Once a stranger, always a stranger? Immigration, assimilation, and the Book of Ruth.
Rodas, M. Daniel Carroll
This article explores a particular dimension of immigration, the
adaptation of first-generation immigrants into the host culture, in
dialogue with a biblical narrative about an immigrant woman, Ruth. (1) I
appeal to recent assimilation theory and apply its insights to a close
reading of the canonical book. (2) This reading explores how it might
resonate with the way contemporary immigrants navigate the challenges of
living in a new context. (3)
Several caveats are in order. First, my concerns lie largely with
Latino/a immigration into the United States. This is due to my personal
background (I am half-Guatemalan) and experience living in Guatemala and
working with Latino/a immigrants. Second, much research on immigrant
integration into the host country explores the experiences of second-
and third-generation descendants of immigrants. My primary contacts,
though, are with recently arrived Spanish-speaking immigrants and their
children. This limitation fits nicely with the Ruth narrative.
Assimilation Theory
For this immigration reading of this narrative I employ
assimilation theory. This theory came under suspicion for a time because
of pejorative connotations of the term "assimilation," which
to some communicated attitudes of superiority, an ideal of conformity to
the majority culture, and the loss of identity. (4) Assimilation theory,
however, has experienced a revival in recent years, and scholars are
exploring diverse dimensions of these cultural dynamics. (5)
Specifically, I employ what is called New Assimilation Theory, which is
associated with Richard Alba and Victor Nee. (6) They are aware of
weaknesses of earlier iterations of the theory, such as suggestions of
ethnocentrism and the inevitability of assimilation.
Alba and Nee define assimilation as "the decline of an ethnic
distinction and its corollary cultural and social differences.
'Decline' means in this context that a difference attenuates
in salience." (7) In their construct, assimilation is not
inescapable; it is incremental, cumulative, and variable in terms of its
time frame, circumstances, and history. It is also a mutual process,
where the host culture is modified in the interaction with newcomers.
Other important topics related to assimilation theory, which I will not
explore, include transnationalism, the changing conceptions of
citizenship, the relevance of social class, residential patterns, and
the impact of economic globalization both here and abroad.
Mechanisms of the Assimilation Process
Several mechanisms serve as causal factors in the assimilation
process. These work in combination and at differing tempos. Alba and Nee
classify these as either "proximate" (those within personal
and larger relational fields) or "distal" (at the macro
level). Immigrants are not passive observers or victims in relationship
to these mechanisms. The authors mention three clusters of mechanisms:
Purposive action. Immigrants make choices and devise strategies to
assimilate to the degree they desire or are able, weighing potential
risks and benefits. Success necessitates that immigrants acquire
appropriate sociocultural competencies that decrease the distance
between themselves and the host culture and that facilitate the
implementation of their efforts.
Networks and forms of human capital. Networks, such as extended
family, friends, and others of similar ethnicity, make the accommodation
process easier. These are sources of orientation and basic information;
they serve as safety nets for immediate needs, provide contacts for
jobs, and help with initial housing.
Institutional mechanisms. These are the more formal institutions
and regulations of a society. They may play a large role in whether
immigrants assimilate or remain segregated (and to what extent), with
all of the sociocultural and legal implications associated with this
status. The relationship between the proximate and distal mechanisms can
be reciprocal. As immigrants are incorporated into their new context,
rules change, and negative attitudes shift; institutional realities are
modified, and opportunities for immigrants may increase.
Boundaries and Ethnicity
Assimilation impacts formal and informal ethnic distinctives for
both the outsider and the host culture. Alba and Nee, for example,
espouse a constructionist view of ethnicity. They distinguish between
boundary crossing ("someone moves from one group to another without
any change to the boundary itself"), boundary blurring ("the
clarity of the social distinction involved has become clouded"),
and boundary shifting ("involves the relocation of a boundary so
that populations once situated on one side are now included on the
other"). (8)
Ruth: A Tale of Assimilation and Acceptance?
This section offers a reading of Ruth from the perspective of
assimilation theory. I do not presume that assimilation processes in the
ancient world were exactly as they are today, but I do assume
commonalities based on a shared humanity. These echoes may generate a
fresh appreciation of this biblical narrative and its relevance for
immigrants and their communities.
