) 147-78.
Lane, Dermot A. The Experience of God: An Invitation to Do Theology. N.Y. : Paulist, 1981.
Leonard, Ellen. "Experience as a Source for Theology: A Canadian and Feminist Perspective." Studies in Religion 19:2 (Spring 1990) 143-162.
Lints, Richard. "The Postpositivist Choice: Tracy or Lindbeck?" Journal of the American Academy of Religion 61 :4 (Winter 1993) 655-678.
Lobkowicz, Nicholas. Theory and Practice: History of a Concept from Aristotle to Marx. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1967.
Lonergan, Bernard J. F. Introducing the Thought of Bernard Lonergan : Three Papers from COLLECTION wi th an Introduction by Philip McShane. London: Darton, Longman 6, Todd, 1973 ,
. Method in Theology. Minneapolis : ~inston/~eabury,1972 .
. 'Theology and Praxis." Proceedings of the Catholic Theological Society of America (1977) 1-17.
. A Third Collection, N.Y. : Paulist, 1985.
Loughlin, Gerard. Review of Pl urality and Ambigui ty. Modern Theology 7:5 (Oct. 1991) 483-487.
Maddox, Randy L. "The Recovery of Theology as a Practical Discipline." Theological Studies 51: 4 (Dec. 1990) 650- 672.
. Toward an Ecumenical Fundamental Theol ogy. Chico, California: Scholars Press, 1984.
Mueller, J. J. What Are They Saying about Theological Method? N.Y. : Paulist, 1984.
O'Connor, Thomas F. 'Spirituality and Its Dynamic Relationship with Pastoral Life and Culture: A Way Toward Liberation. (An Exploration of the Contributions of Gustavo Gutierrez and Bernard Lonergan. ) " Th .M. thesis, Regis College, Toronto, 1990,
Principe, Walter. "Toward Def ining Spirituality. " Sciences Religieuses/Studies in Religion 12: 2 (Spring 1983) 127- 41.
Rahner, Karl, The Dynamic Element in the Church. Montréal : Palm, 1964.
. Foundations of Christian Faith. N.Y. : Seabury, 1978.
. The Practice of Faith: A Handbook of Contemporary Spirituality. Ed. by Karl Lehmann and Albert Raffelt. N,Y.: Crossroad, 1984.
Ruether, Rosemary Radf ord. Sexism and God-Talk: Toward a Feminist Theology. Boston: Beacon Press, 1983.
Schneiders, Sandra. "Spirituality in the Academy." Theological Studies 50 (1989) 676-97. . "Theology and Spirituality: Strangers, Rivals, or Partners?" Horizons 13:2 (1986) 253-74.
Segundo, Juan Luis, The Liberation of Theology. Translated by John Drury. Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1976. Shea, William M., David Burrell, Bernard Cooke, and William James O'Brien, with response by David Tracy. Review Symposium of The Analogical Imagination. Horizons 8:2 (Fall 1981) 313-339.
Sheldrake, Philip. Spirituality and History: Questions of Interpretation and Method. N.Y. : Crossroad, 1992.
Stell, Stephen L. "Hermeneutics in Theology and the Theology of Hermeneutics: Beyond Lindbeck and Tracy." Journal of the American Academy of Religion 61 : 4 (Winter 1993) 679-704.
Tracy, David. The Achievement of Bernard Lonergan. N. Y. : Herder & Herder, 1970. . The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism. N.Y. : Crossroad, 1981. . Blessed Rage for Order: The New Pluralism in Theology. Minneapolis : Winston/Seabury Press, 1975. . Dialogue with the Other: The Inter-Religious Dialogue. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1990. . 'The Foundations of Practical Theology." In Don S. Browning, ed., Practical Theology. San Francisco : Harper & Row, 1983. . "Hermeneutical Reflections in the New Paradigm," and "Some Concluding Reflections on the Conference: Unity Amidst Diversity and Conflict?" In David Tracy and Hans Kitng, eds., Paradigm Change in Theology: A Symposium for the Future. N.Y.: Crossroad, 1989. . "The Influence of Feminist Theory on My Theological Work.,' Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 7 (Spring 1991) 122-125.
. Pl urality and Ambigui ty: Hemeneutics, Religion, Hope. San Francisco: Harper h Row, 1987.
