|
Jacob
Kavunkal, SVD At the very outset, it has to be clarified that the following reflections are evolved out of encouragement given by the Apostolic Exhortation, Ecclesia in Asia: "theologizing is to be carried out with courage, in faithfulness to the Scriptures and to the Church’s Tradition, in sincere adherence to the Magisterium and with an awareness of pastoral realities" (n. 22). It is also to be mentioned that my comments are specifically from an Indian context. Rightly, the entire document is geared to the Church’s mission in Asia. This is done in the context of the fact that the biblical account of salvation has its beginnings in the Asian soil and Christianity has its roots in Asia. The document celebrates the fact that Jesus Christ took flesh as an Asian. The proclamation of this Jesus Christ to Asia is the Church’s "unique contribution to the peoples of the continent" (n.10). The first part of the document paints the doctrinal perspectives, in the line of the Encyclical Redemptoris Missio. This is followed up by a description of the practical consequences for mission and its concrete expressions in Asia. Jesus Christ the one and only Saviour According to Ecclesia in Asia, the Church’s mission is not just a proclamation of Jesus or witnessing to the Gospel (Lk 24:48-49; Acts 1:80); it is proclaiming Jesus Christ "as the one and only Saviour for all peoples" (n.10). In fact a careful reading of the first part of the document makes it clear that this proclamation of Jesus Christ as the one and only Saviour is the chief concern of the document. Within the first 21 numbers nearly 30 times Jesus Christ is qualified as the "only Saviour" or "the Redeemer". This requires some further explanation. Ever since the Prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, Cardinal Jozef Tomko’s description of India as "the epicentre of (certain theological) tendencies and Asia their main territory", there has been a sort of mistrust of the Indian/Asian theologians on the part of the Vatican.1 According to the Vatican these theologians do not believe the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as the only Saviour. Hence we come across the curial concern to emphasize the uniqueness of Jesus Christ at every instance. This in turn has caused a tension between the curial concern and the pastoral requirements of Asia. This tension is manifested in the very title of the Asian Synod, "Jesus Christ the Saviour and His Mission of Love and Service in Asia". One comes across this tension both in the Orientation Paper (Lineamenta) as well as the Working Paper (Instrumentum Laboris) of the Asian Synod. Naturally the tension found its way to the Synod hall as well. Asian Bishops in their interventions emphasized the need for taking a more "practical" approach to mission as Jesus himself did and called for a "gospel that is embodied in our lives which can carry much more credibility and power of conviction than a Gospel that has only been wrapped up in beautiful words, teachings and moral injunctions".2 This conflict of interests is continued in the Post-Synodal document as well. According to the traditional understanding what makes Jesus Christ the unique Saviour is his redeeming Death and Resurrection. In the words of Ecclesia in Asia, "God took upon himself our human nature and endured suffering and death to win salvation for all people" (n.12). Hence for the Church in Asia to fulfil its mission the "preaching of the saving Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ must be [its] absolute priority" (n. 2). This in turn makes the Church as the community of the saved, into which all are to be incorporated, as the body of Jesus Christ. Hence the document hopes: "just as in the first millennium the Cross was planted on the soil of Europe, and in the second on that of the Americas and Africa, we can pray that in the Third Christian Millennium a great harvest of faith will be reaped in this vast and vital continent." (n.1). It is precisely this claim of uniqueness for Jesus Christ and the Church, denying the salvific value of other religions, which makes the Church’s mission objectionable to the followers of other religions in Asia. This insistence on the proclamation of Jesus Christ as the unique Redeemer and the desire to make the fruits of the Paschal Mystery available to all in the Church, makes mission a laughing stock in a pluri-religious context. Reacting sharply to the papal hope for the third millennium that we quoted earlier, Narendra Mohan, Member of Parliament and the editor of many Bharatiya Janata Party publications, wrote: "If we implement the belief of the great religious leader Pope John Paul II for the next millennium we will divide the world and will invite conflict. The views of the Pope to convert the world only to Christianity is contrary to the concept of Universal Brotherhood. It is contrary to the "Freedom of Conscience".3 Ecclesia in Asia is aware how the proclamation of "Jesus as the only Saviour is fraught with philosophical, cultural and theological difficulties, especially in light of the beliefs of Asia’s great religions, deeply intertwined with cultural values and specific world views" (n. 20). However instead of understanding these problems, the Document presents these challenges as "as an even greater incentive in striving to transmit ‘the faith that the Church in Asia has inherited from the Apostles and holds with the Church of all generations and places’" (n.10). For committed followers of Asian religions it amounts to outright arrogance and blind superiority. No wonder Ecclesia in Asia was described by them as " a chauvinistic, offensive and presumptuous document". 