Mechanisms of the Assimilation Process
Purposive action. One thing that becomes readily apparent from an
assimilationist reading of the Book of Ruth is the ambiguities in
character, plot, and dialogue. These are expected in cultural
negotiations across borders. Life in a new land is complicated, and the
obstacles that one must overcome require nuancing words and balancing
personal motives in the effort to survive and succeed. One must be
proactive, and Ruth certainly is, as her strategies to integrate into
Bethlehem make clear. Years before she had married an immigrant from
Judah (1:4-5); now she herself is the immigrant.
1. The decision to follow Naomi (1:14-18). Many have taken
Ruth's declaration in 1:15-18 as a determination to forsake her
ethnic background and to convert to the God of Israel (her possible
conversion was an important topic of discussion among rabbinic
commentators). This is possible, but might not these be the words of a
woman reluctant to return to her kin? Burdened with the stigma of having
married an immigrant from Judah and with questions about not having
borne any children (was she sterile?), could she find a new husband
among her own people? Could not her rejection of Naomi's advice to
return home be instead a decision to say and do whatever was necessary
to make a new life for herself in Judah? Is hers a show of loyalty to
her mother-in-law, or is it a determined overstatement for the sake of
her future? Is it a combination of both impulses?
On Naomi's side, why does she tell her daughters-in-law three
times to "return" (1:8, 11, 12) and repeat that verb one more
time to Ruth, once Orpah leaves them (1:15)? Why does Naomi not respond
to Ruth's audacious statement? Does she welcome Ruth's
company? Is she suspicious of Ruth's motives? Does her bitterness
include anything and anyone Moabite (she had lost her husband and sons
in Moab)?
2. The decision to work in the fields (2:2-3). After the return to
Bethlehem, Ruth asks for permission to work in the fields. The wording
implies that she knows the gleaning laws. (9) She is doing what it takes
to survive. It was the time of the barley harvest (1:22), and to do
nothing was to go hungry. Her initiative quickly pays off. She finds a
place to glean, and the field in which she is working belongs to a
kinsman.
3. The self-deprecating language in the exchange with Boaz
(2:8-13). As in the case of many immigrants, her hard work is noticed by
others (2:7; the meaning of the verse is contested). Boaz inquires of
her and engages her in dialogue. What is puzzling is her self-ascription
as a nokriyya, the not-so-nice label for a foreigner (2:10). Is this an
acknowledgment of the long-standing enmity between Moab and Judah? 10
Her status as a member of Naomi's household and her participation
in the gleaning would lead to the expectation that she classify herself
as a ger, a "resident alien." (11) Does she use the other
label out of a sense of vulnerability? As perhaps the only foreigner in
a field of Bethlehemites, did she feel very much like the outsider (the
foreman calls her "the Moabitess"; 2:6)? Was it her accent,
skin color, dress, demeanor? Had she been shunned? Had the young men
been acting inappropriately?
Her choice of label also might be calculated: it could be
self-effacing, designed to win greater sympathy. She couples this word
with falling prostrate before Boaz. This exaggerated respect wins her
the appreciation of the onlookers and plays to the self-worth of this
important landowner. Note her subsequent humble response to him as
"lord"; she is but his "servant" (2:13).
This immigrant is learning the cultural cues of her new context to
attain her desired end: food, rest, and, with a little luck, continued
support for herself and Naomi. Some suggest that there is a bit of
flirtation on her part as well. If this is correct, it is further
evidence of using whatever means are at hand to gain favor in a foreign
land.
4. The exchange with Naomi after the return from the fields
(2:17-22). There are subtle differences between what was communicated in
the exchange with Boaz and what Ruth reports to Naomi. Ruth says she had
been working among the men (2:21). What is she doing with her words? Is
this an innocent slip of the tongue, or is she manipulating Naomi? Ruth
"accepts" Naomi's advice to work among the women,
something Boaz had told her and she already was doing (2:8-9). By
bringing Naomi food and sharing the news, Ruth wins her
mother-in-law's commendation and gives her hope. At home the
impression is that she is the submissive daughter-in-law to the woman
who, when they first arrived, may have not been so kindly disposed to
her. Ruth's immigrant strategy has to prosper both with Naomi and
in the fields.
5. The actions at the threshing floor (chapter 3). Much is made of
the ambiguities of this scene. The first issue is that Ruth does not
follow all of Naomi's advice at the threshing floor, even though
she states that she will and the text reports that she did (3:1-6).
Instead of waiting for what Boaz will instruct her to do, she tells him
of his obligations as a kinsman-redeemer (3:9). Again, Ruth takes things
into her own hands.