. "The Uneasy Alliance Reconceived: Catholic Theological Method, Modernity, and Postmodernity. " Theological Studies 50 (1989) 548-570.
Tracy, David, and John B. Cobb, Jr. Talking about God: Doing Theology in the Context of Modern Pluralism. N.Y.: Seabury, 1983.
Ysaac, Walter L. The Third World and Bernard Lonergan. Manila, Philippines : Lonergan Center, 198 6.
U.S. Hispanics
Abalos, David T. Latinos in the United States: The Sacred and the Political. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1986.
Acufia, Rodol fo . Occupied America : A History of Chicanos, 3rd ed. N.Y.: Harper & Row, 1988.
Anguiano, Leonard, ed. Facilitators' Manual to Form Basic Ecclesial Communi ties. San Antonio, Texas : Mexican American Cultural Center, 1991.
Aquino, Maria Pilar. "Directions and Foundations of Hispanic/Latino Theology: Toward a Mestiza Theology of Liberation. " Journal of HispanidLatino Theology 1: 1 (November 1993) 5-21,
Barrera, Mario. Beyond Aztlan : Ethnic Autonomy in Comparative Perspective. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1988.
Bishopsf Cornmittee for Hispanic Affairs, National Conference of Catholic Bishops. Communion and Mission: A Guide for Bishops and Pastoral Leaders on Small Church Communities. Washington, D.C. : United States Catholic Conference, 1995. Bishops' Conunittee for Hispanic Affairs, National Conference of Catholic Bishops. Leaven for the Kingdom of God. Washington, D.C.: United States Catholic Conference, 1990.
Blanchard, David. "Hispanic Pastoral Life: Endorsing a Latin Style." Church 4:3 (Fall 1988) 22-27.
Brennan, Patrick. Parishes that Excel : Mode1 s of Excellence in Educa tion, Ministry, and Evangelization. N. Y. : Crossroad, 1992.
. Re-imagining the Parish : Base Cornmuni ties, Adul thood, and Family Consciousness. N. Y. : Crossroad, 1990.
Burciaga, José Antonio. Drink Cul tura : Chicanismo. Santa Barbara, California: Joshua Odell Editions, 1993. Cafferty, Pastora San Juan, and William C. McCready, eds. Hispanics in the United States: A New Social Agenda. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Books, 1985.
Camaxillo, Albert, ed. Latinos in the United States: A Historical Bibliography. Santa Barbara, California : ABC-Clio, 1986.
Concl usiones: Primer Encuentro Nacional Hispano de Pastoral . Washington, D.C.: United States Catholic Conference, 1972 . Davis, Kenneth. "De Encuentro a Reconocimiento: The U.S. Hispanic Church since 1987." Unpubished paper obtained from the author, photocopy [19951. 15 pages. . "The Hispanic Shift: Continuity Rather than Conversion?" Journal of Hispanic/Latino Theology 1 :3 (May 1994) 68-79. . Interview by author, 21 May 1995, San Antonio. Tape recording . Deck, Allan Figueroa. "The Challenge of EvangelicaU Pentecostal Christianity to Hispanic Catholicisrn in the United States." Unpublished lecture given at the Cushwa Center for the Study of American Catbolicism, University of Notre Dame, 1992. . "The Crisis of Hispanic Ministry: Multiculturalisrn as an Ideology." America 163 (21 July
. "E'undamentalism and the Hispanic Catholic." America 152 (26 Jan. 1985) 64-6,
. "Hispanic Ministry Cornes of Age." America 154 (17 May 1986) 400-2. . "Proselytism and Hispanic Catnolics: How Long Can We Cry Wolf?" America 559 (10 Dec. 1988) 485-90. . 'Rising Voices in a Dialogue of and for the Americas." America 166 (8 Feb. 1992) 98-101 .
. The Second Wave. N.Y.: Paulist, 1989. . "The Trashing of the Fifth Centenary." America 167 (26 Dec. 1992) 499-501.
, ed, Frontiers of Hispanic Theolcgy in the United States, Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1992 . Deck, Allan Figueroa, Yolanda Tarango, and Timothy M. Matovina, eds . Perspectivas: Hispanic finistry. Kansas City: Sheed & Ward, 1995.
Dolan, Jay P. The American Catholic Experience: A History from Colonial Times to the Present. Garden City, N.Y. : Image Books, 1985.