4 The Mission of Jesus Recent Scripture scholars have shown how the death of Jesus Christ was both caused by his ministry and the logical consequence of it. Jesus invested the time of his public life for a ministry of "going about doing good" (Peter’s summary of the ministry, Acts 10:38) and forming a group of disciples, the Church, to continue his ministry (Jn 20:18-20). It was a ministry of compassion, love, justice and other-centredness. He showed how the God whom he experienced as the "Abba" (intimate parent) was other-centred and hence the Sabbath laws and similar rules of purity and observances are to be interpreted in terms of the human beings and not in terms of the laws themselves. For God is concerned about the well-being of the humans, especially of the lost, the broken hearted, the marginalized, etc. Ecclesia in Asia too describes beautifully this ministry in number 11. However, the protagonists of Judaism took him to be a threat to their religion and to themselves. Therefore, as Ecclesia in Asia also puts it, "he was accused of being a blasphemer, a violator of the sacred Law, a public nuisance to be eliminated". In fact this plotting to destroy him had its beginning already from the start of his ministry (Mk 3:6). His death was seen as a failure of his ministry. But God intervened and raised him up from the dead as an approval of his ministry (Acts 2;24, 32, 36). Thus, the ministry that he accomplished from the time of his baptism becomes crucial. Hence Peter laying down the qualification for the one to replace Judas says: "one who has accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us" (Acts 1:21-22). Whatever was his metaphysical identity, an issue that became acute only during the Greek inculturation, Jesus’ own self perception was that of a prophet (Mk 6:4; Mt 13:57). He contrasts himself with Elijah and Elisha (Lk 4:24-27). Jesus stood in the prophetic tradition of the Old Testament, finally represented by John the Baptist, though different from him. His contemporaries too perceived him as the prophet from Nazareth (Mt 21:11; Mk 8:28; Mt 16:14; Lk 7:39). It is unfortunate that Ecclesia in Asia did not pay much heed to this aspect of the mission of Jesus, especially since it is very vital in the context of Asia that the Document paints in the first chapter. The concern of Jesus is not so much with Christian doctrines as with the enduring elements that can actively direct or influence human lives of any time. Asia needs the prophetic ministry as the synodal interventions also emphasized. What Asia encounters frequently is the poor whose humanity is assaulted, despoiled and left half dead on the edges of Asian societies. Upholding their humanity is the primary Christian commitment in Asia. Though the document showed very well how the historical and geographical context of Jesus exercised an important influence on his mission (n. 5), when it comes to the Church’s mission in Asia, this is not followed up. This, in spite of the fact that the Synod Fathers had insisted on the Church’s mission of love and service in Asia in the social, political, religious, cultural and economic realities of Asia (n. 5). The dispossessed indigenous peoples of Asia, the marginalized Dalits, the ill-treated women of Asia, the children of Asia who file away their tender childhood years working hard, the victims of terrorization and violence, all wait to hear the prophetic voice of the Asian Church. The Salvation Motive As we have seen, according to Ecclesia in Asia, mission in Asia is the proclamation of Salvation that comes only through Jesus Christ. Even if other religions have authentic values, these "find their fullness and realization [in Jesus Christ]" (n.14). Even the presence of the Holy Spirit "in human hearts and in the history of peoples, in cultures and religions serves as a preparation for the Gospel and can only be understood in reference to Christ" (nn.15,20). One wonders if we can go beyond this position, based on the biblical narratives. In the Bible God’s redemptive action in the world begins already with creation and continues all through history including the Christ event. The Incarnation, as we saw earlier, was geared to the ministry of manifesting God’s fullest form as far as human beings can grasp it (RM, n. 5). Based on the biblical revelation a Christian believes that the Mystery of Jesus Christ is the only mediation between God and humans. At the same time based on the same revelation, one cannot restrict that mediation, that salvation, to Christianity alone, for the Mystery that is identified as Jesus Christ in the Christian tradition, is operative in all creation (Jn 1:1-3; Col 1:14-20) and in all religions in so far as that Mystery is "enlightening every human being coming into the world" (Jn 1:9). We prefer to speak in terms of the "Mystery" for two reasons. For one thing, in spite of the revelation in Jesus Christ, on earth we can never fully grasp all the workings of that Mystery. On the other hand "Mystery" will be more acceptable to the followers of other religions. In a pluri-religious context what we speak must be understandable also to the followers of other religions. Mission in Asia
In the light of what we have been saying it is clear that though according to the New Testament a Christian can and must believe that Jesus Christ is the only Mediator, in so far as all are participants in that Mystery identified as Jesus Christ, we must refrain from making claims of uniqueness in a religiously pluralistic context. What the Gospels describe is the ministry of the Incarnate Lord. The community’s mission is the continuation of that ministry. In this way we preserve the true missionary vocation of the Church without in any way denying the value of other religions. This does not mean that all religions are the same or equal. For the perception and response to the Mystery need not be same in all religions. The former head-hunting Naga religion cannot be equated with a religion like Buddhism. The response to the Mystery is mixed with human selfishness and frailty, which can be true also of Christianity. Yet the Church is called "to serve human beings by manifesting to them the love of God made present in Jesus Christ" (RM, n. 2). The Church, thus, "remains an icon of the service to life in Asia, in courageous contrast to the many dark forces at work in [Asian] society" (n.7). It follows from what we have been saying that it does not make sense to claim that the