What is the meaning of the phrases "uncover his feet and lie
down" (3:4, 7) and "spread your cloak over your servant"
(3:9)? Are these symbolic gestures of modesty without sexual intent, or
euphemistic descriptions of a sexual advance? Either way, Ruth once more
takes a risk. If things go wrong, there will be embarrassment and shame,
with any prospect of acceptance in Bethlehem irredeemably lost (and what
would this mean for Naomi?).
She calls herself simply "Ruth," without the label
"Moabitess," and twice repeats "your maidservant"
(3:9). Is it that she wants to be seen as a person with a name without
the ethnic label, even though she recognizes her social place? As in the
harvest fields and her first experience with Boaz, this immigrant is
largely in control of events. As before, her report to Naomi differs
from what happened. She puts words into Boaz's mouth and includes
Naomi in the benefits of his largesse (3:16-18).
Networks and forms of human capital. Ruth must plot a course within
the networks she encounters to facilitate assimilation. She needs these
networks to accept her and help her, if her new life is to be a success.
1. The family of Naomi. By marrying one of Naomi's sons, Ruth
entered that family's network. In chapter 1 she decides to remain
in this network. Now, she moves to the new setting of Naomi's
hometown. The start of that experience is not encouraging. Naomi does
not answer her declaration, and when they arrive and are greeted by the
women of the town, she does not introduce Ruth (1:19-22). Was Ruth
noticed by the other women? Was she ignored because of her Moabite
ethnicity? Was Naomi embarrassed to have a Moabite daughter-in-law in
light of the negative portrayals of the Moabites in Israel's
traditions? That homecoming must have been an awkward moment for Ruth.
In time, the tone of Naomi's words changes, and her faith is
renewed. Based on what she is told, Naomi believes that Ruth is acting
on her behalf and following her directions. Yet, the reality is another!
In chapter 4 again Naomi is silent, when the women tell her how she
should feel toward this Moabite immigrant because of the love that Ruth
has for her and the fact that, through her daughter-in-law, she has
another "redeemer," a grandson. This little one will take care
of Naomi in her old age, they say (4:14-17). Maybe Naomi's taking
the child onto her lap is an acknowledgment of the truth of what these
women have told her.
2. The women of Bethlehem. This is a world that Ruth will need to
enter if she is to become part of the rhythms of life of the town. At
her first encounter this group overlooks her. Though she is the widow of
one of Naomi's sons, she is still one of "them," not one
of "us." Ruth, however, gains a reputation through her hard
work and actions. By the end, Ruth has won over this network.
3. Two other networks are the workers in Boaz's fields and the
elders. In both cases, what they say reflects respect for Ruth. The
workers are witnesses to her untiring work (2:6-7); the elders at the
gate call for God's blessings upon this new family and link Ruth to
Rachel and Leah, other notable women who came from outside Israel
(4:11-12).
It is noteworthy that these three groups never refer to Ruth by
name. She is the "Moabitess" (2:6), "the woman"
(4:11), "this young woman" (4:12), and "your
daughter-in-law" (4:15). In other words, Ruth is among them and
appreciated by them, but still not o/them. Even so, she has come a long
way since the "whole town" had greeted Naomi upon their return
(1:19). Naomi demonstrates tenderness to her at times, calling her
"my daughter" (2:2, 22; 3:1, 16, 18). To Boaz she will move
from being a poor woman of interest, whom he values, to being his wife,
but she remains--at least in public--"Ruth the Moabitess"
(4:5, 10; though in private conversation, "my daughter,"
3:10).
Institutional mechanisms. The third and final set of mechanisms is
institutional. In the Book of Ruth, these are of both an informal and a
formal nature. By informal is meant that the characters participate
within a cultural-legal framework without any ceremonial accruements.
This is the case of the gleaning laws. Ruth apparently is aware of this
law and goes out to the fields to harvest. This institutional mechanism
assists her integration, even as it meets the physical needs of the two
widows.
Two other legal issues that surface in the book--the redemption of
the property of a relative and (possibly) levirate marriage to provide
an heir for a deceased kinsman--are more formal in nature. (12) These
are handled publicly at the gate of the town, and the pronouncement of a
blessing is given in traditional language (4:1-12). These two rulings
are testimony before the community that Ruth has legal standing: she is
now within the line of a Bethlehemite family, with rights to a specific
parcel of land, and she stands within their genealogical history.
Boundaries and Ethnicity
Is there evidence that the boundary lines between the Bethlehemites
of Judah and this Moabite immigrant are in any way impacted? Several
items imply a positive answer.