, ed. The American Catholic Parish: A History from 1850 to the Present, 2 vols. N.Y. : Paulist, 1987. Dolan, Jay P., and Gilberto M. Hinojosa, eds. Mexican Americans and the Catholic Church, 1900-1965. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1994.
Dolan, Jay P., and Allan Figueroa Deck, eds. Hispanic Catholic Culture in the U. S. : Issues and Concerns. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1994 .
Dolan, Jay P., et al. Transforming Parish Ministry: The Changing Roles of Catholic Clergy, Laity, and Women Religious. KY.: Crossroad, 1989. Elizondo, Virgilio P. Christianity and Culture: An Introduction to Pastoral Theol ogy and Ministry for the Bicul t ural Comunity. Huntington, Indiana : Our Sunday Visitor, 1975.
. Creemos en Jesucristo: Catequesis Hispana para Adul tos. Liguori, Missouri : Liguori Publications,
. The Future is Mestizo: Life Where Cultures Meet . Oak Park, Illinois: Meyer-Stone Books, 1988 - . Galilean Journey: The Mexican-American Promi se. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1983. . "Hispanie Theology and Popular Piety: From Interreligious Encounter to a New Ecumenism." Proceedings of the Catholic Theological Society of America 48 (1993) 1-14.
. Guadalupe: Mother of the New Crea tion. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1997. . Interview by author, 31 May 1995, San Antonio. Tape recording . . "El mestizaje como lugar teol6gico." In V. Elizondo et al., Teologia y Liberacion: Religion, Cultura y Ética. Lima, Perb: Institut0 Bartolomé de las Casas, 1991. Pp. 13-41, . Mestizaje: The Dialectic of Cultural Birth and the Gospel : A Study in the Intercul tural Dimension of Evangelization. San Antonio: Mexican American Cultural Center, 1978.
. La Morenita: Evangelizer of the Americas. San Antonlo: Mexican American Cultural Center, 1980. . "The New Humanity of the Americas." In Leonardo Bof f and V. Elizondo, eds., 1492-1992: The Voice of the Victims (Concilium 1990/6) . Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1990. . "Popular Religion as Support of Identity: A Pastoral-Psychological Case-Study Based on the Mexican American Experience in the USA." In Norbert Greinacher and Norbert Mette, eds ., Popular Religion (Concilium 186), pp, 36-43, Edinburgh: T, & T. Clark, 1986. , ed. Way of the Cross: The Passion of Christ in the Americas. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1992.
Elizondo, Virgilio P., and Maria de la Cruz Aymes. Fe y Cul tura : Manual de Direction, Curso Basico para Catequistas. N.Y, : Paulist, 1986.
Elizondo, Virgilio P., and Angela Erevia. Our Hispanic Pilgrimage. San Antonio: Mexican American Cultural Center, 1980.
Espin, Orlando O. "Pentecostalism and Popular Catholicism: The Poor and Tradi tio. " Journal of Hispanic/La tino Theology 3:2 (Nov, 1995) 14-43. . "Popular Religion as an Epistemology (of Suf f ering) Journal of HispanidLatino Theol ogy 2 :2 (November 1994) 55-78.
Fernandez-Shaw, Carlos. The Hispanic Presence in North America: From 1492 to Today. N.Y.: Facts on File, 1991.
Floristan, Casiano. La Comunidad Cristiana de Base. San Antonio: Mexican American Cultural Center, 1976. Galeron, Soledad, Rosa Maria Icaza, and Rosendo Urrabazo, eds. Prophetic Vision: Pastoral Reflections on tne National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic Ministry. Kansas City: Sheed & Ward, 1992,
Gann, L, H., and Peter J. Duignan. The Hispanics in the United States: A History. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1986. Garcia, David. Interview by author, 31 May 1995, San Antonio . Tape recording , Garcia, Sixto J. "Sources and Loci of Hispanic Theology-" Journal of Hispanic/La tino Theol ogy 1 :1 (November 1993) 22-43.
Gaston, Maria Luisa, ed. Proceedings of the II Encuentro Nacional Hispano de Pastoral. Washington, D.C.: Secretariat for Hispanic Affairs, National Conference of Catholic Bishops, United States Catholic Conference, 1978.
