A Philology of Liberation: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as a Reader of the Classics, Verbum...

University of the Incarnate Word

Verbum

Incarnatum An Academic Journal of Social Justice

Theme Issue:

Race, Religion & Social Justice

Volume Four, Number 1, 2010

Copyright 2010 by the University of the Incarnate Word Press

ISSN 1934-9084

All rights reserved

Verbum Incarnatum

ii

Verbum Incarnatum is a multidisciplinary journal published annually. Each issue focuses on a special theme.

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES FOR CONTRIBUTORS:

Verbum Incarnatum is an annual publication devoted to a chosen issue with particular emphasis on social justice. It welcomes articles from all disciplines presenting original

ideas and critical analysis on the announced special issue topic. • Submissions are subject to anonymous (blind) peer review process.

Each contribution author will be notified on the status of submission as soon as the editor has received comments from the peer reviewers.

• Submissions must be in English. Endnotes and references can be in any language as long as they promote the thesis in the paper and they are accompanied by an English

translation. • Manuscripts for consideration must be submitted in Microsoft Word by email to:

[email protected] • The author’s name and affiliation must appear on the title page of the paper followed

by a 150-word abstract. The manuscript, endnotes and references must follow the most recent edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association

(APA).

BOOK REVIEWS: Books for review and book reviews should be sent to:

Basil A. Aivaliotis University of the Incarnate Word,

4301 Broadway CPO 297, San Antonio, Texas 78209 E-mail: [email protected].

Publication of Verbum Incarnatum is supported by:

Dr. Kevin B. Vichcales, Dean

School of Graduate Studies and Research University of the Incarnate Word

EDITORS

Philip E. Lampe Julie B. Miller

Roger C. Barnes

BOOK REVIEW EDITOR Basil A. Aivaliotis

MANAGING EDITOR

Sabrina Koll

mailto:[email protected]

Verbum Incarnatum

iii

Contents

Contents ......................................................................................................................... iii

Killing An Inconvenient Truth: Social Justice and Forms of Oppression in Modern

Society by Francis M. Boakari, Ph.D.. .................................................................... 1

The “Poor” in Zephaniah and First World Bias: Implications for Interpretation

and Preaching by Timothy Milinovich, Ph.D. ............................................... 34

Beyond the Binary: Exploring the Use of Culture in Lutheran Volunteer Corps

Members’ Understandings of Service and Justice

by Melissa James, Ph.D. Candidate. ............................................................................. 46

Transforming Teenagers: Integrating Social Justice into Catholic Youth Ministry

or Catholic Education

by Arthur D. Canales, D. Min. ...................................................................................... 69

The Demand for Justice Implicit in the Eucharistic Celebration

by Marie A. Conn, Ph.D. ............................................................................................ 922

A Statue Gets a Fresh Coat of Paint: A Glimpse at the Catholic Church and

Chicano Activists in the Rio Grande Valley in 1970

by Gilberto M. Hinojosa, Ph.D. .................................................................................. 111

A Philology of Liberation: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as a Reader of the Classics

by Thomas Strunk, Ph.D. ............................................................................................ 124

Naming the Terrorist in Our Midst: Park51 and the Politics of Injustice

by Nancy E. Nienhuis, Th.D. ...................................................................................... 145

Book Reviews:

Women’s Activism in Latin America and the Caribbean: Engendering Social

Justice, Democratizing Citizenship

by Scott Dittloff, Ph.D. ............................................................................................... 166

Race, Place, and Environmental Justice after Hurricane Katrina

by Donna Meyer, Ph.D. ............................................................................................. 169

Verbum Incarnatum Killing An Inconvenient Truth: Social Justice and Forms of Oppression in Modern society

1

Killing An Inconvenient Truth: Social Justice and Forms of Oppression in Modern Society. Francis Musa Boakari, Ph.D. Universidade Federal do Piaui, Teresina, Brazil. Abstract

Considered different, (less than human?) - Some are hated for what they are - for what they have been changed into, and believed to be. Others oppressed for what they symbolize - discriminated against for what they remind people of. Many are excluded because their wants are the same as other persons’. Many others are not listened to; made voiceless and even invisible, resilient, they stay. All humans have the same needs – biological, psychological, social, and spiritual. Nobody is asking for preferential treatments - We do not present impossible choices. All we are saying is – in relating to who appears to be unlike you, Seize the opportunity diversity offers; learn more about self, others and our world, Collaborate with others - so all become increasingly more human. (FMB, San Antonio, December 2008) Introduction

After a full day’s workshop on Planning for Development as Human

Progress in a remote part of the world, a young wealthy entrepreneur, upon

hearing others complain about all the work they still had to do to reach their

objectives remarked – “Blame it all on social justice!” This young person had

understood that the collective learning arising from the community had the

following interrelated messages: First, it was necessary for people’s lives to

improve since all had the right to better living conditions as biological, social,

psychological, and spiritual beings. Second, for this to become reality, people had

to change their vision of the world, adopt new attitudes, and behave in ways that

consistently recognized and respected the dignity of others, especially those who

seemed different, meaning those whose dissimilarities (singularities?) stood out

more. Planning for progress in terms of reaching the highest possible goals as

human beings in community basically involves these two demands. Though

neither is easy to implement, neither is an impossible task to undertake. And when


2

undertaken with critical consciousness, consistency, simplicity and humility, with

the conviction that some success will be attained, the perspectives of bringing

about some concrete changes in people’s beliefs about others and their behaviors

in relationships with other people could improve (Bell, Gaventa & Peters, 1990).1

This undertaking I have called the “dialectics of daily living” (Boakari, 2006).

They are primarily individual and everyday responsibilities, and an encouraging

social environment with other critically conscious individuals can only be helpful.

The dialectics of daily living are reference to the fact that under normal

conditions as rational beings, we tend to lead thinking lives. Faced with any

particular situation, we think about it and then reflect upon our response

alternatives. Reacting in one way or the other is generally based upon our

definition of the situation, and this is always real in itself. Through this process of

reflection, selection and then action, we are able to carry out our daily

responsibilities. At the same time, we can incorporate our perspectives about the

future. In other terms, the thinking-acting-reflecting spiral denotes the dynamic

nature of daily living. While facing the challenges of today, we evaluate them

based upon past experiences and simultaneously contemplate the consequences

and challenges that will follow. This is dialectical because as one phenomenon

gets completed, another is already on the verge of becoming real. We are living

today (being) and self-organizing (becoming) for the future (Boakari, 2006, p.

06).

1 The book, We Make the Road by Walking: Cconversations on Education and Social Change (1990), is a compilation of interviews of Myles Horton and Paulo Freire, two leaders in the movement to bring about social transformation through popular social consciousness and active participation. As the editors state, the stream of ideas expressed in the interviews is at once abstract and filled with concrete examples of the struggles of both men to change systems” (p. xi). While the contributions of the former are rooted in the US, the ideas and hopes expressed by Freire are Latin American. Nonetheless, in talking about human beings, their struggles, strategies and hopes, both popular educators speak the same language of a Pedagogy of Hope whereby men, women, youth and children recognize their humanity and come together to make it meaningful in their daily rights and responsibilities as social agents using “principles such as love and democracy” to assist people to assume their conditions and strive to “control their lives” (p. 196).

“Change that is transformative in this

sense cannot be hidden; it is evident in the life of a group that is real

community.”


3

Transformative progress as a historical phenomenon sustained by change

imbued with dynamism for further modifications occurs when there are social

agents who untiringly work to bring about new realities that are meaningfully

effective because their consequences can be seen and felt in the daily lives of all

kinds of people in community. Change that is transformative in this sense cannot

be hidden; it is evident in the life of a group that is real community. The idea of

community here is crucial because it is only in the context of a community that

humans relate to one another, and accordingly, can influence changes both in their

lives and in those of other individuals. It is also only in community where socio-

cultural factors influence persons to become human beings and to go on to be

social agents. Respecting others, sharing social services and material goods as

equitably as possible, recognizing and consciously living with those who appear

to be unlike one-self, as well as treating those with various kinds of limitations

(physical, psychological, and social-cultural) with care, respect and dignity, are

some corollaries of the requirements for human progress that is of concern here.

That humans become better when they can live in peace with one another,

building upon their differences to strengthen their commonalities and bring

about more equality across the board, seems to be a universal claim whose

manifestations could be contextual. There are arguments about what strategies

are best for attaining these objectives but not about the essence of the goals

themselves. In this regard, what is social justice? What are some of the hindrances

to making social equity and equal access to opportunities more present in

contemporary society? Why is it that some people’s dignity as human beings is

neither respected nor recognized? In the end what is it all about?

What is Social Justice?

The concept of social justice essentially refers to the principles of equality

and equity in all aspects of life for everybody in a community. As guidelines for

“The concept of social justice

essentially refers to the principles of

equality and equity in all aspects of life for

everybody in a community.”


4

daily life and the way responsible human beings ought to live, these principles are

built upon perspectives and persistent practices (habit forming) that are

permanently all-inclusive. By this same token, these orientations are against any

measures, activities and behaviors that lead to any kind of partiality regarding life

in relationship with other people. In matters of social justice, priority is given to

mantras such as “Of all at all times”, “For all in all places” and “Never willfully

against anybody.” In the beauty of its complex simplicity, social justice demands

much and recommends a lot, but none of these demands and recommendations is

beyond the common person. And for a determined group, only possibilities would

exist. Besides, its justification is very basic: without concrete efforts to make

social justice a reality in human society, living in peace would become very

difficult, if not impossible in certain circumstances. Western civilizations and

empires like the Greek and Roman are believed to have collapsed and vanished

because priorities favored human pleasures and indulgencies and ignored respect

for the poor and excluded. Today, examples of urban violence, increased criminal

acts of different kinds by persons from varying walks of life and social

conditions, as well as international exploitations under the guise of assistance,

easily come to mind in this regard. The absence of neighborhood solidarity,

accentuated work-place competitiveness (sometimes with out-of-bounds disloyal

practices), acts of making some individuals invisible, treating some others as if

they were less than human, taking advantage of others because of one reason or

the other, are some cogent reminders of how justice in society is made less

present today. Making fair-play and respect integrated parts of the relationships

between persons and the contexts in which they are involved is essentially an

individual responsibility. When this is shared, this responsibility becomes social

and its growth tends to be more lasting because it benefits more members of

society.

I have explained that it is social justice, or equity or social fair-play, in

human relationships that determines how we understand, shape and operate being

together as individual persons dependent upon other people. It is this dependency

“Social justice is an umbrella concept that

tries to explain and describe the basic

principles of equality, equity, respect for the

dignity of other people, and respect

for the environment.”


5

– better still, interdependency – that essentially makes us living beings whose

humanity is basically possible because of other people. In the absence of some

degree of social fair-play, life with others would be difficult, if not impossible.

Because of social justice, we can afford to be future-oriented by hoping, planning,

and developing expectations whose realization we consider highly possible

(Boakari, 2006, p. 01).

Social justice is an umbrella concept that tries to explain and describe the

basic principles of equality, equity, respect for the dignity of other people, and

respect for the environment. Also included is the rational consumption of goods

and services which are expected to guide human relationships and community

living at all levels, both in micro-relationships and macro-relations. Because of its

complexity and universal applicability, principles related to justice and respect in

society are also treated in certain documents that have been elaborated with the

historic development of how people have conceived this essential cement for

helping make human living less traumatic and more beneficial for all. These

principles with the objective of guaranteeing human conviviality and dignity for

the individual have been expressed in historical documents of universal

importance. For instance, while the Preamble of the United Nations Universal

Declaration of Human Rights of 10 December, 1948 states “Whereas recognition

of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of

the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,”

the next three articles go on to emphasize that -

Article 1. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the

“All human beings are born free and

equal in dignity and rights.”


6

country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person (United Nations, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948). In this same way, to emphasize the collective charge and individual for making human society possible, the Constitution of the United States declares in its Preamble that -

We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America (US Constitution).

From a document elaborated in the 18th century, these words serve as a

resounding reminder that despite social transformations, various historical

experiences, and industrial and technological changes, humans continue to

have the same basic needs while facing the same problems. To help satisfy

these needs for all and to proactively face the problems that prevent social

justice in all societies continue to be universal tasks. The Universal Declaration

of Human Rights and even more recent constitutions like that of the Federal

Republic of Brazil (1988) support the position that justice in human

communities is always a worthwhile cause, an intelligent means and a dignified

goal to strive to attain. In the Preamble, the Constituents who elaborated the final

document solemnly state, in the names of all Brazilians -

We, the representatives of the Brazilian People, convened in the National Constituent Assembly to institute a Democratic State, for the purpose of ensuring the exercise of social and individual rights, liberty, security, well-being, development, equality and justice as supreme values of a fraternal, pluralist and unprejudiced society, founded on social harmony and committed, in the internal and international orders, to the peaceful settlement of disputes, promulgate, under the protection of God, this Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil (Congresso Nacional, 1988).

These preambles and the articles that follow basically point to efforts to

explain and offer guidance about what constitutes human dignity, collective

security, social harmony, individual prerogatives and responsibilities. The ideals

“The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and even more

recent constitutions like that of the Federal

Republic of Brazil (1988) go to support the position

that justice in human communities is always a

worthwhile cause.”


7

stressed refer to the need to humanize society through appropriate strategies that

bring improvements in the daily lives of people of both local and distant

communities. These documents and others that are similar serve as permanent

reminders that the principles of human dignity, collective social well-being, and

justice in human relations are worth fighting for and that having them reign as

integral parts of society is a goal whose attainment may be a process, but a

measurable one A good measure of how this ideal is being developed or not

consists in how often one fails to see oneself in other people in our daily

activities. Can social justice be partially present, or it is either present or not? No

matter what, there is no need to justify its absence or partial presence. When it is

not present, it is because some human beings are not recognized as such and are

being treated disrespectfully.

The universal nature of these ideals has been referenced in the

aforementioned Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) in its Article 25:

Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself (herself) and of his (her) family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his (her) control (United Nations, Declaration of Human Rights).

Religious institutions contribute to making fair-play and justice in its

different dimensions more real in relationships for the purposes of life in the

world and beyond. For example, the Catholic Church disseminates its orientations

about social justice principally through papal documents and special orientations

from Bishops and Regional Bishops’ Conferences. The central messages over the

years have been “translated” into seven Social Teaching Themes that include

“Life and dignity of the human person; Call to family, community and

participation; Rights and responsibilities; Option for the poor and vulnerable; The

dignity of work and the rights of workers; Solidarity; and Care for God’s

creation” (http://www.usccb.org/).

“Religious institutions

contribute to making fair-play and justice in its

different dimensions more

real in relationships for the purposes of

life in the world and beyond.”

http://www.usccb.org/


8

The Office for Social Justice, St. Paul and Minneapolis (OSJSPM), in a

more didactical manner summarizes these principles in Ten Areas as follows:

“Human dignity; Community and the common good; Rights and responsibilities;

Option for the poor and vulnerable; Participation; Dignity of work and rights of

workers; Stewardship of God’s creation; Solidarity; Role of government; and

Promotion of peace” (www.osjspm.org/). These two ways of presenting the same

message are an attempt to demonstrate how consistently the Church has

historically worked for the humanization of the world family by engaging in

policies, directives and educational programs with the objective of making

societies more human-centered and permanently changed for the betterment of

life all over the world. To be Church is to be the bedrock of human values and a

permanent source of support for any- and everything that lead to concrete results

affirming human dignity, individual freedom and social unity. There are

arguments that different groups in this same Church could understand these issues

differently. Nonetheless, these are fundamental beliefs and values leading to

common concerns that justify the continuing Christ’s legacy of bringing peace,

unity, and brother/sister-hood (humanity) to all God’s children as co-creators of

the universe. This can only be seen as a call to unity in the struggles to work for

attitudinal and behavioral changes in social and environmental matters. These

general areas of concern as highlighted by both the US Catholic Bishops’

Conference (1998; 2003) and the OSJSPM include primary provisions for peace,

harmony, respect, dignity, environmental responsibility and solidarity between all

peoples united through the privilege of being humans on a common mission with

individual and collective responsibilities. When these responsibilities are assumed

realistically and habitually, individual and collective rights would be guaranteed.

Still in the Catholic Church, among several perspectives about peace and

justice for all humans is Liberation Theology. As a conscious choice to work

alongside the poor and for the most abject of these, in making an “option for the

poor” (in mind, spirit, material goods, political strategies, formal educational

attainment, and satisfaction of social needs), this theological orientation, despite

“Still in the Catholic Church, among

several perspectives about peace and

justice for all humans is Liberation Theology.”

http://www.osjspm.org/


9

different perspectives, basically consists of the effort to think clearly about the

meaning of religious faith in the context of oppression, war, poverty, inequality

and environmental destruction, and the effort to live a compassionate, courageous

and life-sustaining response to those conditions. Over the past several decades,

people inspired by Liberation Theology have sought to give voice to a response

that both addresses the needs of those who are injured and oppressed, and also

works to change the structures and ongoing processes of injury and oppression.

Liberation theology varies greatly according to the culture in which it

arises, but its underlying themes are immediately recognizable across the world:

the transformation of everyday life through a new awakening of compassion,

courage, truthfulness and justice. It is a work in progress, born out of enormous

pain and extraordinary hope, which is sure to inspire many and offend many

(www.liberationtheology.org).

Maybe a good summary of these values can be found in the words of Pope

Paul VI, when he said, “If you want peace, work for justice.” Justice and peace

are so intricately interrelated that one is only possible when the other exists. They

are complementary states of being that demand the development of those

conditions that go to make human living less demanding and more satisfying.

Working for peace and justice refers to concrete concerns about human life and

those conditions in which different human groups live. Though the Pope’s words

serve as an important indication of how the Catholic Church views social justice

as the mission of all men, women, youth and children, other religions also

recognize the importance of social justice, living according to the principles of

justice, as humans being human with/to other persons. This ontological concern

for all humans is expressed in various ways. Here are some according to the web-

site www.salsa.net/peace/quotes.html:

You should love your neighbor as yourself (Leviticus, 19:18).

“If you want peace, work for justice.”


10

None of you is a believer until he loves for his brother what he loves for

himself (Islam, 40 Hadith of An-Nawawi 13).

Ascribe not to any soul that which you would not have ascribed to you,

and say not that which you should not. This is my command to you, you

must observe it (Baha’i: Baha’u’llah, The Hidden Words, Arabic, 29).

One should not behave towards others in a way disagreeable to oneself.

This is the essence of morality. All other activities are due to selfish desire

(Hinduism, Mahabharata, Anusasana Parva, 113.8).

Tse-Kung asked, “Is there one word that can serve as a principle of

conduct for life?” Confucius replied, “It is the word shu – reciprocity. Do

not do to others what you do not want them to do to you” (Confucianism,

Analects 15.23).

These quotes provide a working summary of the principal ideas related to

social justice and the humanization of the world that religions are about. As basic

principles, religions mainly serve as a guide that followers need to translate into

concrete actions and practices whose consequences should focus on making all

persons as more human as possible. Principles regarding living in peace with

respect for the dignity of other persons in relationships could have different names

in different parts of the world (Mbiti, 1970). Nonetheless, what they denote may

be recognized universally. For instance, among my people, the Mende of Sierra

Leone, West Africa, proverbs like “When my stomach aches, my brother’s head

hurts” and “You are here because of me” deliver the same message. For us, God,

the Almighty, is Ngewo, the “All-encompassing genderless sky that equally and

always equitably sees, guides and protects all.” Among the Yoruba of Nigeria, a

similar idea is expressed in the following proverb – “One going to take a pointed

“When my stomach aches, my brother’s

head hurts.”


11

stick to pinch a baby bird should first try it on himself (herself) to feel how it

hurts.”

Desmond Tutu, South African Archbishop and Nobel Laureate reminds us

of what his people say – “I am here because we are.” In these words the

Archbishop is referring to the principle (force) called ubuntu, the belief that any

human being is imbued with elements of collective goodness because the

individual cannot live in isolation. Through this generosity with self, the world,

and others, one gains connectedness and is assured of integrity because of the

power that resides in the spirit of the community that makes the individual, while

this latter helps give meaning to the collectivity. To humiliate, cause deliberate

shame and bring harm and unnecessary suffering to another person mean absence

of both self-love and respect for life in community. This does not necessarily have

religious implications as it would in Western culture; for the African, this

principle of oneness in being, as well as behavior that is other-centered and based

upon known shared values, are merely the essence of human life (Tutu, 1999).

Reciprocity as a characteristic manner of relating to others and to the environment

serves as key-word and reminder of the ideal for all persons.

These principles related to peace are ideals, but they are dreams that need

to be transformed into engagements on different fronts against injustice in its

varied subtle forms and veiled manifestations. There are several groups and

movements in different parts of the world, and even in local communities,

working for a society that emphasizes justice and equality. For instance, in San

Antonio, Texas, two such organizations are the San Antonio PeaceCenter and the

Women’s Global Connection (WGC). While the former focuses on working

toward peace and nonviolence at different levels, the latter strives to promote

social education and leadership skills, especially directed at women in the world,

particularly in countries rife with injustice and poverty

(www.womensglobalconnection.org). The development of these networks and

permanent struggles to get more people involved in their activities to bring about

real peace in the lives of many others are worth recognition. It is good to

“To humiliate, cause deliberate shame and

bring harm and unnecessary

suffering to another person means

absence of both self-love and respect for life in community.”


12

remember that there are hundreds of such organizations existing today as

evidence of how complex and widespread is the concern for a more equitable

society.

From what has been presented, it seems evident that the most reliable

source of peace and unity is social justice. Both individuals and human society

stand to gain much when certain attitudes and habitual behaviors demonstrating

respect for positive reciprocity and its implications in human relationships

become part of the daily routine of individuals. Nonetheless, this is not the case in

many everyday relationships. What is generally noticed is the absence of these

values and more open manifestations of abuses against other people (Freire,

2000).2 In effect, these are ways of inhibiting social practices based on the

conception that all should be allies for human growth in mutual respect for one

another in community.

Some hindrances to social justice

After the attempt to present the issues to be discussed as human dilemmas,

I continue by offering some observations about social justice, the element that

gives real meaning to the questions in discussion. Without the concept of social

justice in its varied Western forms of expression (Human, Civil and Constitutional

Rights) and the need for humanizing society, the discussion about negative “-

isms” would be moot. Discussions and other activities take place around social

2 In this text, Freire (2000) sadly reports as television channels did on the evening news of April 21, 1997 that “Today, five adolescents killed, with cruel barbarity, an indigenous of the Pataxo tribal group, who was found quietly sleeping at a bus stop in Brasilia. They told the police that they were joking. How strange! To believe to be playing by killing another person. They set his body on fire as one would a useless object as if it were something without any value at all for anybody. To satisfy their cruelty and pleasure in seeing death, for them the Indian was neither a you nor a he. He was just that, that thing over there. Some kind of inferior shadow in the world. He was inferior and an inconvenience; an inconvenient and offensive object” (p. 65). To drive home the point, these adolescents were middle class youth of European origin and their parents, high-level civil servants in a society that prides itself on its diversity and multiethnic-racial composition! The national ideology of a “racial democracy” has remained an underpinning in private conversations and public policy discussions.

“Principles of social justice as the essence of life in community

do not know boundaries or time

zones; they are universal and ubiquitous.”


13

justice because of its importance for humans as historical subjects responsible for

developing and maintaining the structures and systems we have in society. It can

be forwarded that social justice refers to those principles and their translation into

everyday human practices that recognize all human beings as equals and

accordingly demands that each and everyone be treated as equally and equitably

as possible at all times and in all places. Principles of social justice as the essence

of life in community do not know boundaries or time zones; they are universal

and ubiquitous. Practices built upon social justice serve as the life-force of a

community. Social justice is the fundamental recognition and acceptance of the

humanity in us and in others. It serves as an invitation to develop daily practices

that bring to reality this consciousness and its concomitant expectations (Macedo,

1994).

One of the tragic ironies of today’s globalized world, most characterized

by differences, is that many people still do not know, or are not able to deal

effectively with, those who exhibit characteristics that do not appear to be the

same as theirs. For many, anybody or anything that appears different presents

confounding problems. Individuals who are dissimilar, or made to seem more

different than similar, are seen as threats. Some go to the extreme of believing that

those who are not similar to them, individuals who do not look like them, those

who do not share their world vision and even social preferences are not only

different but inferior. Along this line of thinking, such persons go further and

seem convinced that those who dare to be different must pay the price for being

what they are...’ To be without a family, not to belong, presents a social threat that

must be prevented, sometimes at all costs.

In these terms, two basic groups are in consideration – one whose

members do the defining of a particular phenomenon and the other which is

objectified through this definition because of how its members are perceived in

relation to the phenomenon of interest. It is important to note that these definitions

may have little or nothing to do with “real reality.” These definitions and even the

phenomena may be mere socially contextualized constructions. Nonetheless, as

“To be without a family, not to

belong, presents a social threat that

must be prevented, sometimes at all

costs.”


14

Schultz did remind us, humans build their realities through their own elaborations,

constructions and definitions. Those who do the defining, the socio-economic,

cultural and political movers, blame the defined others for their physical, social

and cultural conditions. There is an in-group that claims to be the center of all that

happens and most of the members seize the opportunities offered through this line

of thinking to lord it over other people considered not to belong, the out-group.

These may be intellectual constructions, one might argue, but the facts of real life

demonstrate that these definitions do have concrete consequences in the lives of

real people. Differences as unlikeness may be socially constructed, but their

economic, cultural, political and everyday outcomes can be equally positive or

negative for this or that group of individuals in society. There is a general

tendency to emphasize the negative outcomes as these call for social awareness

and corrective actions.

The mental gymnastics performed by some members of the dominant

group that develops the widely accepted definitions in society can be described in

these lines: ‘I belong to the group that is the most intelligent, most hardworking,

most important, most powerful, and consequently, I deserve all I have and enjoy

because my group is unique and all-deserving. Members of other groups do not

deserve what my group controls because they are inferior in every way

imaginable; in fact they are not like us; they are very different; they are inferior,

and may even be less human than we are.’ This “ethnocentric monologue”

(Rocha, 2003, p.09), easily employable at both the macro and micro levels in

social interactions has contributed to a myriad of historical problems in the field

of human encounters and relationships. While ethnocentrism can be used to

account for the enslavement of many different groups, Nazism, colonialism,

genocides, the unchristian phase of Christianity in the middle ages, and today’s

hegemonic presence of some national/cultural groups the world over, this view

that centers everything on only one culture’s values is also present in many

everyday interactions between people who emphasize those characteristics that

seem to stand out as being unlike their own in the persons they interact with. The

“I deserve all I have and enjoy because my group is unique and all-deserving.”


15

unquestioned belief (accompanied by conformist attitudes and behaviors) that one

group’s culture and world view serve as sole measures for validating others not

only creates room for conflict but also points to blatant ignorance in assuming

that all the complexities in the world can be fully grasped and effectively

explained by the members of one group.

A fundamental question that cannot be easily silenced is the following:

Why is it that when people generally meet and interact with others, what stands

out and determines the nature of these encounters are those elements that appear

to be different? It seems that what calls attention the most are those characteristics

that are unlike those of the other as perceived by the individual who belongs to

the more powerful group. Simultaneously, the person perceived as less powerful

tends to view her/himself the same way as those who do the defining in society

because he/she has assimilated the values and social perspectives of this latter

group. In this process wherein differences are given priority, similarities are

downplayed or neglected outright as they seem to need coherent explanations. On

the other hand, differences are treated as if they do not seem to need much

explanation. They are believed to be evident, natural, and customary; common

sense, which serves as a very effective instrument for social exclusion, provides

and sustains all the evidence presented in support of this understanding.

Differences are more easily constructed, maintained and explained away because

they seem to need less mental energy to deal with; they encourage intellectual

laziness and honor sloppy thinking practices. During these processes, individuals

who raise questions, demand evidence-based arguments, dare to present

contradictory positions and perspectives are accused of faulty reasoning and may

be neglected. Worse still, such persons may suffer the consequences for standing

out because according to ancient wisdom, the nail that dares stand up must be

made equal to the others. This will be necessary even if it involves hammering it

down many times over. The end in this case is assumed to justify the means.

It must be emphasized that differences in and by themselves are merely

markers in and of the world we construct and historically shape. Without these

“Differences are more easily constructed,

maintained and explained away

because they seem to need less mental

energy to deal with.”


16

markers as pointers, it is difficult to imagine what life would be like especially in

community. Just as similarities help define who I am, differences also provide the

comparative parameters (phenomena) needed to clarify who I really am. In other

words, differences and similarities perform the same basic psychosocial functions

in that they help the individual locate, define and guide her/himself.

Unfortunately, however, whereas similarities tend to be considered more positive

and give origin to more constructive possibilities, differences are generally treated

with negative connotations and implications that tend to more easily depreciate

other persons. Similarities seem to bring comfort and tranquility. Differences tend

to invoke challenge, provoke irrational responses, and force many to react in ways

that neither recognize nor respect the other as a human being.

Downplaying human similarities, while overemphasizing apparent

dissimilarities, are the two complementary processes that most account for

developing stereotypes and maintaining stereotypic perspectives in human

relationships. Stereotypes arise when people use impressions gathered after

preliminary encounters and observations to make judgments about people and

phenomena in general. These assessments which could be extremely simplified

also tend to be biased as they are dependent upon the existing wisdom of the

dominant group. Stereotypes tend to be preconceived notions, baseless inferences

about a group and its members as well as about certain situations. Considering

that preconceptions do not create themselves, they are based upon what group

members think and how they define some situations or a person who belongs to

this or that group. The individual is not judged on her/his merits but on those

characteristics attributed to the group he/she is assigned to or claims to belong to.

In this same way, certain situations are assessed based upon predefinitions that the

group has historically developed and maintained in order to guarantee its own

cohesion, territoriality, and scope of influence. Like other social guide posts,

stereotypes can be misleading tools that can cut both ways. Positive stereotypes

(all hip-hop lovers are good students) help boost the self-esteem of group

members. On the other hand negative stereotypes can easily damage the self-

“It must be emphasized that

differences in and by themselves are merely markers in and of the world we construct

and historically shape.”


17

respect of the members of the group so characterized. Stereotypes negative in

nature easily turn someone into a target of different kinds of violence because

he/she belongs to an agglomeration stereotypically categorized as “a threat.”

As Hinton (2000) points out, “much of the study of judging other people

has emphasized the view that we see people as members of a particular category

of people based upon certain characteristics such as age, gender, ethnicity or

occupation” (p. 6). He goes on to clarify that stereotypes are “categorical

judgments” (p. 6) that exclude particularities in order to facilitate placement

within one group or the other, a task that needs to be performed in order to

perceive; stereotypes determine what is and what is not in order to help one

remember normal expectations and habitual response patterns. As humans,

perceptions are necessary for us to be social agents in relations with others and

other elements. These perceptions involve meaning-making as they determine

what we do with or about that which is perceived. Perceptions as meaning-making

exercises demand that we depend upon social customs and practices within the

group. Perceptions need social reinforcements in order to be validated because

they help the perceiving agent distinguish between phenomena – recognize and

accept (fully or to some degree), or make invisible and neglect completely or in

some situations.

What is perceived and how this is interpreted determine whether

similarities or dissimilarities are emphasized and made the center of attention.

When differences that evoke feelings of separation, distance and unlikeness are

stressed, differentiating treatments could easily follow. Defining someone based

upon the group (social category) to which he/she belongs facilitates developing

and maintaining differentiating treatments which in turn become habitual and

normal. This process leads to the construction of “-isms” that could be either

positive or negative. Some common examples of such “-isms” include those based

upon racial, sexual (gender and sexuality) and age variations with emphases on

those differences that highlight negative elements. Even people’s places of origin

could lead to negative “-isms” that are used to set them apart. There are some

“As humans, perceptions are

necessary for us to be social agents in

relations with others and other elements.”


18

health conditions, especially leprosy and HIV/AIDS, that also lead to

differentiating treatments. Ageism (especially with regards to older individuals,

so-called “senior citizens”)3 and racism are the channels selected for advancing

this discussion. Other negative “-isms” like those mentioned above have

characteristics and modus operandi that are basically much like what I discuss

here. Behaviors supported by attitudes built upon worldviews that work against a

just and more peaceful life in community because human beings are respected in

their fundamental condition as humans follow a similar pattern.

Ageism refers to a set of negative attitudes based upon unfounded notions

regarding individuals in an age group. In this regard, even though people in all

age groups could suffer because they are placed in one group or the other and then

negatively defined, I will concentrate on older persons in this discussion. Notions

about older persons are used as justification for disrespectful and undignified

behaviors in relating to them. These persons who have lived longer are not

considered just as other ordinary human beings but as a group set apart, a set of

persons whose dissimilarities are made more pronounced because our society

values youth and youthfulness more. (The considerable wealth and economic

influence of corporations and companies in the business of rejuvenation

[appearing, staying and behaving young] provide the evidence for this claim). It is

a fact that with age, certain difficulties and deficiencies become more evident.

Nonetheless, like all others, what any older person needs are attention, respect,

purpose, support, conviviality, dignity and caring. All over the world, this group

of citizens continues to grow in numbers. As such, knowing more about ageism is

important in order to know more about the realities in which we presently live.

3 It needs to be clarified that ageism is multi-faceted; just as it can refer to older people, its consequences, especially the more negative ones, can also affect children and adolescents. Reports about child abuse, domestic violence against children, as well as sexual abuse and other forms of violence perpetrated against adolescents provide proof for such a claim. Disrespect for children’s rights, the silencing of and other discriminatory practices against younger persons, easily blamed upon “generation gaps,” are forms of ageism – persons treated negatively and differentially because of their biological ages (and physical appearance).

“It is a fact that with age, certain

difficulties and deficiencies become

more evident.”


19

Generalized inferences about the older person’s presumed inferior

physical conditions, mental capabilities, emotional equilibrium, and economic

situation are used to define each individual who appears to be a senior citizen.

Accordingly, the person considered older is treated as if he/she were weak and

sick, with questionable levels of intellectual competence and uncertain emotional

balance. In most cases, this same older person may also be assumed to be

economically disadvantaged or with more propensity to become so. In most cases

without reason or facts, every person considered to belong to the category of

being older is placed in the same group as most other senior citizens, especially

those whose characteristics and conditions make them already more socially,

physically, emotionally and economically disadvantaged or vulnerable. The

individual person is not taken into consideration. It is the group he/she is assigned

to that defines what ideas are constructed about him/her and consequently, how

he/she is treated by others, especially those who form the social majority, those

who elaborate the definitions that serve as the yardstick in that particular area of

human life and/or condition. These criteria are culture-specific and temporally

determined too.

For example, in many countries where Western values predominate, the

negative treatments of older citizens present a rather interesting contradiction:

The same society that extends the lives of men and women, struggles to accept older persons. What is even worse is that either directly or indirectly, they are blamed for getting old. People forget how much they contributed to the construction of the country [and]… are constantly accused of being a burden on society (Almeida, 2004, p. 31).

As a social antidote to this contradiction, there are legal dispositions in these

countries that should protect the rights of older individuals as full participatory

citizens in society. Taking Brazil as an example, its Statute for the Old

(Congresso Nacional, 2003) legislates that members of this growing population

group have the right to the following – health, work, equality, education, political

participation, development, social recognition, recognition of their economic

“It is the group he/she is assigned to

that defines what ideas are constructed

about him/her.”


20

conditions, violence-free living, and environmental accessibility. The first article

of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights basically stipulates these same

values that emphasize the rights to a life of dignity, respect and protection from

all harm and suffering for all human beings.

In its treatment of older citizens, perhaps Western societies can learn much

from so-called traditional societies and communities scattered all over the globe.

These societies may be considered “backward” because of the stages of their

technological advancement, but many are believed to be much more advanced

because of their value systems in which all human life and conditions are given

due considerations. Whereas many of these less-advanced communities in

countries in Africa and Latin America have not successfully incorporated older

values and practices with more modern ones, most Asian communities have more

successfully constructed an integrated cultural milieu where the old and the new

live together in harmonious unity (Gannon, 2004). It is in this regard that former

UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, is reported to have reminded the world that,

“In Africa, it is said that when an old person dies, a library disappears….Older

persons are the intermediaries between past, present and future. Their wisdom and

experience constitute the true vital force for the development of society”

(Almeida, 2004).

In itself, old age is only a human condition. It can be defined and used as a

positive human factor or as a justification for differentiating treatments. The

characteristics and/or conditions of an individual do not matter; all “-isms” are

constructed, defined and maintained by some people in some human

communities. As human beings the responsibility to be respectful of and

responsible for others are ethical requirements and should be a commonality;

regarding this ethical value, there are no contextual or temporal differences: they

are human rights.

As a doctrine about how other persons are viewed and treated, racism has

a past that needs to be remembered in order to emphasize its historical

“Racism makes it possible to use

differences that are natural as factors for

discriminating against certain people in

society, excluding these people from

having equal access to opportunities and

negatively stereotyping them.”


21

construction and relevance Initially the term race was understood as lineage and

was employed to refer to groups within the same European societies. The notion

of lineage was exported to the peoples of Africa, Asia and South America, and

their differences led to ethnocentric reactions by the European invaders.

