Beyond the other other: A Thiseltonian appraisal of Isagani R. Cruz's hermeneutics

• Main Author: Espiritu, Daniel Llusala
• Format: text
• Language: English
• Published: Animo Repository 2004
• Subjects: Isagani R. Cruz, 1945-Hermeneutics; Criticism; Philosophy
• Online Access: https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/etd_doctoral/57; https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/context/etd_doctoral/article/1056/viewcontent/CDTG003786_P.pdf
• Institution: De La Salle University

In an effort to de-marginalize the bukod na bukod (extremely marginalized) Filipino and subvert oppressive hegemonies shrouded in texts (for example, American neo-colonialism), Filipino Christian literary critic, Isagani R. Cruz, has formulated, practiced, and endorsed what he calls a makabayang pagbasa (nationalist reading), a mapagpalayang pagbasa (liberating reading), a maka-Filipinong kritika (pro- Filipino reading), or a kritikang Pinoy (Filipino criticism), which is essentially postkolonyal na pagbasa (post-colonial reading), a reading/interpretation in the context of colonialism. In his various mga pagbasa (readings), Cruz has explicitly appealed to Christian doctrines/scriptures for support, but most often to post-structuralist, postmodernist, and post-colonial dogmas/writings. This writer asserts that Cruzs passionate concern for the liberation of the Filipino from domination, manipulation and oppression (which has prompted Cruz to place great emphasis on hermeneutical socio-political application and relevance) is noteworthy and praiseworthy. However, this writer argues that, by adopting postmodernist presuppositions and methods, Cruz has betrayed his Christian presuppositions, confused the two horizons (that of the text and of the interpreter), and ignored an Other. In his mga pagbasa, Cruz has not done justice to the texts; he has manipulated texts for his own purposes. So concerned for the other Other (that is, the Filipino, specifically Philippine literature and criticismthe Other, being the Orient), Cruz has marginalized an Other, the author of texts. Hence, in Cruz, evil is not overcome with good. In fact, Cruzs post-modernist pagbasa is reflective and supportive of the debilitating postmodern radical suspicion and manipulation. This writer, therefore, proposes that Cruz and other Filipino Christian scholars go beyond Cruz's concern for the other Other. They need to go beyond to the Other who is genuinely concerned about all others. One learns from Anthony C. Thiselton that hermeneutics for it to be truly non-manipulative and non-oppressive, for it to be liberating, genuinely just must be consistently Christian. The Christian virtues of humility, love, faith, and hope are not only religious or ethical values but are also hermeneutical. With Thiselton, this writer contends that postmodern radical suspicion must be replaced by critical trustif there is to be genuine understanding among people and if they are to work together effectively toward greater peace and justice. With such an end in view, the imperative for Filipino Christian scholars is to move towards a hermeneutics that is both Filipino and Christian.