Goizueta, Roberto S. Caminexnos con Jesrfs: Toward a Hispani c/La tino Theology of Accompaniment . Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1995. . Interview by author, 30 Jan. 1997, Chicago.
. "The Preferential Option for the Poor: The CELAM Documents and the NCCB Pastoral Letter on U.S. Hispanics as Sources for U.S. Hispanic Theology." Journal of HispanidLa tino Theology 3 :2 (November 1995 1 65-77.
, ed. We Are a People! Initiatives in Hispanic- American Theology. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992.
Gonzalez, Roberto 0.. and Michael J. LaVelle. The Hispanic Catholic in the United States: A Socio-Cultural and Religious Profile. N.Y. : Northeast Catholic Pastoral Center for Hispanics, 1985.
Greeley, Andrew. "Defection among Hispanics." America 159:3 (30 July 1988) 61-2.
Guerrero, Andres G. A Chicano Theology. Maryknoll, N. Y. : Orbis, 1987.
Hemrick, Eugene F., ed. Strangers and Aliens No Longer: Part One: The Hispanic Presence in the Church of the United States. Washington, D.C: United States Catholic Conference, 1993.
Hornor, Louise L., ed. Hispanic Americans: A Statistical Sourcebook. Palo Alto, California: Information Publications, 1995.
Hull, Thomas-Patrick, ed. Basic Christian Communi ties: The United States Experience. Chicago: National Federation of Priestsr Councils, nod. (ca. 1985). Icaza, Rosa Maria. Interview by author, 21 May 1995. Tape recording. Isasi-Diaz, Ada Maria, and Fernando F. Segovia, eds. Hispanic/Latino Theol ogy: Challenge and Promise. Minneapolis : Fortress Press, 1996.
Isasi-Diaz, Ada Maria, and Yolanda Tarango. Hispanic Women: Prophetic Voice in the Church. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988,
Kanellos, Nicolas, ed. The Hispanie-American Almanac. Detroit: Gale Research Inc., 1993,
Lampe, Philip E., ed. Hispanics in the Church: Up from the Cellar. San Francisco: Catholic Scholars Press, 1993. Lee, Bernard J. "Intentional Christian Communities in the U. S, Church." The Catholic World 234 : 1402 (July/August 1991) 180-4.
Lee, Bernard J., and Michael A. Cowan. Dangerous Mernories: House Churches and Our American Story. Kansas City: Sheed & Ward, 1986. Lopez, José. Interview by author, 22 May 1995, San Antonio. Tape xecording . Lopez, Vicente, Interview by author, 31 Oct. 1995, Notre Dame .
Lucas, Isidro. The Browning of America: The Hispanic Revol ution in the American Church. Chicago : Fides/Claretian, 1981.
Mirandé, Alfredo. The Chicano Experience: An A2 ternative Perspective. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1985.
Morales, Rebecca, and Frank Bonilla, eds. Latinos in a Changing U. S. Economy. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications, 1993.
Mosqueda, Lawrence J. Chicanos, Catholicism, and Poli tical Ideol ogy. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, 1986,
National Conference of Catholic Bishops. National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic Ministry. Washington, D. C. : United States Catholic Conference, 1987. Originally published in Origins 17:26 (Dec. 10, 1987) 449-463. National Conf erence of Catholic Bishops . The Hispanic Presence: Challenge and Codtment. Washington, D. C. : United States Catholic Conference, 1983.
National Secretariat and Hispanic Teams . Basic Eccl esial Communities: An Experience in the United States. Liguori, Missouri: Liguori Publications, 1980.
Paredes, Mario J., ed. The Hispanic Community, the Church and the Northeast Center for Hispanics. N.Y. : Northeast Catholic Pastoral Center for Hispanics, 1982.
Pérez, Arturo . Popular Catholicism: A Hispanic Perspective. Washington, D.C. : The Pastoral Press, 1988.
Pineda, Ana Maria, and Robert Schreiter, eds. Dialogue Rejoined: Theology and Ministry in the United States Hispanic Reality. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1995.
Ramirez, Ricardo. Fiesta, Worship and Family. San Antonio: Mexican American Cultural Center, 1981.
, ed. Faith Expressions of Hispanics in the Southwest, rev. ed. San Antonio : Mexican American Cultural Center, 1990.