Ethnocentrism is much more diffused and can be considered a normal reaction to

protect one’s culture and group values. The problem arises when it is transformed

into racism as a consistent attempt to mark differences as bases for domination

and exploitation. This notion helped establish and sustain colonialism. It made it

appear logical to separate human beings into Europeans (superior?) and non-

Europeans (less equal?), and go on to hold that the former had a natural right to

dominate and control the latter because of their acclaimed superior characteristics

and much better natural endowments. This uncalled for rule and governance by

foreigners continue to be judged just since no colonizing nations have ever been

called to task for their inhuman relationships with other human beings because of

self-enrichment, cultural domination, and empire building. For a long time, it was

even believed that the colonial powers had a natural right, a moral and divine

responsibility (White man’s burden) as superior beings to govern the peoples of

Africa, Asia and Latin America (Indigenous populations).

Racism, a form of segregation that is most talked about, is based upon the

belief that human beings can be divided into groups along ethnic-racial

characteristics and dimensions. Though there is more than enough proof that there

is only one race, the human race, discussions about human beings and groupings

are still race-centered or ethnically-based. Skin color (phenotype) is most

commonly used as criterion for this division that is believed to be genetic

(genotype), more deep-seated and thus a more powerful explanatory factor for

believing that some people are inferior psychologically, intellectually and morally

because of their racial type.

This idea has been explained by Darder and Torres (2009) in these words:

If “race” is real, it is so only because it has been rendered meaningful by the actions and beliefs of the powerful, who retain the myth in order to protect their own political-economic interests….”race” is socially


22

constructed and its origins clearly steeped in an ideology of exclusion, domination, exploitation, even genocide….” (p. 157).

Racism can then be said to be a doctrine that affirms that races do exist

and that there is a natural hierarchy among them and that there is one in

particular, Western European, that is consistently superior to all others. A logical

consequence of this world view is the development of negative attitudes that

attribute dehumanizing qualities to those groups and their members that do not

belong to the groups defined as superior and so allowed to be dominant. Racism

makes it possible to use differences that are natural as factors for discriminating

against certain people in society, excluding these people from having equal access

to opportunities and negatively stereotyping them. Above all, by naturalizing

historically constructed social inequalities, racist practices succeed in blaming the

victims of racism for their “problems.” In the context of everyday social

interactions between individuals, racism leads to inhuman treatments and

disrespect. When race is used as justification for explaining away discriminations,

social inequalities and injustice in society, racism becomes criminal domination

because psychological violence is combined with cultural and physical forms of

violence (Cunha Jr., 1995).

Since the humanity of the victims of racism is denied, many face problems

of identity and self-worth. The racist falsifies social reality and the dominated

victim assimilates the values and conceptions constructed by his/her dominating

agent (Frantz Fanon, 1967). Accepting the stigmatized, negative and inferior

identity constructed by those with power is an unconscious process in the

socialization of the dominated. To collaborate with their negative identities, the

victims of racism are made to pass for more inferior members of society, and as

such, not to deserve a fair share in the goods and services offered by society.

Many of the victims live with this situation, believing that these discriminations

are the normal ways of life, that in fact, they are natural. Consciously or not, they

help in their domination and discrimination! Situational definitions also go to help

maintain the discriminating relationships because to question what is already

“Above all, by naturalizing historically

constructed social inequalities, racist

practices succeed in blaming the victims of

racism for their problems.”


23

established is not common practice. So efforts have to be made in order to

question the status quo of the unequal relationships between these groups of

human beings illogically defined for special interests (ideological orientations) as

belonging to different racial groups.

Basically, what characteristics do ageism (as discriminatory practices

against senior citizens) and racism (as differentiating treatments dependent upon

racially-defined elements) have in common? What are their common

consequences in modern society? First, partial and unclear definitions are

constructed whereby baseless generalizations easily appear logical and protective

of the interests of some, especially those in positions of privilege. These

definitions appeal to those groups whose members need to be co-opted in order to

maintain the status quo. Second, basic natural human characteristics and

conditions are used to differentiate between individuals in negative terms –

superior/inferior, good/bad, intelligent/stupid, and other such polarizing

descriptive terms become powerful resources in this process. Third, like other

negative “-isms,” ageism and racism are part of daily life. In their wide variations,

we come into contact with them in performing our daily tasks and routines.

Fourth, all negative “-isms” have a conspiratory aspect about them. While the

dominant group justifies its inhuman treatment by falsifying definitions, many

victims “collaborate” by assuming and reproducing these same false conceptions

of reality. Fifth, the underlying issue is one of power relations. The members of

one group control others by controlling access to all kinds of resources. These

divisions can only really be appreciated when they are analyzed from the

perspective of power maintenance and hegemonic relationships. With regards to

ageism, the question is one of age; with racism, it is one of race (generally

European vs. non-European); with sexism (gender), it is whether an individual is

male or female; with sexuality, it concerns heterosexual or homo-affective

orientations; and with such health conditions as HIV/AIDS, the question is

whether one is “contaminated” or not.

“Second, basic natural human

characteristics and conditions are used

to differentiate between individuals in negative terms.”


24

People’s physical appearances and presumed (assumed) conditions are

made criteria for judging intellectual capabilities, moral standards and emotional

conditions, and with the help of predefinitions, these assist in placing individuals

in stereotypical categories that have concrete consequences in their lives. These

negative “-isms” generally close doors to opportunities in different sectors of life

in society. As such, efforts are being constantly made to do away with these

negative consequences and make the playing field for access to social services,

psychological resources and material goods more equal for everybody. Re-

establishing the dignity of people while assisting them to rebuild their self-esteem

while contributing to social cohesion and citizenship formation is a goal this

discussion should focus upon.

Strategies for facing challenges to social justice

This discussion finds its true meaning and purpose in provoking critical

reflections about social justice and some of the challenges our modern societal

values and practices present constantly. There is a continued absence of just,

respectful and equal treatments in society. Little significant change seems to be

effectively taking place. The police sections of newspapers the world over and 24-

hour global television newscasts consistently provide evidence for this claim.

In the face of continued injustice and inequalities that multiply, one would

conclude that more objective actions are needed to bring about more social

justice, or at least, meaningfully reduce those occurrences that hinder it from

firmly taking root among us. In presenting considerations about strategies that

could help in the changing processes in many societies regarding issues of

negative “-isms,” we make it clear that discriminations and exclusions are

products of ideologies that can and should be reconstructed to focus on human

beings in relationships with one another. However, one needs to be aware that

there are individuals who would prefer to leave the social-cultural discriminations

and political exclusions we are discussing just as they have been and continue to

“These negative ‘-isms’ generally close doors to opportunities in different sectors of

life in society.”


25

be. There are others who would prefer to work within existing structures,

programs and projects in order to bring about changes from within. A third

strategy is one that could be considered by the socially conscious who seek to get

engaged. This would involve being fundamentally against the conditions in our

communities and move on to consistently engaging as an agent of structural

transformation in order to transform the system into becoming more ethical and

humane.

In this regard, some suggestions are offered in a summary manner so that

those who are interested could go ahead and give further meaning and directions

to these points for reflection:

1. Concentrate efforts on first establishing the theoretical underpinnings of

diversity, social justice, ethical standards and participatory engagement.

Working definitions have to be established for these concepts because any

attempt to transform social reality today revolves around them. Without a

critical appreciation of their contributions to the development of world views,

no real transformation would be viable (Ayers, Quinn & Stovall, 2009). Their

basic implications for the community of interest have to be investigated on a

continuous basis.

2. Investigate how the negative “-isms” most common in the community are

constructed, maintained and reproduced. Finding out the why, when, how, who,

and where of the discriminatory elements most present would be very basic

tasks in this undertaking.

3. Incorporate and adopt, as much as possible, an intersectional paradigm with

regards to any oppressive practice. The tendency to concentrate on a negative “-

ism” in a unilateral manner does not seem to capture the reality of social

oppression. As Hankivsky and colleagues (2010) and Bailey (2009) have

demonstrated, for example, oppression based upon race, gender and social class

are not additive and sequential. Rather, the oppressor constructs an integrated

“Concentrate efforts on first establishing

the theoretical underpinnings of diversity, social justice, ethical standards and participatory engagement.”


26

and dynamically changing whole to continuously oppress the dominated and

exploited person.

4. Establish and deal with the practical aspects of the most common

discriminatory attitudes, values and behaviors using techniques that are

objective and direct. An effective strategy would be to think about those who

are being left out and dehumanized when the issues are heterosexism, ageism,

racism, sexism, and many other exclusionary factors. Focus upon the real

consequences of these conceptions in people’s everyday lives. Lofty discussions

would help, but the essence of everything should always relate to the real lives

of some real individuals who form (have been assigned to) real existing human

groups.

5. Focus consistently on social justice in all areas including the personal,

professional, social and community living. This is necessary because of the

systemic nature of oppression. Oppressions in relationships permeate all human

interactions, at all times, in all places, and at all levels. In practical terms, some

priorities could be set, but the main goal has to be integrative, working against

oppression in its octopus-like diverse nature.

6. Choose to work as a team or individually. Working as a team takes more

time for planning and administering. Relationships within the group would also

need administering. However, the advantages may be worth the sacrifices

especially if the intentions are to engage in more long-lasting activities. If

participatory change is what is needed, then practicing this relational method

within the group could also be a rich learning opportunity.

These strategies for dealing with forms of oppression are structured

around a fundamental methodology for social interventions used by such

successful transformative educators like Paulo Freire and Myles Horton (Bell,

Gaventa & Peters, 1990). This methodology consists of observations, readings,

reflections, group discussions, planning, strategizing, implementation,

“An effective strategy would be to

think about those who are being left

out and dehumanized when

the issues are heterosexism,

ageism, racism, sexism.”


27

assessing, follow up, and then, the whole process begins all over again. The

difference now is that new realities would be observed, and any renewed efforts

would focus on new problems and challenges. Another advantage in this

methodology is that there is a continuous learning process (in spiral form) for

all participants. Learning that can change lives could be developed along the

way.

In other terms, these techniques are based upon these four basic acts in

working against social injustice:

- Identify (give a name to the form of oppression in question);

- Describe (define and explain the topic that is really the focus of attention);

- Connect (present and discuss concrete examples of the form of oppression

under scrutiny);

- Engage (discuss various strategies for getting involved in projects for

meaningful change that really affects people’s everyday lives); and

- Remain critical (the intersectional and dynamic characteristics of forms of

oppression need to be stressed).

For further reflections

In a text that discusses fundamental human issues, to talk about

“Conclusions” would be a misnomer. The questions that motivated elaborating

this article continue to be problematic. And for most people the world over,

these issues refer to their ongoing daily experiences. As such, any ideas that

have been discussed can only serve as food for thought for deeper reflections

about the moral call to help build more humane, just and human societies.

Planning for progress in terms of reaching the highest possible goals as

human beings in community is a truth that cannot be easily revoked. Basically,

it involves a relatively widespread desire to transform the conceptions people

have about human life in society and to understand that peace can only become

reality when there is justice in a community. And for this to take place, an

increasing number of individuals must take on the responsibility to drive efforts

“The difference now is that new realities would be observed,

and any renewed efforts would focus on new problems and challenges.”


28

with the objective of transforming people’s lives by influencing their world

views, attitudes, value systems, and basic behaviors in their relationships with

other persons.

With this background understanding of the problem, social justice is

defined as a concept that strives to capture the essence of the vocation of all

human beings to work for the equal distribution of all resources, respect for

everybody always, and the adoption of practices that continuously give due

value to the dignity of individuals because above all, they too are human. The

equitable distribution that is at stake is one that basically guarantees equal

physical security and psychological safety. A community built upon social

justice principles makes it possible for individuals and groups to be treated with

fairness as well as have an impartial share of the advantages and disadvantages

within a society.

In sum, in this article, explanatory efforts focused on making it clear that

the principles of social fairness, political power-sharing and psychological

security are universal. Differences could exist, but never in the essence of the

emphases on the human being as an individual with rights and responsibilities

that have to be recognized and respected so that the society itself would enjoy

its material and other resources much more meaningfully. To offer support for

the argument that social justice is a value for all societies, evidence was

presented from the social teachings of the Catholic Church. The perspectives

about “the option for the poor” adopted by Liberation Theology was introduced.

Similarly, other culturally-based philosophies that undergird the relevance of

just practices in society were also presented. Through these arguments, it was

stressed that social justice is a human factor, and that though cultural

differences can have their influences in essence, this is a conception that only

makes full sense when it is understood as a universal and ubiquitous

responsibility.

Everyday experiences demonstrate that social justice remains an ideal

difficult to make real in most relationships at the personal, professional and

“Different forms of oppression exist in society because of

historical circumstances that favored some at the

expense of many others.”


29

even larger societal levels. Different forms of oppression exist in society

because of historical circumstances that favored some at the expense of many

others. Social realities were defined in ways that masked crucially dependent

phenomena and these falsified definitions continue to exert uncritical influences

on people, especially those who are the victims of these oppressive practices.

Social, cultural, political and economic elements, instead of being employed as

explanatory tools for constructing more human societies, are used to justify the

unequal distribution of goods and services. Based upon ideological dispositions,

traditional views and conservative practices, negative stereotypes are

constructed, and these dehumanize the members of certain (natural and/or

assigned) groups. These dehumanizing stereotypes lead to differentiating

treatments that become commonplace. A very powerful consequence of this

situation is that even some dominated and oppressed group members tend to

adopt those world views, values and behaviors that lead to and justify the

violation of their basic rights as human beings. With the continuation of

practices that are unjust, all members of society lose because where there is

injustice, true peace cannot exist.

As concrete examples for discussing stereotypical constructions, forms of

oppression based upon advanced age and racial group were presented. The

short-sighted nature in defining who belongs to the first group and the illogical

reasoning upon which the members of the second group are defined are

presented as social problems whose repercussions permeate other areas of life in

community. The arbitrary performance of the intellectual (ideological?) groups

that produce these definitions is reproductive and can only be questioned when

there is an awareness of how systems of oppression work. This consciousness

only serves as stepping stone for further action with the objective of

transforming the system. Because as Paulo Freire (1998) has appropriately

admonished,


30

No one constructs a serious democracy, which implies radically changing the societal structures, reorienting the politics of production and development, reinventing power, doing justice to everyone, and abolishing the unjust and immoral gains of the all-powerful, without previously and simultaneously working for these democratic preferences and these ethical demands (p. 67).

In agreement with this orientation, some strategies were introduced for

individual and/or collective engagements. These working guidelines are not all-

inclusive; they can be incorporated into other practices that have been tried by

other socially conscious individuals. Once again, Freire (1998) assists us by

pointing out that teaching is not to transfer knowledge. Rather it should help

people think more critically and help develop knowledge that is more relevant and

socially dimensioned. For more specific teaching about social justice, Bell (2007)

posits that

The goal of social justice education is to enable people to develop the critical analytical tools necessary to understand oppression and their own socialization within oppressive systems, and to develop a sense of agency and capacity to interrupt and change oppressive patterns and behaviors in themselves and in the institutions and communities of which they are a part (p. 2).

What underlines the invitation to get engaged and help transform human society

is the belief that people need to acquire more knowledge based upon critical

thinking in order to become involved in a significant manner. The involvement

that is of interest is one that constantly exposes and fights against all kinds of

oppression (dehumanizing words and actions as injustices) such as – omissions,

devaluing, exclusions, discrediting, misrepresenting, stereotyping, scapegoating,

prejudices, making others inferior, undue appropriations, violence,

marginalizations, making others invisible, and many other methods with similar

objectives. To get involved on the side of social injustice is not of interest here.

What the world needs much more of is JUST treatment for every human being in

“What the world needs much more of is JUST treatment for every human being in all parts of the world;

in our local communities, we can

contribute to this global call by doing

the little things we do as SOCIALLY JUST

as possible.”


31

all parts of the world; in our local communities, we can contribute to this global

call by doing the little things we do as SOCIALLY JUST as possible.

In the words of an old story teller in his eighties (at the time), in my

village in Sierra Leone, the central message about social justice and oppression

(based upon natural or induced differences) in this text is the following: “Being

different is not the problem. Social conditions can change. What our neighbors do

and how we respond, make all the difference.”

References

Adams, M. Bell, L. A. & Griffin, P. (Eds.) (2007). Teaching for diversity and social justice: A sourcebook. (2nd ed.) New York: Routledge. lmeida, V. L.V. e cols. (2004). Estatuto do Idoso: Aspectos juridicos, sociais e culturais. Kairos. Programa de Estudos de Pos-Graduados em Gerontologia, PUC-SP, 7(02), dez, pp.127-149.

Ayers, W. Quinn, T. & Stovall, D. (Eds.) (2009). Handbook of social justice in education. New

York: Routledge. Bailey, A. (2009). On Intersectionality, Empathy, and Feminist Solidarity: A reply to Naomi Zack.

The Journal for Peace and Justice Studies, 19(01), p. 14-36. Bell, B. Gaventa, J. & Peters, J. (1990). We make the road by walking: Conversations on

education and social change – Myles Horton and Paulo Freire. Philadelphia, Temple University Press.

Bell, L. A. (2007). Theoretical foundations for social justice education. In M. Adams; L. A. Bell;

& P. Griffin (Eds.). Teaching for diversity and social justice: A sourcebook. 2nd Ed. pp. 1-14. New York: Routledge.

Boakari, F.M. (2006). Social justice: The dialectics of daily living. Verbum Incarnatum: Journal

of multidisciplinary studies. 1(01), San Antonio: UIW. Brasil (2003). Estatuto do Idoso. Brasilia: Congresso Nacional. (1988). Constituicao nacional.

Brasilia: Congresso Nacional. Cunha Jr., H. (1995). As estrategias de combate ao racismo. Presentation, Seminario Nacional,

Universidade de Sao Paulo, USP. Darder, A. Baltodano, M.P. & Torres, R.D. (2009). After race: An introduction. In darder, A.;

Baltodano, M.P. & Torres, R.D. The critical pedagogy reader. New York: Routledge. Dorr, D. (1994). Preferential option for the poor. In J.A.Dwyer (Ed.), The New Dictionary of

Catholic Social Thought. (pp. 755-759). Collegeville: Liturgical Press. Fanon, F. (1967). Black skin, white mask. New York: Grove Press.


32

Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy, and civic courage. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield.

-------------. (2000). Pedagogia da indignação: Cartas pedagógicas e outros escritos. São Paulo:

UNESP. Gannon, M.J. (2004). Understanding global cultures: Metaphorical journeys through 28 nations,

clusters of nations, and continents. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Grusky, D. (1994). Social stratification: Class, race, and gender in sociological perspective.

Boulder: Westview Press.

Hankivsky, O. Reid, C., Cormier, R. Varcoe, C., Clark, N. Benoit, C. Brotman, S. (2010) Exploring the promises of intersectionality for advancing women's health research. International Journal for Equity in Health, 9(5). Also available at - http://www.equityhealthj.com/content/9/1/5

Hinton, P. R. (2000). Stereotypes, cognition and culture. Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis Inc. hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York:

Routledge. Liberation Theology. (Retrieved October 30, 2010). www.liberationtheology.org Macedo, D. (1994). Literacies of power. Boulder: Westview Press. Mbiti, J.S. (1970). Concepts of God in Africa. New York: Praeger Publishers. Office of Social Justice, St. Paul Minneapolis. (Retrieved October 30, 2010). www.osjspm.org Rocha, E. (2003). O que é etnocentrismo? Sao Paulo: Editora Brasiliense. Sachs, J.D. (2005). The end of poverty: Economic possibilities for our time. New York: Penguin

Press. San Antonio (TX.) PeaceCenter. (Retrieved October 30, 2010). www.salsa.net/peace/quotes.html Secretaria Especial de Políticas para as Mulheres (SPM), (2009). Gênero e diversidade na

escola: Formação de professoras-es em Gênero, Orientação Sexual e Relações Étnico-Raciais. Livro de Conteúdo, Versão 2009. Brasília, DF: SPM.

Silveira, R.M.G.(2007). Educação em Direitos Humanos: Fundamentos teórico-metodológicos.

João Pessoa, PB: Editora Universitária. Tutu, D. (1999). No future without forgiveness. New York: Doubleday. United Nations (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. New York: UN. (Retrieved

August 20, 2010). www.un.org/Overview/rights.html United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). (2003). Faithful citizenship: A Catholic

call to political responsibility. Washington: USCCB Publishing. (Retrieved October 30, 2010). http://www.usccb.org/

http://www.equityhealthj.com/content/9/1/5


33

_________. (1998). Sharing Catholic Social Teaching: Challenges and directions. Washington: USCCB Publishing. (Retrieved October 30, 2010). http://www.usccb.org/

United States of America – USA. Constitution. (Retrieved Septemebr 19, 2010).

www.constitution.org/constit_htm Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization (A.M. Henderson & T.

Parsons, Trans.) New York: Oxford University Press. Women’s Global Connection – (Retrieved, October 12, 2010).

http://www.womensglobalconnection.org/

Verbum Incarnatum The “Poor” in Zephaniah and First World Bias: Implications for Interpretation and Preaching

34

The “Poor” in Zephaniah and First World Bias: Implications for Interpretation and Preaching

Timothy Milinovich, Ph.D. University of the Incarnate Word

Abstract

The crucial lines in Zeph 2:3; 3:12 state that a people described as ani and anawim (in Hebrew) will be saved from the coming wrath and left as a remnant faithful to the LORD.1 These terms in Hebrew, however, may be rendered either metaphorically (i.e., the spiritually poor or “humble”) or more literally as those who suffer material poverty (i.e., the poor). To date, the majority of First World English translations render the term metaphorically, including major Catholic translations. This article will argue, following historical and lexical evidence, that the terms ani and anawim in Zeph 2:3 and 3:12-13 should be translated as those who are economically poor. The common translation of “humble” or “meek” in these verses represents a First World bias and should be rejected. Revision to the Catholic lectionary’s translation would correctly represent the historical meaning of the texts as well as inspire homiletic exhortations on Catholic social teaching.

Demonstration of the Problem

The crucial lines in Zeph 2:3; 3:12 state that a people described as ani and

anawim (in Hebrew) will be saved from the coming wrath and left as a remnant

faithful to the LORD. These terms in Hebrew, however, may be rendered either

metaphorically (i.e., the spiritually poor or humble) or more literally as those who

suffer material poverty (i.e., the poor). To date, the majority of First World

English translations render the term metaphorically, including major Catholic

translations (New American Bible, Jerusalem Bible, and in the lectionary [Fourth

Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A]). A decision to translate metaphorically

greatly influences the meaning of the passages:

1 I use all caps with “LORD” here in order to appropriately translate the Tetragrammaton, the four-letter proper name of God in Hebrew (YHWH).


35

2:1-3: Gather, gather yourselves together, / O nation without shame! /

Before you are driven away, / like chaff that passes on; / Before there

comes upon you / the blazing anger of the LORD; / Before there comes

upon you / the Day of the LORD’s anger. / Seek the LORD, all you

humble (anawim) of the earth, / who have observed his law; / Seek justice,

seek humility; / perhaps you may be sheltered on the day of the LORD’s

anger.” (NAB)

3:12-13: “But I will leave in your midst / a people humble (ani) and lowly

(dal), / Who shall take refuge in the name of the LORD: / the remnant of

Israel…. / They shall pasture and couch their flocks / with none to disturb

them.” (NAB, emphasis added)

To whom is the exhortation—and hope for salvation—directed? To the pious, or

to the poor? The former emphasizes personal piety, the latter warns against

economic injustice. As yet, there has not been an article-length study that engages

the terms ani and anawim both from their lexical and historical progression as

well as their literary context. This study will provide both historical and literary

evidence to argue both that “poor” is the appropriate translation for ani and

anawim in Zephaniah. Furthermore, this appropriate translation of “poor,” it is

argued, serves to strip away First World bias in order to understand the original

author’s intended message, as well as to underscore the social justice implications

for preaching this text today.

Arguments for “humble”

King (1994, p. 419) argues that ani and anawim shifted in meaning from

literal to metaphorical in ancient Israelite culture prior to Zephaniah’s

proclamation (ca. 590 BCE) in a way similar to that of the Greek term praus

(Bauder: 1986, p. 257). Vlaardingerbroek (1999, p. 203) prefers to view the

anawim as “spiritually poor” who are contrasted with the haughty in 2:1; 3:11. He

views this contrast as religious, not economic. The spiritually poor are those

“people who humble themselves before God.” Citing Lev 19:15 (which

“The spiritually poor are those people who humble themselves

before God.”


36

commands that the Israelites not judge one another based on wealth or poverty in

courts of law), Vlaardingerbroek contends that God cannot have a preference for

the poor, and therefore neither can Zephaniah.

Others (e.g., Robertson) presume “meek/humble” as the inferred meaning

based on the prophet’s condemnation of pride in 2:15; 3:4. Sharp goes so far as to

view the “poor” as a group of pro-Deuteronomistic loyalists of the LORD who

have gone underground during the polytheistic administration of Manasseh (1996,

p. 13-15). Still others (e.g., McComsky) do not even address the ambiguity of the

terms ani and anawim.

Contra-“humble” arguments

Despite the preponderance of “humble” supporters, there remain

significant problems with the position. First, there is no evidence of a

considerable shift in meaning for ani and anawim prior to Zephaniah’s

prophesying. On the contrary, there is significant textual proof that the terms

maintained a literal meaning of material poverty, as will be shown further below.

Second, the text of Lev 19:15 is concerned with humans judging one another

superficially and does not preclude a divine preference for the poor. At any rate,

the text was not necessarily correlated into its final authoritative form until after

the Exile (ca. 500 BCE), making dubious its influence on Zephaniah’s preaching.

Third, aside from pride, Zephaniah also condemns the wealthy and corrupt in 1:8-

12 and 3:3-4.

Pro-“Poor” arguments

The similar use of the terms ani and anawim in Amos 2:7; 5:10; 8:4

supports the meaning of “poor” in Zephaniah. “Poor” then means those who “are

without wealth and influence in society” and are therefore more dependent on the

LORD than their wealthy counterparts (Kapelrud: 1975, p. 32-33). Kapelrud

argues that the prophets Amos and Zephaniah are demonstrating the poor to be

“truly righteous,” contrasted with the proud and haughty who rob from the poor

“Amos and Zephaniah are

demonstrating the poor to be ‘truly

righteous.’”


37

through unjust means. This foiling is also found in other prophets (Isa 3:44; 10:2;

14:32; Hab 3:14, among others) and Psalms (10:2, 9; 14:6; 18:28; 68:11; 72:2;

74:19). In each of the cases above, there is a clear meaning of economic poverty

rather than a metaphor. Several of these passages occur from 750-550 BCE and so

represent a relative context for Zephaniah’s understanding of ani and dal.

Weigl engages the Zephaniah texts from a social-historical perspective

and develops a similar conclusion for the identity of the poor. The verb used in

2:3 “to gather” (qashish) may be a play-on-words that refers to the activity of

gathering fodder from the fields—a role associated with lower socio-economic

status (1994, p. 219). For Weigl, this is a term that was linked to poverty in the

original hearers’ ears. Since the verb qashish has a reflexive sense, it appears that

the people are to collect themselves. This is a change from understanding the

proud and arrogant of gathering together for the destruction that ensues in 2:2.

Weigl’s translation makes more sense of the ending of v.1 (unloved

people) and of the odd temporal markers in 2:2 (Weigl: 1994, p. 219; Sweeney:

2003, p. 102). Why would Zephaniah call for the people to gather together

“before” the impending doom? Rather, if the poor are the focus of the

exhortation, then the poor are called together before the doom described in v 2 so

that they can seek God as directed in v.3. This perspective will be discussed in

more detail in the exegetical section.

Third, the surrounding contexts of 2:3 and 3:12 support “poor” as the

proper translation of ani and anawim. Whenever dal is found alongside ani or

anawim in Biblical literature, as it is in Zeph 3:12, the terms refer to material

poverty (see, e.g., Exod 30:15; 1 Sam 2:8; Isa 3:14; 10:2; 49:13; Am 2:7; Ezek

22:29, among others).

Finally, there is textual proof for a consistent meaning of “poor” for

anawim and ani. Prior to 787 BCE, songs from 1 Samuel (2:8) and the prophets

Isaiah (Isa 3:14; 10:2; 11:4; 14:32) and Amos (2:7; 4:1; 8:4) use the terms ani and

dal in direct contrast to those who are materially wealthy and often take

advantage of and rob the anawim through unjust means. The focus is entirely

“ If the poor are the focus of the

exhortation, then the poor are called

together before the doom....”


38

economic. Around the time of Zephaniah’s prophesying, ca. 586 BCE, Ezekiel

(22:29) and Habakkuk (3:14) also use the terms in a setting that points to material

poverty.

Following the Exile, the terms are used often in Second Isaiah (Isa 41:17;

49:13; 51:21; 54:11). Images of being parched for thirst, needing consolation,

national powerlessness, and a contrast with precious stones all denote a meaning

of economic weakness to portray the Exiles who return to Jerusalem. Around the

same time, the prophet Zechariah (7:10) includes the ani among widows, aliens,

and orphans, and the Priestly tradition in Exodus (30:15) contrasts the ani with the

wealthy. Later in the Second Temple Era, 160 BCE-200 CE, an Aramaic

derivative of ani is found in Qumran and later rabbinic writings to refer to

material poverty (Plein: 1192, p. 1116).

Revised Translation and Comment (Zeph 2:1-3)

1 “Gather yourselves together [as stubble];

be gathered together, undesirable people…! 2 Before the decision comes—

The day passes over as dust.

Before!

—Lest the wrath of God’s anger come upon you.

Before!

—Lest the day of God’s anger come upon you. 3 Seek the LORD, all the poor of the land who do his command.

Seek righteousness.

Seek dependence.

Perhaps you will be forgiven on the day of the LORD’s wrath.” (AT)

Zeph 2:1-3 may be delimited as a unit. What precedes it is a closed entity,

1:2-18 (Smith, p. 129). Two declarations from God to destroy the earth in 1:2 and

1:18 create an envelope to delimit this section as a whole. Within this section


39

God decries the evils of Israel, focusing on the injustice the wealthy have

perpetrated. There is mention of inappropriate cultic or idolatrous actions (1:4, 8,

12b), but by proportion, their crimes are more deviant in the economic sphere:

they gain wealth by violence (9b), mis-measure gold (11), and become fat at

others’ expense (12b). Ironically, their material goods are used against them.

Although they have gained much through cruelty, still they can neither enjoy their

wicked harvest (13), nor can their wealth save them—God will not be bought off

by gold (18a). At chapter 2, we see a shift to a denunciation of the nations.

The second verse can be separated into three units, each beginning with

the repeated temporal marker “before!” The words “before,” “decision,” “wrath,”

and “the day,” all refer to the same event, namely, God’s impending destruction.

The event is precipitated through a decision or decree. His exhortation that

follows in 2:3 is meant to encourage the audience to seek the LORD “before” the

decision is made. God’s will is as guaranteed as it is evident. There are

connotations with the Noah-Flood story in this section. The idea of universal

destruction and salvation for a mere few are present here and in Genesis 6-7. The

alternating interjections (“before” and “lest the day…”) intensify the force of the

impending doom. The alternation underscores the prophet’s main point: the

prophet’s instructions must be carried out before the LORD’s decision is made.

Let the LORD’s wrath come upon them.

The third verse is driven by its three imperatives. All have the same

directive verb, “seek,” and the same object, God. The verb “seek” here refers back

to those who had ceased to seek God and have turned instead to idolatry and

injustice (1:5-6). Its impact on the poor/wealthy context comes from likely

economic implications of idolatry. Those who were of high status and wealth in

Israel at Zephaniah’s time would be encouraged to use some Assyrian culture and

religion as status symbols. This exhortation then calls the audience to keep away

from idolatry and continue to seek the LORD.

The first imperative is to seek the LORD, and is self-evident. This is

developed in the second imperative “seek justice”, which given the corrupt state

“God’s will is as guaranteed as it is

evident.”


40

of Israel, cannot possibly mean human justice. Rather it is the divine judgment

and decision of God that the poor are to seek after. Humanity’s corrupt judgment

has brought about God’s wrath. The extent of the meaning of this exhortation is

clarified further in the final imperative, which is addressed further below. For

now, it suffices to say Zephaniah is calling on the poor to accept God’s supreme

sovereignty and his decision to “make an end” of all those on earth (1:18) and

even Judah (2:1). Salvation is still not guaranteed after the acquiescence, but it is

only through this acquiescence that the poor have an opportunity to be saved

(2:3b2).

In light of the LORD’s impending judgment, the economically

impoverished are in the best position to accept the LORD’s sovereignty. As with

Amos, the wealthy have become so at the expense of the poor. The poor were not

guilty of these serious violations and so are given an opportunity to escape the

coming destruction. The exhortation to seek dependence refers to the state of

powerlessness within a corrupt social structure. The poor are to seek the LORD

and depend on him in order to escape his wrath.

Revised Translation and Comment (3:12-13) 12 And I will leave in your midst

a people poor and deprived,

and they will seek refuge

in the name of the LORD. 13 The Remnant of Israel

will not pursue greed through violence,

and they will not speak lies,

and a false word will not be found

on their lips,

for they will rest and find pasture

and will have no anxiety.” (AT)

“In light of the LORD’s impending

judgment, the economically

impoverished are in the best position to accept the LORD’s

sovereignty.”


41

The section 3:12-13 acts as a culmination of the oracle in 3:6-15. This

penultimate part of the book focuses on gathering together the poor of the nations

with those of Israel. In 3:19 God says he will “deal with” the oppressors and save

“the lame” and “the outcasts.” He will then give these low-status groups “praise

and renown.” These groups parallel the “people poor and lowly” in 3:12 and do

not appear to be “spiritually lame” or “outcasts from the law”—these terms are

intended to have a cultural and literal meaning, not metaphorical.

This same phrase (am ani w’dal) is found in 2 Sam 22:28 and Ps 18:28.

Those cases recognize a dichotomy, namely, that God rescues the poor but looks

down on “those who are filled.” Regardless of their relation to one another, one

redactor who used the earlier copy (whether the psalmist or the redactor of 2

Samuel) decided to maintain the wording and dichotomous meaning. They also

both preserve the view that God rescues the poor but looks down on those who

are “full.”

The term ani is used heavily amongst the prophets to describe those who

are economically oppressed. The prophets often condemn the wealthy for

misdeeds against those of low status. “The spoil of the poor is in [the wealthy

person’s] house” (Is 3:14; also in 14:32). Ezekiel describes the crime bluntly as

“oppression” when corrupt judges take advantage of the poor (22:29). Second

Isaiah describes the exiles’ condition often as one of deprivation (Is 49:13; 51:21;

54:11). Their time of purification has set them in a low status position; they seek

for water but find none (41:17), which is clearly a concrete, and not metaphorical,

image of poverty. Zechariah blatantly groups ani among other low status groups

that could easily be taken advantage of in courts: the widow, the orphan, and the

foreigner (7:10).

The meaning of poverty for dal has never been questioned. This term

describes those who are lifted from the dust and are contrasted with princes (1

Sam 2:8). Amos also contrasts the wealthy with dal, stating that the “fat cows of

Bashan”, the wives of the corrupt judges, have also crushed the poor by accepting

the fruits of the oppression (4:1). This meaning is carried forward into the post-

“God rescues the poor but looks down on

those who are filled.”


42

exilic era. The priestly codes make exceptions and offer less costly sacrifices for

the poor (Ex 30:15; Lev 14:21; 19:15). Both ani and dal are seen in Isa 10:2 and

Am 2:7. In both cases the context demands a meaning of economic poverty.

Since ani and dal are paired elsewhere, and given the consistent meaning of

poverty for both words independently, it is reasonable to translate these words as

denoting a concrete state of poverty and oppression.

In the second part of 3:12, the poor remnant now takes refuge in the name

of YHWH. In Ps 64:11 the just are said to take refuge in the Lord, as opposed to

the wicked who hurt the innocent and expect to not be caught. A similar instance

is seen now in Zeph 3:12—the wicked had oppressed the poor and expected not to

be caught (1:11), but the poor were exhorted to depend on the Lord (2:3) and now

are to take refuge in him (3:12). There is a running theme here of irony. The

wicked oppress the poor and shield themselves from worry about God; their

destruction comes from their unwillingness to accept the judgment that is

apparent in God’s command; in short, they “shut out” God. The poor, on the

other hand, have nothing to depend on but God; human justice and mercy have

abandoned them. The poor’s dependence on God is what truly saves them in the

end, while the powerful ones’ rejection of God brings their doom.

The name of the Lord has a rich tradition. In Mic 4:5 “to walk in the name

of the Lord” is a manner of conduct. Joel 3:5 states all who call on the name of

the Lord will be saved. Zephaniah uses this phrase again in 3:9 as it is seen in

Joel 3:5: the peoples will be purified, and thus will be able to call on the name of

the Lord, in order to serve him. A patron-client relationship is being established

between Gentiles and God in Zephaniah as they are in Joel. R. Smith argues that

Zeph 3 combines ideas from Gen 11 and Isa 6 and looked to a time when peoples

would be purified to call on God’s name. The “scattered ones” (v 9) probably

refers to the scattered nations (as it did in Gen 11) who are converted as Jerusalem

is renewed (Smith: 1985, p. 141).

In 3:13 the Remnant of Israel is said to be gleaned as a vine and like a

flock gathered together by God and given rest and time to graze (see also Mic

“This ‘wickedness’ is described elsewhere as

the opposite of justice.”


