National Profile
The first issue addressed in the interviews was continuing education. In most cases the diocesan budget available for the continuing education of the Hispanic Ministry director is relatively small (usually $500 to $1,000 annually). However, most directors found that other diocesan funds could be tapped to support their education as needed. Some directors reported attending 3 or more Hispanic Ministry-related conferences annually in addition to formation programs at training institutes such as the Mexican-American Cultural Center in San Antonio. These networking and formation activities were deemed essential to the conduct of their work. Generally, the directors' transportation budget or membership allowances could be utilized to support these activities; if not, their diocese often found ways to make additional funds available. A few directors also noted that their diocese had partially or wholly subsidized their undergraduate and/or graduate studies at a nearby college or university. In general, the directors praised their diocese for making funds available to support their skills development and education.
A second issue, however, was why so few Hispanic Ministry directors were interested in becoming the director of another diocesan department. Most directors described their career mission as supporting and promoting Hispanics in the Church; in their view, the position of Hispanic Ministry director was the best platform for pursuing this goal. Several noted that the role and mission of the Hispanic Ministry director was fundamentally different from that of other diocesan directors. " Hispanic Ministry directors are not supposed to administer their own programs but to advocate on behalf of Hispanics in all the other departments," said one director. "Our job is to help other directors do their job better when it comes to Hispanics." Another director used a medical analogy to explain the different roles. "The other directors are like cancer doctors or pediatricians. We're more like the general practitioners. We need to know something about each area of ministry, while the other directors need to be highly specialized. I feel I can do more for my brother and sister Hispanics here [as the Hispanic Ministry director] than if I were stuck in just one area of ministry.'
Some of the directors interviewed had applied for other diocesan positions and some planned to do so in the future. One female director described her current role as "transitional." She felt that her mission was to ensure that other Hispanics in the diocese developed the skills and the credentials to replace her. "I'm not going to stay here forever," she noted. "My whole idea is to develop the lay leadership that can take over after me. That's my whole thrust, formation and leadership development." Some directors also disputed the notion that their current position was the most important one for advancing Hispanics in the diocese. "It is also important for non-Hispanics to experience Hispanics in top administrative positions in this diocese," noted one director. "Why? Because just my presence in that position in going to remind you that the Church is not all of one color. I can offer a different vision and on a daily basis, you will not have the same kind of interactions with me that you would have with a White Caucasian. Until the Church recognizes that Hispanics can take over the general leadership roles in the Church, and not just those specifically aimed at Hispanics, we cannot become the Universal Church."
Despite receiving support for their own leadership development, most directors said their diocese had not done enough to foster Hispanic leadership at all levels. A key issue raised by the directors was the need for their diocese to develop and maintain more culturally sensitive and equitable hiring and promotion standards. Ideally, Hispanics should acquire an advanced degree and English fluency to function in a senior administrative position. However, because Hispanics were less likely than non-Hispanics to have this training, they were clearly at a disadvantage. Moreover, not all diocesan-level positions actually required advanced training, and many Hispanic candidates possessed dynamic communication and outreach skills that were critical for multicultural programming and ministry. All of the directors felt that their diocese tended to under-value these non-academic skills and credentials and to over-value the academic ones. In addition, their dioceses rarely if ever imposed a language requirement for any position outside of Hispanic Ministry. Bilingualism might be preferred, but was not actually required of incoming directors. Thus, diocesan hiring and promotion systems still tended to be biased in favor of non-Hispanics.
On the broader issue of racism and ethnic discrimination, few directors complained of overt hostility or ethnic stereotyping in their day-to-day dealings with colleagues. In fact, most expressed high praise for the faith commitment and professional dedication of the non-Hispanics they worked with. However, most directors also felt that effective cooperation was frequently undermined by deeply ingrained cultural attitudes that reflected an "Anglo-dominant" outlook on the Church. In addition, most dioceses in their view still lacked the institutional mechanisms to ensure consistent Hispanic representation in pastoral planning and programming. One director noted: "there is still this assumption when Anglos talk about 'The Church' and multiculturalism, that it is 'their' church, and that we Hispanics are the outsiders."
Another director said there is a "profound lack of awareness of our Hispanic reality that creeps into assumptions about how to conduct outreach or to design programs appropriate to Hispanics." Some Anglos think by translating a document into Spanish or by inviting Hispanics to attend a diocesan event, Hispanics will simply respond. If they don't respond, they must not be interested. "We are ignoring the need to engage Hispanics as full participants in the planning of all diocesan programs and events," said this director. "It is a subtle way that even well-intentioned gestures or activities do not build up the church as One Church."
Despite these observations and criticisms, the directors were nearly unanimous that the Encuentro 2000 meeting in Los Angeles was a major step forward for the Church. The Encuentro attracted over 5,000 Catholics, including 88 Bishops, in a nationwide celebration of the Church's growing diversity. For some dioceses, noted one director, " participation in the Encuentro was the most high-level expression of multi-culturalism they have ever had." Another director described the Encuentro 2000 as "an important consciousness-raising experience" but was doubtful that the momentum would last. However, about half the directors said their diocese was now organizing its own encuentro-type process that would adapt the format and principles of the Los Angeles meeting to its own reality. These directors were hopeful that by creating a mechanism for inter-cultural faith sharing, diocesan-level encuentros would create a foundation for broader dialogue and more participatory structures that would facilitate collaborative ministry at all levels.
AUTHOR: Stewart J. Lawrence, Puentes, Inc.,
September 20, 2000, Washington, DC
Previous Page 
Next Page (Summary and Conclusions)
