Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Our struggle with World Views


This post was difficult for me to write and I'm still not sure if it's coming across correctly, but here it goes...

Justo Gonzalez is a Latin American theologian who has written extensively on the history of theological movements in Latin America. His book, Manana, Christian Theology from a Hispanic Perspective, draws a few distinctions between the West and the Hispanic world, which may in part add to the discussion in previous post.

One primary aspect of difference between the US and Hispanic culture is probably not so surprising to most of us, autonomous identity versus communal identity. Guess who is autonomous? Yes…wealthy Westerners…We do reflect the best hopes of our Founders who were all reading the same enlightenment philosophers way back when…Descarte, Locke and Hobbes.

Men like Jefferson and Madison believed that rights (personal and autonomous rights) to a large extent existed as a means of preserving a private sphere where men (and women…eventually) could enrich themselves and satisfy the desiring parts of their souls. Hegel, in response to this view of autonomy took that further in the next century. He saw rights as ends in themselves, because what truly satisfies human beings is not so much material prosperity as recognition of their status and dignity– the struggle for recognition.

Hispanic individuals, for the most part, do not think of themselves as autonomous beings. They’re not trying to preserve a “private sphere” where they can achieve “self actualization”. They are communal. Identity is defined within the community, the pueblo, the church, the family. Moreover, responsibility is to the community.

One reality that flows from autonomy is the ability for one person to distance himself from the sins of the fathers. What do I mean? Simply this: Does a Swede (Do I) feel shame and disgrace over the death and destruction wrecked in Europe by the Vikings? Many innocent victims came back into Scandinavia as slaves, those that weren’t murdered. Also, monetary wealth flowed into Norway, Sweden and Denmark as a result of Viking piracy and marauding. True, my recent ancestors were extremely poor, the underclass in a country that had little wealth during the 1700s and 1800s. So, why feel any guilt?

What about the more recent past? Do I feel shame over my country’s role in WWII? The Norweigians haven’t forgotten that their neighbor, in an attempt to save itself, cut a deal with Hitler that allowed him access to oil-rich Norway. Sweden stayed neutral in the war and true, many Jews were funneled into Sweden and saved by compassionate individuals in that country, but it is also true that oil from Norway prolonged the war and cost many many lives. Some historians say Sweden had no choice, but it's messy, isn't it? It's not a clean history. You can look past the feo to the bonito, but to deny that ugliness exists is dishonest.


We Americans have our own mess to contend with...Slavery, displacement of the native people's, injustice, broken treaties...


In Mexico, Mestizo identity does not allow for denial. Mexicans are European and Native. They are mixed up in the same person...an identity which is mostly celebrated, but sometimes mourned. The story of Mexico is messy. Blood is on all hands. This is one of Gonzalez’ main points in his book. Hispanic individuals live with a connection to their history in their very person, such that denial is an impossibility.


As Jason and I have contemplated looking past the “feo” to see the “bonito”, we wonder if is more difficult for us in the West to live in the mess that may be our marriage, our job, or our community, than it is for our Mexican neighbors.

It may seem easier and less painful to bring closure to the marraige, change jobs, or move away from our community, to wipe away the feo and put away the problem forever. This raises the question, can you really get rid of the mess that easily? If the mess is "out there", this strategy should work wonderfully, but if not...if the mess in "in here" as well as out there, then the strategy will fail.


From what we can tell, Biblical wisdom favors the Mestizo world view. It is possible, as our Mexican friends are showing us, to live without denying that the feo exists and see past it, appreciate and receive as a gift, the bonito.

2 comments:

Ryan Park Grant said...

S--

I suspect you've received no comments because this is a hard topic to dip into casually. I'll not pretend to give you the full response you deserve, but here are some thoughts.

First, it is clear that the Hebrew world view in biblical times was highly communal. I'll assume this is self-evident. However, one major stream of God's revelation to that culture challenged its communal assumptions, whether implicitly (Abram, leave your father's house and I will bless you) or explicitly (Ezek. 18 is an extended meditation on taking personal responsibility in which God defends himself (!) for not judging the son as the father). Jesus's teachings on some matters (sheep & goats, setting a man against his father, one taken and another left) are uncontroversial to the autonomous mind but are dangerously revolutionary to the communal mind. My point is not to exalt this stream of revelation above others but to question whether the biblical worldview can be called communal, even if the the biblical culture was.

Now personally: I write as an American who believes that my country and my culture are the best in the world. I have confirmed this by travels to about 40 countries from every major cultural/ethnic orbit. Most of my Christian friends (including my own wife) are uncomfortable with this attitude, and I won't bother to defend it. The immediate point is that I am not temperamentally disposed to see "more of God" in other cultures, and yet I am deeply disturbed by my own culture's abuse of its hard-won and admirable freedom. All too many of us (me too) use that freedom (i.e., autonomy) to pursue our selfish desires with increasingly naked force instead of pursuing what is good or loving.

I hypothesize that love is the godly/biblical mindset that reconciles autonomy and community. Love is a choice, made by an autonomous person with freedom to withhold it, but a choice to deny self and serve one's neighbor. And we love because God first loved us, i.e., our autonomy is derivative, not absolute. In loving us, God creates fellowship. Americans too easily forget that, making idols of themselves. Other cultures may need to get it separated from a community that is imposed without choice or freedom, demanding the loyalty of slaves.

End of hypothesis. I am glad that your travels have provoked your thoughts. I pray that you will find more of God--whether in culture or beyond it--and that he will make your own calling clear in his good time. And I hope you are enjoying the baseball playoffs. Vamos Rockies! Grace and peace,

--R

Carin said...

Susi,

I am a little late reading your post but I wanted to ask you for some examples of how people there are not in denial of the mess. How do you see it in everyday life? Does it lead to greater responsibility and love for one's neighobor or is it just a more sober sense of existence?

Interesting post,
wish we could have discussions over dinner. miss those...
Carin