43

2:12). Both images are messianic and utopian. The reader will recall the remnant

“of the house of Judah” (2:7) and “of my people” (2:9) from earlier in the text.

Berlin follows Ben Zvi in distinguishing the two remnants of Judah and Israel

(Berlin, p. 136). They believe the former is “a geographical or political concept,”

whereas the latter is a “religious, ideological concept” (Berlin: 1994, p. 136; Ben

Zvi: 1991, p. 334). But the distinction along these lines seems overly

anachronistic. Israel did not separate its religious self from its national self-prior

to the exile. This shift came only after the kingdom of Israel was dissolved.

The key word which connects this phrase, and likely the entire book, to

condemnation of misused power is a’olah. This “wickedness” is described

elsewhere as the opposite of justice (Hos 10:13; Mic 3:10; Hab 2:12; see also

Zeph 3:5). Ezekiel, a later contemporary of Zephaniah, says that this wickedness

resides in humanity as the result of over-reaching trade and merchandising,

particularly through violence (28:15). Humanity’s corruption and desire for

wealth have affected justice to the point that the poor have no recourse but to

God; the corruption demands a powerful cleansing act, one which Zephaniah

envisions as a universal destruction which precipitates in the gathering and

salvation of the innocent poor among Israel and the Gentiles. Since the wealthy

have given up on God and his commands in order to serve their own desire, God

will destroy them but perhaps will seek to save those who seek him.

In sum, 3:12-13 is a critical portion of the oracle in 3:6-19 in which the

poor (am ani w’dal) from the nations are joined to, and saved along with, the

remnant of poor Israelites (anawim from 2:1-3). The LORD will give these low

status groups (including “the lame” and “the outcasts”) “praise and renown”

(3:19). Unlike the wealthy who have wronged them for gain, the poor do not

pursue greed through violence and so may be left as a remnant following the

judgment of their oppressors.

“Amos also contrasts the wealthy with dal, stating that

the ‘fat cows of Bashan’, the wives

of the corrupt judges, have also

crushed the poor by accepting the fruits of the oppression.”


44

Conclusion

Following an analysis of historical, lexical, and literary evidence, this

article has argued that the terms ani and anawim in Zeph 2:3 and 3:12-13

(respectively) should be translated as those who are economically poor rather than

as the metaphorical “humble” or “pious.” As yet, many modern translations

render these terms metaphorically and thus perpetuate a first world bias that seeks

to moderate any form of social shift. But such mistranslations miss the meaning of

the text in both letter and spirit. Zephaniah’s message is one of good news for the

poor. Those who suffered injustice would now find comfort in the LORD.

Economic corruption and injustice have required universal destruction (1:2-18).

Yet, because the poor had no opportunity to become corrupt, they may escape the

coming day of wrath. The “poor of the land” and “a people poor and deprived”

may start anew in a revitalized world. The earthly situation is so vile that only the

LORD’s direct intervention can bring justice. It is through dependence on the

LORD that one is able to remain in the new era of peace. The common translation

of “humble” or “meek” in these verses should be rejected. Revision to the

Catholic lectionary’s translation would correctly represent the historical meaning

of the texts as well as inspire homiletic exhortations on Catholic social teaching.

References Ben Zvi, Ehud. A Historical-Critical Study of the Book of Zephaniah. Beiheft Zur Zeitschrift Für

Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft. Walter De Gruyter, 1991. Berlin, Adele. Zephaniah. AB 25A. New York, 1994, Doubleday. Eichrodt, Walther. Theology of the Old Testament. Volume 2. Trans. J.A. Baker. Philadelphia:

Westminster, 1967. Holladay, William L. “Reading Zephaniah with a Concordance: Suggestions for a Redaction

History.” JBL 120, 4 (Winter, 2001) 671-684. Kapelrud, Arvid. The Message of the Prophet Zephaniah. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1975. King, Greg A. “The Remnant in Zephaniah.” Bibliotheca Sacra 151 (Oct-Dec 1994) 414-27.

“Zephaniah’s message is one of good news

for the poor.”


45

Kaselman, John S. “The Book of Zephaniah.” In volume 6 of the Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David Noel Freedman. 6 volumes. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Plein, David J. “Poor, Poverty.” In volume 5 of the Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David

Noel Freedman. 6 volumes. New York: Doubleday, 1992. Robertson, O. Palmer. The Books of Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah. NICOT. Grand Rapids:

Eerdmans, 1991. Sharp, Donald B. S.J. “The Remnant of Zephaniah: Identifying ‘A People Humble and Lowly.’”

IBS 18 (Jan 1996) 2-15. Smith, J.M.P., W.H. Ward, and J. Bewer. Micah, Zephaniah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Obadiah and

Joel. ICC. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1985. Smith, Ralph L. Micah—Malachi. WBC 32. Waco: Word Books, 1984. Sweeney, Marvin A. “Zephaniah: A Paradigm for the Study of the Prophetic Books.” CR:BS 7

(1999) 119-145. __________. Zephaniah: A Commentary. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2003. Vlaardingerbroek, Johannes. Zephaniah. Historical Commentary on the Old Testament Series.

Leuven: Peeters, 1999. Weigl, Michael. Zefanja und das "Israel der Armen": Eine Untersuchung zur Theologie des

Buches Zefanja. Österreichische Biblische Studien. Klosteneuburg: ÖBS, 1994.

Verbum Incarnatum Beyond the Binary: Exploring the Use of Culture in Lutheran Volunteer Corps Members’ Understanding of Service and Justice

46

Beyond the Binary: Exploring the Use of Culture in Lutheran Volunteer Corps Members’ Understandings of Service and Justice Melissa James, Ph.D. Candidate Graduate Theological Union

Abstract

This paper examines the way Lutheran Volunteer Corps participants actively use culture to form understandings of service and justice. Using data from in-depth, qualitative interviews with ten volunteers, this paper argues that though almost all of the types of positions the volunteers hold are fields that are historically “women’s work,” the way volunteers make sense of their work extends beyond reification of gender norms. Using the theory of cultural repertoires of Ann Swidler, this paper shows how volunteers actively draw on available elements of the cultures that surround them to create understandings of “service” and “justice” that are simultaneously bounded by constructions of gender, race, and class as well fluid and flexible.

Introduction

Historically, work within religious organizations has been divided strongly

along gendered lines and given different status and privilege. Undergirding this

type of division are assumptions about what is considered “women’s work” and

what is considered “men’s work.” Language of service, servant, and servant hood

provide a framework for the understanding of many types of work within the

church that have historically been considered “women’s work.” Despite the fact

that opportunities to participate in service-based ministry are open to individuals

regardless of gender, the participants in such ministries continue to be

predominantly women.

I will use cultural theory to explore how individuals in service-based work

make meaning of service, work, and themselves. In her book, Talk of Love: How

Culture Matters, Ann Swidler examines culture in terms of how it is employed in


47

everyday life through what she calls a “repertoire of meaning” (Swidler, 2003).

She notes that people do not necessarily have different amounts of cultural

knowledge; rather, they utilize different levels or amounts of their cultural

knowledge to make meaning of their world. In other words, it is not that

individuals are more or less familiar with gender norms in a given context but that

they actively emphasize, de-emphasize, and ignore elements of these norms to

make sense of the work they do. I will employ cultural theory to look at meaning-

making processes of contemporary individuals involved in work traditionally

considered “women’s work” who are currently participating in the Lutheran

Volunteer Corps (LVC), a year-long service commitment through which young

adults commit to living in intentional community and work in community-based

organizations. LVC is also open to individuals regardless of gender and consists

mainly of individuals who are in their first or second year out of college. While

LVC is considered a pan-Lutheran organization, volunteers need not be Lutheran

and, in fact, come from a wide variety of faith traditions. The LVC experience does

not include intensive formation around concepts of service. Through in-depth

interviews I will explore the volunteer’s cultural repertoires and how they employ

culture to make meaning of the work they do.

This project examined the experiences of women who are involved in

work that has been historically feminized and now falls under the umbrella of

“service” work. I conducted in-depth, open-ended interviews with individuals

who were a quarter of the way through a year-long volunteer commitment. By

asking them about both their experiences and the meanings they held for terms

they used to describe these experiences I found that these volunteers drew on a

number of different concepts from their cultural repertoire that were influenced by

multiple cultural loci.

Conceptual Framework

“This project examined the experiences of women who are

involved in work that has been historically feminized and now

falls under the umbrella of service.”


48

Since Carol Gilligan’s seminal work In a Different Voice: Psychological

Theory and Women's Development, there has been discussion about a binary

between an ethic of care and an ethic of justice (Gilligan, 1982). Gilligan

criticized Lawrence Kohlberg for developing a set of moral stages that was not

only based solely on studying men but, as a result, resigned women to never

reaching the highest stage of morality. Gilligan claimed that women were not, in

fact, incapable of being fully morally developed as the test results of Kohlberg’s

studies suggested, but operate from a different type of moral development. As a

result, Gilligan developed her own stages of morality which offered the

alternative of an ethic of care to counter the dominant ethic of justice. The

Kohlberg/Gilligan debate set up a binary between approaches to ethics labeled as

justice ethics based in objectivity and rationality and those labeled as care ethics

that focus on relationality and interdependence. As Sara Ruddik (1998) makes

clear these two orientations are gendered with men being reason and justice

focused and women being relational and caring. Gilligan argues that women are

aligned with an ethic of care because of the way the feminine is constructed while

men align with an ethic of justice being more concerned with large-scale worldly

concerns. Gilligan sparked a sometimes intense dialogue which fostered decades

of critique, rebuttal, and debate over whether or not women are innately different

from men.

What is important to highlight about her work is not the methodological or

even theoretical merits, or lack thereof, of her work but the cultural narrative it

captured which struck a chord with academics and non-academics alike and

makes her a much-cited figure even today. In this narrative justice and care are

set up as dichotomous. In other words, one operates either from an orientation

based in reason and autonomy (a justice approach to ethics) or from an orientation

based in relationships (care).

Much scholarship has engaged this and even challenged the binary of

justice and care work. Some studies such as that of Karniol, Grosz, and Schorr

“…Gilligan developed her own stages of

cou nt

morality which offered the alternative of an ethic of care to

nter the dominaethic of justice

service.”

“Intersectionality explains that individuals’

understandings are influenced not only by their gender … but by

other important identity elements such

as class, race, and nationality.”


49

(Kamiol, Grosz, and Schorr, 2003) criticize the essentializing nature of Gilligan’s

theory by asserting that the connection to either “ethic” is connected not to one’s

assigned gender but one’s gender role orientation.1 Others suggest that there is

overlap between justice and care such as argued by Orme (2002) who describes a

more complicated, nuanced relationship between care and ethics in Social Work,

itself an historically gendered field of work. The binary between these two

unfortunately named ethics are insufficient when one takes cultural theory into

account. Ann Swidler provides a much more agential understanding of one’s use

of culture which helps explain how women doing service are constructing their

understandings. Intersectionality explains that individuals’ understandings are

influenced not only by their gender (though this is one important element) but by

other important identity elements such as class, race, and nationality (Crenshaw,

2004).

To address the question of how women in service-based work make

meaning of service, work, and themselves, I turn to Ann Swidler’s concept of

culture consisting of a “repertoire of meaning.” Swidler takes on the task of

examining culture in terms of how it is employed in everyday life. Contemporary

views of culture, on which she draws and builds, share Clifford Geertz’s

understanding culture as “the set of symbolic vehicles through which such sharing

and learning take place" yet differs from classic theory in that they recognize that

we traverse many different sets of symbols (Swidler, 2003). Culture is varied in

content; it is not one set of symbols from which people operate according to how

much of the culture they have learned. Swidler demonstrates that we use culture

for more things than simply explaining or communicating our thoughts and

actions. Culture, she claims, also shapes who we are and how we act. In her

study, Swidler found that understandings of “self” and the integration of culture

were connected. When one’s understanding of who one is was static (for

1 See also the work of Virginia Held.


50

instance, she interviewed one woman who stated repeatedly that she was “happy”

and had no need to reexamine a sense of self or sets of beliefs) culture tends to be

less integrated. That is, the person will draw on cultural symbols less to form an

understanding of the “self” as compared to others who are actively drawing in

cultural symbols to help them become a certain kind of person that is in line with

those symbols.

While foundational theorists of culture claim culture influences actions

through shaping their telos through ideas (such as Weber), or shaping moods or

ethos (ala Geertz), Swidler claims that culture, instead, shapes “strategies of

actions.” Strategies of action, defined as “ways actors routinely go about

attaining their goals” (Swidler, 2003, p. 82) are more influential than goals. She

characterizes strategies of actions as dependent upon culture, inherently social,

and a part of a pattern of actions. Culture works on the level of “means” and not

“ends” shaping our sense of selves, our routines, our understanding of the world,

our habits, etc. These in turn shape what strategies are available to us to deal with

the world around us.

There are two particular insights, however, that make Swidler’s works

particularly useful. First, Swidler’s use of culture as a “repertoire” opens up the

space to understand the role of culture in today’s society when individuals are

traversing multiple cultures. Understanding culture as something we employ as

needed explains the ability of individuals to traverse the cultural overlap that is so

characteristic of today’s world such as the need of someone who is a minority

with the knowledge of how to engage majority culture, or someone who is mulit-

racial living at the nexus of multiple cultures. By recognizing multiple cultures

present in any given society and within any given individual, Swidler also points

us to the pervasiveness of the dominant culture and the ability individuals develop

to navigate and employ elements of this culture even if by rejecting it. Finally,

Swidler provides a helpful understanding of the role culture plays in actions. This

is more compelling than understanding culture as shaping action by forming the

“Culture, she claims, also shapes who we are and how we act.”


51

goals toward which we strive. While culture has an impact on those goals,

merely having a goal does not necessarily result in action. Having elements of

culture to draw upon as we navigate our daily lives, however, such as explained in

Swidler’s strategies of action explains the fluidity which people demonstrate in

acting every day.

Swidler describes peoples’ relationship to culture as different in settled

versus unsettled periods. During unsettled times people tend to more actively

analyze their use of culture. Because of this, participants in year-long volunteer

programs are fantastic candidates to talk to about the use of culture to understand

service and justice. Participants tend to be young adults in their first or second

year out college (all of my respondents fit this description) which is a time of

great transition. In addition, committing to one or two years (some re-up for a

second year) they enter a time-bound commitment necessitating re-evaluation of

next steps in their lives.

Swidler’s concept of strategies of actions captures this process by

explaining that “[p]eople do not build lines of actions from scratch, choosing

actions one at a time as efficient means to given ends. Instead, they construct

chains of action beginning with at least some prefabricated links. Culture

influences action through the shape and organization of those links, not by

determining the ends to which they are put” (Swidler, 1986, pp. 273-286).

Swidler suggests people employ different elements of culture in patterns that are

developed over time. Neither the elements individuals utilize nor the way they

employ them are static and individuals often shift which parts of culture are being

drawn on, sometimes mid-stream, in order to make sense of their world. The very

symbols which capture the cultural meanings are created and afforded that

meaning through an active and collective process. However, the meanings of

symbols, particularly language, are not monolithic. Cognitive linguistics has

shown us that one linguistic symbol can have many meanings and be employed in

“…the meanings of symbols, particularly

language, are not monolithic.”


52

multiple ways (Fauconnier, 1997). Respondents are actively constructing their

understandings but they are not whole-cloth original ideas.

Methods

This research examined how individuals involved in different types of

service work within the church make meaning of that work and their notions of

service. Since the primary purpose of this research was to explore the way events

and concepts are interpreted, that is to explore meaning-making processes, in-

depth interviews best fit this study (Weiss, 1994). In addition, as a researcher I

operate from a Feminist Ethical perspective that includes a commitment to

making space for the stories and voices of traditionally marginalized groups.

Though I am not strictly taking a narrative approach, interviews provide a venue

for learning from the narratives of the women in the study.

I conducted in-depth, open-ended interviews with ten of the sixteen

volunteers participating in a year-long service program in the San Francisco Bay

Area and two informants including a city coordinator for the program and a past

member of a local support committee for a volunteer. In the following spring I

conducted follow-up group interviews with seven of the volunteers. Of the ten

respondents, nine identified as women, nine identified as “white” or “Caucasian,”

all were US citizens, and, per the requirements of the program, all had a

Bachelor’s degree. While not asked in either the interviews nor in a brief follow-

up survey, three self-identified sexual orientation during the fall interviews (one

as straight, one as queer, and one as gay) and three additional volunteers did so in

the spring (one as bisexual, one as gay, and one as exploring).Volunteers commit

to a year of living in intentional community with four to six other volunteers,

working full-time at a community-based organization. Contact information for the

volunteers and permission to contact the volunteers directly were given by the city

director. Respondents were recruited through e-mail invitations to participate in

interviewing. Respondents were then asked to “talk up” the interviews with their

“Respondents were not provided with

terms such as service and justice or

identity labels.”


53

housemates to encourage them to reply and schedule an interview. Interviews

took place in various coffee shops close to either a volunteer’s work placement or

house and were arranged around their work schedule. Interviews lasted between

one and two hours. Respondents were asked questions about their childhood,

family, involvement in school, church, and other community organizations

through high school and college, career aspirations, and past involvement in

service, volunteer or justice work. Respondents were not provided with terms

such as “service” and “justice” or identity labels (i.e. liberal, conservative,

feminist). Many of the respondents offered terms such as these and toward the

end of the interviews, respondents were asked directly about the meaning or

definition of key terms they used (i.e. service, justice, and empowerment) as well

as the significance of their gender on their experiences. Interviews were

transcribed and coded with an eye to metaphors, cultural symbols, and places of

intentional formation.

Interviews were conducted in public spaces which may have influenced

the level of disclosure of the respondents; however, respondents seemed to speak

freely and willingly shared stories of their past and present experiences. While

response rate was high (75% agreed to interviews and 62.5% of the volunteers

participated in interviews by the time of this paper), many of the volunteers who

did not respond or complete interviews are from demographics that tend to be

under-represented in the organization (namely people of color and men). Because

of this, my sample is fairly representative of the majority demographic of the

volunteers across the organization but leaves exploration of minority

demographics for further research.

In a study conducted using conversational journals, Susan Cotts Watkins

and Ann Swidler suggest one possible weakness of using more sociological and

ethnographic methods such as surveys and interviews to explore meaning-making

is that these tools miss the dynamic, everyday use of culture found in the

interactions that make up people’s lives as they actually create and negotiate

“Volunteers commit to a year of

living in intentional

community with four to six other

volunteers, working full-time at a community-

based organization.”


54

culture (Watkins and Swidler, 2009). Aware of this, however, in-depth interviews

in which the respondents are asked to share many parts of their personal narrative

and decision making processes allows for insight into part of the processes

through which they make meaning.

Findings

Among the symbols respondents used to talk about their experiences and

work were those of justice and service. Through appropriation as well as

contestation, respondents were able to use these widely used linguistic symbols to

make sense of their experiences, values, and choices. The meanings behind these

words were not only publicly created and shared as a semiotic cultural analysis

would suggest but were sites of cultural work. For the respondents, the symbols

of “justice” and “service” became containers for their own understandings. The

concepts they used to fill in the container of “service” and “justice” came from the

cultural repertoires around them. I now turn to look at the cultural pieces

respondents utilize to fill these containers and the varied and sometimes

competing influences on those repertoires.

Understandings of Social Justice

Respondents drew on a number of metaphors and concepts to talk about

their work in and relation to social justice. One resounding theme in

understanding social justice was that of equality. For instance, Julie, who grew up

going to community organizing meetings with her mother, thought very carefully

about what she meant by “social justice” before she offered “I guess, just social

equality is what it means, and just, equal access and equal opportunities.”

Included in the volunteers’ understandings was the language predominant

in the Kohlberg-Gilligan dichotomy of right and wrong which suggests they

operate with at least a partially deontological understanding of justice. For

instance, Emma, a volunteer from the Midwest working in fundraising, explains

“For the respondents, the symbols of justice and service became containers for their

own understandings.”


55

that justice is based in “the very basic sense of right and wrong.” However, she

continues by explaining that her sense of right and wrong is founded on a belief

“that things shouldn’t be so unfair for people.” Like other volunteers, her

understanding of justice was layered and included more than one frame of

analysis. Mixed in with the language of right and wrong, she drew on the

metaphor of being a part of a “human family living together.” The metaphor of

family and other metaphors which connoted connectedness were a common theme

in the respondent’ understandings of justice. For instance, Annie, a 23-year-old

volunteer in her second year of the program, talks about an immersion trip to

Mexico in terms of having the opportunity to learn about the people there because

she didn’t “know how that branch of the family lives.” Annie is particularly fond

of using metaphors to inform her commitment to social justice. What is

fascinating about Annie’s engagement with metaphors, and thus merits an

extended quote, is the way she draws on multiple metaphors to formulate her

understanding:

I call it “Tightening the Web” and is how I sort of started to explain why I actually got involved in social justice work. And especially international . . . because I was working to help organize Episcopal churches to be involved in anti-poverty, like, the ONE campaign, this was after my Junior year of college. And, I think of tightening the web, like, when you’re a kid in grade school and you’re playing with the parachute, and like, if everyone just, like, has a parachute and like the balls are just going everywhere; but, like if people just hold on to the parachute and lean back you can actually feel, like when the ball lands on the other end of the parachute. And, like, I think, that was really helpful to talk about what we were doing, like, why churches should care about international poverty issues is like, you’re part of the same parachute, but, like, if you don’t pull back, if you don’t tighten the web, you don’t realize that. You don’t see how your actions are affecting people in other parts of the world. And, so, that’s kind of where I am now, again, like, tightening the web, and figuring out, like, who’s holding the parachute with me, like, who’s around that parachute? Um, and what does tightening the web mean for me right now.

“I call it ‘Tightening the Web’ and is how I

sort of started to explain why I actually got involved in social

justice work.”


56

By drawing on these multiple metaphors, Annie is utilizing cultural

symbols and experiences to capture this notion of connectedness. By utilizing

both of these metaphors she is able to draw on similar but nuanced understandings

from her repertoire to make sense of her current approach to justice. Utilization

of culture is not always as consistent as this, however, especially when we

compare the language individuals use while describing particular experiences or

decisions with the definitions they develop when asked for their specific meaning.

For instance, Kate, a volunteer who grew up in the Northwest, described a

moment when she was given language that captured what was to become an

important view of social justice. In her initial interview she described her reaction

to the way the executive director of the agency framed the work:

She said, “You know, if you think you want to be helping people, then you probably shouldn’t work here because that’s not what we do. We’re about being a community and standing with people.” And I was like, “YES” I didn’t even know that was important to me until she said it and the second she said it I was like, “Yes, I understand, it’s not about being there and doing the right thing and being savior for the world and helping everyone”

Here she encountered an alternative frame through which to look at the

work that was in competition with an understanding based in “saving” and

“helping” people. Like Annie, she returned multiple times to the concept of

community to understand her current work. However, she also spoke of her

competing desire to give the youth with whom she worked anything she could and

reacting from her “bleeding heart.” Respondents whose notions filled the

container of “justice” also utilized notions of “helping” or to explain parts of their

work.

Understandings of Service Only two of the volunteers used the language of service to describe what

they were doing this year without having some qualifier (i.e. direct service,

“ y

pr

wh ”

You know, if you thinkou want to be helping

people, then you obably shouldn’t work

here because that’s not at we do.

“Respondents spoke of these experiences as

influencing their understandings of the

world and of justice and service.”


57

indirect service, service-learning). When I asked Molly to think of an example of

something she would consider “good” that she would not consider service she

captured her understanding of what service actually is by saying “I think I would

be really hard pressed to come up with an example of something that I thought

was good for other people that I wouldn’t, personally at least, wouldn’t

conceptualize as service. I’m sure that other people could do that, but, I feel like

just the way that I have incorporated that word into my life that I could come with

something.” Service was described as “an orientation toward others.” Yet, this

self-less giving in a pure altruistic sense of the word did not resonate with the

volunteers (even her) and was instead met with a great deal of cynicism.

While respondents who used terms of justice would often use qualified

service terms in their interviews, neither of the volunteers who offered service as

a symbol to understand their work used language of justice. Many of the

respondents described being involved in service projects or service-learning

experiences in high school and college. While they often spoke of these trips as

awakening them to different issues of poverty, race, and urban life (since most of

these types of trips are to urban settings), they described the involvement in terms

of getting to go to a new place and meet their classmates. Respondents spoke of

these experiences as influencing their understandings of the world and of justice

and service. For instance, Heidi, a Midwestern Lutheran, became very active in

her campus service organization at the end of her freshman year of college.

Through this organization she was introduced to service-learning theory and

understanding service as being separated into charity and justice. She spoke of

learning about this distinction at the first retreat she went on with the campus

organization:

I think that was a very “Aha” concept to me because I had never heard of trying to think of why things happened instead of just trying . . . trying to prevent things from happening in the first place by thinking about their causes, their root causes of them rather than just doing what you can for people who are in bad situations.


58

This distinction between helping “people who are in bad situations” and

“trying to prevent things from happening in the first place” was a common theme

among the respondents. While Heidi drew on concepts from the social work

classes and community organizing she was exposed to in college as part of her

understandings of this distinction with relation to justice and service, others used

language they drew from anti-racism training and academic discourses such as

Irene who struggled with the relationship between the work she was doing in a

group home for youth who were predominantly African American and Latino and

the anti-racism training she received with LVC. She explained:

I had a really hard time with [it] at first because I very much felt like I was kind of supporting the system that these kids were stuck in and kind of supporting the cycle that they’re stuck in and, and as I became more just conversational about racism and going through all of the training, like I just felt like I was supporting institutional racism. Like, a lot of our kids are there because they are stuck in these horrible situations that just aren’t really their fault. And, it took me a long time to realize that people stuck in the system need support as well as . . . like, there are different roles.

Through utilizing cultural elements she was gaining through anti-racism

training as well as those from her college experience she made sense of her work

by explaining that she was “much more equipped to support people stuck in the

system than to change the system.” Like Molly, Irene did not use language of

justice. However, her notion of service was much more in line with those who

did use justice language in that service was something people did because they

got something out of it in return. She claims “I think that’s an aspect of doing

service work in itself is that the person doing the service work benefits from that

as well. . . I don’t think people would do service if they didn’t get something out

of it themselves. And, whether it’s just the simple feeling appreciated or feeling

like you’re making a difference”.

“Others used language they drew from anti-racism training and

academic discourses.”


59

Shaping the Repertoires

Some parts of the volunteers’ repertoires are based on intentional

conversations which took the form of service-learning requirements and programs

in high school and college, faith and call, anti-racism training, and academic

study. Respondents were not asked directly about their political affiliation, yet,

many labeled themselves or those things which they drew from their parents as

“liberal.” Because LVC claims an identity to be a progressive Lutheran

organization it is not surprising that most of the volunteers it attracts fall on the

liberal end of the political spectrum. Abigail described her family as the one

family in her town that could be labeled as “the liberal family” because of their

involvement in various protests and political events. She describes herself as

having been “a NPR baby” and goes on to say that she has become “even more

liberal” than her parents. Rather than in the relatively few times respondents

labeled themselves as “liberal,” the influence of liberal discourse is even more

evident in the use of language of “rights” and “equality.” Respondents also

turned to language of “privilege” and “oppression.” While some traced this

language back to college courses, these concepts are among the few things that

LVC turns volunteers’ attention to through their retreats and trainings. While

there are few expectations about how the volunteers continue reflection in

between the retreats, this formation appears to be enough to add to the volunteers’

cultural repertoires.

Respondents had a variety of connections to religion and faith. Some

grew up being involved in a Christian church but are currently exploring what

they would like spirituality to look like for them now like Kate who grew up

Lutheran but lists her current religious affiliation as “unsure.” Many attended

Lutheran colleges and had varying involvement with religion throughout their

college experiences. Some drew specifically on religious understandings to make

sense of the work they are doing. These religious understandings most often were

in line with “liberal” or “progressive” Christian traditions. Respondents who

“…it is not urprising that mos

attracts fall on theliberal end of the

itical spectrum

s t of the volunteers it

pol .”

“Many attended Lutheran colleges and had varying

involvement with religion throughout

their college experiences.”


60

grew up in liberal protestant or Catholic traditions also tended to cite a feeling of

guilt and a desire to “help” people as motivating factors, particularly when they

were younger, for being involved in service work. Annie, our metaphor loving

volunteer, spoke of her understanding of her high school community service

requirement stemming from a “liberal-Protestant, we help people kind of thing.”

As she went on to college she had an “aha” moment when she was introduced to

the concept of social justice based in the prophetic literature of the Hebrew

Scriptures (Old Testament). Unlike many of the other respondents, she was able

to point to a particular biblical concept that had captured the concepts that became

so meaningful to her. For her being able to draw on elements of her faith was

central in being able to describe her motivations for the work she was doing.

When she spoke of participating in a secular immersion trip she described how

difficult it was for her to not be able to explain why she was doing so using her

“native tongue” of faith. However, like other respondents for whom faith or

religion were important parts of their repertoire, she decided against other year-

long volunteer programs because they were “too Jesus-y.” One other concept that

came up specifically with respondents who were connected to Protestant

traditions was that of “call.” Molly, who attended a Midwestern Lutheran

college, captures the common understanding of call not being related to a specific

career but more to a sense of self:

I think lately it’s become more of almost a sense of a calling and not necessarily a big “this is what you’re supposed to do” but, like, this is the way you can serve where you’re at right now and that’ll lead to the next step and that’ll lead to the next step. Interestingly, Molly goes on to talk about how language of “call” would

not, in fact be among her every-day language because she considers it too

“flouncy” and implying things she didn’t “necessarily mean to imply.”

Contesting Notions

“Negotiating and utilizing culture isn’t simply about using

elements from one’s repertoire that work at a given moment.”


61

Negotiating and utilizing culture isn’t simply about using elements from

one’s repertoire that work at a given moment. As Swidler points out, we also use

culture to react against concepts and dominant understandings to make meaning.

Part of the journey for many of the volunteers was a matter of questioning and

contesting elements of the culture they knew or were learning. I met Abigail at a

coffee shop in downtown San Francisco after she finished work at her placement

about three months into being there. Unlike many of the other placements and

volunteers I spoke with, Abigail worked at the local branch of a national non-

profit organization that provides housing to qualified individuals in need. She

described her struggle with working with a multi-million dollar non-profit. One

of her responsibilities was to go to congregations in the Bay Area and recruit

volunteers to work with the organization. Having to sell the organization and the

volunteer opportunities to different constituents, she offered thoughtful reflections

on the meanings people attached to the work they did with the organization. In

pitching the organization to the churches, she described having to stress the fact

that people aren’t simply given houses because people were uncomfortable with

“quote-un-quote charity work.” She received much better reactions when she

stressed that those that received the houses had to contribute by working on their

houses and paying a mortgage. When I followed up with her about her use of

“charity work” she told me that it “doesn’t sit well with people from what I’ve

noticed . . . with some people it does there’s a sort of a weird dichotomy between

“yes, I’m just gonna give to you, you don’t have to do anything in return” to a

“that family is in need but, it’s the American way to make them work for it.” And

that’s not considered charity to a lot of people that’s considered, you know, a

program to help people.” Many of the other volunteers’ understanding of justice

would also include this “empowerment” notion of helping people help

themselves. When Abigail attaches this to “the American way” she is

highlighting a link between empowerment and the boot-strap myth which is a

narrative with a lot of clout in the U.S.


62

Role of Gender and Class

Two groups of individuals spoke clearly about gender. The first were

those who took gender studies, women’s studies, or feminism classes in college.

These students drew on language from these classes to reflect a systemic analysis

of sexism, socialization, and power. Three of the respondents drew on gender

analysis they traced back to classes in college in gender studies or feminist

philosophy. Julie, who attended a college that she described as attracting

“idealists” like herself, spoke at length about the changes in understandings about

women and service and how she wishes more men worked in human services

because they have been detrimentally gendered as feminine. However, when

asked how that affects her personally she explained:

I guess I don’t really think about it that much, because I would rather see it in terms of that it’s something I want to do, and not something that I do because I’m a woman. . . .I think that my identity as a woman has definitely shaped a lot of. . .maybe even, I mean it’s definitely had a lot to do with a lot of the experiences I’ve just kind of found myself falling into in my life. And I’d like to think that I’m doing all of this because I want to, because I as a person want to rather than me as a woman want to. But, I mean, I’m not sure how true that is. You know, I think . . . gender works in mysterious ways. Here she captures her negotiating two important influences on her cultural

repertoire. On the one hand she has a whole set of notions and frames from a

gendered, power-based analysis of social systems and socialization so prevalent in

today’s gender studies. On the other hand, she, like many of the volunteers,

utilized understandings of autonomy and agency which allows individuals to be in

charge of their choices.2

2 Her cultural negotiations here fit nicely with Bourdieu’s theory of habitus in which we learn to desire those things that are available to us and believe that we have actually chosen those things (Bourdieu, 1987).

“These students drew on language from these classes to

reflect a systemic analysis of sexism, socialization, and

power.”


63

The other group that spoke explicitly about the role of gender in concrete

ways was those volunteers involved in institutional church organizations. Typical

of these responses is Annie who claimed that her whole world was women in

terms of work and living, but where she saw gender being an issue was in the

institutional church.

Not all respondents, however, spoke as succinctly about gender. In fact,

when I asked most of the respondents about what it was like to be a woman doing

the work they were doing or what being a woman meant for them in their context

most were unable to articulate their thoughts and resorted to “I don’t know” or

something along the lines of “I’m sure it has some impact” without being able to

go further. Not speaking about or having formulated analysis does not mean we

are not influenced by certain parts of cultures, in this case the role of gender in

culture. Much to the contrary, many volunteers turned to one of two things which

they did not directly link to gender but had elements of teaching gender (Butler,

1999). First, volunteers resorted back to role models who were women. For

instance, Molly spoke at length about the example her mother set for her as

someone who gave selflessly to others whereas Emma, spoke of women ministers

who set an example and spoke with her about being in nontraditional roles.

Second, volunteers spoke occasionally of those behaviors and goals for which

they were rewarded or toward which they were groomed such as quietly paying

attention in school.

Respondents were much more fluent with issues of class and race

privilege than with issues of gender. As a high school student, Kate participated in

a summer leadership program put on by the regional office of her denomination.

During summers between her college years she worked at a Christian summer

camp as a counselor. One of the programs offered at this camp is a two-week

leadership camp for high school students. When she interviewed for a second

summer at the camp she told the director that she really wanted to work with the

leadership program. She was hired on and went off to camp training with no

“The central concept for the program she taught was that of

‘servant leadership’.”


64

formal commitment that she would in fact be working with the high school group.

At staff training the director pulled her aside and told her that she was not only

working with that camp but was in charge of figuring out what the program

looked like. She described the following days as sitting alone designing

everything from curriculum to scheduling. The central concept for the program

she taught was that of “servant leadership.” When asked what this meant she

described:

My big phrase for them was “Eyes that see do.” So, like, if you see something that needs to be done you should just do it. And then we talked about like, being a leader isn’t telling people what to do, it’s leading by example. Like I never ask you to do something that I’m not willing to do myself.

Her campers sometimes needed prompting to do the “dirty work” she

included in servant leadership but were generally receptive to the training which

included challenge courses, team building, and training around communications.

When Kate joined LVC she interviewed and eventually worked at a placement

that provided services for homeless youth. During the summer of her first year at

that placement she and another staff member were given the responsibility to

work with a number of the youth who had been selected to be a part of a

leadership board. Since her experiences in school and camp had ignited a passion

for leadership development and community building, she was very excited about

this opportunity. She approached the board meeting with team-building exercises

ready to go. She described her experience:

I was really excited about doing team building stuff with them and they were having none of it. Like all the stuff I did with my campers I was, like, it will be great and we’ll learn so much. And they were like, “absolutely not. Trust falls? What is this crap?” and I was like, “Okay.” . . . I know not to take it personally, but, it was just like, wow, these people are in a very different place than the white middle class privileged kids that I worked with at camp.

“Service was seen much more in terms

of a Bourdieun capital sense in terms of

participants increasing their chances at

college admission or future jobs.”


65

Service was seen much more in terms of a Bourdieun capital sense in

terms of participants increasing their chances at college admission or future jobs

(Bourdieu, 1986; Swartz, 1998). The concepts respondents drew on to explain

why they served and what it meant for them was connected to the class from

which the respondents came.3 Volunteers that described their background as

middle-class or upper-class, such as Annie and Irene, talk about their year of

service as a chance to figure out how to live simply or as a chance to discover

how to live out their values. While most volunteers spoke of a practical desire to

explore careers and gain experience, these respondents framed that in terms of

self-discovery.

On the other hand, respondents who described an upbringing that was less

financially secure tended to talk about self-discovery only as secondary if at all.

