What fascinated me in Canals’ article was his discussion on Maria Lionza’s “double possession”. I found it quite intriguing how Lionza’s spirit can possess the medium, in this case Barbara, first in the “Indian” form, and secondly, in the form of a “white woman”; this phenomenon quite symbolically speaks to the plurality of this saint’s identity, and the ethnic and cultural multiplicity from which this cult has come to be. 

Of course, one of the major themes in Canals’ article is the relationship between technology, or his camera, and sacred rituals, or intimate and often private moments of religious devotion and activity. I felt like there was quite a connection between the fluid and evolving identity of Maria Lionza and the guidelines governing what cameras are, and are not allowed to capture during a moment of spiritual possession. Canals’ ability to film Maria Lionza’s incarnation as a white woman or “queen” but not as an Indian woman was described as being due to the incarnation of the latter as “frailer” than the former. I wonder, what does this say about Indigenous influences on the Maria Lionza cult? Why is her reincarnation in the “Indian” form considered to be a more frail moment of spiritual possession? 

What further stood out was how the cult of Maria Lionza, after Catholicism (from which it derives a significant proportion of religious influence, and of which many of its believers simultaneously consider themselves to follow) is considered to be the second most popular religion in Venezuela. The diversity of the cult’s followers conveys a unifying function of religion, and a, perhaps, unique transcendance of class boundaries. It seems as though the plurality of identities that follow Maria Lionza reflects, or maybe mirrors, the plurality of the saint’s own identity and what she represents. From fertility and eroticism to a benevolent divinity and universal mother, according to Canals, Maria Lionza symbolizes “the plural and composite nature of both the cult that bears her name and, more generally, of the Venezuelan society that gave birth to her” (163).

All-in-all, the religious practices of the cult and identities of Maria Lionza herself powerfully reflect those of her followers, and as such, seem to shape and dictate the relationship between ‘the sacred’ and ‘the camera’. 

In your opinion, do you think there is a place for something like a camera in religious rituals like the one described in Canals’ article?