Mission as Intercultural Reconciliation in the Iberian Diaspora

As explained earlier in this research, my focus is to promote mission as intercultural reconciliation (MIR). In this series of texts, we have seen how the Catholic Church and the Iberian states mutually established each other’s legitimacy in the colonizing project. And this legitimacy stemmed from the spiritual prestige attributed to both. More than in any other European states, the occupation of high ecclesiastical positions validated the ruling elites of Spain and Portugal. The early colonial era was a time of Spanish and Portuguese exceptionalism (Yun-Casalilla, 2019). The Spanish nobility became the center of European Catholic nobility and its marital market. The Iberian colonizers were exceptionally good at reproducing political structures wedded to Catholicism in the American colonies. And aspects of the ecclesiastical structures that emerged in these colonies both inhibited and promoted the indigenization of Latin-American Catholicism (Yun-Casalilla, 2019). 

Although the Protestant lands also adhered to supersessionism, the fragmentation into several churches meant that they could not represent the “people of God” like Spain and Portugal did. Therefore, proponents of mission as intercultural reconciliation in the Iberian diaspora today face a specific type of supersessionist legacy. The Anglo-Saxon and Continental European Protestantism developed a supersessionism expressed primarily in doctrine. Protestants hammered out supersessionist ideology in centuries of polemics against the Jewish foil. But the Iberian supersessionism didn’t depend primarily on theological argument, but on the prestige and authority of the Catholic Church.

The fact that this prestige had been wounded during the Protestant Reformation gave a particular stridency to Iberian Catholicism’s supersessionism. And the culmination of the Reconquista against the Moors in 1492 strengthened the Iberian Catholic kingdom’s claim to primordial representation of the people of God. The European castles of the Medieval era – most of which were Catholic – have been considered the greatest artistic accomplishment in human history (Hoje Falamos de Notre-Dame, Não Do Nosso Senhor – Contra-Corrente, n.d.). Therefore, proponents of MIR must recognize the prestige of Catholicism in the collective imagination of the Iberian diaspora. This problematizes confronting the cultural appropriation by the West of an ancient Semitic folk religion. The ancient messianic hope of the Jewish people was seized, universalized, and institutionalized by what became European Christendom. Although the message was universal, i.e., for all peoples, white Western Europeans were the idealized heirs called to catechize the nations into Catholic culture. 

But despite supersessionism, there is much evidence that the Spirit of God was at work in the Iberian Catholic missions in the Americas. Natives were groomed for clerical functions and the task of evangelism (Hsia, 2017). And perhaps by targeting elites in these efforts, indigenous agency in the development of theology and worship was fostered. At the top of the Catholic hierarchy the theological premises of supersessionism validated the supremacy of the white European colonizer. But at the grassroots level, the experience of most indigenous members of the missions the experience of Catholicism was predominantly native not Spanish or Portuguese. The translation of Scripture into native languages using the printing press was intended to regulate the communication of the Catholic message. However, what ended up happening was the production of native Christian texts with variant versions of biblical motifs and narratives (Hsia, 2017). 

Drawing from the History of Indigenous Agency

Proponents of MIR in the Iberian diaspora can draw from the history of indigenous agency in the Americas. Unconventional teachings and practices should not be seen as resulting from an inability to understand Christian doctrine, or a desire to distort it. Rather, we should honor the helpful ways the natives reinterpreted biblical content to suit their needs. The fact that many natives found refuge from Iberian conquistadores should also be considered (Sarreal, 2014). The missions were built through a collaboration of various religious orders and native agency. By the 18th century the missions consisted of multi-generational residents steeped in this way of life. Promoting MIR among Latin American Catholics today requires understanding the two sources of the mission culture that develop. Both the missionaries and the indigenous peoples made biological, technological, organizational, and theological contributions (Sarreal, 2014). It can be argued that without the missions indigenous language and customs would have been eradicated by Iberian colonization (Sarreal, 2014). 