To varying degrees, these respondents saw their volunteer year as a concrete way

to have a secure income and place to live for a year while doing something they

thought was valuable. Ruth, a volunteer working for an environmental

organization, captures this in her story. She grew up on a small hobby farm in the

Northwest. Both of her parents worked through much of her childhood, her mom

working out of the house sewing clothes. When she was in middle school her

mom went back to school to be trained as a teacher. This brought somewhat of an

economic boost to the family. She described her childhood as being significantly

different for her than her sister who was four years younger. In talking about this

difference she explained “the childhood I remember was like you get one winter

coat and then if you lose it you’re like gonna wear two sweatshirts. My sister

remembers like if you lose your winter coat we’ll buy you a new one.” Ruth

didn’t talk about the choice to participate in a year of service in terms of spending

3 The respondents’ class is self-reported. They were not asked to provide income levels to verify their class position growing up. However, all respondents were asked about the types of work their parents did and the impact that work had on them. From this I was able to cross check their self-reported class when this was offered.

“…it wasn’t that I wanted to do a

voluntary year of simplicity.”


66

a year discovering herself and finding out ways to live simply. She explains that

“it wasn’t that I wanted to do a voluntary year of simplicity, it was like, for me I

am actually economically much better off in the LVC because it’s a year of

guaranteed, yeah I might only be making this much money a month but I know

I’m going to make that much money every month until my year is up. Whereas

with where I was working part-time, I might get laid off next week.”

For Ruth, the progressive middle class narrative was in competition with

the class narrative with which she grew up. While this type of tension sometimes

leads to an integration or redefinition, for Ruth, this resulted in critiquing the

program for the class bias which she sees inherent in the organization.

Conclusion

How do we make sense of all of this? For women working in fields that

have been feminized, their understanding of what they do is not a simple matter of

aligning their work with their gender or specific gender roles. Nor are the

processes by which they end up in these fields based in the simple logic of “they

are women, therefore they do service work.” Respondents are not drawing on

gendered terms of service and justice to explain their work and understand

themselves in relationship to that work. That is, they do not draw on the concept

of service because it captures feminine virtues of caring and nurturing and avoid

justice because it captures more masculine traits of right and wrong. Instead, the

very linguistic symbols of “service” and “justice” are the sites for negotiating

culture. The terms themselves serve as containers in which the individuals must

put understandings from their cultural repertoire in order to make sense of the

concepts which then help shape their strategies of action. The cultural repertoires

from which they draw are indeed influenced by their gender. However, other

significant influences on both their available culture and their utilization of

culture include race, class, and religion. Establishing the complexity and nuance

of the cultural work done by women in these fields opens the doors for important

“Instead, the very linguistic symbols of service and justice

are the sites for negotiating culture.”


67

research to be done which critically examines the role of race and class as

intersecting with gender on shaping the cultural repertoires. In particular, more

work needs to be done around the role of race and class privilege in forming the

repertoires from which the organization and individuals build their

understandings. References: Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.) Handbook of Theory and

Research for the Sociology of Education (pp.241-258). New York: Greenwood. Bourdieu, P. (1987). Distinctions: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Trans. Richard

Nice Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Butler, J. (1999). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Hamden: Routledge

Press. Cotts Watkins, S. & Swidler, A. (2009). Conversational Journals as a Method for Studying Culture

in Action Poetics (Amst). 37(2), 162-184. Crenshaw, K. (2004). Mapping the Margins: Intrersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence

Against Women of Color. In Laurel Richardson, Verta Taylor, and Nancy Whittier (Eds.), Feminist Frontiers, 6th ed. (pp.405-414). Columbus: McGraw Hill.

Gilligan, C. (1993). In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development.

Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Fauconnier, G. (1997). Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press. Karniol, Rachel; Grosz, Efrat; & Schorr, Irit. (2003) Caring, Gender Role Orientation, and

Volunteering Sex Roles, 49(1-2), 11-19. Orme, Joan. (2002). “Social Work: Gender, Care and Justice” British Journal of Social Work 32,

799-814. Ruddick, Sara. (1998). “Care as Labor and Relationship” in Norms and Values: Essays on the

Work of Virginia Held. (pp. 3-26) Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Schwickert, E. (2005) Gender, Morality, and Ethics of Responsibility: Complementing

Teleological and Deontological Ethics. Trans. Sarah Clark Miller. Hypatia, 20(2), 164-187.

Swidler, A. (2003). Talk of Love: How Culture Matters, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

javascript:AL_get(this,%20'jour',%20'Poetics%20(Amst).');


68

Weiss, R. (1994). Learning from Strangers: The Art of Qualitative Research. New York: The Free Press.

Verbum Incarnatum Transforming Teenagers: Integrating Social Justice into Catholic Youth Ministry or Catholic Education

69

Transforming Teenagers: Integrating Social Justice into

Catholic Youth Ministry or Catholic Education

Arthur David Canales, D. Min. St. Edwards University Abstract

This article investigates transforming teenagers through the process on integrating and implementing social justice concepts and principles into Catholic youth ministry and Catholic secondary and higher education. The essay addresses four aspects concerning social justice and Catholic young people: (1) it briefly studies the ecclesial documents concerning social justice and young people, (2) it looks at integrating Christian social justice concepts and principles into Catholic ministry and academia, (3) it examines the benefits of social justice-learning initiatives, and (4) it discusses two types of social justice-learning initiatives that work well in Catholic youth ministry and Catholic education--praxis-based education and immersion trips.

“I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word

in reality. That is why right temporarily defeated is stronger than evil triumphant.”1

Martin Luther King, Jr. Nobel Prize for Peace Acceptance Speech December 10, 1964

Introduction

Transforming teenagers into responsible U.S. citizens and faith-oriented

Christians is not new for adolescent ministers, high school campus ministers,

college campus ministers, and college theology professors. For several decades

Catholic youth ministry and Catholic education--secondary and collegiate--has

been trying to instill social justice principles and foster social justice values into

the lives of Catholic young people2 with varying degrees of success.


70

Mark Bauerlein (2009), in his engaging, insightful, and controversial

book, The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans

and Jeopardizes Our Future staunchly maintains that,

Most young Americans [ages 16-22] possess little of the knowledge that makes an informed citizen, and too few of them master the skills needed to negotiate an information-heavy, communication-based society and economy. Furthermore, they avoid the resources and media that might enlighten them and boost their talents. An anti-intellectual outlook prevails in their leisure lives, squashing the lessons of school, and instead of producing a knowledgeable and querulous young mind, the youth culture of American society yields an adolescent consumer enmeshed in juvenile matters and secluded from adult realities. . . . the average 18-year-old cannot name his mayor, congressman, or senator, or remember the last book he/she read, or identify Egypt on a map. (pp. 16-17)

Bauerlein lists each category of learning deficiencies in American

teenagers demonstrating it with “piles” of data in history, civics, math, science,

technology, fine arts, and literature, thus proving his point that today’s young

people--those in high school and college--are America’s intellectually-challenged

generation. Although Bauerlein does not mention or measure a young person’s

knowledge of theology/religion/Bible, catechetical instruction or social justice

initiatives, one can easily glean that those areas of specialization would also fare

just as low as the areas Bauerlein does research.

What does the material in The Dumbest Generation have to do with

Catholic ministry, education, and social justice? Absolutely everything. Today,

more than ever, human beings are connected to one another via the technological

superhighway and digital revolution. Today’s youth experience information and

news at lightning speed and matters of faith, religion, and spirituality are engaged

through time-honored traditions and rituals, which conversely do not captivate or

motivate young people with lightning speed. Although research indicates that

religious activities help to transform teens’ spirituality, religious activities do not

always appeal to adolescent sensibilities.

“What does the material in The

Dumbest Generation have

to do with Catholic ministry,

education, and social justice?”


71

The National Study of Youth and Religion (NSYR), which was published

under the title Soul Searching: the Religious and Spiritual Lives of American

Teenagers by Christian Smith with Melinda Lundquist Denton (2005),

investigated the faith lives, religious practices, and spiritual beliefs of thousands

of American adolescents. This study is extremely helpful in shedding light on

spirituality among American adolescents. Smith and Denton’s findings regarding

Catholic teenagers are quite sobering and warrant serious attention.3 The

implications for Catholic teenagers are clear: Catholic adolescents are religiously

weak and are spiritually anemic. There is a laxity among Catholic adolescents

and this “spiritual slackness” is directly connected to spirituality and spiritual

activities (Smith & Denton, p. 207). One of the more poignant claims from Soul

Searching, for the parameters of this essay, is that Catholic teenagers are

interested in religious activities, especially those that directly help others such as

mission trips, service projects, immersion trips, and social justice-learning

experiences but seldom get to participate in them (Smith & Denton, p. 113).

Practical and experiential learning are types of education that yield great

dividends for young people and give them the chance to serve others and reflect

upon their own lives and the living conditions of others through the lenses of

social justice.

Social Justice and Ecclesial Documents Pertaining to Catholic Young People

The United States Catholic Conference (1978) in the religious education

document Sharing the Light of Faith, defines the term social justice as “the

[reality] by which one evaluates the organization and functioning of political,

economic, social, and cultural life of society. Positively, the church's social

teaching seeks to apply the Gospel command of love to and within social systems,

structures, and institutions.” (p. 93; n. 165) These areas are so important to

Catholic life; however, if young people do not experience them or have no

exposure to them or do not even think about them as Bauerlein suggests, then it

“Although research indicates that

religious activities help to transform teens’ spirituality,

religious activities do not always appeal to

adolescent sensibilities.”


72

may be solely up to Catholic ministry and Catholic education to instill social

justice principles and foster social justice-learning in young people.

The National Conference of Catholic Bishops (1998) sternly admits in its

document, Sharing Catholic Social Teaching, this sad truth: “Many Catholics do

not adequately understand that the social teaching of the Church is an essential

part of the Catholic faith. This poses a serious challenge for all Catholics, since it

weakens our capacity to be a Church that is true to the demands of the Gospel” (p.

3). Social justice and its various virtues--avoiding racism and classism,

eradicating discrimination, fighting for gender equality, living for peace,

overcoming prejudice, standing in solidarity with the poor, living a life of

stewardship, and teaching tolerance--are external practices that evolve from an

interior reality of love (Pope Benedict XVI, no. 16, 28b). Love and compassion

are the foundational components for social justice and ought to be freely shared

by others.

The pioneer Catholic youth ministry document, A Vision of Youth Ministry

(1976), asserts the importance of social justice. The document eloquently notes

that “the justice and service of youth ministry is based on the responsibility of the

Church to extend the kingdom of God in the world through service and action on

behalf of justice.”

As a natural out-flowing of the community experience of faith, service and action on behalf of justice should be constitutive dimensions of the Church’s youth ministry. First of all, by exercising moral leadership and sharing its material and human resources, the Church in ministry with youth must live out a commitment to young people and communities who suffer discrimination, poverty, handicaps, and injustice. Second, by providing models, experiences, and programs, the faith community of the Church should fulfill its responsibility to educate youth for justice and to call young people themselves to action on behalf of others . . . . A consciousness of the demands of justice and willingness to serve should characterize the overall stance of youth ministry—not confined to specific programs, but penetrating prayer, recreation, creativity, and Christian witness. Both youth and adults engaged in youth ministry should strive to

“Love and compassion are the

foundational components for socialjustice and ought to

others.”

be freely shared by

“Social justice ministry helps balance adolescent spirituality and deepens a young person’s faith life and

helps expand the teenage worldview.”


73

deepen their sensitivity to the innate dignity of all persons and to the right of each individual to fulfill his or her fullest potential. (p. 18)

Living social justice teachings and living for mercy and compassion are

not mere abstractions or deemed as something nebulous but are definite elements

that constitute social justice, a reality that deserves achievement. The Vision’s

(1976) words help to reiterate the Gospel values of service, justice, mercy,

charity, peace, and compassion and their significance for young people. Social

justice ministry helps balance adolescent spirituality and deepens a young

person’s faith life and helps expand the teenage worldview, which is usually

myopically limited in scope and personal experience.

The most recent youth ministry document, Renewing the Vision: A

Framework for Catholic Youth Ministry (1997), strongly advocates that a vibrant

and comprehensive youth ministry provides a strong component of justice and

service. The document reads,

Our faith calls us to work for justice; to serve those in need; to pursue peace; and to defend the life, dignity, and rights of all our sisters and brothers. This is the call of Jesus, the urging of the Spirit, the challenge of the prophets, and the living tradition of our Church. (p. 37)

It is paramount that those who work with young people do not merely

conduct outreach activities but offer theological reflection on the personal and

communal experience to balance and ground the reality of the social justice

experience. Christian service is not merely helping people in need; it is also

empowering others to transform their lives. Stephen J. Pope (2010) maintains that

experiential learning that incorporates social justice initiatives stimulate personal

growth and social transformation (p. 133).

The Catholic campus ministry document Empowered by the Spirit (1985)

strongly encourages campus ministers of high school and college to educate

young people about social justice. The document calls Catholic campus ministers

to have a threefold foci with young people: (1) to search for justice on campus, (2)

“Campus ministry is called to be a consistent and

vigorous advocate for justice, peace, and

the reverence for all life.”


74

to teach the principles of Catholic social justice, and (3) to work for social justice.

The document states,

Campus ministry is called to be a consistent and vigorous advocate for justice, peace, and the reverence for all life. All the baptized should understand that "action on behalf of justice is a significant criterion of the Church's fidelity to its missions. It is not optional, nor is it the work of only a few in the Church. It is something to which all Christians are called according to their vocations, talents, and situations in life." With this in mind, campus ministers have the responsibility of keeping alive the vision of the Church on campus as a genuine servant community that is dedicated to the works of justice, peace, and reverence for life, in all stages of its development. (n. 73)

Empowered by the Spirit encourages campus ministers to empower young

people to work towards and to live by social justice teachings of the Catholic

Church. Avoiding racism and classism, eradicating discrimination, and fighting

for gender equality are culturally relevant and timely topics for college students to

discern and take action upon. College is the perfect time and college students are

at the right age to think critically about social justice issues, initiate protests, and

organizes marches for social causes they believe strongly about.

Moreover, campus ministers also can be advocates for young people to

express themselves and find appropriate and meaningful experiences that create

social justice-learning and that provide long-lasting affects for both high school

and college students. Therefore, high school and college campus ministers are

charged with the important task of empowering young people with the social

gospel and mission of the Church, a task that advocates for the vulnerable, less

fortunate, and disadvantaged.

Another significant document for young people is Sons and Daughters of

the Light: A Pastoral Plan for Ministry with Young Adults (1997), which is

directed towards young adults 18-30 years of age. The document has a section on

Christian service and addresses the importance for Catholic young adults to be

engaged in the service and social justice mission of the Catholic Church. The


75

document encourages young people to live “the call to holiness, community, and

service through lived faith” (p. 18). The whole Catholic Church provides the

necessary support for young adults to be disciples of Christ: living their faith in

community (koinonia), nourished by Sunday worship and sustained through the

sacraments (letourgia), proclaiming the word of the prophets of old and of Jesus

Christ (kerygma), and serving humanity with compassion, action, and love

(diakonia and caritas) are the deepest expressions of the Church (Benedict XVI,

no. 25a). Whether adolescents or young adults, young Catholics as the Young

Church are called to participate fully in the social justice ministry of the Catholic

Church.

The social justice teachings of the Catholic Church are not merely lip-

service but are profound words that Catholic bishops expect the Christifideles

laici to faithfully engage in to help them contribute to the transformation of the

world. The influential words of social justice that are found in the ecclesiastical

sources mentioned above did not appear out of thin air but are rooted in Scripture

and tradition. The importance of these social justice teachings to Catholic

ministry and Catholic education are twofold: (1) they provide Catholic adolescent

ministers and Catholic educators with a clear understanding of the role that social

justice plays in the life of Catholic adolescents and young adults and (2) they offer

pastoral insights that can be turned into pastoral methods and strategies which can

be successfully integrated into the life of parish youth ministry, campus ministry,

and classroom, and ultimately into the lives of Catholic young people.

Integrating Christian Social Justice Concepts and Principles Directly into a

Parish Youth Ministry and Catholic Education Curriculum

Introducing young people to social justice must begin with serving others.

The challenge and call for those who work with young people is to move beyond

random acts of kindness and simple outreach and into the work of social justice.

Oftentimes a high school student or college student’s worldview needs shifting;

“The challenge and call for those who work with young people is to move

beyond random acts of kindness and

simple outreach and into the work of social justice.”


76

therefore, social justice activities and initiatives must move beyond random acts

of kindness, to be grounded in charity, and move toward a holistic understanding

of social justice, which respects human dignity and views all people as God's

good and holy creation (Canales, 2004; p. 44).

Perhaps it is worthwhile to address Renewing the Vision’s (1997)

interpretation of the importance of integrating social justice into a comprehensive

youth ministry. RTV maintains that the ministry of social justice should have

distinct features that provide young people with solid direction, action, and

programming. The document offers six important reasons for integrating

techniques for doing social justice ministry. The document asserts that social

justice ministry

1. engages young people in discovering the call to justice and

service in the Scriptures, in the life of Jesus, and in

Christian social teaching;

2. involves adolescents, their families, and parish

communities in actions of direct service to those in need

and in efforts to address the causes of injustice and

inequality;

3. develops the assets, skills, and faith of young people by

promoting gospel values in their lifestyles and choices; by

increasing positive self-esteem, self-confidence, and moral

reasoning abilities; by building leadership, and social skills;

by helping them discover their personal gifts and abilities;

by helping them learn that they can make a difference in

the world and receive recognition by the community for

their contributions;

4. incorporates doing the right thing with attention to why

and how we do what we do (four elements guide

“The document asserts that social justice ministry… incorporates doing the right thing with attention to why and how we do what we

do.”


77

adolescents in moving from awareness to action on the

issues of justice):

a. involvement helps adolescents connect with justice

issues personally and experientially;

b. exploration helps adolescents understand the

causes, connections, and consequences of justice

issues—expanding their knowledge and moving

them toward action with a stronger background and

motivation to work for real change when faced with

injustice;

c. reflection helps adolescents utilize the Scriptures,

Catholic social teachings, and the lived faith of the

church community to discern a faith response to

justice issues;

d. action helps adolescents respond to injustice

through direct service or actions of social change—

locally or globally, short term or long term;

5. includes a supportive community that builds a sense of

togetherness, nurtures a life of justice and service, works

together to serve and act for justice, and provides support

and affirmation;

6. nurtures a lifelong commitment to service and justice

involvement (this includes providing opportunities,

support, and follow-up to help the young people reflect on

their experience; people who learn to serve when they are

young are more likely to be service-oriented throughout

their lives). (pp.39-40)

“…action helps adolescents respond to injustice through

direct service or actions of social

change.”


78

These six areas are helpful for those who minister to Catholic adolescents

and who teach Catholic young adults. They are also useful in planning,

coordinating, and implementing the various social justice programs in both

Catholic ministry and academia.

The integration of Christian social justice concepts and teachings are

paramount to Catholic youth ministry and Catholic education. Too many parish

and campus ministries only offer service programs without concentrating on the

integration of social justice issues which include classism, gender concerns,

homelessness, intolerance, joblessness, poverty, racism, and sexism.

Furthermore, Catholic parish youth ministers are notorious for not providing

young people with theological reflection about the social justices issues

surrounding outreach projects and discerning those issues and their relevance to

Christian living and bringing it into a prayerful context (Canales, 2006; p. 67).

Ronald Krietemeyer (2002) indicates that the ethical responsibility and

moral imperative for passing on Catholic social teaching falls on every youth

minister and Catholic educator and “plays a fundamental role in teaching students

about the Church’s social mission in a structured manner” (p. 47). One of the

primary duties of parish youth ministers, campus ministers, and Catholic

educators is to ensure that the Christian social teachings are applicable to the

contemporary world and to real life issues that teenagers may face on a regular

basis. For example, in larger cities across the United States, especially southern

and warmer cities, there is an abundance of the homeless and on many street

corners the homeless beg for money, food, or work. This may be a situation that

merits discussion and the planning and implementation of a social justice

initiative.

A pastoral strategy concerning racism -- or in reality avoiding racism--

and teaching tolerance to young people may seem unnecessary but in the deep

south there are still some “pockets” of prejudice that practice the ideas of the Ku

Klux Klan. One simple way to teach students tolerance and to break down the

“This may be a situation that merits discussion and the

planning and implementation of a

social justice initiative.”


79

walls of racism is to have students watch a movie that highlights the topic such as

To Kill a Mockingbird (1962), The Color Purple (1985), Mississippi Burning

(1988), Ghosts of Mississippi (1996), Amistad (1997), American History X (1999),

Monsters Ball (2002), A Day Without a Mexican (2004), and Gran Torino (2009);

of course, these are only a few movies that can be used to implement social

justice-learning with young people regarding racism. After viewing the movie

have students break into small faith-sharing groups with specific questions that

pertain to the film and the issue being discussed.

Another method for helping to eradicate discrimination is to plan a trip to

a city in the south such as Selma, Alabama, Little Rock, Arkansas, or

Philadelphia, Mississippi, and expose students to the rawness and grittiness of

those places while walking in the footsteps of the African-Americans who lived

through those tumultuous times. Visiting memorials or listening to stories of the

elderly who may have had first-hand experiences of brutality and racism will

expose them to experience solidarity and empathy and will lead them to

intellectual, moral, and religious conversion. Therefore, teaching about specific

social justice teachings that surround racism and gender issues would be a fruitful

dialogue for high school and college students to engage in and learn from.

Another method of integrating Christian social teachings is to offer

workshops or evening lecture series that provide high school and college students

with theology concerning and discussion of social justice issues such as

homelessness and hunger, peace and non-violence, discrimination and racism, and

solidarity and stewardship. An example of such a workshop or evening lecture

series is to offer a “Christian Social Justice Series” which highlights the various

social justice teachings of the Catholic Church. Such a lecture series could

provide presentations once a week that represent the “flavor” of Catholic social

thought. Some of the presentations may be the following:

Presentation # 1: Dignity and Equality of the Human Person

Presentation # 2: Rights and Responsibilities

“Therefore, teaching about specific social

justice teachings that surround racism

and gender issues would be a fruitful dialogue for high

school and college students to engage in and learn from.”


80

Presentation # 3: The Social Nature of Humanity

Presentation # 4: The Common Good

Presentation # 5: Subsidiarity

Presentation # 6: Solidarity

Presentation # 7: Fundamental Option for the Poor

Presentation # 8: Stewardship

These presentations will thoroughly ground young people with Catholic social

principles and allow them to connect their faith with larger global realities that

other people endure on a daily basis. The lecture series will serve as a guiding

focus for them throughout their lives, and they will be able to remember the

concepts and principles that were presented and discussed.

A further responsibility for youth ministers and theological-minded

educators is to integrate the Bible into the curriculum and to teach directly from it

as a source of divine revelation and divine inspiration regarding themes of social

justice, such as the common good, the fundamental option for the poor, solidarity,

and stewardship. Finally, it is the moral obligation of those who minister to and

teach theology to teenagers and college students to implement social justice

experiences that afford young people with catechetical and learning opportunities

that serve the needy (homeless, hungry, children, the poor, prisoners) and benefit

the greater community in which the service is offered. For instance, a college

professor who teaches a social justice class may want to take her/his students on a

field trip to visit and spend time with teenagers at a youth prison or detention

center. This can be an extremely rewarding experience for college students

because it allows them to be role models to incarcerated juveniles and it gives

them a sense of giving back to the community.

Krietemeyer (2002) observes that high school students and college

students “need to learn not only the value of volunteer charity, but also the

Christian mandate to work for basic justice and human rights of all” (p. 52).

Social justice experiences and social justice-learning opportunities are excellent

“…students need to learn not only

the value of volunteer charity,

but also the Christian mandate to work for basic justice and human

rights of all.”


81

pragmatic tools which help to educate young people about the larger implications

of systemic social issues as well as help them to affirm and live by Christian

social justice principles.

The Benefits of Social Justice-Learning Initiatives

It is extremely important for anyone who works with Catholic young

people to integrate social justice themes and to infuse theological reflection into

social justice-learning4 and experiential methodology. Social justice-learning,

also called praxis-based education, is an excellent way for high school students

and college students to comprehend the impact of their social action experience.

Constance Fourré (2003) reports “personal experience is the best method of

jolting people’s consciousness in such a way that they begin to ask more profound

questions” (p. 49). The asking of more insightful questions and the format and

process to ask the reflective questions, to discern issues, and to think critically are

the educational ingredients of social justice-learning. Social justice-learning is a

medium to teach the values of social justice within a pastoral setting or academic

setting. Social justice-learning provides young people the capability of reflecting

on and discussing the service component of justice.

Social justice-learning has three essential components which can be easily

adapted and facilitated within a pastoral or academic setting: (1) provide real and

tangible service opportunities to the community; (2) create structured theological

reflection, which is integrated throughout the learning process; and (3) integrate

outreach, service, and justice issues into the youth ministry and educational

curricula. The following is an example of social justice-learning adapted from the

National Youth Leadership Council and the Saint Paul, Minnesota Public School

District (2006):

· Cleaning up a river bank or lakeshore area is service.

· Sitting in a biology classroom, looking at water samples under a

microscope is learning.

“Social justice-learning is an avenue that

challenges high school and college

teenagers to discover areas that

were once unknown to them in creative and collaborative

ways.”


82

· Biology students meeting state standards by taking samples from

local water sources, then analyzing the samples, documenting the

results, presenting the scientific data to a pollution control

agency, and discussing the impact these results may have on

future pollution control issues and our own behaviors is service-

learning.

· Discussing the importance and impact that clean water has on a

community, especially a poor community or an impoverished

country is social-justice learning (p. 13)

Social justice-learning is an avenue that challenges high school and college

teenagers to discover areas that were once unknown to them in creative and

collaborative ways. Social justice-learning is also an exceptional integration

methodology that will help youth ministers, high school religion teachers, college

campus ministers, and college theology professors to empower their students

about social justice themes, principles, and concepts.

Jesuit Superior General, Peter-Hans Kolvenbach (2008), refers to social

justice-learning as praxis-based education that he links to solidarity. Kolvenbach

states,

Solidarity is learned through “contact” rather than through “concepts.” Personal involvement with innocent suffering, with the injustice others suffer, is the catalyst for solidarity, which then gives rise to intellectual inquiry and moral reflection. Students, in the course of their formation, must let the gritty reality of this world into their lives, so they can learn to feel it, think about it critically, respond to its suffering, and engage it constructively. They should learn to perceive, think, judge, choose, and act for the rights of others, especially the disadvantaged and the oppressed. (p. 155) As a result of social justice-learning, one of the major benefits is

solidarity, and this makes it an indispensable component of ministry formation

and academic education. There are numerous social justice-learning

methodologies, strategies, and activities which can be addressed and analyzed.

“Solidarity is learned through ‘contact’ rather

than through ‘concepts’.”


83

However, there are two types of social justice-learning initiatives that merit

serious attention in the discussion of transforming teenagers and integrating social

justice into Catholic youth ministry and Catholic education: (1) praxis-based

education and (2) immersion trips.

Praxis-Based Education

According to Mark Ravizza (2010) praxis-based education has tangible

and lasting impact upon Catholic high school students and college students.

There are four dimensions of praxis-based education that help to shape Catholic

identity, spirituality, and faith-formation in young people: (1) academic and

pastoral reflection rooted in reality, (2) integrated community learning, (3)

recollection and pedagogical accompaniment, and (4) formation of Christo-centric

imagination (Ravizza, pp. 113-125).

An academic and pastoral reflection rooted in reality provides young

people with “hands-on” experience, which shapes their worldview and shifts their

individualistic paradigm; it opens the door for fairness, objectivity, and solidarity

with issues that others struggle with such as poverty, racism, gender equality, and

classism; theological reflection in ministry and academic settings also aid the

minister/professor to craft lesson plans that require students’ input and

experience, which connects theory and praxis (Ravizza, pp. 114-115). An

integrated community learning experience affords young people with the

opportunity to conceptualize learning through praxis sites rather than lectures in a

classroom; it encourages deeper reflection, involved sharing, and discernment of

concepts that become alive and lived experiences as distinct from theory; it is a

more holistic and intentional learning that is experienced by individual and

community (Ravizza, p. 117). A recollection and pedagogical accompaniment

refers to the self-awareness that takes place within students as a result of praxis

experience, their shared experiences in community, and their personal and prior

history. This takes place by reflecting on their own brokenness and suffering

“A Christo-centric imagination points

to the trust that young people must go through as they put their faith in

Christ as the hope of God impacts the

students.”


84

while resonating with social justice concepts or wrestling with theological and

philosophical theories which captivate their minds and hearts to discern God’s

direction. A recollection and pedagogical accompaniment is a methodology that

focuses on engaging students to comprehend their praxis encounter and to

articulate their social justice experience to the praxis sites where they learned

firsthand from the pastoral involvement (Ravizza, p. 119). A formation of

Christo-centric imagination connects praxis-based education with the humanity of

Jesus of Nazareth and centers social justice in Christ’s kenosis or self-emptying.

A Christo-centric imagination points to the trust that young people must go

through as they put their faith in Christ as the hope of God impacts the students as

well as the marginalized and disenfranchised to whom they minister. It is

providing hope to people who are oftentimes helpless and stuck in deep despair

and feel overwhelmed and burdened with day-to-day struggles, and offering them

Christ’s eternal hope along with pragmatic solutions helps to transform their

situation (Ravizza, pp. 124-125).

As a result of integrating these four dimensions, either in a pastoral setting

or academic setting, young people will be able to learn, grow, and mature into

social justice oriented adults. As Kolvenbach (2008) notes, “When the heart is

touched by direct experience, the mind may be challenged to change.” (p. 156)

Those who work with young people and incorporate praxis-based education into

their curriculum will resonate and testify to its veracity.

The rewards of integrating social justice-learning such as praxis-based

education into a parish youth ministry or college classrooms are numerous.

Thomas East (2004) offers four recommendations for the successful integration of

praxis-based education within Catholic ministry and Catholic education: (1) plan

long-term trips or extended service opportunities that require training; (2) use

planning teams that include both young people and adults to highlight the

importance of group implementation; (3) train and support core leaders and

catechists in the fundamentals and guidelines of social justice and (4) collaborate

“Those who work with young people

and incorporate praxis-based

education into their curriculum will

resonate and testify to its veracity.”


85

with other parish staff, other parishes, other schools, other colleges, and other

diocesan and national organizations to help coordinate Christian social justice

initiatives beyond the local community and local diocese (pp. 54-55). These four

recommendations afford high school and college youth the opportunities to

experience life beyond their horizons and can lead to the transformation of the

world.

Constance Fourré (2003) lists eight reasons for promoting and integrating

social justice and praxis-based education into Catholic ministry and academic

curricula.

• First, praxis-based education “attaches emotion to learning, which common

sense and brain-based learning research both show clearly improves the

quality of learning” (p. 50). Quality comprehension is an aim for those

working with young people; therefore, since service-learning enhances

brain-based learning it will give much creditability to a youth minister’s or

theology teacher’s programming. • Second, praxis-based education “raises the stakes for students” (p. 50). If

students must research and present information at some forum then they are

more likely to be more serious about the project. • Third, praxis-based education “uses multiple-intelligence” (p. 50). During

praxis-based education programs students may be asked to do specific skills

that require more than reading, writing, and arithmetic, such as plotting a

course using a compass or navigating a blueprint. • Fourth, praxis-based education “promotes critical-thinking” (p. 50).

Critical-thinking is an alternative approach to learning through

memorization, which helps to create less predictable learning outcomes. • Fifth, praxis-based education “promotes applied learning” (p. 51). In other

words, experiential learning has real and applicable dimensions for daily

life, which can be incorporated into a young person’s routine.

“If students must research and present information at some forum then they are

more likely to be more serious about

the project.”


86

• Sixth, praxis-based education “improves retention”5 (p. 50). This is a

significant claim because youth ministers and theology teachers are usually

concerned about the amount of information that gets “absorbed” into a

young person and the amount of information that is retained.

• Seventh, praxis-based education “improves attendance” (p. 51).

Predominately attendance is a phenomenon that affects schools more than

youth ministries, since youth ministries are purely a voluntary enterprise;

nevertheless, if service-learning has been associated with greater gains in

attendance then it is another excellent reason to integrate it into Catholic

youth ministry and education curricula. • Eighth, praxis-based education “is a particularly useful strategy for at-risk

students because it is a change from their previous experience of schooling”

(p. 51). Since this type of “hands-on” learning affects at-risk young people,

it can be implemented in urban, rural, and inner-city areas as well as

ministry and academic settings. Therefore, praxis-based education is by no

means limited to middle-class or suburban Caucasian teenagers and young

adults.

Praxis-based education is a vehicle of education that can create not only social

justice-learners in the community but also servant-leaders who can do service

outside the local community. Beyond praxis-based education is another great

method for enhancing social justice-learning and education--immersion trips.

Immersion Trips

An absolutely wonderful type of social justice opportunity which helps to

transform high school and college students is full immersion trips. Immersion

trips place young people in usually different surroundings, encountering different

cultures, and living in a different country for an extended period of time.

According to Stephen J. Pope (2010) personal transformation occurs on four

“Moral transformation

moves a person to think, act, and live

differently.”


87

levels and immersion trips promote this change within young people. The four

types of transformation that young people may experience as a direct result of

immersion trips are: (1) social transformation, (2) moral transformation, (3)

spiritual transformation, and (4) affective and cognitive personal transformation.

Social transformation evolves within a person; it is a gradual awakening of ideas,

concepts, and realities; a process of changing the mind and the heart (metanoia); it

evokes a greater sense of communal responsibility and accountability (Pope, p.

133). Moral transformation moves a person to think, act, and live differently; it

encompasses the willingness to be conscientious about social issues and/or

economic concerns which affect another person’s well-being; it reduces

sentimentalities from an “us” and “we” scenario and promotes solidarity with the

marginalized (Pope, p. 137). Spiritual transformation pertains to a young person’s

development to the sacred and to a sense of reverence with God; it is a deeper

realization and self-actualization that comes from one’s personal journey of

conversion; a personal ascent of faith in God, and ultimately, in the identification

with the Catholic Church as a profound agent of social justice, and trusting in and

belonging to the larger mission of Jesus the Christ (Pope, p. 138). Affective and

cognitive personal transformation are in reality the byproducts of social, moral,

and spiritual transformation; young people may encounter powerful emotions

while embarking upon a social justice experience such as an immersion trip which

can affect their attitude and behavior in intentional ways; emotionally charged

experiences may elicit a paradigm shift in commitments, interests, friendships,

and decision-making; a deeper cognitive awareness may inspire students to

“tackle” more profound social issues that impact the global community (Pope, p.

140).

An example of this transformation as a direct result of an immersion trip

could be this scenario. A 20-year old international business and marketing

student volunteers to participate in an Alternative Spring Break offered through

the college which takes a group of 20 students on a mission trip to Santa Rita,

“…a deeper cognitive awareness

may inspire students to ‘tackle’

more profound social issues that impact the global

community.”


88

Honduras. After a week of being with the Honduran people of Santa Rita, the

student returns back to the United States and to the college with a very different

attitude about helping others and about classism. The student now has a new

understanding of poverty and a new sense of classism because of the firsthand

opportunity to meet and work alongside the people in Honduras. Here is where

the affective, social, moral, and spiritual transformation occurs. As a direct result

of the one-week immersion trip to Honduras, the international business and

marketing student decides to concentrate and minor in not-for-profit business and

philanthropy and to accentuate the major field of study. The student now has a

new interior passion to help the poor and to investigate the ways to eradicate

classism and other areas impacted by poverty.

Immersion trips have the ability to foster a deep sense of discipleship,

instill Christian values, contribute to the mission of the Church, and promote

solidarity with the marginalized, disenfranchised, and oppressed. Immersion trips

“plop” young people directly into the gritty realities of social poverty and

personal despair, which is typically a startling contrast to the way the majority of

American middle class high school students and college students live. The

tangible and raw encounters and exposures that young people make with those

who are severely less fortunate than they are is often a catalyst for change and

transformation. Immersion trips afford Catholic young people such interaction.

Immersion trips empower Catholic young people to look beyond their oftentimes

limited worldview and to experience the world anew with a fresh pair of social

lenses. Immersion trips encourage young people to “stretch” themselves to look

beyond race and ethnicity and to embrace new cultures; to create a world that

does not judge people by class, gender, and sexuality but sees people as children

of God created in imago Dei.


89

Conclusion

Transforming teenagers is a process, at times an arduous process, but one

that can be achieved through Catholic social teachings, integrating social justice

concepts and principles into Catholic ministry and education curricula, and by the

exposure of praxis-based education and immersion trips.

The Department of Social Development and World Peace (1993) wrote a

beautiful document titled Communities of Salt and Light, which encourages,

challenges, and mandates that justice and service are constitutive virtues and core

beliefs to the entire People of God:

The central message is simple: our faith is profoundly social. We cannot be called truly “Catholic” unless we hear and heed the Church’s call to serve those in need and work for justice and peace. We cannot call ourselves followers of Jesus unless we take up his mission of bringing “good news to the poor, liberty to captives, and new sight to the blind [cf. Luke 4:18).” (p. 3)

This social justice document empowers Catholic youth ministers, high school

theology teachers, college campus ministers, and college theology professors to

develop and maintain quality social justice initiatives and service-learning

programs.

It seems that there may be great hope for the “Dumbest Generation” and

that Mark Bauerlein might not be totally accurate when it pertains to Catholic

adolescents and young adults. If, and when, Catholic young people decide to

dedicate their time, even in a limited capacity, to social justice issues that

overcome world problems, then real transformation takes places and has the great

potential of being contagious. The world needs “infectious” teenagers to

regenerate themselves into caring and compassionate young people with a zest for

serving others while meeting the world’s needs. This type of social justice

regeneration needs role models and advocates, and youth ministers, campus

ministers, high school theology teachers, and college theology professors have a

responsibility to lead the way for young people on their quest for social justice.