Raycraft, Helen Marie. Seeds of Hope: Hispanic Spirituality in the Basic Ecclesial Communities. Austin, Texas : privately published, 1994.
Reddy, Marlita A., ed. Statistical Record of Hispanic Americans. Detroit: Gale Research Inc., 1993.
Rodriguez, Jeanette. Our Lady of Guadalupe: Faith and Empowerment among Mexi can -Ameri can Women . Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1994.
Romero, C . Gilbert. Hispanic Devotional Piety: Tracing the Biblical Roots. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1991.
Samora, Julian, and Patricia Vandel Simon. A History of the Mexican-American People, rev. ed. Notre Dame, Indiana : University of Notre Dame Press, 1993.
Sandoval, Moises. Hispanic Challenges to the Church. Washington, DX.: Secretariat for Hispanic Affairs, United States Catholic Conference, 1978.
. On the Move: A History of the Kispanic Church in the United States. Maryknoll, N.Y. : Orbis, 1990.
, ed. Fronteras: A History of the Latin American Church in the USA since 1513. San Antonio: Mexican American Cultural Center, 1983.
Scheuring, Thomas J. Evangelii Nuntiandi and the Puebla Final Document: Their Effects on the Mission of Evangelization with the Poor. N. Y. : Ph. D, thesis, Fordham University, 1990.
Schick, Frank L,, and Renee Schick, eds. Statistical Handbook on U. S. Hispanics. Phoenix: Oryx Press, 1991.
Sedillo, Pablo, ed. Prophetic Voices: The Document on the Process of the III Encuentro Nacional Hispano de Pastoral. Washington, D.C.: Secretariat for Hispanic Af fairs, United States Catholic Conference, 1986-
Shorris, Earl. Latinos: A Biography of the People. N.Y. : Avon Books, 1992.
Spicer, Edward H. Cycles of Conquest: The Impact of Spain, Mexico, and the United States on the Indians of the Southwest, 1533-1960. Tucson, Arizona: University of Mizona Press, 1962.
Stern, Robert L. "Evolution of Hispanic Ministry in the New York Archdiocese." In Hispanics in New York: Religious, Cul tural and Social Experiences, vol. II. N.Y.: Office of Pastoral Research, Archdiocese of New York, 1982.
Stevens-Arroyo, Anthony M., ed. Prophets Denied Honor: An Anthology on the Hispanic Church in the United States. Maryknoll, KY. : Orbis, 1980.
Stevens-Arroyo, Anthony M., and Gilbert R. Cadena, eds. Old Masks, New Faces: Religion and Latino Identities. N.Y.: Bildner Center for Western Hemisphere Studies, 1995.
Sweetser, Thomas P., and Forster, Patricia M. Transforming the Parish: Models for the Future. Kansas City: Sheed & Ward, 1993,
Tovar, Consuelo, ed, Documenta de Trabajo: III Encuentro Nacional Hi spano de Pastoral, Edicion Bilingue. Washington, D. C. : Secretariat for Hispanic Affairs, United States Catholic Conference, 1985.
Valdivieso, Raf ael, and Cary Davis. U. S. Hispanics: Challenging Issues for the 1990s. Washington, D.C. : Population Reference Bureau, 1988.
Vilar, J. Juan Diaz, Somos Una Sola Iglesia/We Are One Church: Ten Themes for Reflection on the W. S. Bishopsr Pastoral Let ter "The Hispanic Presence: Hope and Commitment. " N,Y, : Northeast Catholic Pastoral Center for Hispanics, 1984. Villaman, Marcos J. "Church and Inculturation: Modernity and Culture in Latin America." Journal of HispanidLatino Theology 1:3 (May 1994) 5-46. Vizcaino, Mario. Interview by author, 3 Jan. 1996, Miami. Tape recording.
Weyr, Thomas. Hispanic LT. S. A. : Breaking the Me1 ting Pot. N.Y.: Harper & Row, 1988. Wright, Robert E. 'If It's Official, It Canrt Be Popular? Reflections on Popular and Folk Religion." Journal of Hispanic/Latino Theology 1:3 (May 1994) 47-67. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (QA-3)
APPLIED IWGE . lnc 1653 East Main Street 7 --. Rochester. NY 14609 USA --= --= -- Phone: 716M82-0300 --Fax: 71 6/288-5989