1. Note the way in which the narrative and its characters refer to
Ruth. The label "Ruth the Moabitess" is used throughout by the
townsfolk, even Boaz (1:22; 2:2; 4:5,10), but Naomi and Boaz also call
her "my daughter." Even though boundary markers are still in
place within the story, the spirit of the ethnic labeling has shifted.
The narrator on two occasions refers to her simply as "Ruth"
(2:8; 4:13; yet 1:22; 2:2, 21). In the narrator's view, Ruth has
lost her ethnic label as a "foreigner."
2. The characters in the narrative affect the boundary as well.
Boaz, a significant person in the community, praises Ruth (2:11-12; cf.
3:10-14) and offers her aid and protection in the hearing of the workers
(2:8-9, 15; cf. 3:15). He demonstrates commitment to Naomi and Ruth at
the gate in the exchange regarding the family land (4:1-10). All of this
would have had an impact on attitudes. The people connect Ruth to the
traditions of several women of Israel, and not to the stories of
Israel's past encounters with Moabite women (4:11).
3. The experience of Obed, the son of this mixed marriage, will be
different from Ruth's (4:13-17). He is embraced (literally) by his
grandmother and is named by the townswomen. Ruth's assimilation
strategies have paved the way for a different life for her son.
4. The book also places this narrative within the much larger
context of the genealogy of David (4:18-22). This connection, unknown to
the characters, is directed at the reader and further underscores that
Ruth "belongs." She is the ancestress of Israel's
greatest king. Perhaps because David had not forgotten his ancestral
roots in Moab, he takes his parents there to protect them when he flees
from Saul (1 Sam. 22:3-4).
5. Whatever this narrative's relationship to other passages
dealing with Moabites, at least in the world of this book, ethnic
boundaries have changed. Ruth has done more than simply cross boundaries
that remain unaffected. The progressive acceptance of this outsider
suggests that ethnic boundaries were blurred and eventually shifted, at
least in this small town.
Additional Issues for Future Reflection
At least two other items affecting assimilation that are dealt with
in the literature deserve more study but are beyond our purview. One is
the role of religion. It is interesting to note that, even though Ruth
makes a profoundly religious confession in chapter 1, nowhere does she
mention the God of Israel by name.
Naomi does (1:20-21), as do Boaz (2:12; 3:10-13) and the people of
Bethlehem (4:11-12, 14). One might ask, How deeply was Ruth invested in
her new cultural setting? Were her actions focused on survival and
acceptance, without the impulse of faith? How much of her Moabite
background and memory did she retain?
Another topic is the role of intermarriage in ethnic assimilation.
In the narrative the intermarriage of the Israelite Boaz and the Moabite
Ruth is not an issue. Perhaps this is due to the importance that it will
have later for someone from that town: David.
Conclusion
This essay offers a brief reading of the Book of Ruth through the
lens of assimilation theory. The theory's notion of three sets of
mechanisms and their effects on ethnic boundaries find parallels in this
account of the assimilation of a Moabite immigrant into Bethlehem. And
this biblical story opens a window into the processes of immigrant
assimilation today.
I have found that this approach has the pastoral value of allowing
present-day Latino/a immigrants to find their own story in the text.
(13) The challenges they face in terms of their identity and status are
well documented in anthropological and sociological research and are
laid bare in the wrenching stories of Latino/a fiction. The obstacles to
overcome are similar: physical and economic survival, ethnic acceptance,
cultural competence, and legal awareness. (14)
The mores of Ruth also are familiar: hard work and loyalty, coupled
with creative (even risky) action. It is a tale of a process, perhaps
never completed for Ruth but with a brighter promise for her son. Who
knows whether today's immigrants are part of a larger, significant
trajectory of which they are totally unaware? For people who are the
product of ethnic intermarriage--in my case, the son of an immigrant
mother and a native-born father--we have heard the stories of that
parent who worked so hard for us to feel at home here while not losing
our other cultural identity (for me, my guatemalidad). We are Obed. Said
another way: Ruth still lives among us.
Notes
It is a pleasure to offer this article in honor of Jonathan Bonk, a
missionary statesman and scholar with a heart for refugees and
immigrants. I count it a privilege to call him a friend.
(1.) For immigrant readings, see, e.g., Dianne Bergant, "Ruth:
The Migrant Who Saved the People," in Migration, Religious
Experience, and Globalization, ed. Gioacchino Campese, and Pietro
Ciallella (New York: Center for Migration Studies, 2003), 49-61; John M.