“It seems that there may be great hope for the ‘Dumbest

Generation.”


90

References Bauerlein, Mark. (2009). The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes our Future. New York, NY: Penguin Group. Canales, Arthur David. (2004). “Integrating Christian Discipleship IS Franciscanism.” The Journal of the Association of Franciscan Colleges and Universities, 1 (1): pp. 34-53. Canales, Arthur David. (2006). “The Ten-Year Anniversary of Renewing the Vision: Reflection on Its Impact for Catholic Youth Ministry.” New Theology Review, 20 (2): pp.

58-69. Department of [Catholic] Education. (1976). A Vision of Youth Ministry. Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference. Department of Social Development and World Peace. (1993). Communities of Salt and Light. Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference. East, Thomas. (2004). Effective Practices for Dynamic Youth Ministry. Winona, MN: Saint Mary’s Press. Fourré, Constance. (2003). Journey to Justice: Transforming Hearts and Schools with Catholic Social Teaching. Washington, DC: National Catholic Educational Association. Kammer, Fred. (1991). Doing Faithjustice: An Introduction to Catholic Social Thought. New York, NY: Paulist Press. Kammer, Fred. (1995). Salted with Fire: Spirituality for the Faithjustice Journey. New York, NY: Paulist Press. Kolvenbach, Peter-Hans. (2008). The Service of Faith and Promotion of Justice in Jesuit Higher

Education.” In George W. Traub edits, A Jesuit Education Reader. Chicago, IL: Loyola Press, pp. 144-162.

Krietemeyer, Ronald. (2002). Leaven for the Modern World: Catholic Social Teaching and Catholic Education. Washington, DC: National Catholic Educational Association. National Conference of Catholic Bishops. (1985). Empowered By the Spirit: Campus Ministry

Faces the Future. Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference. National Conference of Catholic Bishops. (1997). Sons and Daughters of the Light: A Pastoral

Plan for Ministry with Young Adults. Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference.

National Conference of Catholic Bishops. (1998). Sharing Catholic Social Teaching: Challenges and Directions. Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference. National Youth Leadership Council. (2000). “Handout Adapted from Saint Paul Public

Schools Plan for District-Wide Service-Learning.” Saint Paul, MN: Otto Bremer Foundation.

Pope Benedict XVI. (2006). Deus Caritas Est. Washington, DC: United States Conference


91

of Catholic Bishops. Pope, Stephen J. (2010). Immersion Trips. In Thomas P. Rausch edits, Educating for Faith

Justice: Catholic Higher Education Today. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, pp. 127-142.

Ravizza, Mark. (2010). Praxis-Based Education. In Thomas P. Rausch edits, Educating for Faith

Justice: Catholic Higher Education Today. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, pp. 111-126.

Smith, Christian and Melinda Lundquist Denton. (2005). Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. United States Conference Catholic. (1978). Sharing the Light of Faith: National Catechetical Directory for Catholics of the United States. Washington, DC: United States

Conference of Catholic Bishops. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. (1997). Renewing the Vision: A Framework for Catholic Youth Ministry. Washington, DC: United States Conference of Catholic

Bishops.

1 Martin Luther King Jr., (1964), Nobel Prize for Peace Acceptance Speech; contained in Fred Kammer, S.J. (1995) Salted with Fire: Spirituality for the Faithjustice Journey (New York, NY: Paulist Press), p. 99. 2 Through this article the term “young people” will be used as an encompassing term that refers to both middle adolescence (ages 15-18) and late adolescence (ages 19-22), those typical high school and college age years. Moreover, throughout this study the terms “teenagers” and “young adults” will also be used; unless otherwise stated the term teenagers will refer to high school aged students and the term young adults to college age students.

3 Christian Smith and Melinda L. Denton’s investigation and evaluation was not based on just a few sample interviews. Rather, their evaluation was based on a national representative sample of hundreds of Catholic teenagers who were questioned over the telephone about their religious and spiritual beliefs. There were also face-to-face interviews which were also a nationally representative sub-sample of the original teenagers that had completed the telephone survey. For more information see Smith and Denton (2005), Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers (New York, NY: Oxford University Press) pp. 193-217. There is an issue of the questions that were posed to Catholic youth and their understanding of the questions asked, and did those questions rightly reflect Catholic jargon and Catholic culture. At any rate, the findings are still rather alarming.

4 The term social justice-leaning refers to experiential learner that is specific to enhancing young people’s knowledge about social justice issues and is committed to expanding their comprehension of the Catholic Church’s social justice teachings and principles. In this essay social justice-learning is not tantamount to service-learning since not all service-learning is focused on social justice issues and concerns. 55

5 The term retention in this article refers to the academic and intellectual information attained and learned by a young person through the process of praxis-based education. Retention in this case does not refer to an academic institution’s ability to keep students enrolled in a specific college or program.

Verbum Incarnatum The Demand for Justice Implicit in the Eucharistic Celebration

92

The Demand for Justice Implicit in the Eucharistic Celebration

Marie A. Conn, Ph.D., Chestnut Hill College

Abstract

This article was inspired by Enrique Dussel’s essay, “The Bread of the Eucharistic Celebration as a Sign of Justice in the Community” (1982). The governing question which gives shape to the article is whether it is possible to celebrate Eucharist without at the same time being active in the pursuit of justice for the poor and the marginalized. The article looks at bread as both physical reality and sacramental element; the meaning of Christian community; and justice as the indispensable link between these two. An earlier version of this article appeared in Questions Liturgiques.

The Demand for Justice Implicit in the Eucharistic Celebration The title of Enrique Dussel's provocative 1982 article, "The Bread of the

Eucharistic Celebration as a Sign of Justice in the Community," will provide the

framework for this article. Dussel, an Argentinian who is one of the first

generation of Latin American liberation theologians, sees philosophy as the

weapon for the liberation of the oppressed. He, like many Third World liberation

theologians, points to Luke's description of Jesus reading Isaiah 61 in the

synagogue (Luke 4:14-18, New American Bible) as the passage that constitutes

the essence of the Christian gospel (Ferm, 1988). Dussel stresses the theme, not of

poverty, but of the poor one: the poor are people.

Providing a philosophical and historical framework for liberation theology

is Dussel's major concern. The title quoted above as the basis for this article is

stated descriptively, but, as I intend to show, the "as" bears the weight of the

imperative: to be Eucharistic, bread must be a sign of justice; to participate in the

sharing of Eucharistic bread, a community must be just.

My argument, then, is that the question must be asked: "Is a true

Eucharistic celebration possible in a world filled with dire poverty, a poverty


93

which is to a large extent created, maintained and manipulated by deliberate

human choice?" The answer, I shall insist, is yes; but it is a yes that is intrinsically

qualified by the condition that the celebrating community be actively engaged in

the ongoing struggle to effect justice in the global society. Taking Dussel as a

starting point, I will address three major areas: bread, as both a physical reality

and a sacramental element; the meaning of true Christian community; and the

mediating function of justice as the indispensable link between the other two.

Bread: “Which earth has given and human hands have made...”

Dussel underscores the importance of bread as the "symbol and reality of

the product of human labour" (1982, p. 57). He goes on to explore the three

elements: earth, bread, and work. His understanding of the material relationship

among these elements is crucial to this article. Earth is the material of work in

the sense that, without work, there is the earth and the cosmos, but no material.

This productive materialism, unlike cosmological materialism, is "irrefutable and

sacramental: earth is the material of work. Without earth and work there is no

bread. Without bread, there is no Eucharist" (Dussel, 1982, p. 58). Bread, then, is

the fruit of work, which is the human activity par excellence. Work objectifies

human dignity. It is through work that humans are rescued from a subjective state

of emptiness, and their hands are filled with bread for the sacrifice.

That having been said, however, it is also true that bread is, first of all,

food. Hunger is the lack of food, and bread is produced to satisfy this lack. "The

simple, central action of the Eucharist is the sharing of food - not only eating but

sharing. The simple, central human experience for the understanding of this

action is hunger" (Hellwig, 1976, p. 10).

Hunger is a multivalent reality which those living in areas with high

standards of living cannot fully appreciate. Hunger is the supreme experience of

dependence and insufficiency. To be hungry is to know ourselves as creatures.

Extreme hunger deprives people of goals and horizons; all that is important is the

obtaining of food. Human vision, the freedom to transcend, the appreciation of

“Is a true Eucharistic celebration possible in

a world filled with dire poverty, a poverty

which is to a large extent created, maintained and manipulated by

deliberate human choice?”


94

the good and the beautiful, all are impossible in the face of hunger (Hellwig,

1976). That is why "Bread is life to the destitute, and it is murder to deprive them

of it" (Sir. 34:21).

It is important here to note that the Bible sets up an ethical person-to-

person relationship between the rich and the poor. In order for there to be poor,

some must be rich. But the rich, in this equation, are those who use the product of

others' work as a means of domination over them. To be poor is to be alienated

from the product of one's labor. Leaving the producer without the product is

murder (Dussel, 1982).

The biblical understanding of justice gives a fundamental perspective to our reflections on social and economic justice.... Central to the biblical presentation of justice is that the justice of a community is measured by its treatment of the powerless in society, most often described as the widow, the orphan, the poor and the stranger (non-Israelite) in the land.... What these groups of people have in common is their vulnerability and lack of power. (NCCB, 1986, pp. 37-38)

The implications of this understanding are enormous. Bread is the staple of life; it

is what humans sweat to earn. "But it is also the bread we deny to others, as

many people in this world starve for want of it" (Newman, 1988, p. 149). Since

the source of the bread is human labor, then Christ, in the Eucharistic bread,

obligates us "to evaluate our offering and the human process that precedes and

defines the offering - that is, the social relationships of production," (Avila, 1981,

p. 95) with a view to righting those relationships.

This way of looking at bread, at food, is not new. Eating does more than

sustain the physical body. "Foods become metaphor and metonym, expressing ...

the fundamental assumptions or world view of individuals and groups."

(Humphrey & Humphrey, 1988, p. 2) It is not irrelevant that the lunch counter

was an important locus of the civil rights movement of the 1960s: “I'm not going

to sit at your table and watch you eat, with nothing on my plate, and call myself a

diner. Sitting at the table doesn't make you a diner, unless you eat some of what's

on that plate” (Malcolm X, quoted in Feeley-Harnik, 1994, p. 13).

“Human vision, the freedom to

transcend, the appreciation of the

good and the beautiful, all are impossible in the face of hunger.”


95

Food acquires its character in a meal, that is, in food which is eaten. The

complex of behaviors surrounding the preparing, serving, and consuming of food

creates "a symbolic vocabulary of the basic assumptions of the community,"

(Humphrey & Humphrey, 1988, p. 3) a vocabulary which allows everyday

behaviors to be "invested with multivalent resonances, creating and affirming the

very ideal of the community that performs them" (Humphrey & Humphrey, 1988,

p. 3). The exchange of food, then, is a crucial part of the rituals that mediate our

progress through life.

In the Pentateuch and the Deuteronomic books, as well as in the prophets,

the power of the Lord is manifested in the ability to control food: to feed is to

bless, to confer life. Acceptance of the Lord's power is symbolized by the

acceptance of the offered food; likewise, rejection of the Lord is symbolized by

seeking after forbidden food. Questions of the extent of the power of the Lord are

framed as questions about the Lord's ability to feed the people. In other words,

eating either joins people to the Lord or separates them from the Lord.

Throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, those who eat together establish a relationship

of mutual obligation.

All of this and more is contained in Jesus' choice of bread and wine as the

symbols of his abiding presence. At a very fundamental level, the Last Supper

was simply a sharing of food. "It is essential that both aspects of the broken bread

be remembered: it is a symbol of spiritual nourishment, and it is a call for actual

food for the hungry" (Grassi, 1985, p. 9). New food-language is needed so that

Christians can appreciate anew the connection between the Eucharist and food for

the hungry.

In Luke, the theme of the Last Supper account is direct service to the poor.

Christians today must recover that link between Eucharist and food-sharing.

Appreciating bread as a fruit of human labor and a part of humanized nature is

critical. Humanity in its entirety is signified in the Eucharist. The bread and wine

"are an unpretentious summary of the earth's cosmic and cultural Odyssey; in

their own way they are a diagrammatic representation of the human" (Martelet,

“Foods become metaphor and

metonym, expressing ... the fundamental

assumptions or world view of individuals

and groups.”


96

1976, p. 35). These Eucharistic symbols remind us that culture has no true value

except by providing food to sustain life. “As the bread and wine bring to the table

of Christ the symbolic loading of the world's culture, so we must accept that they

evoke, too, the world's distress; for the food and drink which the Eucharist uses as

though they were available to all as a matter of course are still an unsolved

problem for the majority of the world's inhabitants” (Martelet, 1976, p. 39).

To be the body and blood of Christ is to be torn and broken. It is to remember

that bread is a staple lacking to the disinherited of the earth. The bread which

Jesus blessed and broke contained the gift of himself; it was a blessing meant to

be shared.

Today we are aware of the industrial and mercantile interdependence of nations and of the various chains of causes that lead to abject poverty and starvation for whole populations. Our experience and our understanding of our own human situation in the world today is the foundation for understanding what the good news of the gospel is (Hellwig, 1976, p. 51).

We cannot live without concern for others and claim to receive the blessing of

Christ in the Eucharist. "The celebration of the Lord's Supper presupposes a

communion and solidarity with the poor in history. Without this solidarity, it is

impossible to comprehend the death and resurrection of the Servant of Yahweh."

(Gutiérrez, 1983, p. 16)

The Eucharist is both memorial and prophecy: memorial, because

remembering what has already been accomplished inspires us to do what we can;

and prophecy, because the realization of what is still lacking in the movement

toward eschatological fulfillment challenges us to attempt the impossible. (Avila,

1981, p. 75): “It is this very possibility of a world made new that is contained in

the symbol of bread, understood as the fruit of human production. The Eucharist

has the appearance of bread and wine, that is to say, of food and drink; it is

therefore as familiar to people, as closely linked to their life as food and drink ...

in this sacrament of bread and wine, of food and drink, everything that is human

really undergoes a singular transformation and elevation.” Eucharistic worship is

not so much worship of the inaccessible transcendence as worship of the divine

“Without this solidarity, it is impossible to

comprehend the death and

resurrection of the Servant of Yahweh.”


97

condescension, and it is also the merciful and redeeming transformation of the

world in the human heart. (John Paul II, quoted in Kilmartin, 1981, pp. 76-78)

Just as human labor produced the bread offered on our altars, so human

labor can make the bread of justice a reality in our world. "The Eucharistic bread

and wine refer to the world men and women make, the world in which social

justice ought to reign and must be continually fought for". (Kiesling, 1980, p. 15)

The important thing is not the ritual itself, but the power the leaven has of making

the bread of this world rise. The Eucharist is by nature a challenge that "sets a

table at which the witnesses to God's love and to justice can nourish and sustain

themselves" (Léon-Dufour, 1987, p. 301). Two kinds of remembrance are

required of Jesus' disciples. One is a remembrance by liturgical action, and this is

symbolized by food. The other is remembrance by service, and this is expressed

in concrete action on behalf of the neighbor.

The church can sensitize people to recognize that things are not eternally

ordered to be the way they are now. Someone made them this way and they can

be unmade. Shalom is rooted in a theology of hope, in the powerful conviction

that the world can and will be transformed and renewed, and that life can and will

be changed. Eating is our most fundamental way of ordering reality and

expressing what we mean by this shalom (Brueggemann, 1982, pp. 74-75).

John's substitution of the foot-washing at the Last Supper is significant:

the Eucharist is inseparably united to love, service, and the building up of this true

human fellowship. "The Eucharistic rite in its essential elements is

communitarian and oriented toward the constitution of human fellowship"

(Tillard, 1969, p. 129).

So the bread of the Eucharist is physical bread as well as sacramental

symbol. The Eucharist energizes us to work for a more human world; to proclaim

the radical liberation of Jesus Christ for all people; to prolong our liturgical action

by "sharing bread that is, promoting justice, fighting against hunger in the world,

and delivering the oppressed from every evil" (Léon-Dufour, 1987, p. 299).

“The Eucharist energizes us to work

for a more human world.”


98

Before turning to the meaning of community, it may be well to recount

briefly the story of Bartolomé de las Casas, which Dussel uses to frame the article

we are considering. De las Casas, the first priest ordained in the New World, was

very much a part of the enforced "conversion" of the Amerindians of the

Caribbean. One day, while he was preparing to preach, a passage from Sirach

convinced him that the treatment of the native peoples of the region was

completely unjust. Bartolomé saw that the bread of the host was stained with the

blood of the poor, and he could no longer celebrate Eucharist. This moment of

conversion led to a lifetime of struggle against the unjust exploitation of the

Amerindians, a struggle which enabled de las Casas to resume his priestly

ministry with the knowledge that he was no longer celebrating Eucharist with

bread stolen from the poor.

In the next section, I will describe the truly Christian community, the only

community which can rightfully celebrate Eucharist in a world where a large

percentage of people do not have enough to eat. The Lord's Supper cannot be

reconciled with a global table that is groaning with food for some and hardly

supplied at all for others. The Lord's table is incompatible with any table that is

unmindful of the poverty of much of the world (Martelet, 1976, p. 38).

Community: "We, many though we are, are one body"

It is clear from the gospels that justice, for Jesus, is equated with

community of life and a reaching out to the excluded and the marginalized. We

need to see as Jesus sees: the deeper our Christian contemplation, the more

involved we will become. In the gospels, obedience in suffering and action takes

priority over clear-sighted comprehension of theoretical vision. Conversion is not

just adopting a new set of beliefs but relating to people in a new way. Conversion

means living justly. The major issue today is not the form of the Eucharistic

ritual, but the nature, vision, goals, and practice of the celebrating community

(Seasoltz, 1987).

“Conversion is not just adopting a

new set of beliefs but relating to

people in a new way. Conversion

means living justly.”


99

The celebration of the Eucharist both presupposes and nurtures faith. It

involves belief in a God who is both Creator and Redeemer. Our Creator God

enables us to participate in the building of a more human world, and our

Redeemer God rescues us from the evil in ourselves and in society. So, the

interaction between life and worship becomes a dynamic circle: we live justly in

order to celebrate worthily; by celebrating worthily, we are empowered to live

justly (Seasoltz, 1987).

And all of this is solidly rooted in hope, a hope in a faithful God whose

love endures forever, and in a Jesus who gave his very life for the realization of

the kingdom for which we strive. The ultimate test of Christian faith is not our

steadfast belief in doctrines but our steadfast hope in God. In fact, "the bread of

hope is all that one can eat and offer to others" (Seasoltz, 1987, p. 312).

The Eucharist both commissions and empowers us for a new engagement

with the world. Words and symbols must be cracked open to reveal their

personal, social, and political meaning, which is only found in relation to how the

church lives its life in the world where God is at work. “The Lord's Supper is a

metaphor of the community realized through the action of Jesus Christ reconciling

us to one another and to God. As such, it is a sign of perfect community.”

(Newman, 1988, p. 139)

The church is a community of shared gifts. The liturgy represents a

gathering for a meal and a sending forth once the table has been cleared. "Praxis,"

a word that has deep meaning for many Third World theologians, is nothing more

than this hermeneutical circle: worship informs life which informs worship.

True Eucharist forms authentic community. The meal which Jesus left us

is meant to be a symbol of the unity of the participants, a unity reflected in the

work for that total human liberation for which Jesus gave his very life. The early

Christians “understood the deep meaning of the symbol instituted by Jesus. Its

social impact was the main criterion of its value and credibility.... Christianity was

then a dynamic movement of human liberation from selfishness and exploitation.”

(Balisuriya, 1979, p. 25)

“Jesus showed that true worship

involves identification with the poor and the

suffering....”


100

Jesus showed that true worship involves identification with the poor and

the suffering; he left us the Eucharist as his way of being present to us in our

struggles with and for them. Moreover, this Eucharist of Jesus seems to have been

action-oriented. “It was a prayer and an offering in the midst of his public life at

the height of his involvement in the political and social issues of the time. It

signified his irrevocable contestation of the religious leaders of his people and the

narrowness of their message” (Balisuriya, 1979, p. 17).

It is important to understand that, for the early Christians, cult only made

sense within a context of a community committed to the needs of others. In fact,

when the first Christians used cultic terminology, they were referring to the way

they lived, not the way they celebrated. When there was a suspicion of

discrimination on the basis of language groupings or of a distinction between rich

and poor which left the poor shamed and hungry at the Eucharistic gathering, the

apostles saw the whole fabric of the church threatened.

Security rested in the community, so no one amassed at others' expense.

The early communities might thus be poor, but they were not destitute.

Destitution results from some in the group pressing advantages over the weaker

members (Hellwig, 1976). This approach to security is rooted in the experience of

the Hebrews of Old Testament times who, in their relationship with Yahweh,

came to understand that “the true test of whether they have hardened their hearts

or recommitted themselves and returned to God is not what they do in the temple

but how they show justice and mercy to widows and orphans, aliens and

strangers, and the dispossessed who live in the land” (Collins, 1987, p. 253).

Thus, this concern of the community that no one be in want was an

integral part of anamnesis, liturgical memorial, remembering as the way to

maintain the covenant. The Eucharistic assembly remembers "God's justice in its

fullness in the face of human suffering; it does this through its remembrance of

Christ Jesus" (Collins, 1987, p. 257).

This understanding of the mystery of God's justice was reflected in various

ways in the first Christian communities. In the Johannine community, it was

“The ideal harmony reflected in Luke was grounded in a

shared faith but found concrete

expression in the sharing of material

goods.”


101

reflected in the ongoing debate over the meaning of law: the customary

interpretation of the Law of Moses by which God is honored by observance of the

Sabbath was juxtaposed with Jesus' stance that collaborating in God's work of

justice takes precedence over the Sabbath.

The Matthean community, meanwhile, clearly saw involvement in the

alleviation of human suffering as the ultimate criterion for kingdom-participation,

while concern for the poor is a hallmark of Luke's account in Acts, a concern

often asserted in the context of the Eucharistic breaking of bread. The ideal

harmony reflected in Luke was grounded in a shared faith but found concrete

expression in the sharing of material goods. “While referring to the sacramental

rite as a whole, the term breaking of bread emphasizes the element of sharing,

within unity, that characterizes the Christian celebration, an emphasis all the more

justified since according to Luke the community's daily life reflected that unity

and sharing” (Léon-Dufour, 1987, p. 23).

This concern for unity is an important concept throughout the early history

of the church. The first letter to the Corinthians shows the fundamental outlines

of the ecclesial act of table sharing: bread and wine are taken, blessed, and shared;

and the poor are fed. “Eating together at the common table actualizes the church

and represents the fundamental paradigm for all transactions in the community,

transactions essentially of diakonia and sharing” (Mannion, 1987, p. 43).

Paul is arguing against an individualistic morality within a framework of a

Christian community apparently struggling with internal differences. In doing so,

"he emphasizes the purity and holiness of the individual as well as of the ecclesial

body in order to establish firmer social-ritual boundaries" between that

community and the pagan environment in which it found itself” (Schüssler

Fiorenza, 1982, p. 7). In this body of Christ, there are no social distinctions;

discrimination is abolished. "The communal banquet or meal regularly gathered

together all members of the group for table companionship. Eating and drinking

together socially was the major integrative moment" for the community.

“Humanity in its entirety is signified in the Eucharist.”


102

Considered abstractly, then, the communal meal of the Corinthian

Christians already had a value in itself. Its function was to have believers share

their lives and thus strengthen their sense of identity and their cohesiveness. In

addition, it provided an opportunity to feed the hungry, not only for humanitarian

reasons but also in order to let the concrete Church express itself (Léon-Dufour,

1987, p. 20).

Understanding this social context renders intelligible Paul's complaint that

individualistic eating and drinking should be done in private houses. He does not

contrast an ordinary meal with the Lord's Supper but the satisfaction of individual

hunger and thirst with the neglect of that of the poor. Thus he emphasizes the fact

that the sharing of food is essential to the celebration of a Eucharistic meal. "The

central symbol of the Christian association is not a code or a holy place, not a

ritual formula or action, but the very concrete sharing of a meal in justice and

love." (Schüssler Fiorenza, 1982, p. 10) “Eucharistic communion, therefore, is

not just the sacrament of one's personal communion with the risen Lord. It is

rather the sacrament of our communion with one another in the one body of

Christ, a body at once ecclesial and Eucharistic.” (Taft, 1983, p. 413)

So, the organic unity on which Paul insists does not adhere in the

Eucharistic elements but in the new body of communion and fellowship. Jesus is

really present in the elements, but he is even "more" present in the organic unity

he shares with all his members. "To discern the body is to grasp the indissoluble

link between the Eucharistic action and the community that is created and

sustained by that action" (Seasoltz, 1987, p. 321). To cause a fracture in this

community created by the Lord is to disqualify ourselves from participation in the

worship which celebrates that reality.

This image of Eucharist as primarily an act of sharing is the original sense

of the koinonia of the early church. "As the reenactment of the mystery of our

salvation, of the entire paschal mystery in ritual form, the goal of the eucharist is

the building up of Christ's body" (Baldovin, 1985, p. 34). This spirit of Christian

responsibility and involvement in issues of social justice is readily apparent in

“He does not contrast an ordinary meal with the Lord's

Supper, but the satisfaction of

individual hunger and thirst with the

neglect of that of the poor.”


103

early Christian witnesses, such as the Didache, Justin Martyr’s First Apology, and

the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus. It is also attested to in many of the

sermons and homilies of the great church Fathers, of both East and West, such as

John Chrysostom and Augustine, who stress that God is a provident Creator

whose blessings are meant to be shared by and with all.

In the Pauline Eucharistic model and its practical and theological

elaboration in the postapostolic and patristic periods, the Eucharistic transactions

of bread, wine, and money took place out of the fullness of the church's

communion in Christ and gave expression to the bounty of the church.

Eucharistic koinonia involved the care of the poor and the dead; offerings of food

and money found their radical identity in this involvement (Mannion, 1987, p.

328).

In the beginning, then, the Christian Eucharist was the act of a transformed

people embodying a living cult in its common life. It was only with the later

patristic and medieval periods that liturgy began to be more the means of access

to sacred realities than a way of expressing Christian identity, in part because of

the increasing clericalization of the rites. "The praxis of a priestly people was

replaced by the praxis of a hierarchical society: a dynamic of inclusion was

replaced by a dynamic of exclusion" (Mannion, 1987, p. 329). It is no accident

that many Third World liberation theologians find themselves more at home in the

period of the gospels and the early Fathers than in the age of the Scholastics.

The challenge for us today is to recognize the Eucharist for the creative

force it is and to allow it to be, in each local church, "a power which is a

dynamism for unity, for regenerating and for re-orientating the faithful to

mission" (Manus, 1985, p. 207). In the Lord's Supper, all of us in the church

come together as sinners obliged to face the serious issues of our times. In that

supper, we share in healing food and drink, in an act of ecclesial reconciliation,

and in a mutual strengthening for the struggle against sin and for life, in which

Christians, despite their individual and communal sinfulness, are called to engage

in the public forum. (Power, 1987, p. 185)

“Eucharistic koinonia involved

the care of the poor and the dead;

offerings of food and money found

their radical identity in this involvement.”


104

Justice: "Then go and do the same"

The challenge is clear. We have to re-think the commitment inherent in

the sharing of the Eucharist. Communion with God must issue forth in

involvement in the struggle for justice and human freedom. A stance of gratitude

for all of creation will help us realize that all possession is relative. This world

view that appreciates everything in the universe as coming from the hand of a

loving God will lead to a respect for the full dignity and importance of each

human person. That respect will in turn underscore the importance of an active

concern for justice.

"Worship is the response to our apprehension of the ultimate meaning and

nature of this world." (Wolterstorff, 1988, p. 387) God's action in the world and

our response in liturgy are reciprocal. When we come to liturgy, we bring with us

the full and rich ambiguity of human life. We recall what God has done in the

past; we express what is happening in the present; and we look forward in hope to

what will take place in the future.

... the church is committed to an everyday witness in word and deed which will give the opportunity for all the material resources of creation and all occasions of human contact to become the medium of that communion with God and among human beings which is marked by justice, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit, and in which the kingdom of God consists. (Wainwright, 1988, p. 136)

It is in the Eucharist that we are enabled to absorb the values of God's

kingdom; it is in the Eucharist that we are empowered to put those values to work

in our world. The Eucharist, responsibly celebrated, images the justice of

universal acceptance, the peace of mutual reconciliation, and the joy of the Spirit.

The authentic celebration of the Eucharist will lead the local church to understand

that it must direct itself to ministry on behalf of justice.

Third World theologians ask us bluntly whether an authentic Eucharist can

be celebrated with bread that is stolen from the poor. The question is not

rhetorical. On its answer depends our whole understanding of Eucharist as post-

modern Christians. The experiences of the past century, experiences of Holocaust

“That respect will in turn underscore the importance of an active concern for

justice.”


105

and starvation and atomic bombs, lead us from a simplistic notion of a God who

commands to a compelling God who can only be encountered symbolically

through a fresh discovery of transcendence. "This sense of a compelling Parent

God who has gifted humanity, who shares in our vulnerability through the cross,

is the foundation for any adequate moral ethos in the contemporary world."

(Pawlikowski, 1984, p. 320) Liturgy, with its communal setting and links to the

tradition, provides the most apt opportunity for the revitalization of moral goals.

“The recollection of the suffering of the crucified rules out a view of the feast as

an escape from the painful conditions of earthly life. It is more like the silent

suffering of mankind and creation made audible in the groaning of the Spirit.”

(Moltmann, 1974, p. 79)

In the light of the resurrection, freedom lives in both liberating protest and

the superabundance of the future. “Because resurrection overcomes death, its

protest resists death and the power of death in the midst of life. It resists the

private death of apathy, the social death of the abandoned and the noisy death of

bombs.” (Moltmann, 1974, p. 84)

The resurrection does, indeed, assure us that death will not triumph, but it

also places before us the obligation to work against the daily death experienced by

so many in our world. Unless we respond to this demand, then our participation

in the Eucharist becomes an exercise in make-believe. For liturgy to be authentic,

it must be connected to the hard issues which confront us, issues of economics,

issues of racism, issues of sexism, issues of armed conflict and genocide, issues of

justice of all kinds.

The celebration of the Eucharist demands an awareness of the tension

between God's plan and present reality. The Eucharist is a prophetic calling into

question of the status quo; as a result of the Eucharist, we should be provoked to a

change in thinking and action. There can be nothing neutral about our celebration

of Eucharist.

If the Eucharist is the center of the church's life, why have all of us so

spiritualized, depoliticized, and a-historicized the broken bread and poured-out-

“The celebration of the Eucharist demands an

awareness of the tension between God's plan and present reality.”


106

wine so that no one remembers or is reminded of the fact that Jesus' death (as is

the death of millions today) was the result of a religio-political coalition of those

who wanted to protect and perpetuate their social and economic positions (Avila,

1981, p. xii).

The church has a responsibility to evaluate the social and economic

positions in the contemporary world. Ministry is not either sacramental or social:

it is both. The dynamism of the Eucharist, as we have seen, is a dynamism for

unity, but we must work to attain that unity. Through the Spirit, we must harness

that dynamism and use it to boost our flagging energy in the face of seemingly

insurmountable obstacles. We must believe that, even though the "accidents" of

social injustice remain, our efforts can and will have effect on the "substance"

(Dussel, 1982, p. 63).

Dussel accuses capitalism of depriving the wage-earner of part of the

fruits of his work, just as the "sharing-out" system of the sixteenth century

deprived the Caribbean Indians. An honest appraisal of the values and practices of

many in our country would seem to bear him out.

After centuries of Christianity, with the message of sharing and simplicity

of life, preached and enacted in the Eucharist, one would expect that in Christian

nations the difference between rich and poor would no longer be so great and that

the poor would at least not be destitute. The abject misery of barrios, haciendas,

and favelas of Latin America and the long discouraging fight of the migrant farm

workers, the rural poor, and the black ghetto dwellers of the United States of

America, give the lie to that expectation (Hellwig, 1976, p. 54).

Many who do the hardest work gain the least return for their efforts. In

today's world, to have a home at all, or clothes to wear, or food to eat, is to be

wealthy when compared with millions of others. The suffering of Lazarus was

taken for granted and ignored. We can no longer afford to surround ourselves

with that same kind of comfortable ignorance. Stewardship is about

acknowledging the claims of the poor on our resources.

“Many who do the hardest work gain the least return for

their efforts.”


107

In the past, priority in sacramental action was often based on the need to

accumulate grace; today, all the sacraments, but especially the Eucharist, need to

be seen as vehicles for the "responsibility for applying to historical events the

basic Christian scheme of liberative interpretation: the paschal mystery"

(Segundo, 1974, p. 97). God has entrusted the Christian community with a

message for the world, a message of hope and freedom. But to transmit that

message effectively, Christians must mirror it in their attitudes and actions. In the

world of the pre-Vatican church, community was the means and reception of the

sacraments to ensure salvation was the end. Today, the sacraments are means

which form and set in motion a community whose liberative influence is the end.

Communion, a covenant commitment to Christ, and the offering of gifts

and money for communal needs, the care of the poor and the support of the

ministry can be restored to their rightful position as the practical side of the

church's koinonia in the Eucharistic celebration. If the language of offering is

applied to such deeds, rather than being seen as an offering which is a condition

for Eucharist and communion, it is an offering which engages us in the gift of life

which is offered in the body and blood, by God's initiative (Power, 1987, p. 184).

Living sacramentally, eucharistically, enables us to see that work for civil

rights or economic justice or any of the other global issues that have an impact on

our world is heeding the demands of God for all God's people. The attainment of

those goals will not just benefit those most immediately deprived by their

absence; the attainment of those goals will benefit all.

For many in today's world, the Eucharist has been a symbol that whispered

when it should have shouted. It is up to the Christian community to make of the

celebration of the Eucharist a cry of victory and vision for the world redeemed by

Jesus Christ and his gift of self (Mahony, 1983). We must be convinced of the

truth that Jesus is present among us here and now, not just in the unleavened

bread of the hosts in our tabernacles, but in the unshaven faces of the poor on our

city streets, in the unwanted children of our sophisticated society, and in the

unhealed millions in every walk of life.


108

We cannot be one with Jesus in his moment of suffering and in his

Eucharistic self-offer while we continue to ignore the poor and suffering people

among us. Whatever label is affixed by theologians to the change in the

Eucharistic elements, our lives must be radically transformed by the presence of

Jesus in the Eucharist. We must become communities of the resurrection,

touching the lives of the poor and hungry of the world with "authentic and

generous compassion, drawing on the bread of life that is Jesus, to become

[ourselves] bread of life for the needy" (Dussel, 1982, p. 64).

Conclusion: "Of course he could go back"

Bartolomé de las Casas was able to resume his priestly ministry and to

celebrate the Eucharist once he had become actively engaged in the fight for

better conditions for his Indians. As a result, he is looked upon by many as the

"Moses of Latin American Liberation Theology.” We, too, can continue to

celebrate our Eucharist, provided we bring to our celebration an awareness of all

that it implies, as long as our celebration is part of our community's continual

effort toward true justice.

The bread of the authentic Eucharistic celebration is "the bread of justice,

the manna from heaven, bread kneaded in commitment to the interests of the

poor, to the development of more just economic structures, the practical

conditions that make it possible to offer the Eucharistic bread, the 'Bread of life."

(Dussel, 1982, p. 64).

References Avila, R. (1981). Worship and Politics. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books. Balasuriya, T. (1979). The Eucharist and Human Liberation. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books. Baldovin, J. (1985). Concelebration: A Problem of Symbolic Roles in the Church. Worship

January, 32-47. Brueggemann, W. (1982). Living Toward a Vision. New York, NY: United Church Press.

“God has entrusted the Christian

community with a message for the

world, a message of hope and freedom.”


109

Dussel, E. (1982). The Bread of the Eucharistic Celebration as a Sign of Justice in the Community. In M. Collins, D. Power, (Eds.), Can We Always Celebrate the Eucharist? (56-65). New York, NY: The Seabury Press.

Feeley-Harnik, G. (1994). The Lord’s Table: The Meaning of Food in Early Christianity and

Judaism. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institute Press. Ferm, D. W. (1988). Profiles in Liberation: 36 Portraits of Third World Theologians. Mystic, CT:

Twenty-Third Publications. Grassi, J. A. (1985). Broken Bread and Broken Bodies: The Lord’s Supper and World Hunger.

Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books. Gutiérrez, G. (1983). The Power of the Poor in History. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books. Hellwig, H. (1976). The Eucharist and the Hunger of the World. New York, NY: Paulist Press. Humphrey, T. C., Humphrey, L. T. (Eds.), “We Gather Together:” Food and Festival in

American Life. Ann Arbor, MI: U. M. I. Research Press. Kiesling, C. (1980). Social Justice in the Eucharistic Liturgy. Living Light, Spring, 2-19. Léon-Defour, S. (1987). Sharing the Eucharistic Bread. New York, NY: Paulist Press . Mahony, R. (1983). The Eucharist and Social Justice. Worship January, 52-61. Mannion, M. F. (1987). Stipends and Eucharistic Praxis. In R. K. Seasoltz (Ed.). Living Bread,

Saving Cup pp. 43-64). Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press. Martelet, G. (1976). The Risen Christ and the Eucharistic World. New York, NY: The Seabury

Press. National Conference of Catholic Bishops (1986). Economic Justice for All. Washington, DC:

United States Catholic Conference. Newman, D. R. (1988). Worship as Praise and Empowerment. New York, NY: The Pilgrim Press. Pawlikoski, J. T. (1984). Worship after the Holocaust: An Ethician’s Reflections. Worship July,

315-329. Power, D. N. (1987). The Sacrifice We Offer. New York, NY: Crossroad. Schüssler Fiorenza, E. (1982). Tablesharing and the Celebration of the Eucharist. In M. Collins,

D. Power, (Eds.), Can We Always Celebrate the eucharist? (3-12). New York, NY: The Seabury Press. asoltz, R. K. (1987). Justice and the Eucharist. In R. K. Seasoltz (Ed.), Living Bread, Saving Cup (305-323). Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press.

Segundo, J. L. (1974). The Sacraments Today. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books. Taft, R. (1983). Receiving Communion—A Forgotten Symbol? Worship September, 412-418. Wolterstorff, N. (1988). Liturgy, Justice, and Tears. Worship September, 386-403.


110

Verbum Incarnatum A Statue Gets a Fresh Coat of Paint: A Glimpse at the Catholic Church and Chicano Activists in the Rio Grande Valley in 1970

111

A Statue Gets a Fresh Coat of Paint: A Glimpse at the Catholic Church and Chicano Activists in the Rio Grande Valley in 1970

Gilberto M. Hinojosa, Ph.D. University of the Incarnate Word

Abstract

In December, 1969, at the end of a weekend conference, a group of Mexican American activist students painted a statue of Mary brown, causing an uproar among some priests and faithful. This reaction did not, however, cause the Church to pull back on its commitment to social justice. Indeed, some bishops, priests, and laity took strong positions and acted on issues related to farmworkers and Chicano youth projects in the face of opposition within the Church and among the public. This paper utilizes oral history interviews, newspaper accounts, and documents in archives of the Oblate School of Theology

In late December of 1969, the Mexican American Youth Organization

held a regional conference at La Lomita, outside of Mission, Texas in the Rio

Grande Valley. La Lomita is the site of St. Peter’s Novitiate, an institute where

previously men had prepared to take first vows in the religious order of the

Oblates of Mary Immaculate. On the night of Sunday, after a special mass, some

of the conference attendees, in the process of making a bold statement of cultural

pride, painted a statue of Mary, the Blessed Mother, metallic bronze, causing

uproar among some Catholics in the local area and beyond.1 In the context of the

history of MAYO and of the Church’s involvement in the Chicano Movement of

the times, this was, to be sure, a very minor incident. However, some of the

social currents swirling around this event reflect the role of faith and the Church

in the Movimiento.

1 Corpus Christi Times, January 1, 1970


112

Since the mid-1800s, La Lomita was a “mission” (that’s where the nearby

city gets its name) for the horse-mounted Oblates Fathers, the “Cavalry of Christ,”

who ministered to the Mexicans and Mexican Americans in the South Texas

ranches. The chapel – originally an adobe hut, later a stone structure built by the

Oblates themselves –got its name from its location, El Rancho La Lomita (the

Little Hill Ranch, so called because of the unusual elevation in an area of flat

grassy plains). It served as a central gathering place for the faithful in nearby

ranchos and functioned as a half-way station for the priests riding the circuit

between Brownsville and Roma. Later, in the early 1900s, a good-size structure

was built on the site to house the order’s Southern Province novitiate, St. Peter’s.

In the mid-twentieth century, the novitiate was moved elsewhere, and the Oblate

Fathers found other uses for the buildings at La Lomita.2

With the transformation of the ranches into large-scale farms in the early

twentieth century – thus regional Chamber of Commerce’s “Magic Valley” term

– area Mexicanos resided mostly in the towns that sprung up to service the farms

and they joined parishes in those towns. Still, La Lomita’s old chapel continued

to draw worshipers who came periodically to pray for special intentions or out of

devotion, celebrating the planting of the faith in the area “in olden times” by the

Oblates in the 1800s and by settlers in the previous Mexican and Spanish periods.

La Lomita, thus, became the area’s “mother parish.” A replica of the Fatima

grotto had been constructed at St. Peter’s, and novices prayed the rosary there.

Because of its location in the proximity of the old chapel and the novitiate, the

grotto quickly became an extended sacred gathering space for groups of pilgrims

from the Rio Grande Valley towns. On special occasions, the Oblates organized

huge celebrations at La Lomita and the faithful came by the bus-load. In a word,

La Lomita was a holy place that symbolized the depth and breath of the faith, and

2 Brochure on La Lomita, undated, Oblates School of Theology Archives. See also Paola G. Zinnecker, “La Lomita Mission: Past and Present,” unpublished paper, University of Texas, Pan American Library Archives, pp. 2, - 4, 6.

“However, some of the social currents swirling

around this event reflect the role of faith and the Church in the

Movimiento.”


113

the first thing visitors saw upon entering the grounds was the statue of Mary

(larger than the one in the crypt of the grotto) that became the center of the

controversy.3

The conferees involved in that 1969 incident were pilgrims of a different

sort. They were high school- and college-age Chicanos, members of a social

movement that considered the condition of Mexican Americans as an internal

colony subjugated by the interests of agri-business in South Texas and California

and by a political system nation-wide that denied them economic access in a

variety of ways. Chicanos complained that the prevailing socio-economic

structures also attempted to stamp out their culture and identity while imposing a

homogeneous Anglo-Saxon culture. The dominant system, according to this

view, was so controlling that it was for all practical purposes impervious to the

ordinary avenues of change and required a social revolution to bring a

transformation to the status of Mexican Americans. Although not all Chicanos

were young, el movimiento had a youthful look and spirit because, in proposing

change, participants generally acted outside established organizations and

political parties and called upon Mexican Americans to proclaim the uniqueness

of the identity and culture they had developed, one that was neither principally

Mexican or American but Chicano. Despite radical revolutionary rhetoric and

symbols, el movimiento was dedicated not so much to overthrowing the system as

to overhauling it so that Mexican Americans could enjoy their fair share of the pie

and have the freedom to be themselves.4

And being a people of faith was part of who Mexican Americans were,

hence the role of the Church in the movimiento and the conference at La Lomita.

3 Hand-written notes in an album of photographs of La Lomita, undated, Oblate School of Theology Archives.

4 For a thorough but succinct description of the underlying causes of the Chicano Movement, see the Introduction, “Paradigm for the Etiology of the Chicano Movement,” pp. 1 – 8, Armando Navarro, Mexican American Youth Organization: Avant-Garde of the Chicano Movement in Texas (Austin, University of Texas Press, 1995)

“And being a people of faith was

part of who Mexican Americans were, hence the role of the Church in the movimiento and the

conference at La Lomita...”


114

The influence of faith and of Catholic tradition in the Chicano Movement is

eminently clear in the work and life of César Chávez, who dedicated himself to

improve the lot farmworkers. Chávez possessed a mystic personality and even as

an organizer he saw himself as doing God’s work here on earth. Indeed, for many

Catholic poor, Chávez was “the manifestation of the church made flesh and

blood.” Drawing on deep theological resources on the issues of social justice,

Catholic bishops in California and across the nation supported the farmworkers

demands and some offered to mediate between the different players in the

strikes.5

In Texas and nationwide, Archbishop Robert E. Lucey had been

advocating workers’ rights for years, and in the Rio Grande Valley, in the mid-

1960s, Bishop Thomas Drury of Corpus Christi and Bishop Humberto Medeiros

of Brownsville had endorsed the unionization efforts of area farmworkers.

Archbishop Lucey had brought attention to the plight of migrant workers and the

poor on a national level and called for Catholic institutions to provide minimum

wages to their staffs and to workers in the archdiocese’s building projects.

Following Lucey’s lead, Bishops Drury and Medeieros organized agencies that

would encourage the introduction of federal and state services to the poor.6

Still, the Church’s role in social justice advocacy seemed ambivalent and

even appeared to defend the status quo. Some priests saw their role principally –

and, in some instances, only – as one of providing for the spiritual needs of the

faithful. This goal seemed daunting enough, given the increasing number of

Mexican immigrants since the turn of the century, leaving the Church a legacy of

5 Stephen R. Lloyd-Moffett, “The Mysticism and Social Action of César Chávez,” pp. 35 – 52 in Gastón Espinoza, Virgilio Elizondo, and Jesse Miranda, eds. Latino Religions and Civic Activism in the United States (New York, Oxford University Press, 2005)

6 Patrick J. Sullivan, CSC, “Catholic Social Thought on Labor Management Issues, 1960 – 1980,” University of Notre Dame (http://archives.nd.edu/psl/psl022.htm). Archbishop Robert E. Lucey’s pioneering efforts are cited repeatedly; for a thorough examination, see Saul Edmund Bronder, “Robert E. Lucey: A Texas Paradox,” (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Notre Dame, 1979).

“Still, the Church’s role in social justice

advocacy seemed ambivalent and even appeared to defend

the status quo.”

http://archives.nd.edu/psl/psl022.htm


115

seeming to ignore the economic plight of the Mexicano community. Additionally,

in the quest for long-term institutional stability, the Church never condemned

outright the corporate forces that exploited the working poor and was reluctant to

encourage the public protest that would bring social and economic change.

Understandably, then, some Chicano activists accused the Church of cooperating

with the oppression of Mexicanos. In response to the outcry over the incident

with the statue, Mario Compean labeled the Church as “gringo-racist oriented.”7

Yet changes were in the offing within the Church, and official Church

support, symbols of faith, and activist priests were part of the farmworker

struggles in Texas. It is in this environment that the MAYO conference took

place at La Lomita, and the traditionally all-white statue of Our Lady of Fatima

got painted Chicano brown. The actual spraying of the statue did not seem so

outrageous to the youths who painted it. According to a MAYO spokesperson, “It

was tarnished and ugly, so we painted it. It’s brown and beautiful now.”

Leaving the snake at the foot of the Virgin white was “very symbolic,” as was the

“Huelga” red and black flag draped on her shoulder, a “glittering symbol of

hope.”8

According to the local papers, the incident upset area Catholics, and

claiming he had been sent by the Oblates, Father Joseph O’Brien, a former prison

chaplain in Huntsville now a pastor in the nearby town of McAllen, drove to La

Lomita to investigate the developments. The novitiate buildings complex and

grounds had been leased by the Oblate Fathers to the Colorado Migrant Council,

which had a bilingual daycare center that incorporated themes of ethnic pride that

had been labeled by some as “radical.” The Council’s decision to allow MAYO

to hold a conference for some 600 delegates at La Lomita thus added fuel to the

fire. The proximity of the grotto and the old chapel – and the fact the statue of

7 Valley Morning Star, Harlingen, January 1, 1970

8 Corpus Christi Times, December 31, 1969


116

Mary, placed on a good-size pedestal, sat squarely in front of the main building –

made all activities there appear Church-sponsored. Additionally, the property still

belonged to the Oblates, hence Father O’Brien’s involvement. When he

complained about the painting of the statue, a MAYO member reportedly justified

the action by claiming that the church belonged to everyone, a notion that

smacked of Communism to Fr. O’Brien.9

A few months later, Father O’Brien claimed to have in his possession a

secretly made film that showed four intoxicated MAYO members kneeling at the

grotto shrine and leaving beer cans as gifts and even offering the Virgin a sip

before processing to the front of the building to paint the statue.10 Fr. O’Brien

was referring to a second painting of the statue, which had been scrubbed and

restored to its original white after the first incident. Despite his outrage over all

the developments and his very vocal opposition to decisions the Oblate Fathers

related to the La Lomita property, Fr. O’Brien never released of the film.

Fr. O’Brien might have been even more infuriated had he known the

details of all the events related to the famous episode. Prior to the painting of the

statue Father Roberto Peña, Director, Social Action, of the Diocese of

Brownsville, had celebrated mass under somewhat extraordinary circumstances.11

Years later, in an interview with José Angel Gutiérrez, Fr. Peña related how he

got caught up in the swirl of events at La Lomita:

I didn't know what was going to happen, Joe. I had in my car... wine, I had hosts, I had my vestments, I had everything…even a purificator and all that you need properly…for me to…(celebrate) Mass. When I got there, Joe, things changed…. Well, someone got some limbs from trees and they made a processional cross…. (out of) mesquite. And someone came in and put a… zarape on me and they had a table out there and that even had a serape on it too and I had never seen a zarape on an altar, Joe, and I was beginning to shake, you know… Inside, you know. And I say (to myself), what am I going to do? What am I going to do? This is not right. This is not right, you know. This is not a church…I never seen this happen. I

9 Ibid. Zinnecker, p. 11. 10 The Mission Times, August 27, 1970. 11 Valley Morning Star, Harlingen, January 1, 1970

“And I say (to myself), what am I going to do? What am I going to do? This is not right.

This is not right, you know. This is not a

church...”


117

never celebrated Mass this way and then, when they bring the tortilla, Joe, and I didn't get my hosts out and they wanted that celebration…. I celebrated Mass… But you don't know how I felt inside. I said, “I am going to be blasted by the bishop and all that. No one is going to want me anymore as a priest in their diocese.” [But] I went ahead and did it… It was beautiful…. Yeah, all of them were young. Remember that, that Yo soy chicano, tengo color Americano pero con honor (I am Chicano and I have American color but with pride)….. Man, that was [wonderful; it] rang out in the streets. Joe, I said I'm a Chicano too.12

Those events never made it into the newspapers, probably because the

reporters got to La Lomita only by the next morning, when news of the painting

of the statue began to circulate or possibly because what happened to the statue

was more colorful or more permanent. Fr. Peña described the developments at La

Lomita in this way:

And so then after the Mass we kept on singing and then they said we are going to paint the statue…. We are going to paint the statue brown. Help us, Father. So, we got about a, a gallon of paint and they gave me a brush and (they) said you get up there and come up with us. I got up there; we painted the statue brown…13

It was that simple.

Figuring he was in trouble, Father Peña went to Bishop Medeiros first

thing in the morning, before word got out of the painting of the statue. The

bishop chuckled and advised Fr. Peña to just wait and see what would happen.

Peña also informed his Oblate superior. Neither the diocesan nor the Oblates

records show any formal reprimand. In the interview years later, however, Father

12 Oral History Interview with Roberto Peña, 1998, by José Angel Gutiérrez, CMAS, No. 98, Tejanos Voices Collection, University of Texas Arlington Library.

13 Ibid.

“We are going to paint the statue brown. Help us,

Father...”


118

Peña did not indicate that he told his superiors about the way he celebrated Mass;

he only related the story about the statue that came out in the papers.14

The Oblate superior, Father Clifford Blackburn, cautioned Fr. Peña about

participating in any way in the desecration of a statue of Mary, but the admonition

seemed pro forma. Fr. Peña recounted that he had replied, saying,

There was no intention of desecrating anything. We just wanted to say that we are brown and we are proud of it and so is the Virgin, so it's just this way. But we never meant any harm to anything or to anybody. It wasn't sacrilegious or anything. We just wanted to press upon them that we are brown. We are brown.15

According to Fr. Peña, “he (Fr. Blackburn) understood,” and left it at that.16 The

statue was eventually removed from La Lomita and taken to San Antonio.17

In the scheme of things, painting a statue brown is not any more

sacrilegious than any other depiction of Mary, who through ages has been

sculpted or painted as a Greek, Roman, or medieval European Madonna.

Although Fr. O’Brien and other Catholics were outraged, Bishop Medeiros and

Fr. Blackburn understood the symbolism of the action and, more importantly,

realized that there were more serious issues at stake. In fact, Bishop Medeiros

went out of his way to align himself with the “radicals”:

“If Christ lived today, do you think He would cut Himself off from the MAYOS (Mexican-American Youth Organization) or the Black Panthers? He might not approve of everything they were doing but He wouldn’t isolate Himself from them…I’m not going to stop these contact – even if I am called a Communist.”18

From the time of his appointment to the Brownsville diocese in 1966,

Bishop Medeiros saw himself as an agent of change. One of the first things he

called for was the integration of parishes. The initial Church experience in

ministering to the faithful was to have a single parish, usually in the “Mexican

14 Ibid. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid. 17 The Mission Times, August 27, 1970. 18 Newspaper clipping, unidentified, undated, Oblate School of Theology Archives

“I must make known to them (the

community) the moral principles of

the Gospel of justice, peace, and love which Jesus

Christ, the Founder and Head of the

Church, has left as His legacy…”


119

side” of the Rio Grande Valley towns, where most Catholics, who were

Mexicanos, resided. Anglo American Catholics attended church there and often

led parish organizations. As the towns grew, particularly after World War II,

Anglo American parishioners broke away and established separate parishes in

their neighborhoods, and these continued to be seen as “the Anglo churches” even

as Mexican Americans climbed the economic ladder, became acculturated, and

moved into the “better” (meaning Anglo) neighborhoods. Bishop Medeiros

quickly called an end to the trend designating some parishes as “Mexican” and

others as “Anglo.”19

Bishop Medeiros also used his position as the regional leader of the

Catholic Church to instruct community business and political leaders on the

Church’s deep theological and philosophical thinking of social justice. In a long

talk to Harlingen business leaders, Bishop Medeiros reminded them that equal

opportunity was at the core of the Gospel, and it was primarily their obligation to

bring it about:

I am not and cannot be alienated from the social and economic life of the people to whom I have been se(n)t as father, shepherd, and leader…I must make known to them (the community) the moral principles of the Gospel of justice, peace, and love which Jesus Christ, the Founder and Head of the Church, has left as His legacy…It is my prayer that the day is not far away when equal opportunity, which is now mostly in the books, will soon be a reality through the dynamic action of those upon whom the responsibility for the economic progress of our people primarily rests.20

Bishop Medeiros also attended to the immediate needs of the poor as well

as addressing the structural causes. Besides personally appearing before county

commissioners and city councils to lobby for programs such as Urban Renewal,

Medeiros created a Social Action and Rural Life department at the chancery and

gave that agency legal power by incorporating a Catholic Charities agency. The

19 Ibid.

20 “We Speak of Moral Order,” The Valley Catholic Witness, Sunday, April 30, 1968

“The Valley Oblates had supported the

action proposed by the Oblate Provincial Council, but not

without the opposition of Fr. O’Brien, who injected himself into

the issue.”


120

latter’s role was “to initiate, improve and extend all form(s) of charitable and

social welfare programs,” as well as “to coordinate all health and welfare

services” for the diocese that are not met by public agencies. The incorporation

status gave Catholic Charities legal standing to accept gifts and revenues (the

Christmas collection) and spend funds. A survey was sent to the parishes to

assess the most pressing needs. Fr. Peña was director of both agencies.21

Fr. Peña reported to the chancellor, Bishop Medeiros’ administrative

assistant, and, as has been noted, to the Oblate Provincial, Fr. Blackburn. At the

time, the Oblate Fathers staffed a significant number of the parishes in the

Brownsville diocese, and subsequent to the incident of the painting of the statue,

Bishop Medeiros, who worked closely with Fr. Blackburn, asked the Oblates to

take a risk and lease La Lomita to a group of Chicano activists looking for

facilities for the Jacinto Treviño Center of Learning, a graduate extension of

Antioch College of Yellow Springs, Ohio. The Valley Oblates had supported the

action proposed by the Oblate Provincial Council, but not without the opposition

of Fr. O’Brien, who injected himself into the issue. Fr. O’Brien alleged tuition

and support grants from the Office of Economic Opportunity amounted to

students receiving “$350 a month of public money to bring their ideas and

revolutionary activity to the Valley,” and that the curriculum and the insecurity of

that kind of funding “will defraud the poor still more” by making promises that

could not be fulfilled. The Mission paper reported that Fr. O’Brien’s sentiments

were shared by area residents, but Fr. Blackburn’s leadership in this project

prevailed, because it seemed an attempt to meet the educational needs of Valley

Mexican Americans. So, despite internal opposition, the Oblates leased La

Lomita to Antioch College for a nominal amount. Fr. Blackburn also directed the

21 The Valley Catholic Witness, October 15, 1967, May 13, 1969

“$350 a month of public money to bring their ideas

and revolutionary activity to the

Valley.”


121

congregation’s picking up the lease of a building in Mercedes for an outreach

program for drop-out students run by the Jacinto Treviño Center.22

The Oblates’ involvement with Chicano activists caused problems for the

order with its benefactors, as suggested by an undated, hand-written

memorandum, very likely from Father Paul Decker, the province’s fundraiser.

The document has his name at the top as if indicating the source and is initialed

“D” at the bottom. The content presents “talking points” for his staff and his

fellow priests in the field. “The Oblates are interested in the salvation of all

persons, even those with particular ideas. Our work with any organization does

not mean our approval (of any ideology).” In fact, by cooperating with them, the

Oblates would “help them do the right thing.” The learning center in Mercedes

helps drop-outs among Mexican Americans, and “nobody (else) is doing anything

for them.” Additionally, the memorandum explained that the chaplain at Pan

American College was working with the MAYO students in order to influence

future leaders; he was not formally a part of the organization. Furthermore, Fr.

Decker clarified, La Lomita was not technically leased by an activist group,

implying but not specifying that the Oblates’ arrangements were with Antioch

College. Finally, possibly arguing with Fr. O’Brien and his sympathizers, the

writer noted that while chaplains work with prisoners at Huntsville, the state

penitentiary, it “does not mean we approve of their criminal activities.”23

The memorandum suggests that there were several Oblates who were

involved with Chicano activists and were supporting their causes. These priests

extended that support from deep personal convictions, as indicated by Fr. Peña’s

fervor and resolve:

22 Medeiros to Blackburn, May 16, 1970, Oblate School of Theology Archives. The Mission Times, August 27, 970. The Valley Catholic Witness, July 19, 1970. Undated, hand-written draft of a memorandum from Paul Decker, OMI. Oblate School of Theology Archives.

23 Undated, hand-written draft of a memorandum from Paul Decker, OMI. Oblate School of Theology Archives.

“The Council’s decision to allow MAYO to hold a

conference for some 600 delegates at La Lomita thus added

fuel to the fire.”


122

I read about Christ in the gospels. And he wanted to bring justice and love into the world and that always, you know, always como se dice (as is often said). I wanted to change the world, José, thinking that I could do something to change it for a greater [good]… the people of God to treat others justly, authentically speaking…. In fact, his quest for justice influenced Fr. Peña’s decision to become a

priest:

I saw the difference there. Christ influenced my life a lot. I wanted to do something, not for the sake of…profit, financial profit. But I said, "How can I bring the message of Christ, which has to do with justice and love, and compassion, and forgiveness, and peace?"…(and) my priesthood has been primarily on justice, social justice. And not only for nuestra gente (our people). Wherever you are, injustice shouldn't be done to you.24

Fr. Peña and other fellow priests were involved in various social services

in the Rio Grande Valley and with the farmworkers, and some scholarly attention

has been paid to faith-based civic and social activism. But the full picture of the

role of faith and of the Catholic Church in the Chicano Movement in South Texas

awaits more research. For example, several priests later became staunch

supporters of Valley Interfaith, a regional community organization that lobbied

city, county, state and federal governments to provide poorer residents of the Rio

Grande Valley sorely needed social services. Even Fr. O’Brien eventually joined

those pressuring the system to provide health care for the poor and his advocacy

was so much in the forefront that a clinic was named after him.25 These causes

and issues are obviously of far greater importance than the colorful incident of the

painting of the statue of Our Lady of Fatima; still, that event brought to the fore

the inspiration of Bishop Medeiros and the momentum for activism he introduced,

the institutional backing of the Oblates of Mary Immaculate, one of several orders

that had been ministering to Mexican Americans for over a century, and the

24 Oral History Interview with Roberto Peña, 1998, by José Angel Gutiérrez, CMAS, No. 98, Tejanos Voices Collection, University of Texas Arlington Library.

25 Fr. Patrick Guidon, interview, July 31, 2007

“I saw the difference there. Christ

influenced my life a l ot. I wanted to dosomething, not for the sake of…profit,

f inancial profit.”

“These causes and issues are obviously of far greater importance

than the colorful incident of the

painting of the statue of Our Lady of

Fatima.”


123

dedication of priests and religious to doing the work of God on the frontlines here

on earth.

Significantly, the incident took place at La Lomita, a shrine that

symbolized the presence of the Catholic faith in South Texas ranchos since the

mid-1700s. The Church and its priests are not without the tarnishes of individual

or institutional sins, but on occasion Church leaders, priests, and laity

demonstrated personal and organizational conviction and enthusiasm for justice,

and their faith shines as if it got a fresh coat of paint.

Verbum Incarnatum A Philology of Liberation: Dr Martin Luther King, Jr. as a Reader of the Classics

124

A Philology of Liberation: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as a Reader of the Classics

Thomas Strunk, Ph.D. Xavier University

Abstract

This paper explores the intellectual relationship between Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the classics, particularly the works of Plato, Sophocles, and Aeschylus. Recognizing Dr. King as a reader of the classics is significant for two reasons: the classics played a formative role in Dr. King’s development into a political activist and an intellectual of the first order; moreover, Dr. King shows us the way to read the classics. Dr. King did not read the classics in a pedantic or even academic manner, but for the purpose of liberation. Dr. King’s legacy, thus, is not merely his political accomplishments but also his example as a philologist of liberation.

Obama and the New America

In the autumn of 2008, I happened to be teaching a course on ancient

Greek civilization in which we read, amongst others, Aeschylus’ Agamemnon,

Sophocles’ Antigone, and Plato’s dialogues on the trial and death of Socrates.

Throughout the course of the semester I felt that many of the ideas we read about

and discussed were somehow charged with the Zeitgeist of the presidential

election and the attendant rhetoric and analysis of what it meant for the United

States to elect a black man as president. I was delighted that this course on an

ancient civilization could so easily join in conversation with the present.

America has come down from those precipitous heights where we were in

November 2008 and January 2009, and once again we are living in the

comfortable and familiar dregs of modern American politics where we fight over

important matters like healthcare reform, unemployment, and military strategy in

Iraq and Afghanistan. But I would like to return briefly to November 2008 and


125

January 2009. I feel those are important days for us to remember as Americans.

For what was achieved was not merely the election of a Democrat or the

inauguration of a black man, or more specifically a man of mixed race, as

president. But rather what I feel, and what I think many others feel, is that

America as a country overcame an impediment placed before us by our ancestors

who established race-based slavery in the United States. We have been relieved of

a great burden, much more quickly than anyone, black or white, really imagined

was possible. Within the last decade there have been movies, such as Chris

Rock’s “Head of State” (2003), about a black president, as if this were fantasy.

But this is not fantasy; in truth we have rapidly come to find that we are not that

racist, or at least that we are not racist in the way we thought we were. I do not

mean to gloss over any still-existing manifestations of racism or pretend that since

we elected an African American president that we are suddenly free from our

past. We are not; studies continue to reveal that African Americans

disproportionally lack access to adequate resources in education, healthcare, and

housing. Nonetheless, it is hard to deny that political life in America is somehow

profoundly changed by the election of 2008.

John McCain (2008) himself recognized this in his concession speech,

saying:

This is an historic election, and I recognize the special significance it has for African-Americans and for the special pride that must be theirs tonight. I've always believed that America offers opportunities to all who have the industry and will to seize it. Senator Obama believes that, too. But we both recognize that though we have come a long way from the old injustices that once stained our nation's reputation and denied some Americans the full blessings of American citizenship, the memory of them still had the power to wound.

A century ago, President Theodore Roosevelt's invitation of Booker T.

Washington to visit -- to dine at the White House was taken as an outrage in many

quarters. America today is a world away from the cruel and prideful bigotry of

“We have been relieved of a great

burden, much more quickly than

anyone, black or white, really

imagined was possible.”


126

that time. There is no better evidence of this than the election of an African

American to the presidency of the United States.

I would like to suggest that in this new light we might better understand

our past and our dialogue with it. It is a commonplace that Barack Obama has

reaped the rewards of an earlier generation’s struggle for civil rights. We have

heard repeatedly that Barack Obama’s election is a direct result of the civil rights

movement and individuals like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Such sentiments have

been expressed by such diverse individuals as Tom Brokaw (Rose, 2008), a

trusted, mainstream voice of traditional gravitas, and Michael Eric Dyson (2008),

an outspoken African American professor of sociology at Georgetown University

(Pratt, 2008). I would like to argue that Barack Obama has also, perhaps

unwittingly, reaped the rewards of an earlier generation’s intellectual struggle.

Since the publication of Frederick Douglass’ Narrative of a Life of

Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, Written by Himself (1982), wherein he

recounts his furtive and illegal attempts to gain knowledge, the intellectual life of

African Americans has been recognized as contested terrain. The question of what

is the proper subject of study for African Americans was hotly debated at the turn

of the nineteenth century made famous by thinkers such as W.E.B. Dubois (1999)

and William Sanders Scarborough (2006), who argued for higher learning with a

classical curriculum, and Booker T. Washington (1995), who maintained the need

for an industrial education. In this paper, I am focusing on the intellectual

background of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. specifically.

To the question of influences on Dr. King’s intellectual formation, there

are some obvious answers that take precedence over all the others: there are the

lived experiences of those who were direct ancestors in the civil rights struggle,

those women and men, black and white who fought against racial discrimination

for generations long before Dr. King and Rosa Parks came along; the African

American church as an institution and the writings of the Old and New

Testaments, which surely strengthened and inspired many to take such bold and

“By no means am I attempting to argue

that Dr. King’s thought and

subsequent actions are purely derivative from

classical learning.”


127

decisive action, placing themselves before angry mobs and in dirty jail cells, or

worse; there are also the non-violent teachings of Mohandas Gandhi, Henry David

Thoreau, and Bayard Rustin. I would like to explore another less-considered

intellectual influence: the classical tradition. I want to consider how Dr. King read

the classics, in particular those authors I mentioned earlier: Plato, Sophocles, and

Aeschylus.

First a caveat. By no means am I attempting to argue that Dr. King’s

thought and subsequent actions are purely derivative from classical learning.

Rather I hope to show the breadth of learning that Dr. King acquired and how he

incorporated that learning into his life’s work. I hope the reader will accept what

follows as a further demonstration of Dr. King’s claim to being regarded as a

first-rate intellect and not as an effort to re-appropriate his accomplishments for a

particular discipline. Such a life cannot be confined to any narrow interpretation.

Dr. King and Plato’s Socrates on Nonviolence

I would like to start with Dr. King’s philosophy of nonviolence. King

wrote that he first encountered the concept of non-violence in a book, which he

correctly saw as a conversation with the past about the present. The book was

Thoreau’s Essay on Civil Disobedience, which King read while a freshman at

Morehouse College (2010a, p. 78). There is an important point here worth

emphasizing: Dr. King was not solely an activist; he was a reader and intellectual

who developed into someone we should consider both a theologian and

philosopher. Through the combination of King’s reading of Thoreau and later

Gandhi and then his interactions with Bayard Rustin and his experiences during

the Montgomery bus boycott, Dr. King developed a philosophy of nonviolence

based on six principals as outlined in Stride Toward Freedom (2010a, pp. 90-95),

King’s earliest book. They are worth summarizing here.

1. “Nonviolent resistance is not a method for cowards; it does resist.”

“America today is a world away from the

cruel and prideful bigotry of that time.”


128

2. Nonviolence “does not seek to defeat or humiliate the opponent, but to

win his friendship and understanding”.

3. “The attack is directed against forces of evil rather than against persons

who happen to be doing the evil”.

4. Nonviolence includes “a willingness to accept suffering without

retaliation, to accept blows from the opponent without striking back”.

5. Nonviolent resistance “avoids not only external physical violence but

also internal violence of spirit”; the resister should be motivated by love in

the sense of the Greek word agape, which “means understanding,

redeeming goodwill for all men”.

6. Nonviolent resistance “is based on the conviction that the universe is on

the side of justice”.

I cite these principals and Dr. King’s mention of Thoreau to show the fruit that

reading the great works of human literature can bear. Alexander Pope’s words

from An Essay on Man (2003 p. 281), often in the minds of men like Du Bois and

Scarborough, apply here: “The proper study of mankind is man”.

These ideas on nonviolence presented as they are by King suggest few

parallels with the Greco-Roman world pervaded by war, the violence of slavery

and the gladiatorial arena. Yet there are affinities, nonetheless, with works King

read as a student at Crozer Seminary in his course on Greek religion, namely

Plato’s Apology and Crito (West, 2000). We can compare Plato’s (trans. 2003)

account of Socrates in his own jail cell conversing with Crito, to whom he says,

Do we say that there is no way that one must ever willingly commit injustice, or does it depend upon circumstance? Is it true, as we have often agreed before, that there is no sense in which an act of injustice is good or honorable? Or have we jettisoned all our former convictions in these last few days? Can you and I at our age, Crito, have spent all these years in serious discussions without realizing that we were no better than a pair of children? Surely the truth is just what we have always said. Whatever the popular view is, and whether the consequence is pleasanter than this or even tougher, the fact remains that to commit injustice is in every case bad

“Nonviolent resistance is not a

method for cowards; it does

resist.”

“To be certain, Dr. King and Socrates at this point are talking

about two slightly different things:

violence and injustice.”


129

and dishonorable for the person who does it. (Crito 49a3-b6) To be certain, Dr. King and Socrates at this point are talking about two

slightly different things: violence and injustice. A few lines later in the dialogue,

however, Socrates asks Crito to clarify his position,

I want even you to consider very carefully whether you share my views and agree with me, and whether we can proceed with our discussion from the established hypothesis that it is never right to commit injustice or return injustice or defend one’s self against injury by retaliation; or whether you dissociate yourself from any share in this view as a basis for discussion. I have held it for a long time, and still hold it. (Crito 49d5-e3)

I would not want to argue that Socrates (or Plato) was a philosopher of

nonviolence. After all, we do know that Socrates served as a hoplite and fought

bravely in several battles during the Peloponnesian War, specifically the Potidea

campaign and at Delium in 424 B.C.E. (Symposium 219d3-221c1). However, it

should be noted that he did refuse to participate in the execution of the generals

after the battle of Arginusae in 406 B.C.E. under the democracy and the execution

of Leon of Salamis in 403 B.C.E. under the Thirty Tyrants (Apology 32c3-e2).

Nonetheless, Socrates’ point in the Crito resonates with Dr. King’s fourth

principle of non-violence: the willingness “to suffer without retaliation”.

Furthermore, Socrates’ words to Crito harmonize with Dr. King’s philosophy of

nonviolence and point to the radical nature of one of the fundamental tenets of

Socratic-Platonic philosophy: we would do better to suffer injustice than to

commit injustice (Gorgias 474b1-475e6). I have a difficult time reading those

words without images coming to mind of attack dogs and fire hoses turned against

African Americans in Birmingham or young students, black and white, defiantly

yet calmly enduring the taunts of an angry mob at a lunch counter in Jackson,

Mississippi – images made famous by the photography of Bill Hudson and

Charles Moore. When we see such images we can readily identify who is

“I want even you to consider very

carefully whether you share my views and

agree with me.”


130

committing the injustice and who is demonstrating a certain nobility of spirit and

virtue of fortitude.

According to Plato (trans. 2003), Socrates himself seems to have captured

the essence of those images in words he reportedly spoke shortly before his own

death:

Neither Meletus nor Anytus can do me any harm at all; they would not have the power, because I do not believe that the law of God permits a better man to be harmed by a worse. No doubt my accuser might put me to death or have me banished or deprived of civic rights; but even if he thinks as he probably does (and others too, I dare say), that these are great calamities, I do not think so; I believe that it is far worse to do what he is doing now, trying to put a man to death unjustly. (Apology 30c-d)

Neither Socrates nor Dr. King sought to retaliate or escape the use of force

by their enemies. Socrates remained in his jail cell, just as Dr. King sat in his jail

cell rather than eluding the law, using force or money and influence to escape.

And in the end Dr. King and Socrates have been proven right in their judgments.

Socrates held the Athenians responsible for their decision, which they have

labored under ever since, just as Dr. King condemned Birmingham, Alabama

1963 to the international reputation of Bombingham, America’s most segregated

city.

Direct Action

I would like to focus now on Dr. King’s Letter from Birmingham Jail,

which King wrote in April 1963 in response to “moderate” clergy who criticized

his activities in Birmingham and later included in his account of the Birmingham

campaign, Why We Can’t Wait, from which I cite. King was in Birmingham as

part of the local campaign to protest the city’s segregation laws (King, 2000). The

desegregation campaign began just after the mayoral election of the moderate

Albert Boutwell, who beat out the notorious segregationist and commissioner of

public safety “Bull” Connor. The campaign included all the actions we now

“King’s arrest came on Good Friday,

April 12th.”


131

associate with the tactics of the civil rights movement: lunch-counter sit-ins,

marches, boycotts, and the like. King’s arrest came on Good Friday, April 12th,

after he participated in a march without the proper permit. He was kept in solitary

confinement without access to books and paper, yet during that confinement

written in the margins of the Birmingham News he scribbled his epistle, which has

rightfully become one of the fundamental writings of American democracy.

