Skip to main content

Of Statues (again) and Vandalism

A friend of mine from high school - who stands pretty far to the right of me politically - sent me an article about a case of statue vandalism, not of a Confederate general but of a Catholic saint. 
Apparently, in the two years since the pope elevated Junipero Serra to sainthood, statues of him have been vandalized four times.  Why the attacks?  Because many Native Americans and others claim that he took part in and supported the destruction of Native American culture in California.  It’s important to note that the Roman Catholic Church asserts that he protected Native Americans from those who wanted to harm them.
I have no idea which story is true.  
But I can discuss in general two issues this raises.
One, what about those statues?  They just won’t go away, huh?
Two, what is the argument against Junipero, and by extension the church?
First the statues.  Again.  And probably not for the last time.  [NOTE: Just to be clear, I am not speaking of art statues.  I’m speaking of memorial statues of real individuals, put up to remember them and their “contributions” to the world].  If statues exist to hold up as examples those who have lived exemplary lives, then a saint might not be a bad choice.  Personally, I'm not a fan of statues in general - at least not of regular people - because rather than draw our attention to the positive work of the saint, they tend to emphasize, even glorify, the person him or herself.
Another thing about statues in general is that they only allow us to highlight one side of a person.  There is no nuance, no gray area.  In my unsolicited opinion, the world would be no worse off for not having the things.  Do they teach history?  No.  Do they glorify certain people?  Sure they do.  And do they sometimes rewrite history, making someone guilty of great evil into, well, a saint?  Absolutely.  There is a reason, I suspect that the second commandment (depending on how you read it) forbids people from making any “graven image.”  There is only one to glorify, and that is God.
Sure, we do make statues - biblical saints, angels, Jesus - we can’t help ourselves, I guess.  However, they are not sacred.  They’re just pictures in stone.  As for vandalism, our church has certainly seen its share of that.  In my years here, I’ve seen mausoleums and signs be hit with spray paint. I’ve seen windows smashed.  We just clean up and move on.
But what about Junipero himself?  Is he worthy of a statue?  Of sainthood? 
Junipero Serra was a Spanish missionary in the 18th century, mostly in Mexico and what is now California.  Not only did he found many missions in the region, but he was the Inquisitor.  His missions served as schools as well as churches, and depending on who you listen to, he either protected Indians from the Spanish military or forced conversions, instituted a sort of slave labor, and worked at suppressing their culture.
That’s between the Roman Catholic Church and the Native peoples of the region.
On the more general issue of how the churches treated Native Americans, however, it’s worth noting that we have a bad track record.  Not just the Roman Catholics, but all of us.  We came to this continent with the rather arrogant assumption that we knew what was best for the poor savages, and we set about stamping out their culture.
Over time, churches began to partner with the government to create schools (not too dissimilar from Padre Serra’s) for Native children.  They were forcibly removed from their families, often at gunpoint, and lodged in residential schools often described as similar to concentration camps.  Their hair was cut, their personal clothing burned, and they were beaten if they spoke their native language.
Please note, there is nothing “evangelical” about this.  None of this served the traditional goals of evangelism.  Nowhere in the past were cultures destroyed - least of all when missionaries came to Europe to bring the gospel.  Teaching the gospel did not require eliminating language, clothing, or other cultural traditions.  No, this was cultural destruction quite separate from faith.
Nevertheless, churches of many denominations (including, alas, my own) administered these schools which eventually became known as Bureau of Indian Affairs schools.  In the end, they were recognized for the destructive forces they were and no longer exist.  But they hung around more than a hundred years destroying countless lives.
My friend who brought the article to my attention said he was aware of the past harm done to Native Americans but assumed that was all in the past.  It would be great if it were.
But it’s not.
Sure, the schools don’t exist any longer, but treaties are still violated.  Native Americans are still corralled in reservations which are a shadow of their ancestral lands.  They still face governmental abuse when corporations want what they have.  Witness the Standing Rock standoff that has now gone to the favor of the corporations.  Not only will their drinking water be endangered, but sacred burial grounds will be disrupted.
Considering the pipeline was re-routed to Standing Rock because its first path was deemed to be too close to white communities, we can see that the abuse of Native peoples is still the rule. So while I have no formal opinion about Junipero Serra, I do suspect there is precious little in our dealings with the original inhabitants of this continent worthy of statuary.  
If we truly wanted to tell history, we would teach about the schools and the broken treaties in our schools and museums.  We would read primary sources of white Americans noting their goals for the people they were replacing.  Memorial statues can’t do that - they can only glorify people and institutions.  And that, to this Christian, seems a little too close to what God had in mind with the second commandment.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

It’s All On Kavanaugh

The Senate is set to vote on Brett Kavanaugh as early as today (Thursday, October 4), though they might wait till Friday.  The FBI turned in its report before 8:00 AM today, a whole day earlier than necessary and without interviewing many of the key players in this sham of a game. The biggest sham in the entire debacle, however, is that this is some “sh*t show” as a former high school classmate put it.  That the mean Democrats have somehow made this all up just to derail President Trump’s wonderful nominee.  They’re playing politics, say the Republicans. There are several holes in this theory, and I will try to enumerate them here as dispassionately as I can: If you want to see “playing politics” with a Supreme Court nominee, look no further than Merrick Garland.  Remember him?  He was a moderate but highly rated judge even among Republicans.  They simply chose - out of thin air - to refuse to give him a hearing.  With nearly a year before the ...

"All's Well That Ends Well?" Sermon preached on August 20, 2017

What a week it’s been, huh?  Just last Sunday, I was preaching to you about the Neo-Nazi march in Charlottesville, Virginia that ended so tragically in murder and countless fights. Throughout the week, the tensions mounted with questions of what should be said about it and what constitutes free speech, and are Nazis really such bad guys anyway?   Then, yesterday, in Boston, the white supremacists were to have another rally in Boston.  If the Boston Globe is to be believed, they counted about fifty white supremacists and roughly 40,000 counter-protesters - just to show what this country really thinks of them. The bad guys - and it is fair to say from the pulpit that there is nothing good in Nazi or white supremacist ideology - were sent packing.  So, that takes care of that, right?  All’s well that ends well, right? Um… I think you know the answer to that.   If you don’t, maybe our scriptures can help.  Let's look at Joseph in Genesis. ...

My Rules of Engagement

MY RULES OF ENGAGEMENT: I have been troubled for a long time with the declining lack of civility in public discourse.  This is especially true in comment sections of nearly every forum and is particularly insidious on FaceBook.  I have been a part of this, and I’m repenting of the wrong.   Not that I will no longer comment, but I will no longer engage in the long back-and-forth’s of old.  They are not helpful - in fact, they lead to abuse of the one who might dare to stand up and disagree (regardless of what side they choose).  So, here are my new rules of engagement when it comes to controversial or charged issues.  Pray that I may faithfully adhere to them, and know that they are there because I love and respect you: In the Spirit of Matthew 18:15 , if I have a problem with what you write, I will not attack you in the comment section.  Rather, I will PM you and lay out my arguments as reasonably, civilly and lovingly as I am able.  I ...