Prior, "'Failed' Migrants Return: A Transforming Word
from the Book of Ruth," in God's People on the Move: Biblical
and Global Perspectives on Migration and Mission, ed. VanThanh Nguyen
and John M. Prior (Eugene, Ore.: Pickwick Publications, 2014), 132-43;
Fleur S. Houston, You Shall Love the Stranger as Yourself: The Bible,
Refugees, and Asylum (New York: Routledge, 2015), 83-92; the reflections
of Athalya Brenner and Yani Yoo in Global Perspectives on the Bible, ed.
Mark Roncace and Joseph Weaver (Boston: Pearson, 2014), 186-89.
(2.) Cf. M. Daniel Carroll R., "Reading the Bible through
Other Lenses: New Vistas from a Hispanic Diaspora Perspective," in
Global Voices: Reading the Bible in the Majority World, ed. Craig S.
Keener and M. Daniel Carroll R. (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2012),
20-22; also my Christians at the Border: Immigration, the Church, and
the Bible, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2013), 55-58.
(3.) For the choice of the canonical text, see my "Ethics and
Old Testament Interpretation," in Hearing the Old Testament:
Listening for God's Address, ed. Craig G. Bartholomew and David J.
H. Beldman (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012), 204-27. For a survey of views
on the book's provenance, see Tamara Cohn Eskenazi and Tikva
Frymer-Kensky, Ruth (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 2011),
xvi-xix.
(4.) Some prefer terms such as integration, accommodation,
acculturation, or adaptation.
(5.) Ruben G. Rumbaut, "Assimilation and Its Discontents:
Ironies and Paradoxes," in The Handbook of International Migration:
The American Experience, ed. Charles Hirschman, Philip Kasinitz, and
Josh DeWind (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1999), 172-95; Peter
Kivisto, "What Is the Canonical Theory of Assimilation? Robert E.
Park and His Predecessors," journal of the History of the
Behavioral Sciences 40, no. 2 (2004): 149-63; Chris Lee,
"Sociological Theories of Immigration: Pathways to Integration for
U.S. Immigrants," Journal of Human Behavior in the Social
Environment 19 (2009): 730-44. In biblical research, Katherine E.
Southwood has utilized assimilation theory in Ethnicity and the Mixed
Marriage Crisis in Ezra 9-10: An Anthropological Approach (Oxford:
Oxford Univ. Press, 2012).
(6.) Richard Alba and Victor Nee, Remaking the American Mainstream:
Assimilation and Contemporary Immigration (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
Univ. Press, 2003); idem, "Assimilation," in The New
Americans: A Guide to Immigration since 1965, ed. Mary C. Waters and
Reed Ueda, with Helen B. Marrow (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press,
2007), 124-36.
(7.) Alba and Nee, "Assimilation," 130.
(8.) Ibid., 131.
(9.) The gleaning laws are found in Lev. 19:10; 23:22; Deut.
24:19-22.
(10.) Gen. 19:30-37; Num. 22-25; Deut. 23:3-6 (MT 23:4-7). For the
term's negative connotations, see, e.g., Ezra 10:2, 10, 14, 17-18,
44; Neh. 13:27; cf. Gen. 31:15; Prov. 5:20; 23:27.
(11.) English versions translate ger differently: "alien"
(NRSV), "sojourner" (ESV), "foreigner" (NTV 2011),
"immigrant" (CEB).
(12.) Lev. 25:23-34, 47-55; Deut. 25:5-10.
(13.) Within Hispanic biblical and theological studies, diaspora
perspectives are coming to the fore. See Luis R. Rivera-Rodriguez,
"Toward a Diaspora Hermeneutics (Hispanic North America)," in
Character Ethics and the Old Testament: Moral Dimensions of Scripture,
ed. M. Daniel Carroll R. and Jacqueline E. Lapsley (Louisville, Ky.:
Westminster John Knox, 2007), 169-89; cf. Carroll R., "Reading the
Bible through Other Lenses."
(14.) See Carroll R., Christians at the Border, 17-26, 153-56.
M. Daniel Carroll R. (Rodas) is distinguished professor of Old
Testament at Denver Seminary in Denver, Colorado. He is the author of
Christians at the Border: Immigration, the Church, and the Bible (2d
ed.; Brazos, 2013) and co-editor of Immigrant Neighbors among Us:
Immigration across Christian Traditions (Pickwick Publications,
forthcoming).