Moreover, King did this while his wife, Coretta, was back home in Atlanta,

Georgia tending to their two week old daughter. Once enough bail money was

raised, King was released on April 20, 1963 after a week in jail. By then the letter

was being mimeographed and published as a pamphlet by the American Friends

Service Committee.

Among the many points King raised in his letter is the question of direct

action, which brought much tension and strife to the cities he visited. In his Letter

from Birmingham Jail, King wrote (2000),

But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word ‘tension.’ I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. (p. 90)

King’s mention of Socrates’ gadfly-like activities in Athens refers to Socrates’ defense, where Socrates says,

If you put me to death, you will not easily find anyone to take my place. To put it bluntly (even if it sounds rather comical) God has assigned me to this city, as if to a large thoroughbred horse which because of its great size is inclined to be lazy and needs the stimulation of some stinging fly. It seems to me that God has attached me to this city to perform the office of such a fly; and all day long I never cease to settle here, there, and everywhere, rousing, persuading, reproving every one of you. You will not easily find another like me, gentlemen, and if you take my advice you will spare my life. But perhaps before long you may awake from your

“If you put me to death, you will not easily find anyone to take my place.”


132

drowsing, and in your annoyance take Anytus’s advice and finish me off thoughtlessly with a single slap; and then you could go on sleeping till the end of your days, unless God in his care for you sends someone to take my place. (Apology 30e1-31a7)

Socrates’ description of his activities in Athens provided King with a

useful exemplar (Fulkerson, 1979). For Socrates does not shy away from

portraying his activities as shaking the Athenians out of their torpor and rousing

them to more virtuous behavior. And is not this activity the basis of democratic

citizenship? Democracy is vibrant when there is tension, when there are gadflies

about. Earlier I wrote that America has come down from our dizzying heights of

the election and inauguration back to the dregs of everyday democracy. But isn’t

it wonderful to be here where there is wrangling over our health-care system,

where there is wrangling over just and unjust wars. We might all enjoy a period of

respite and silence, and those are necessary for reflection, but the day that we

cease to have agitation and strife, when decisions are made smoothly and quietly

by the unquestioned wisdom of one person or perhaps a few, is the day that we no

longer live in a republic. So we want to see and even to encourage the agitation of

which Socrates and Dr. King speak.

Just and Unjust Laws

Well, what is all this agitation and tension over? The “moderate” clergy

who opposed the direct action of King did so on the basis that King was breaking

the law. They raised a natural objection to King’s willingness to break some laws,

such as marching without a permit, while insisting on obedience to other laws,

such as the Brown vs. Board of Education Supreme Court decision against

segregation in public schools in 1954. King responded that the actions of civil

rights demonstrators were not in contradiction by arguing that a distinction had to

be made between just and unjust laws. In the letter King writes (2000),

One may ask: “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just

“The answer lies in the fact that there are

two types of laws: just and unjust.”


133

and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that ‘an unjust law is no law at all.’ Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. (pp. 93-94).

Several paragraphs later he reinforces the point (2000):

I hope you are able to see the distinction I am trying to point out. In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law. (pp. 95-96)

Although we might find affinities with Socrates’ words in the Crito or

even the writings of Cicero, the locus classicus on this subject is Sophocles’

Antigone (1994), wherein Antigone disobeys King Creon’s edict not to bury those

traitors who attacked the city of Thebes. Antigone, whose brother Polyneices led

the attack on Thebes, is conflicted by this edict which does not square with the

moral law that requires one to bury the dead, particularly one’s own kin. To

heighten Antigone’s dilemma, her other brother Eteocles, who remained loyal to

Thebes, is given a hero’s burial. Antigone, who disobeyed the order of Creon and

defiantly buried her traitorous brother Polyneices, admits her actions and

famously justifies them with the following words (Sophocles, trans. 1994),

It was not Zeus who published this decree, Nor have the Powers who rule among the dead Imposed such laws as this upon mankind; Nor could I think that a decree of yours – A man – could override the laws of Heaven Unwritten and unchanging. Not of today Or yesterday is their authority; They are eternal; no man saw their birth. (450-457)

“One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty.”


134

These lines had a long lineage well before Dr. King read them in his

Greek religion course while at Crozer Seminary (Becker, 2000). To take such

inspiration from Antigone’s famous lines was not unique to Dr. King. These lines

were quoted by Aristotle in the century after they were performed as the basis of

his discussion on the nature of law (Sussman, 2002); in his Rhetoric, Aristotle

(trans. 1941) echoes the affinities between Sophocles’ Antigone and Dr. King’s

reasoning:

It will now be well to make a complete classification of just and unjust actions. We may begin by observing that they have been defined relatively to two kinds of law, and also relatively to two classes of persons. By the two kinds of law I mean particular law and universal law. Particular law is that which each community lays down and applies to its own members: this is partly written and partly unwritten. Universal law is the law of nature. For there really is, as everyone to some extent dives, a natural justice and injustice that is binding on all men, even on those who have no association or covenant with each other. It is this that Sophocles’ Antigone clearly means when she says that the burial of Polyneices was a just act in spite of the prohibition: she means that it was just by nature. Not of to-day or yesterday it is, but lives eternal: none can date its birth.

(1.13)

King himself cites as his source St. Augustine, who undoubtedly had come across

the idea in Sophocles’ Antigone and most likely also Aristotle’s Rhetoric.

Civil Disobedience

King concludes that just laws should be upheld while unjust laws should

be disobeyed with the goal of seeking their repeal. To bolster his argument, King

cites, in Letter from Birmingham Jail, examples from history of those who also

practiced civil disobedience writing (2000):

Of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. It was evidenced sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meschach, and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake. It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating

“Universal law is the law of nature.”


135

pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire. To a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practiced civil disobedience. In our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represented a massive act of civil disobedience. (p. 96)

The civil disobedience of Socrates, to which King alludes, is his insistence

on philosophizing and continuing to pursue the examined life. Citing a greater

obedience to God, Socrates says in his defense speech,

Suppose, then, that you acquit me, and pay no attention to Anytus, who has said that either I should not have appeared before this court at all, or, since I have appeared here, I must be put to death, because if I once escaped your sons would all immediately become utterly corrupted by putting the teaching of Socrates into practice. Suppose that, in view of this, you said to me, “Socrates, on this occasion we shall disregard Anytus and acquit you, but only on one condition: that you give up spending your time on this quest and stop philosophizing. If we catch you going on in the same way, you shall be put to death.” Well, supposing, as I said, that you should offer to acquit me on these terms, I should reply, “Gentlemen, I am your very grateful and devoted servant, but I owe a greater obedience to God than to you; and so long as I draw breath and have my faculties, I shall never stop practicing philosophy and exhorting you and indicating the truth for everyone that I meet”. (Apology 29b9-d6)

Obedience to God first, disobedience to man if necessary. In fact this

passage was directly quoted by another civil rights activist Bayard Rustin, seven

years before the Montgomery Bus Boycott in his speech “In Apprehension How

Like a God” before the Arch Street Meeting House in Philadelphia (1948). Rustin

is perhaps best remembered for leading the 1963 March on Washington, yet is

largely an unsung hero of the civil rights movement, who often found himself on

the margins as a pacifist, African American, homosexual with communist

tendencies, quite a litany of indictments for the times. Yet Rustin (1912-1987),

who was a generation older than Dr. King (1929-1968), taught the younger

activist the finer points of nonviolent civil disobedience during the Montgomery

Bus Boycott, even encouraging King to remove guns from his house and the

armed guards posted outside (Rustin, 2003; Pollard, Kates, and Singer, 2002).

“Gentlemen, I am your very grateful and devoted servant, but I

owe a greater obedience to God than

to you.”


136

But to return to Socrates, we should not question his commitment to his

words, for he goes on to say most forcefully,

You can please yourselves whether you listen to Anytus or not and whether you acquit me or not; you know that I am not going to alter my conduct, not even if I have to die a hundred deaths. (Apology 30b8-c1)

Such lines Dr. King pondered as he sat in his Birmingham jail cell.

Persecution and Death

Of course such conduct often comes at a price, a price which, as indicated

by the last quote, Socrates and Dr. King were willing to pay. The activities of

King and Socrates brought much strife and dissension to their societies and much

danger to themselves. Repeatedly King faced the criticism that his actions, though

nonviolent, led to violence, just as Socrates’ philosophic teachings, though

peaceful, led to the corruption of the young. King addresses these criticisms in

Letter from Birmingham Jail, writing (2000),

In your statement you assert that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. But is this a logical assertion? Isn’t this like condemning a robbed man because his possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery? Isn’t this like condemning Socrates because his unswerving commitment to truth and his philosophical inquiries precipitated the act by the misguided populace in which they made him drink hemlock? Isn’t this like condemning Jesus because his unique God-consciousness and never-ceasing devotion to God’s will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion? (p. 98)

King’s critics could be accused of using the tension that King brought to

the surface to obfuscate the root causes of injustice rather than examining them.

Socrates too had to answer for the tensions he released within Athenian society

and to confront accusations against the results of his teachings, namely that his

actions corrupted the youth. Clearly he feels this is an incorrect line of argument,

since his actions sought to improve the virtues of those with whom he engaged.

“In your statement you assert that our

actions, even though peaceful, must be

condemned because they precipitate

violence.”


137

To show the absurdity of this conclusion Socrates clarifies what his message to

the Athenians, young and old, has been,

For I spend all my time going about trying to persuade you, young and old, to make your first and chief concern not for your bodies or for your possessions, but for the highest welfare of your souls, proclaiming as I go, ‘Wealth does not bring goodness, but goodness brings wealth and every other blessing, both to the individual and to the State.’ Now if I corrupt the young by this message, the message would seem to be harmful; but if anyone says that my message is different from this he is talking nonsense. (Apology 30a7-b7)

The Athenian jurors might have condemned Socrates, but they would have

been hard-pressed to disagree with Socrates’ message as he describes it, given its

moral clarity and the suggestion that he strove to improve the virtues of young

and old rather than encourage them to follow their lesser ambitions. Just as Dr.

King inspired many to question America’s unjust segregation laws, Socrates’

teachings inspired the youth to ask inconvenient questions to their own elders.

Given their teachings and the tensions they created in their societies, we

should not be surprised that Socrates and Dr. King were executed for their

troublesome activities. But what is revealing is their attitudes toward their early

deaths, which they seemed to accept as the wages of their life’s work.

Dr. King even suggests that we seek out that for which we are willing to

die: “And I submit to you that if a man has not discovered something that he will

die for, he isn’t fit to live” (2001a, p. 67).

For Socrates, we recall the image of him in the Phaedo reassuring his

students that the soul is immortal and not to fear death. The death of the body

does not frighten Socrates; he is worried about another kind of death, which

comes from a life that is not authentically lived. So in his apology, he says,

If on the other hand I tell you that to let no day pass without discussing goodness and all the other subjects about which you hear me talking and examining both myself and others is really the very best thing that a man can do, and that life without this sort of examination is not worth living, you will be even less inclined to believe me. (Apology 38a1-6)

“I just want to do God's will.”


138

Here we have Socrates’ description of what precisely he was willing to die

for: the necessity to live the examined life. For King and Socrates, their

philosophic disregard for death was rooted in their firm belief that they were

carrying out the will of God. This put them beyond the reach of the harm their

fellow citizens could inflict upon them. As King prophetically spoke on the night

before he was killed, “Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity

has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will”

(2001b, p. 222).

King’s peaceful disregard for his own death is mirrored by Socrates’ lack

of concern over his death. In the Apology, after his conviction he says,

I suspect that this thing that has happened to me is a blessing, and we are

quite mistaken in supposing death to be an evil. I have good grounds for thinking

this, because my accustomed sign could not have failed to oppose me if what I

was doing had not been sure to bring some good result. (40b6-c2)

A few lines later, Socrates elaborates on this point:

You too, gentlemen of the jury, must look forward to death with confidence, and fix your minds on this one belief, which is certain: that nothing can harm a good man either in life or after death, and his fortunes are not a matter of indifference to the gods. This present experience of mine does not result from mere earthly causes; I am quite clear that the time had come when it was better for me to die and be released from my distractions. (Apology 41c8-d7)

Bitter Wisdom

Although Socrates and Dr. King could speak about their imminent deaths

free of anxiety, their followers had a much more difficult time mirroring their

teacher’s philosophic detachment. The Phaedo records the emotional reactions of

Socrates’ disciples once he drank the hemlock (117c1-118a). The history books

also tell of the mass riots after the assassination of Dr. King. But just as Socrates

“But just as Socrates tried to

soothe the grief of his students, there were those who

spoke for moderation in the aftermath of Dr. King’s murder.”


139

tried to soothe the grief of his students, there were those who spoke for

moderation in the aftermath of Dr. King’s murder.

Robert F. Kennedy perhaps put it most eloquently in his speech in

Indianapolis on April 4th, 1968 (Kennedy, 1999):

But we have to make an effort in the United States, we have to make an effort to understand, to get beyond these rather difficult times. My favorite poet was Aeschylus. He once wrote: Even in our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, until, in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God. What we need in the United States is not division; what we need in the United States is not hatred; what we need in the United States is not violence and lawlessness, but is love and wisdom, and compassion toward one another, and a feeling of justice toward those who still suffer within our country, whether they be white or whether they be black.” (pp. 42-44)

He goes on to say,

Let us dedicate ourselves to what the Greeks wrote so many years ago: “to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world.” Let us dedicate ourselves to that, and say a prayer for our country and for our people.

Kennedy’s words are a paraphrase of Edith Hamilton’s (1930) translation

of Aeschylus’ Agamemnon lines 179-83 from the Chorus’ Hymn to Zeus.

God, whose law it is that he who learns must suffer. And even in our sleep pain that cannot forget, falls drop by drop upon the heart, and in our own despite, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God. (p. 186)

The closing passage is quoted from Edith Hamilton’s The Ever-Present Past

(1964, p. 34; Casazza, 2003). Kennedy was giving his speech to a large audience

mostly of African Americans who had not yet heard the news of King’s

assassination. Like Aeschylus’ Oresteia trilogy, which told how the cycle of

violence within the house of Atreus came to an end, Kennedy’s speech sought to

“And even in our sleep pain that

cannot forget, falls drop by drop upon

the heart, and in our own despair, against

our will, comes wisdom to us by the

awful grace of God.”


140

defuse the potential violence and anger that might arise, and ultimately did arise

following King’s violent death (Sussman, 2008).

One must imagine that King, who read the Oresteia while at Crozer

Seminary, found inspiring Aeschylus’ notion that communities must ultimately

solve their problems by means other than violence. Dr. King expressed most

eloquently the need to end the cycle of violence not with more violence but with

love in his work Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community (2010b):

The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. So it goes. ... Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that. (pp. 64-65)

Our Modern World

As a conclusion, I would like to come to the subject proper of my paper

and draw ourselves into this story a bit, not as philologists and educators,

professors and scholars as such, but rather as perhaps Socrates and Dr. King

would prefer, as citizens and intellectuals. I am only marginally interested in these

slight connections between Dr. King and Socrates that I have been examining.

What I am supremely interested in is Dr. King as a reader of Plato, Sophocles, and

Aeschylus. When asked in an interview with Playboy in 1965 which book he

would want to have on a deserted island, the Bible aside, King’s response was

Plato’s Republic saying (1986),

I feel that it brings together more of the insights of history than any other book. There is not a creative idea extant that is not discussed, in some way, in this work. Whatever realm of theology or philosophy is one’s interest – and I am deeply interested in both – somewhere along the way, in this book you will find the matter explored. (p. 372)

“I would like to come to the subject proper of my paper and draw ourselves into this story a bit, not as philologists

and educators, professors and

scholars as such, but rather as

perhaps Socrates and Dr. King would prefer, as citizens and intellectuals.”


141

These words once more remind us of the power of books and the ability of their

ideas to change people and thereby the world. We know that Dr. King did read the

Oresteia, Antigone, the Crito, and Apology in his Greek Religion class at Crozer

Seminary (Becker, 2000). He read the Republic in his Platonic philosophy course

at Harvard University as part of his graduate work at Boston University (Becker,

2000, pp. 185-186).

I make this point not to argue that King’s thought was merely derivative

from classical antiquity, but rather to demonstrate that King has a lot to teach us

about why and how we should read. If we consider how Dr. King became a voice

for nonviolent social change, we see that Dr. King did not get there solely by

attending a workshop on how to get arrested without throwing a punch at a police

officer, necessary as such trainings are. Dr. King started that journey by

encountering dangerous thoughts in the great books of the Western and Eastern

humanist tradition. Dr. King never met Gandhi; he never met Thoreau or Plato or

Socrates in the flesh. Instead, he communed with them through their written

words, and upon reflection on those words he was moved to action. For Dr. King,

activism followed his studies which provided an intellectual foundation for his

life’s work.

Dr. King’s method of reading puts certain demands upon our studies that

they should stir our souls to action. I would describe Dr. King’s reading as a

philology of liberation. Philology is often viewed as a pedantic and antiquated

practice of reading texts dispassionately and detached from contemporary

meaning. Yet Dr. King provides a philology and a study of the humanities that

lives up to its name as a liberal art and is so thoroughly engaged in our lives that it

liberates us from parochial thought; a philology that is in constant conversation

with our present, while at the same time freeing us from our own narrow time and

place.

This is not a new idea; rather it is a very old idea that traces its roots to

ancient educators such as Plato, Isocrates, Cicero, and Quintilian. Plato wrote


142

dialogues for this very purpose, so that as readers we would be brought into the

conversation. We are a participant and our reactions matter. This is an argument

against pedantry, against objective distance. When we read Plato’s Crito or

King’s Letter from Birmingham Jail, we need to get into that jail cell with

Socrates and Dr. King. And when we walk out of that jail cell, we must search our

hearts for what is different in us.

We professors are very capable of presenting the text, at teaching our

students to analyze information, to identify similes and rhyme schemes. But I do

not think we are very good at getting them into the prison cell, or to be less

politically focused, into the artist’s studio, into the theater of the playwright. To

do this we need imagination and reflection, and though the imaginative and

reflective powers of our students may be weak, they may be impaired, and their

results may be provincial, we need to encourage our students to form and mold

those abilities to imagine and to reflect as much as the ability to recognize irony

or a metaphor.

We need to cultivate readers who reflect with imagination and then act.

The humanities must be seen as a living tradition and not encountered as

traditionalism. I fear we will have fewer Dr. Kings and more pedants who are

socially disengaged and more social activists who are intellectually ungrounded,

until we buttress our actions with intellectual rigor, and until we are willing to

move our classrooms, out to the agora, The ultimate weakness of violence is that

it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy and into the

prison cells.

Lastly, I want to suggest that Dr. King deserves to be held in the same

company of poets, philosophers, and theologians I have been discussing. Dr.

King’s reading, reflection and actions, which included authoring several books

and numerous published speeches and letters, make him a formidable intellectual

who should be considered a profound theologian and philosopher meriting shelf

space next to Plato, St. Augustine, and Thoreau.

“The ultimate weakness of

violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to

destroy and into the prison cells.”


143

References Aristotle. (1941). The basic works of Aristotle. (W. Rhys Roberts, Trans.; Richard McKeon

Eds.). New York: Random House. Becker, T. H. (2000). A source for ideology: The classical education of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Classical Bulletin, 76.2, 181-189. Casazza, J. (2003) “Taming the savageness of man”: Robert Kennedy, Edith Hamilton, and their

sources. CW, 96.2, 197-99. Douglass, F. (1982) Narrative of a life of Frederick Douglass, an American slave, written by

himself. London: Penguin Books. (Original work published 1845) Dubois, W.E.B. (1999). The souls of black folk. (H. L. Gates Jr. & T. H. Oliver, Eds.). New York:

W.W. Norton & Company. (Original work published 1903) Dyson, Michael Eric. (October 21, 2008). Race is a tough tightrope for Obama: An interview with

sociologist Michael Eric Dyson. Retrieved July 12, 2010, from http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,585563,00.html

Fulkerson, R. P. (1979). The public letter as a rhetorical form: Structure, logic, and style in King’s

Letter from Birmingham Jail. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 65, 121-136. Hamilton, E. (1930). The Greek way. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Hamilton, E. (1964). The ever-present past. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Kennedy, M. T. (Ed.). (1999). Make gentle the life of this world: The vision of Robert F.

Kennedy. New York: Broadway Books. King, M. L., Jr. (1986). Playboy interview: Martin Luther King, Jr., January 1965. In J. M

Washington (Ed.), A testament of hope: The essential writings and speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr. (pp. 340-377). San Francisco: HarperOne.

King, M. L., Jr. (2000). Why we can’t wait. New York: Signet Classics. (Original work

published 1964) King, M. L., Jr. (2001a). Address at the freedom rally in Cobo Hall. In C. Carson & K. Shepard

(Eds.), A call to conscience: The landmark speeches of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (pp. 57-73). New York: Warner Books. (Original speech delivered 1963).

King, M. L., Jr. (2001b). I’ve been to the mountaintop. In C. Carson & K. Shepard (Eds.), A call

to conscience: The landmark speeches of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (pp. 201-223). New York: Warner Books. (Original speech delivered April 3, 1968 at Bishop Charles Mason Temple [Church of God in Christ Headquarters], Memphis, TN)

King, M. L., Jr. (2010a). Stride toward freedom. Boston: Beacon Press. (Original work

published in 1958)


144

King, M. L., Jr. (2010b). Where do we go from here: Chaos or community. Boston: Beacon Press. (Original work published in 1967)

McCain, J. (November 5, 2008). Concession speech. Transcript provided by Federal News

Service. Retrieved July 12, 2010 from http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/ president/speeches/mccain-concession-speech.html?ref=john_mccain#.

Plato. (2003). The last days of Socrates. (H. Tredennick & H. Tarrant, Trans.). London: Penguin

Books. Pollard, S. (Producer), Kates, N. (Producer/Director), and Singer, B. (Producer/Director). (2002).

Brother outsider: The life of Bayard Rustin [Motion picture]. Pope, A. (2006). The major works. (Pat Rogers, Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

(Original work published 1733). Pratt, C. (Executive Producer). (Sunday January 18, 2009). Face the Nation [Television

broadcast]. Washington, DC: Columbia Broadcasting Service. Rock, C. (Writer/Director) and Rotenberg, M. (Producer). (2003). Head of state [Motion picture].

United States: DreamWorks. Rose, L. (April 4, 2008). Tom Brokaw on King. Forbes.com. Retrieved July 12, 2010, from

http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/03/television-brokaw-king-biz-media- cx_lr_0404brokaw.html.

Rustin, B. (1948). In apprehension how like a god. Philadelphia: The Young Friends

Movement. Retrieved July 12, 2010 from http://www.quaker.org/pamphlets. Rustin, B. (2003). Montgomery diary. In D. W. Carbado and D. Weise (Eds.), Time on two

crosses: The collected writings of Bayard Rustin (pp. 58-65). San Francisco: Cleis Press. Scarborough, W. S. (2006). The negro and higher learning. In M. V. Ronnick (Ed.), The works of

William Sanders Scarborough: Black classicist and race leader (pp. 213-218). Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1902)

Sophocles. (1994). Antigone, Oedipus the King and Electra. (H.D.F. Kitto, Trans. & E. Hall, Ed.).

Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sussman, L. A. (2002). Similarities between Antigone and Martin Luther King, Jr.: An unjust law

is no law at all. Classical Bulletin, 78.1, 43-66. Sussman, L. A. (2008). The oratory of tragedy: Martin Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy April

3-4, 1968. Classical Bulletin, 84.2, 65-75. Washington, B. T. (1995). Up from slavery. (W. L. Andrews, Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University

Press. (Original work published 1901) West, W. C. (2000). Socrates as a Model of Civil Disobedience in the Writings of Martin Luther

King, Jr. Classical Bulletin, 76.2, 191-200.

Verbum Incarnatum Naming the Terror in Our Midst: Park51 and the Politics of Injustice

145

Naming the Terrorist in Our Midst: Park51 and the Politics of Injustice

Nancy E. Nienhuis, Th.D. Andover Newton Theological School

Abstract

Given the role that “far-right Christianism” plays in fomenting suspicion and prejudice against non-Christians, this article argues that feminist and liberation theologies are critical for effective theory. Theoretical analysis is more robust when combined with critical feminist and liberation theological analyses for three reasons. First, religion is often appealed to as the moral underpinning of many positions in public debates when in fact it is being used to reinforce dominant systems of power. Second, without critical feminist and liberation theologians and ethicists taking a part in public debates, often the loudest or only religious voice heard in public debates has been that of a few conservative Christian groups with enormous power to define what counts as “Christian” for everyone else. Finally, perhaps the most critical potential contribution of critical feminist and liberation theologies and ethics is in the motivation they bring as many freedom struggles have been inspired by religious faith. This article utilizes these theories to critique the ad called “Kill the Ground Zero Mosque” developed by the National Republican Trust PAC and to expose its xenophobic and racist message.

On July 12, 2010, Scott Wheeler, executive director of the National

Republican Trust PAC, was featured on the Kilmeade and Friends show on Fox

News Radio. He was promoting a new television advertisement against the

proposed Park51 Community Center in New York City which the NRT PAC

hoped to air on stations across the country. The ad is called “Kill the Ground

Zero Mosque.” “We’re not saying all Muslims are terrorists at all,” Wheeler said,

“but if it were someone within any other culture they would be very delicate about

the sensitivities of the people who had been offended or damaged or murdered.”1

Wheeler went on to explain that those in favor of the mosque were “pretending to

1 The full interview with Brian Kilmeade is at http://nationalrepublicantrust.com/ as is the “Kill the Ground Zero Mosque” advertisement. (2010, January 28) National television networks refused to air the spot.

http://nationalrepublicantrust.com/


146

be doing something good for the community” but implied that they were receiving

funding from nefarious groups around the world. Radio host Brian Kilmeade then

played the advertisement.2

The ad opens with an Islamic call to prayer in the background while the

words “The audacity of Jihad” appear on a black screen. After 3 seconds the

screen opens with film of Arab-dressed men in the desert with a variety of

weapons, shooting and running around. In seconds 10-17, the film shows the

planes hitting the twin towers in NYC, as well as footage of people jumping out

of the towers while the narrator says, On September 11 they declared war against

us. In seconds 18-21, groups of Arabs dancing, shouting and smiling appear.

Narrator: And to celebrate that murder of three thousand Americans. In seconds

22-25, a beautiful mosque appears on the screen. Narrator: They want to build a

monstrous 13 story mosque at ground zero. In seconds 26-30, the scene then

changes to the ground zero rubble that remained after the towers fell. Narrator:

This ground is sacred. White firefighters are seen in the rubble. Then in seconds

31-2, we hear bagpipes in the background playing “Amazing Grace” and see a

man draped in the American flag. Narrator: Where we weep… At seconds 32-33,

half the screen fades into more photos of Arab-dressed and Middle Eastern-

looking men, some with weapons, dancing and jumping up and down. Narrator:

…they rejoice… Then the man in the flag fades out and the full screen shows

Arab military marching with weapons (seconds 34-36). Narrator: That mosque is

a monument to their victory and an invitation for more. In seconds 37-42, the

screen returns to white, male fire fighters standing before the smoking rubble.

Narrator: A mosque at ground zero must not stand. The political class says

nothing. Seconds 43-45 show a split screen with the White House in one half and

President Obama in the other. Narrator: The politicians are doing nothing to stop

it. In second 46 the words “Americans will be heard” appear on the screen, while

an American fills half the screen. Narrator: But we Americans will be heard.

Then “Join the Fight” appears on the screen (seconds 49-50) and the narrator says,

2 For the full ad go to: http://nationalrepublicantrust.com/

“On September 11 they declared war

against us.”

http://nationalrepublicantrust.com/


147

Join the fight to kill the ground zero mosque. As the latter statement is made,

“Kill the Ground Zero Mosque” appears on the screen, in seconds 51-53,

superimposed over a mosque dome. The ad finishes with the web site

www.GOPTRUST.Com on the screen and the narrator saying, Go to GOP

Trust.com. The final seconds show the ad was paid for by the NRT PAC, and the

narrator finishes with Paid for by National Republican Trust PAC, which is

responsible for the content of this message. The entire ad is 1:01 long. The

narrator has a deep, male, unaccented, white-sounding, booming voice.

The NRT PAC was founded in 2008 and describes itself as "an

independent organization to help promote American values and support federal

candidates for Congress, Senate and the Presidency who share those values" and

as "committed to continuing the legacy of Ronald Reagan.”3 Scott Wheeler, the

executive director, has a background in investigative reporting and worked at the

conservative Cybercast News Service. The co-founder is Peter Leitner, a former

Reagan administration official who has also worked as a national security

consultant. In the final weekend of the 2008 presidential race, the PAC spent $2.5

million on ads trying to connect then candidate Obama with Rev. Jeremiah

Wright. It also tried to argue that candidate Obama was ineligible for the

presidency due to when and where he was born. The live birth certificate from

Hawaii did not satisfy them as it did other media outlets. Overall they spent over

$8 million against candidate Obama.4

Although the PAC is not affiliated with the Republican National

Committee, its messages echo GOP leaders. One of the GOP’s intellectual

leaders, Newt Gingrich, referred to Park51 as “an assertion of Islamist

3 http://nationalrepublicantrust.com/about.html accessed October 30, 2010. 4 Weigel, D. (2009, March 17). At this writing I know of no other conservative PAC with deeper pockets than the NRTPAC.

“The live birth certificate from Hawaii did not satisfy them as

it did other media outlets.”

http://nationalrepublicantrust.com/about.html%20accessed%20October%2030


148

triumphalism” that was part of “an Islamist cultural-political offensive designed to

undermine and destroy our civilization.”5

The actual community center planned for the Park51 site in NYC does not

look like a mosque at all. The design evokes traditional Islamic architecture and

has the outward appearance of a tall white honeycomb. The address is

approximately 2 blocks from the World Trade Center in an old Burlington Coat

Factory Building, where local Muslims have already been praying for over a year

(Ghosh, 2010). In fact that neighborhood has been the historical center for

Muslim immigrants in NYC. In the 1880s this area in lower Manhattan was

known as “Little Syria” because of the number of Arab Christians and Muslims

who settled the neighborhood. This area also holds the African Burial Ground

where enslaved Africans, many of whom were Muslim, are buried (Curtis, 2010).6

The 13 story Park51 Center will hold a 500 seat auditorium, theatre,

performing arts center, fitness center, basketball court, swimming pool, childcare

center, bookstore, culinary school, art studio, food court, a September 11

memorial, and a Muslim prayer space for up to 2,000 people. The prayer space

will be located in the basement, in a room technically known as a musalla and not

a mosque. Construction constraints disallow the sanctification of a true mosque,

so only a musalla, a prayer hall, will be included (Shari, 2010). The Center is also

designed to be a place for multi-faith dialogue.

The idea for the Center originated with Imam Feisal Rauf and his wife

Daisy Khan, both of whom have earned reputations as moderate Muslims known

for their work in promoting interfaith dialogue. The project’s developer is Sharif

El-Gamal, who modeled the Center after a Jewish Community Center in

Manhattan’s Upper West Side where he is a member (Caruso, 2010).

Given the reality of the purpose, background, and design of the Park51

Community Center, the RNTPAC ad is a work of fiction, designed to incite its

5 Hertzberg, H. (2010, August 16) Zero Grounds. The New Yorker, retrieved from http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2010/08/16/100816taco_talk_hertzberg 6For more on the history of Islam in the United States see Nyang, S. (1999) Islam in the United States of America Chicago: Kazi Publications.

“In fact that neighborhood has been the historical center for Muslim immigrants in

NYC.”

“After Sept. 11, 2001 the Southern Poverty Law Center reported a 17-fold increase in

anti-Islamic hate crimes.”

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2010/08/16/100816taco_talk_hertzberg


149

viewers against the Park51 Center. Its content reflects and perpetuates American

stereotypes and fears about Islam and Muslims. A 2009 Gallup poll found that

Americans felt more prejudice against Islam than against any other faith group.

43% admitted feeling prejudiced toward Muslims (Gallup Center for Muslim

Studies, 2010). A 2010 Time-Abt SRBI poll found that 47% of Americans

thought Islam encouraged violence, although 63% of Americans know no

Muslims. In addition, 24% of respondents believed President Obama is Muslim;

that number climbs to 47% among Republican respondents (Altman, 2010). In

another poll, almost 1 out of 4 Americans said they would not want a Muslim as a

neighbor, and fewer than half thought Muslim Americans were loyal to the United

States (Esposito, J.L., & Mogahed, D., 2007, p. x). Such views are often

expressed in acts of violence against Muslims in America. After Sept. 11, 2001

the Southern Poverty Law Center reported a 17-fold increase in anti-Islamic hate

crimes (Tanenbaum Center for Religious Understanding, 2010).

Where does this level of distrust originate, and what are the ideas that

foster it? Answering this question requires an analysis of how systems of power

like racism and sexism function to both create and reinforce the Islamophobic

attitudes evident in the polls and hate crimes referenced above.

Learning to Let Down the Guard: Analyzing How Systems of Power

Function

Cornel West (2000, p. 544) writes that “Theory is inescapable because it is

an indispensable weapon in struggle, and it is an indispensable weapon in struggle

because it provides certain kinds of understanding, certain kinds of illumination,

certain kinds of insights that are requisite if we are to act effectively.”7

In this country we learn to be on guard against the other. We learn to view

unknown others with suspicion and worse. Analyzing the roots and manifestation

of American xenophobic tendencies may enable us to learn how to let down our

guard and engage others across boundaries of difference. This is exactly the kind

7 This is an interview between bell hooks and Cornel West.

“In this country we learn to be on guard against the other.”


150

of interpersonal understanding that dominant systems of power and privilege are

designed to prevent.8 To engage others requires acknowledging their social

locations or positions in some way and thus providing for a possible moment of,

at least, empathy and, at best, critical solidarity.9

Given the role that “far-right Christianism”10 plays in fomenting suspicion

and prejudice against non-Christians, feminist and liberation theologies are

critical for effective theory. Without a theological component, theories about how

injustice functions are missing something vital. At its best, feminist and critical

theory facilitates the interrogation of what Chandra Talpade Mohanty (1992) calls

the “politics of location,” the geographical, historical, cultural, psychic and

imaginative boundaries that give us political and self-definition. Such

interrogation enables an interpretation of contemporary experience that is

historically contextualized and analyzed, while also demonstrating how historical

practices create existing power relations. It understands that analyzing the

interstructuring of various power relations such as racism, classism, religious

exclusion, colonialism, heterosexism, ableism, and others, is absolutely critical.

Theoretical analysis is more robust when combined with critical feminist

and liberation theological analyses for three reasons.11 First, religion is often

appealed to as the moral underpinning of many positions in public debates when

in fact it is being used to reinforce dominant systems of power. Too often,

8I define dominant systems of power and privilege as those like racism, sexism, class bias, heterosexism, and other injustices that circulate freely in American culture, reinforcing the right to power of white, elite, wealthy men to the varying detriment of all others. 9Critical solidarity begins when one sees others as “caught” between and within interlocking webs of power and decides to stand beside them to fight that power system, disavowing oneself (at times) from the privilege that those power systems bestow upon oneself. 10 I coined the term “far-right Christianism” to denote the cooptation by the conservative right of Christian concepts, images, and/or beliefs to create a view of non-Christian others as fundamentally immoral, deceitful, untrustworthy, and dangerous.

11I use “critical” to underscore the ideas of critique, crisis, and assessment, all of which are desperately needed in regard to analysis of poverty policy. Schüssler Fiorenza (1999) explains the term thusly, “A critical approach is interested in weighing, evaluating, and judging texts and their contexts, in exploring crisis situations and seeking their adjudications. Its goals and functions are opposite to those of a more positivist approach of ‘pure’ science.” Schüssler Fiorenza, E. (1999) Rhetoric and Ethic. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, p. 9.

“Given the role that ‘far-right

Christianism’ plays in fomenting suspicion and prejudice against

non-Christians, feminist and liberation theologies are critical for effective theory.”


151

systems of power are both interpreted and defended as “God-ordained” rather

than humanly constructed orders.

The RNC PAC ad is a poignant example of this. The ad portrays the

Park51 project as a battle between good and evil, where all Muslims are terrorists

(most of the footage supposedly portraying Muslims shows men in Arab garb

with weapons). These “terrorists” are juxtaposed in striking contrast to “real

Americans” who are portrayed as either wrapped in an American flag with the

hymn “Amazing Grace” playing in the background or as firefighters on the rubble

of the twin towers. The message is clear: Muslims are evil terrorists and

Americans are innocent Christian victims of horrific Islamic violence. This

message of a war between good and evil and Christianity and Islam is reinforced

in the ad by the narrator continually referring to the Community Center as a

“mosque” and by showing images of existing mosques instead of the actual

modern design of the planned building.

Furthermore, the RPT PAC ad carefully constructs definitions of “moral”

and “immoral” in the Park51 debate. Critical feminist and liberation theologies

assist us in beginning to disengage these definitions and demonstrate that, too

often, nonreligious policy and life cannot be separated from religious

understandings and practices, and that what is defined as “religious” or “moral” is

often a cover for dominant power interests.