I have discussed the disastrous effects of disease and the imposition of social norms that violated indigenous cultures, particularly among nomadic indigenous communities (Jackson, 2015). This testimony should inform proponents of MIR regarding the damage a supersessionsist evangelistic supremacy can cause. In some contexts, the reconciliation of cultures faces a shorter “gap”, perhaps illustrated by the more fruitful reception of the gospel among the sedentary indigenous communities. But MIR practitioners must recognize when the space between cultures requires relatively greater time, patience, and Spirit-led ingenuity. 

We have also seen how indigenous resistance to evangelization fueled the passions of missionary efforts in mostly negative ways (Rivett, 2014). Opposition to the gospel was interpreted as evidence of demonic influence instead of resistance to incarceration in reducciones (Rivett, 2014). MIR offers a vision of Christian witness that seeks to see the operation of the Spirit in other cultures, even in other religions, according to the promise of the witness of the Spirit throughout the earth (John 16:8-11). 

We have seen research indicating the depth and vibrancy of scientific, technological, geographical, and anthropological work being done on the Iberian Catholic missions in the Americas (Rivett, 2014). This has been posited as contradicting the center-periphery dichotomy between European urban metropolis and primitive rural colonies (Rivett, 2014). MIR appreciates this motif in the history of missions as it engages the reversal of roles in world Christianity. MIR advocates should avoid the center-periphery perspective that has categorized much analysis of colonial missions. This caricature has omitted the agency and contributions of the majority indigenous membership of the missions. There was much oppression and subjugation by missionaries towards indigenous peoples. But the missionaries also arrived during a time of liminal turmoil among the indigenous cultures of the Americas.

Again, we must ask ourselves what the fate of these communities would have been if Iberian colonizers were not accompanied by Catholic missionaries? The point here is that MIR proposes a view of the global work of God that breaks forth across the globe. The Spirit’s work has consistently upended the status quo of Christian predominance and leadership on the world stage. MIR is flexible regarding national loyalties and is primarily concerned with identifying where the Spirit is at work and collaborating with it. When the center of the Spirit’s most vibrant activity shifts from the metropolis to the “periphery”, MIR is ready to learn from new cultural loci of Christian leadership. 

Lastly, the effectiveness of the missions’ organization of space, surveillance, and communication can be seen as either oppressive (Foucault, 1986) or cultivating. MIR recognizes that Christian doctrine has been denounced as a means for governing the soul through the rite confession and a consciousness of the all-seeing eye of God (Foucault, 2003). MIR rejects all forms of Christian surveillance and management which characterizes “ministry” that seeks to exploit and dispossess the cultural other and occupy their land (Zavala-Pelayo, 2020). On the other hand, we see in the story of Iberian missions in the Americas the careful planning of communities that had a sort of beauty. Can we say that the reducciónes were beautiful? We have seen accounts of the carefully planned streets and blocks, each house with its own orchard and garden, the house of the priest, the farmlands, and livestock spaces (Zavala-Pelayo, 2020). We have seen the vast networks of communication, map making, and land administration the missionaries promoted. MIR does not consider all forms of organization and structure in evangelistic efforts as oppressive. God can call members of his church to cross national and continental frontiers to bless other peoples in His name. This cross-cultural witness and service can include administrative and governmental work, if it defers to local authority. MIR seeks to act as a guest enjoying the hospitality of the host people of the land, which does not preclude helping build institutions of governance.

References

Foucault, Michel (1986). Of Other Spaces. Diacritics. 

Foucault, Michel (20030. Abnormal. Lectures and the College de France 1974-1975. London: Verso.

Religious transformations in the early modern Americas / edited by Stephanie Kirk and Sarah Rivett. (2014).

Sarreal, Julia J. S. (2014). The Guaraní and Their Missions: A Socioeconomic History. Stanford University Press

Yun-Casalilla, Bartolomé (2019). Iberian World Empires and the Globalization of Europe 1415–1668. Palgrave Macmillan

Zavala-Pelayo, E. (2020). Religion and space in colonial South America: A technology of geo-political rule and terrestrial-spatial subjectivity in the Jesuit missions of the Banda Oriental. Religion, 50(4)