Second, without critical feminist and liberation theologians and ethicists

taking a part in public debates, often the loudest or only religious voice heard in

public debates, or at least the one gleaning the majority of sound bites in national

news, has been that of a few conservative Christian groups with enormous power

to define what counts as “Christian” for everyone else. Some of the best-known

conservative Christian voices made their way into the articles on Park51written

by national news organizations. For example, Franklin Graham (Qtd. In Ghosh,

2010), son of the famous evangelist Billy Graham, was interviewed by Time and

was quoted saying Islam is “a religion of hatred. It’s a religion of war.” Similarly,

in a recent New Yorker article Pat Robertson (Qtd. In Wright, 2010) was quoted

warning that if the center brings “thousands and thousands” of Muslims into the

The RPT PAC message is clear: “Muslims are evil

terrorists and Americans are

innocent Christian victims of horrific Islamic violence.”


152

area, “the next thing you know, they’re going to be taking over the city council.

They’re going to have an ordinance that calls for public prayer five times a day.”

Missing from most of the national news articles were quotes from more

progressive Christian leaders, and although a few articles did report that some

religious organizations supported the mosque, the vast majority of their specific

examples were of intolerance from Christian leaders.12 The effect of a public

square flooded with conservative Christian voices has been both a general

backing away from religion on the part of those who define themselves as

nonreligious, and an intimidated silence from many of those who see themselves

as Christian but do not want to be identified with the public image of Christianity

put out by these groups.

Finally, perhaps the most critical potential contribution of critical feminist

and liberation theologies and ethics is in the motivation they bring. Critical

feminist liberation theologies provide a sustainable source of moral authority and

reflection. Patricia Hill Collins (1998, p. 248) points out that, “Although secular,

pragmatic concerns clearly matter, in the absence of deep caring infused with

ethical or moral authority, freedom struggles become increasingly difficult to

sustain.” Many freedom struggles have been inspired by religious faith from the

very beginning, in part because their participants have often found their pursuit of

liberty restrained by those who appealed to certain religious ideas and definitions

of proper moral action as the basis of their opposition.13

Again the RPT PAC ad against Park51 is illustrative. By framing the

issue as good vs. evil and American vs. Islamic, and by conflating “American”

12 For an example of one of the earliest interfaith statements in support of the Park51 project see excerpts from the “To Bigotry, No Sanction” press conference held at the Boston State House September 6, 2010 at http://www.ants.edu/news/detail/andover-newton-community-members-respond-to-attacks-on-islam/. However, here too the report on the press conference in that evening’s television news broadcasts gave a minute or so to the Florida pastor threatening to burn Korans to protest Park51 and approximately 10 seconds to the interfaith leaders who spoke at the press conference in support of Park51. 13Examples abound, but some particularly pertinent ones include an 1893 text, now reprinted. See Joslyn Gage, M. (1980) Woman, Church, and State. Watertown, Mass.: Persephone.; Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s The Woman’s Bible (reprint, Salem, N.H.: Ayer, 1991), part 1 originally published in 1895, and part 2 in 1898; and Sarah Grimké’s 1838 Letters on the Equality of the Sexes and the Condition of Women (reprint, New York: Source Book, 1970).

“Critical feminist liberation theologies provide a sustainable

source of moral authority and reflection.”

http://www.ants.edu/news/detail/andover-newton-community-members-respond-to-attacks-on-islam/

http://www.ants.edu/news/detail/andover-newton-community-members-respond-to-attacks-on-islam/


153

and “Christian” (remember “Amazing Grace” being played as the ad shows a man

wrapped in an American flag), all who support the Center are by definition

unchristian and un-American. This also means, of course, that Muslims cannot be

Americans. Eboo Patel (Qtd. in Ghosh, 2010) pointed this out when he said

recently that “The core argument emerging from [the anti-mosque protests] is that

Muslims are not and never can be full Americans.”

As Kathleen Sands (1994, p. 12) writes, liberation movements benefit

from faith as a “rich source of social vision, because religions, notwithstanding

their presumptive patriarchalism, also mandate some version of justice,

compassion, and the more equitable distribution of wealth.” Indeed, many

religious people find that our deepest motivation for fighting injustice arises from

a belief that God intends for the world to be different than it is, a belief that we

are meant to be co-creators with God of a new and just creation. Critical feminist

and liberation theologies and ethics foster just practices at every level, where

justice is understood as economic, spiritual, emotional, and physical flourishing—

in both private and public spheres.14

Perhaps the best-known source for this motivation for justice work is the

Christian parable of the Good Samaritan, a story of a man beaten by robbers and

left to die. As Jesus is reported to have told the story in Luke 10:29–37, various

prominent religious people pass by a wounded man who is a member of an

outcast group. Finally, one, moved with compassion, crosses over to where the

man lies and helps him. In the same way, feminist theo-ethical engagement

requires a moving across the boundary of my own life into that of another, a

movement that takes me from the comfortable borders of my own world and puts

me face to face with the needs of another. In particular the parable seems to be

saying that the greater the chasm between people, the more critical the crossing.

14I agree here with Wayne Meeks’s definition of ethics as “morality rendered self-conscious,” where morality is defined, in Schüssler Fiorenza’s words, as a “pervasive and often only partly conscious set of value-laden dispositions, inclinations, attitudes, and habits.” For this reason, an engaged feminist ethics affects an understanding of myself as a contested site of conflicting power relations, which, if left uninterrogated, will result in my contributing to injustice despite my best intentions. See Meeks, W. (1993) The Origins of Christian Morality: The First Two Centuries. New Haven: Yale, p. 4; and Schüssler Fiorenza. (1999) p. 195.

Faith is a “…rich source of social vision, because

religions, notwithstanding their

presumptive patriarchalism, also

mandate some version of justice,

compassion, and the more equitable distribution of

wealth.”


154

As legal theorist Lucie White (1998, p. 186) notes, moving into the space of

another’s needs is messy. It takes me from “the clean, quiet space where social

measurement, moral deliberation, and legal judgment would seem most

comfortably at home. . . .” But how is it that one’s theoretical work can reveal the

other as the neighbor one is meant to move toward, reveal the path toward that

neighbor, and expose those elements that may block our crossing?

An analysis that builds upon both feminist theory and feminist and

liberation theologies provides a “road map” for what such movement to the

neighbor entails. What becomes clear is that such movement is not simply an

emotional response to another, but rather, a radical political act that requires a

thorough analysis of dominant systems of power in order to understand what love

of neighbor means and requires. For the story of the Good Samaritan focuses on

the agency of the subject; in his action, notions of love and justice are brought

together.15 It is this requirement to forge love and justice into one act that comes

from the theo-ethical mandate to love one’s neighbor as oneself.

By analyzing how power functions, what we’re really doing is finding out

why it is that certain of our neighbors are so difficult for us to see or so easy for

us misunderstand and demonize. As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (1968, p. 167)

said, “Without understanding our position in relation to others within the complex

of various power structures operating in society, we cannot really know our

neighbors. Without such knowledge, we cannot act ethically toward them.

Without such knowledge, we cannot love them.” Obviously, if we can’t

recognize our neighbors it will be impossible for us to function as their allies; it

will be impossible for us to be ethically accountable to those neighbors.

How do structures of power and domination define the world in such a

way that we don’t recognize some others as people to whom we are morally

accountable? Hill Collins (1998, p. 49) argues that “Domination, whether of race,

class, gender, sexuality or nationality, produces public and private knowledges on

15I thank Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza for this insight; personal communication, December 1998.

“For the story of the Good Samaritan focuses on the agency of the subject; in his

action, notions of love and justice are brought together.”


155

both sides of power relations.” Dominant power systems “guard the borders” of

what is understood to be authoritative knowledge, normative truth, and moral

action in American society.16 But what does it mean that we have borders of

knowledge to guard? Who gains from this guarding, and whose interests are acted

against? The guarding of borders “poses a basic question to our claim to

subjectivity—to identity and agency, both as individuals and as political and

normative community (White, 1998, p. 184-185).” Such guarding reflects the

workings of dominant systems of power to keep some people and groups in the

center of definitions of what’s normal and constitutive and others outside those

definitions.

We all share this guard duty, whether we’re aware of it or not, in our

exercise of power and privilege. James Baldwin reminds us that “You cannot

escape the pathology of a country in which you’re born. You can resist it, you can

react to it, you can do all kinds of things, but you’re trapped in it (Qtd. in Hill

Collins, 2006, p. 95).” So we must learn first how to identify and then put down

the pathology-based weapons we use for guard duty in the U.S. context (a process

requiring theoretical analysis), then learn how to map the terrain that separates us

from others, and finally how to cross the border to the other. Such a crossing

requires both a critique of status quo understandings and a reconstruction of

different systems of knowledge.17 Theories can function as weapons because

they are not simply descriptive but often function in prescriptive ways as well.

They are explanations of the world that carry a certain authority. Thus theory

plays an authorizing function in that it gives authority to a particular way of

viewing and defining the world.18 Theory that isn’t done well will be co-opted by

16I am borrowing this phrase from Lucie White, “On the Guarding of Borders,” pp. 184-185.

17Collins argues that there are four responses to one’s being excluded and defined by policy: believe prevailing wisdom, act in accordance with it (i.e., accept it), critique it, or construct different knowledge. Effective theory enables us to do the third and fourth responses. See 1998, pp. 106–7. 18 See the description of this authorization process in Maria Lugones, “On the Logic of Pluralist Feminism,” in Claudia Card, ed. Feminist Ethics, 1991.

“We all share this guard duty, whether we’re aware of it or

not, in our exercise of power and privilege.”


156

dominant systems of power to reinforce normative ways of seeing the world.

Theory that is not done carefully is homogenizing in its impact: it will serve to

reinforce normative experience while simultaneously rendering non-normative

experience invisible, enabling stereotypes about that non-normative experience to

more easily escape interrogation and critique.

Systemic Powers and the Construction of Knowledge

Knowing how power functions in society and being able to recognize its

tactics are both fundamental elements of an engaged feminist Theo-ethics and are

key to building just personal action and practice. Without the ability to diagnose

structural causes of injustice, we will never be able to recognize the proper

solutions, let alone implement them. Key to understanding how race bias, gender

bias, heterosexism, far-right Christianism, class bias and other biases work

together to reinforce power and privilege for a few at the top of the social

hierarchy is understanding the role bias plays in the construction of knowledge.19

Systems of bias legitimize and define particular public knowledges as

“normative,” “natural,” or “commonsense.” Neighbors that don’t meet these

definitions, in this case Muslim neighbors, tend to disappear from public view and

understanding. Patricia Hill Collins (1998, p. 44-45) explains public knowledges

this way: “Designed to represent the interests of those privileged by hierarchical

power relations of race, economic class, gender, sexuality, and nationality, elite

discourses present a view of social reality that elevates the ideas and actions of

highly educated white men as normative and superior.” Those whose power and

privilege puts them at the top of society have the power to determine what counts

as truth for everyone else, the power to define how the world is and should be. As

Margaret Urban Walker argues, “Reproducing uncritically one’s specific position

as the norm is an exercise of one’s privilege that at the same time reinforces it

19It is important to differentiate between systems of power and systems of bias. The two are always connected; racism is both. But a bias may be discussed on its own, apart from other biases, whereas a system of power is always benefiting from and reinforcing other dominant power systems (sexism, classism, and so forth) for the benefit of an elite group of people. Thus, a power system is the result of an interplay of biases on which it feeds and grows. As systems, dominant powers produce normative knowledge.

“Dominant power systems ‘guard the borders’ of what is understood to be

authoritative knowledge, normative truth, and moral action in American society.”


157

(Urban Walker, p. 54).” It is critical that theories about how the world is and

should be are analyzed contextually, that is, that they be understood as arising

from a particular social location affected by race, class, gender, nationality and so

forth, and as possibly reflecting the view from that location but not necessarily

useful for explaining any other location.20 They may explain the world of

privileged white males, but they misrepresent the experiences of Muslim

Americans.

It is also critical to ask how dominant systems of power gain and retain

their authority, their claims to “rightness,” and in effect their moral authority for

defining how the world “should” be structured. Dominant systems of power retain

normative power because they have strength and credibility; they reflect and

reinforce “commonsense” understandings of people and of life. They do this in a

variety of ways, always simultaneously reflecting and reinforcing cultural and

political hierarchies. But what counts as credible knowledge reflects the view

from the top.

That top tier defines reality, or at least what is seen as normative, for

everyone else. Those operating from top positions of privilege and power create

“epistemic authority,” a way of knowing or defining the world that determines

what counts as knowledge for everyone else.21 The RPT PAC ad makes such

authoritative claims. First, the narrator, who sounds educated, white, and male,

will be understood as credible, because he evokes images of powerful and

privileged members of society. His voice embodies epistemic authority, which is

always raced and gendered, by sounding white and male. Second, the ad gives all

Muslims the identity of Arab (despite the fact that only 20% of the world’s

Muslims are actually Arab (Esposito, et.al., p. 28)) and evil, demonizing all

20Many feminist theorists have suggested this approach. See bell hooks, Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center, 2d ed. (Cambridge, Mass.: South End, 2000), and Ain’t I a Woman: Black Women and Feminism (Boston: South End, 1981); Collins, Fighting Words, especially xiv; Elizabeth V. Spelman, Inessential Woman: Problems of Exclusion in Feminist Thought (Boston: Beacon, 1988); and the various works of Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, among others. 21 Walker (2007) coined this term.

“It is critical that theories about how

the world is and should be are

analyzed co ntextually.”

“Those operating from top positions

of privilege and power create ‘epistemic authority.’”


158

Muslims as terrorists. A necessary social identity like this is an identity generally

mapped onto a certain kind of body, making it a condition of birth and therefore

both “natural” and inevitable. In the case of the NRT PAC ad, the necessary

identity is “Muslim terrorist” and the ad maps it onto all Arab-looking bodies.

Necessary identities are usually applied to those with less power and privilege in

order to shore up power and privilege for those with more power. Such identities

are “epistemic and social accomplishments… and are not necessary for the ones

who bear them, but for others who need to legitimate the ways they treat the

bearers or to foreclose examination of those ways (Walker, p. 165).”22 Moreover,

a necessary social identity functions to make unjust actions toward those so

portrayed appear “normal” and reasonable” and just (Walker, p. 162). By literally

demoralizing Muslims as dangerous terrorists, the RPT PAC ad makes it seem not

just reasonable but patriotic and moral to oppose the plans of the American

Muslims in New York City for the Park51 Center.

One way the functioning of necessary identities is protected from exposure

is through normalizing the coercion and violence that are required to keep them in

place. By defining all Muslims as un-American, terrorist, and against the United

States, patriotism and pro-American are understood as anti-terror, anti-Muslim,

and thus anti Park51. From this point of view, the message in the ad makes sense;

it seems reasonable, and anyone who opposes such understanding by definition is

anti-American. By fostering this “commonsense” understanding of the issues

surrounding Park51, the ad masks its racism and anti-Islamic rhetoric. Dressed up

in patriotic garb, the racism in the ad appears to be patriotic, American, moral and

Christian—the way any right-thinking American would see the issue.

Since generally it is from a position of power that social norms and values

are generated, Muslim voices in the media do not have a chance of being seen

with the same credibility as do the “real American” voices. The further people are

from positions of power, the less the resemble that norm, the harder it will be for

22 Walker (2007, p. 162) describes the development and functioning of necessary identities.


159

their voices to be heard, and the less likely it will be that those with privilege and

power will have any idea of what their daily experience consists of or feel

compelled to understand it.

The necessary social identities fostered by the RPT PAC ad are reinforced

through stereotypes. Those stereotypes denigrate Muslim character and morality

and reinforce this moral misunderstanding of what Muslims are like. People

believe the stereotypes because “stereotypes organize fields of interpersonal

experience rather than being discovered within them, rendering especially salient

those instances that fit, while screening out or cordoning off ones that don’t.”23 If

the ad’s images reinforce what racism and far-right Christianism have already led

non-Muslims to believe about non-white and non-Christian people, then the ad’s

images seem that much more credible. And since most Americans have never

met a Muslim, they have no other “data” to confuse the truth they’ve already

embraced about who Muslims are and what they are like. This is how moral

epistemology, the nature, source, and justification of moral knowledge, is created

and sustained. Systems of power like racism, sexism, and religious bias work

together to create a commonsense understanding of which members of American

society are most moral and credible--always those who are white, male,

privileged, and powerful. This is how prejudice is created and sustained.

Prejudice, in turn, shapes personal practices and public policy, perhaps

more so than anything else. Again, the Park51 case is a poignant example. As

noted above, while most Americans don’t know a Muslim, a New York Times poll

showed that Americans opposed the Center by a 54-20% margin (Barbarao, M.,

2010). Other polls showed similarly strong opposition. 24 The more legitimate the

negative myths and stereotypes about Muslims seem to be, the stronger public

opposition to the Park51 Center is likely to be.25

23 Walker (2007, p. 202), paraphrasing Lorraine Code.

24 For an account of the results of other similarly negative polls see the extensive “Park51” article on Wikepedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park51, accessed 10/29/10. 25 In 1996, when welfare in the US was dismantled, Martin Gilens did a study that found that racist myths about welfare influenced a person’s opposition to welfare in direct proportion to the degree

“The further people are from positions of power, the less they resemble that norm, the harder it will be for their voices to be

heard.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park51


160

Such beliefs adopt the view from the top of the societal power system and

mask the effects of structural injustice; they mask the operation of dominant

systems of power. As Walker (2007, p. 65) warns, “social powers can render

some people’s assumptions arbitrarily prevalent or undeservedly authoritative in

inquiry or elsewhere.” The more privileged and powerful one is, the more

authority your views will hold. The further up you are, the more your intuitions

or assumptions become the “data” behind the construction of moral theories

(Walker, 2007, pp. 62-63).

This data, these perceptions of how the world is, are learned within

community. Individual people within the community may not agree with these

perceptions, but they will be familiar with them. “Any particular system of

mutual moral accounting is a cultural practice already there that we learn from

others (Walker, 2007, p. 69).” We learn prejudice and bias within and from our

communities.

It is very difficult to move across the differences that divide communities.

Legal theorist Martha Minow (1990, p. 3) points out that one downfall of analysis

is that “when we analyze, we simplify.” We break things down into familiar

categories to see them more clearly (or so we believe). But the way we see things

and label things has a lot to do with how we respond to those things and with the

moral and ethical judgments we make about them. For example, Minow (1990,

pp. 4-5) describes the work of Harold Herzog, Jr., an animal behaviorist who has

looked at how the labels we use impact our moral responses to mice. At the

University of Tennessee there is a facility for animals that houses 15,000 mice

used in experiments each year on the campus. The university requires that any

experiment using mice be approved by both the Federal Department of

to which the person believed those myths. The more legitimate the myths seemed, the more normal or commonsense the myths seemed, the greater the person’s opposition to welfare. Writing about the study, Traci West explains that one of Gilens’ most significant findings was that “white perceptions of blacks as lazy have a larger effect on their welfare policy preferences than does economic self-interest, beliefs about individualism, or views about the poor in general. The judgment of whites about how to construct national policy is fundamentally distorted by their racist views.” See West, T. (1999, p. 141) Agenda for the Churches: Uprooting a National Policy of Morally Stigmatizing Poor Single Black Moms. Welfare Policy: Feminist Critiques, ed. Bounds, E.M., Brubaker, P.K., & Mary E. Hobgood, M. E. (Eds.), Cleveland: Pilgrim.

“The more privileged and

powerful one is the more authority your

views will hold.”

“Language and labels like Arab=Muslim=

terrorist and their associated moral

valuations are produced by systems of power, and they play a key role in perpetrating and

perpetuating injustice.”


161

Agriculture and the American Association for the Accreditation of Lab Animal

Care.

But only experimental mice receive this level of care and concern. If a

mouse escapes, it loses its label of “lab mouse” and attains the label “pest,” and

then it is routinely captured and killed. No body oversees the methods used for

this destruction, and no permission needs to be gained. Herzog (Qtd. In Minow,

1990, p. 4-5) says that “Once a lab animal hits the floor and becomes an escapee,

its moral standing is instantly diminished.”

The role and label of the mouse determine how the very same animal may

be perceived and treated differently. As Minow (1990, p. 5) points out,

interactions between moral judgments and labels can be even more pronounced

with people. This is especially true for those with less influence in society, for

whom efforts to rename themselves may be undermined by the attitudes and the

power/authority of those who have defined the differences. It may be very

difficult for them to fight the labels assigned to them. This is one reason why it is

so important for disenfranchised groups to name themselves.

Language and labels like Arab=Muslim=terrorist and their associated

moral valuations are produced by systems of power, and they play a key role in

perpetrating and perpetuating injustice. Minow (1990, p. 7) writes, “[P]utting

labels . . . on people is an effective way to deny the bonds of commonality we

have together. There is a possibility that our labels, our terms of comparison, may

shut off any understanding of the connections we have with another person as a

human being, in that we risk becoming less than human ourselves.”

Dominant powers function this way purposefully. As long as I can’t

understand or connect with those who fall below me in the power and privilege

hierarchy—or don’t have to—I won’t question the contours of my own life. I

won’t see how I may benefit from my race, religion, and class. I’ll buy the lie that

I am simply “better”—more skilled, a harder worker, more moral—than those

below me, who haven’t achieved as much as I have. I will not see the role that

systems of power like race, gender, religion, and class play in devaluing people—

literally demoralizing them—nor understand how such devaluation keeps them in

“The privileged person doesn’t see

his or her own experience as one

among many but as normative.”


162

particular positions of powerlessness. As long as we believe that those who have

the most privilege have come by their power legitimately, rather than by the

coercion or misrepresentation of those below, we won’t question their right to be

there. As long as I understand an elite white protestant man as better than I am, as

having insight I don’t possess, I will see him as “better,” not privileged; as

“deserving,” not benefiting from a system of power that always defines all

wealthy white protestant males as knowledgeable about the world and therefore as

deserving of power and privilege.

Walker (2007, pp. 21-22, 63) calls this view from the top of the social

hierarchy the canonical form of moral theory. It takes the viewpoints and

prerogatives of those with the most power and status and acts as if they’re God’s

view, not the view of the group with the most power and privilege. It assumes the

power to model for all what may be “obvious, acceptable, or comprehensible only

to some of us (2007, p. 56).” Walker (2007, p. 54) warns that when such

representations of moral life are posed as “…’truths’ about ‘human’ interest, ‘our’

intuitions, ‘rational’ behavior…” they’re not just false, “they uncritically

reproduce the represented positions and locations as normative, i.e., as the central

or standard (if not the only) case.”

When this happens the particular nature of those at the top’s own

experience disappears and all others’ experiences become problematic—

substandard or even immoral. The privileged person doesn’t see his or her own

experience as one among many but as normative, as that against which everything

else should be measured.

Multiply constructed epistemic authority has the ability to compromise

how all of us see ourselves. Those of us with the most privilege and power in

American society need new insight into ourselves if we are to gain moral

understanding of others. Walker (2007, p. 79) warns, “When members of groups

historically or systematically disqualified from epistemic or moral authority begin

to occupy positions that carry it….new judgments and new means of judging are

likely to result.” Such changes depend on changes in power, material goods, and

“Those of us with the most privilege

and power in American society need new insight

into ourselves if we are to gain moral understanding of

others.”


163

access to institutions and places that “shape public discourses and disseminate

them (Walker, 2007, p. 71).”

But until and unless this happens the view from the top of the social

hierarchy will be defended as “God’s revealed will” in a seemingly naturalized or

commonsense process. Religious texts and interpretations may be used by elites to

further rationalize and reinforce their “right” to power and privilege. When

ideology is dressed up as God, or far-right Christianism, it becomes particularly

cunning and evil, and much more difficult to expose and fight. Such ideology

masks structural sins such as racism and sexism while serving as their essential

servant. Ideologies create lies about the world at the behest of the politically,

socially, and religiously elite. These moral valuations, and the power and

privilege behind them, create commonsense understandings of the world.

To overcome such epistemic authority is very difficult. Muslim families

have to be far above the norm in all valued social indicators to be thought of as

even half as successful and moral as an average Christian family. The reverse is

true also: Christian families will be given the benefit of the doubt in a way that

Muslim families will not.

The systems of power like racism, far-right Christianism, and sexism, so

evident in the epistemic narrative created by the NRT PAC ad, will not die easily.

But they can be fought by exposing the way their lies, myths, untruths and general

perpetration of moral misunderstanding of Muslims have been fostered. As

Jennifer Peace (2010) wrote recently, “Suggesting that no building associated

with Islam should be built in proximity to Ground Zero is to suggest that all

Muslims are irrevocably tainted by the acts of terrorists claiming (erroneously) to

be acting in the name of this religion. Are we willing to suggest by analogy that

all Christians are similarly tainted because of the actions of the Lord’s Resistance

Army in Uganda?” Certainly we can do better than this.

In Where do we go from here? Dr. King (1968, p. 167) wrote, “This is the

great new problem of humankind. We have inherited a large house, a great world

house in which we have to live together—black and white, Easterner and

Westerner, Gentile and Jew, Catholic and Protestant, Muslim and Hindu—a

“The systems of power like racism,

far-right Christianism, and

sexism, so evident in the epistemic

narrative created by the NRT PAC ad,

will not die easily.”


164

family unduly separated in ideas, culture, and interest, who, because we can never

again live apart, must learn somehow to live with each other in peace.” This is

even truer now than it was in Dr. King’s day. Prejudice stands at the door of this

house, torch in hand, ready to burn it down. May we have the courage to fight it,

and the theoretical tools to make that possible.

References Altman, A. (2010, August 19) Majority Oppose Mosque, Many Distrust Muslims. Time.

Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,2011799,00.html# Barbaro, M. (2010, July 30) Debate Heats up about Mosque Near Ground Zero. The New York

Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/31/nyregion/31mosque.html Caruso, D.B. (2010, October 2) On paper, NY Islamic center looks modern, secular. The

Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/02/AR2010100201683.html

Curtis, E.E. (2010, July 23) Islam has long history downtown: Why the ‘Ground Zero Mosque’

Belongs in lower Manhattan. New York Daily News.com. Retrieved from www.dailynews.com/fdcp?1288287059076

Esposito, J.L., & Mogahed, D. (2007) Who Speaks for Islam? New York: Gallup Press. Gallup Center for Muslim Studies. (2010, January 21) In US Religious Prejudice Stronger Against

Muslims. Gallup Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/125312/religious-prejudice-stronger-against-muslims.aspx

Ghosh, B. (2010, August 19) Does America have a Muslim Problem? Time. Retrieved from

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2011798,00.html. Hertzberg, H. (2010, August 16) Zero Grounds. The New Yorker, Retrieved from

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2010/08/16/100816taco_talk_hertzberg Hill Collins, P. (1998) Fighting Words: Black Women and the Search for Justice. Minneapolis:

University of Minneapolis Press. Hill Collins, P. (2006) From Black Power to Hip Hop: Racism, Nationalism, and Feminism.

Pennsylvania: Temple University Press. King, M.L. Jr. (1968) Where do we go from here? Beacon Press: Boston. Minow, M. (1990) Making All the Difference: Inclusion, Exclusion, and American Law. Ithaca:

Cornell University Press.

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,2011799,00.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/31/nyregion/31mosque.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/02/AR2010100201683.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/02/AR2010100201683.html

http://www.dailynews.com/fdcp?1288287059076

http://www.gallup.com/poll/125312/religious-prejudice-stronger-against-muslims.aspx

http://www.gallup.com/poll/125312/religious-prejudice-stronger-against-muslims.aspx

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2011798,00.html

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2010/08/16/100816taco_talk_hertzberg


165

Peace, J. (2010) An Interfaith Educator Responds to the Mosque Controversy. Andover Newton Theological School web site. Retrieved from http://www.ants.edu/peacemosquestatement

Sands, K.M. (1994) Escape from Paradise: Evil and Tragedy in Feminist Thought. Minneapolis:

Fortress Press. Shari. (2010) Islamic Park51 Design Revealed to Public. Gowanus Lounge. Retrieved from

http://www.gowanuslounge.com/islamic-park-design-revealed-public/ Talpade Mohanty, C. (1992) Feminist Encounters: Locating the Politics of Experience. In Michèle

M. Barrett, M. & A. Phillips, Eds. (1992) Destabilizing Theory: Contemporary Feminist Debates.

Tanenbaum Center for Religious Understanding. (2010) Muslims in America & Islam Fact Sheet.

Retrieved from www.tanenbaum.org. Schüssler Fiorenza, E. (1999) Rhetoric and Ethic. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. Weigel, D. (2009, March 17) Hard Right PAC Complicates GOP Mission. The Washington

Independent. Retrieved from http://washingtonindependent.com/34087/hard-right-pac-complicates-gop-mission.

West, C. (2000) The Cornel West Reader. Basic Books: New York. White, L. (1998) On the Guarding of Borders. Harvard Civil Rights–Civil Liberties Law Review.

33: 186. Wright, L. (2010, September 20) Intolerance: Comment. The New Yorker. Retrieved from

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2010/09/20/100920taco_ talk_wright?printable=true

http://www.ants.edu/peacemosquestatement

http://www.gowanuslounge.com/islamic-park-design-revealed-public/

http://www.tanenbaum.org/

http://washingtonindependent.com/34087/hard-right-pac-complicates-gop-mission

http://washingtonindependent.com/34087/hard-right-pac-complicates-gop-mission

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2010/09/20/100920taco_%20talk_wright?printable=true

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2010/09/20/100920taco_%20talk_wright?printable=true

Verbum Incarnatum Book Review: Women’s Activism in Latin America and the Caribbean: Engendering Social Justice, Democratizing Citizenship

166

Women’s Activism in Latin America and the Caribbean: Engendering Social Justice, Democratizing Citizenship Rutgers University Press (April 23, 2010) Edited by Elizabeth Maier and Nathalie Lebon Book Review by Scott Dittloff, Ph.D.

Women’s Activism in Latin America and the Caribbean: Engendering Social Justice, Democratizing Citizenship, edited by Elizabeth Maier and Nathalie Lebon, is a multi-author compilation book that deals with wide ranging issues of particular importance to women throughout Latin America and the circum-Caribbean. The mainland is much more thoroughly covered than the islands, although the usual countries (Cuba, Dominican Republic, and Puerto Rico) from the Caribbean do make an appearance in Part II. Interestingly, some of the most rigorous social science methodology appears in the articles on the Caribbean.

The book is broken down into several sections, not all of which seem distinct. There are two introductory chapters by each of the editors that provide excellent, though very normative, discussions of the substance of the subsequent chapters in the context of an overview of feminist theory. Part II addresses women, families, and economic inequality. Part III focuses on women’s political behavior in and out of politics. The authors address grassroots activism in the mothers and grandmothers of the Plaza de Mayo in Argentina and urban and rural activism in Guatemala to the role and prominence of women in political institutions in Nicaragua. Part IV also addresses women’s activism but from a perspective of specific sub-groups (racial, lesbian, and indigenous groups). The title of Part V refers to shaping public policy (which does not differ from the goals in Part IV). Part VI deals with feminist agency from local, regional, and global perspectives. Part VII reflections based on the myriad cases provided throughout the book.

Women’s Activism in Latin America and the Caribbean could be more accurately titled as feminist activism in Latin America and the Caribbean. This book takes a very normative approach to the exploration of feminist activism in Latin America. It is important in terms of highlighting the extent of feminist


167

activities in Latin America. It is also very useful in laying out the range of feminist concerns and feminist ideology. One gets a very good description of what feminist theory is and how it is applicable. Yet, the authors almost universally put a feminist agenda ahead of solid social science research methodology. This is particularly apparent when conclusions of the different authors constantly use the word “should” when summarizing the significance of the issue or activity they are writing about. The book as a whole is geared towards promoting the feminist agenda and does not have broader applicability to society.

The book may be limited in scope in terms of geography but can be seen as a more general discussion of feminism. The reason may well be that if feminism can be successful in Latin America, with its prevalence of machismo, it can be successful anywhere. Feminist theory has many sub-currents. Liberal feminism focuses on individual equality and the need for legal and social changes that would enable women’s equality. Success is seen largely by the numbers of women in positions previously occupied by men, especially powerful positions. A good portion of the book addresses issues related to liberal feminism, focusing on the actions of women in a very male dominated region. Chapters on Haiti, Nicaragua, Argentina, and Venezuela highlight the struggles women have had and continue to have to make a difference and participate in politics.

Radical or socialist feminism focuses more on the socioeconomic structure of society than on individual success. Socialist feminists contend that women are marginalized by a capitalist system that gives the lion’s share of power and capital to men. Until the system is changed to redistribute wealth and power, women will continue to be marginalized. This change will not become manifest unless women work together to bring about this change. The sum total of the book points in the direction of socialist feminism.

Third Wave feminism is popular among younger women. Similar to liberal feminism, Third Wave feminism is very individualistic. While not rejecting political activism, Third Wave feminism is focused more on the individual as the key to social change. Third Wave feminism focuses on the construction of individual identities and promotes women defining themselves as they wish not how traditional society would have them be defined. When the authors discuss changing gender roles in Cuba, single family households, and


168

specifically feminist political activism they most assertively highlight Third Wave feminism. In one respect, these are, the strongest sections of the anthology. The authors highlight issues of particular concern to women and show that despite decades of rhetoric about changing attitudes toward women’s roles in society, little has really changed. Women are still socially, politically, and economically marginalized but are often looked to maintain the family structure. This is problematic in that women want more control over their fertility and their personal identity that may very well not be compatible with ideas of traditional family structures. In another respect, the authors deemphasize the more traditional marginalization of women and assert that women’s primary concerns are family planning (mainly the right to abortion) and lesbianism. Those women (in particular) who have (relatively) more conservative political views are looked at as being reactionary and are dismissed almost out of hand as being behind the times and irrelevant as well as a detriment to the cause of women’s rights.

The book has its methodological and theoretical flaws, but excels in highlighting the practical concerns of women and feminists as well as providing a detailed, yet accessible, explanation of feminist theory and objectives. The range of topics covered in the book in and of itself performs a great service in educating the reader of the extent of feminist interest and foci. It also admirably sets out the extent of feminist contributions to politics and human rights (and how far women’s rights have yet to go to achieve equality). It is the objectives, or the normative element of the book, that I take the most issue with. The authors all are strong supporters of the tenets of feminism. They are trying to get readers to sympathize with feminist ideals. Moreover, they are, in a very real sense trying to create, and create acceptance for, a new view of the social world, but in the process they are guilty of over-generalization—blaming men, and patriarchy, as well as asserting a concerted and conscious effort at gender oppression, as the cause for all of the problems and issues that confront feminists. They also refuse to accept the legitimacy of women who choose not to adhere to feminist doctrine.

Verbum Incarnatum

169

Race, Place, and Environmental Justice after Hurricane Katrina Westview Press; (February 10, 2009) Edited by Robert D. Bullard and Beverly Wright Book Review by Donna Meyer, Ph.D.

Hurricane Katrina and its disastrous aftermath forced the Nation to acknowledge shocking socioeconomic contradictions that are frequently masked from the national consciousness. Public stereotypes of New Orleans were typically formed by glamorous “Big Easy” media shots taken at celebrations like Mardi Gras and jazz festivals. One might argue that all U.S. citizens share some blame for not recognizing the racial disparities and fully understanding that socioeconomic injustices do lead to social disaster. It may be less fair to expect that the average citizen should have been aware that the levee system was so precarious and vulnerable. The appalling events provided a powerful lesson on the importance of maintaining both our human and physical infrastructures. The disaster was and continues to be a compelling example of the Environmental Justice imperative.

This book presents the “proceedings” of the two symposia held at Dillard University in October 2006 and May 2008. Both the participants and the place are well suited to contribute to this comprehensive examination of all aspects of the disaster. The knowledgeable authors of each chapter are qualified to critically review and dissect the various causes and effects of long term injustice and explain the information in a manner that deepens our understanding.

The editors, Drs. Bullard and Wright, are eminently qualified. Bullard is widely known as the “Father of Environmental Justice”; he has extensively studied environmental racism. Wright is an advocate for environmental justice and founder and head of the Deep South Center for Environmental Justice at Dillard University. Dillard University, an old, well established black institution located in the Gentilly neighborhood of New Orleans, received extensive flood damage. For twelve months after the storm, the University was housed in the Hilton Riverside Hotel.

A vast trove of information has already been published about the storm and its aftermath. It is often difficult, even for those who sincerely strive, to understand whose opinions are being represented and whether information strikes an appropriate balance between resources and the needs of those most vulnerable. What this publication adds is that it so clearly attempts to represent the opinions and viewpoints of the majority poor black population of New Orleans and the

Verbum Incarnatum

170

immediate environs. While no population is homogeneous, these studies do strive for scientific validity. These writers present solid data that questions the legitimacy of the many existing studies and plans either because the government is perceived as paternalistic and corrupt or because the process did not incorporate opinions of the “silent underserved” or the many displaced Orleanians.

As would be expected, multiple authors create considerable variation in writing styles. Several chapters are engrossing reading (Sanyika and King stand out); most are crammed with data and not meant for the recreational reader. The thorough analyses and extensive references produce a very valuable resource for anyone engaged in social justice efforts anywhere; it should be considered required reading for those helping to rebuild or assisting the dislocated post Katrina.

Verbum Incarnatum

171

A Philology of Liberation: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as a Reader of the Classics, Verbum...

Documents

Transcript of A Philology of Liberation: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as a Reader of the Classics, Verbum...