values in other religions or the "intense yearnings for God, experienced in Asia, are to be fulfilled in Jesus Christ. They are the result of the presence of the Mystery of Jesus Christ and it would only be presumptuous to say that it "can only be fully satisfied by Jesus Christ", or to make this yearning as the justification "to proclaim with vigour in word and deed that Jesus Christ is the Saviour" (n.9). Or else we should also be prepared to accept that the yearning for God in Christianity has to be fulfilled in the Asian Religions! In fact the current exodus from the West to the East in search of spiritual experience, makes such a conclusion even more logical. Similarly it would be better to refrain from expressions like: "the heart of the Church in Asia will be restless until the whole of Asia finds its rest in the peace of Christ, the risen Lord" (n.10). They can only be damaging the cause of the Church’s mission in Asia. As the Bishops of Japan wrote in their response to the Lineamenta, "If we stress too much that ‘Jesus Christ is the one and only Saviour’, we can have no dialogue, common living or solidarity with other religions".5 It is only right that the Church in Asia distances itself from this sort of expansionistic mission which is a hangover from colonial thinking. We have to become reconciled to the fact that salvation is the work of God who makes it available to humans through his "Vak" (Word), and that the mission of the Church is to continue the mission of Jesus of Nazareth. Then we will realize that it is a tremendous obligation than any claim of superiority or arrogant monopoly. Such a mission of service is more demanding though less romantic. This does not mean that the Church is not interested in giving rise to communities. Asia always had appreciation for Jesus Christ. Many will be attracted by our Christian life and will want to commit themselves fully to the Lord in the community. Such a mission takes place in the climate of good will and collaboration. It does not share the language and spirit of Ecclesia in Asia. As Pope John Paul II told the leaders of the non-Christian religions at Delhi on 7 November, 1999, "Religion is not and must not become a pretext for conflict particularly when religious, cultural and ethnic identities are involved. Religion and peace go together". He went on to say "Religion is the source of goodness, respect, harmony and peace. This is the only way to honour God".6 The Pope concentrated on the love of God and stressed "our common origin and common destiny and the shared responsibility for peoples’ well-being and progress, our need of the light and strength that seek in our religious convictions". As the Vidyajyoti "Editorial" has shown, though the Pope did not mention Jesus Christ, "it was an announcement of good news that set a pattern for the mission of the Church in Asia".7 One does not come across this sensitivity that the Pope exercised while addressing the leaders of non- Christian religions, in the document Ecclesia in Asia. True, in the first chapter it portrays the Asian context, especially the religious context. However it has no impact on the document’s prescription for proclamation. Here one finds the typically Western triumphalism and exclusivism. The proclamation of Jesus Christ must take place primarily through the life-style of the Christians. It is not a frantic effort to save Jesus Christ from other saviours by trumpeting truths about Jesus Christ. The Church must stand for what Jesus Christ stood for and work for the realization of God’s reign on earth, which was the foundational theme of Jesus’ work. A sheer proclamation of the uniqueness of Jesus Christ will turn out to be a religious competition which in the Asian context can only lead to fanaticism and religious violence, the opposite of the divine reign! The "new life in Jesus Christ" is the quality of the lives of the Christians and not a claim made over the followers of other religions. Christian mission in Asia must become a love affair and not a Truth-affair. There is great wisdom in the document’s recommendation of the value of personal contact. It was the methodology of Jesus himself and that of the early Church. It was also the method of sharing religious experience in India in its classical periods as can be known from the very name Upanishads. Literally it means the teaching, experience transmitted by sitting close by. Today too it has relevance in India and would be more effective than megaphonic proclamations. Inculturation: a Means or Mission? In the context of the Proclamation of Jesus Christ Ecclesia in Asia advocates the need for inculturation. "The presentation of Jesus Christ as the only Saviour needs to follow a pedagogy which will introduce people step by step to the full appropriation of the mystery" (n. 20). For this purpose the Document cites the examples of John of Montecorvino, Matteo Ricci and Robert de Nobili. This type of inculturation becomes peripheral and self-centred. The justification for inculturation is getting the message across. However praiseworthy the experiments of Matteo Ricci and Robert de Nobili were, it cannot be denied that what inspired them to cultural adaptation was not so much the love of the respective cultures or the right of these cultures, but to make Christianity acceptable to the upper and aristocratic classes. This is not the true principle of inculturation. The point of departure for inculturation is the autonomy of the given culture, in so far as it is the God-intended means of unfolding the capabilities of a given group (Gaudium et Spes, n. 53), giving them identity and rootedness. Culture, taken integrally, is the fundamental givenness in mission. That is the reason why the first Jerusalem Council decided that no unnecessary burden is to be imposed on the gentile cultures (Acts 15:28). The question is not so much how best the message can be conveyed, but how the culture can be transformed so that it becomes more humane and life-giving. Hence, Paul VI defined evangelization in terms of evangelizing cultures (Evangelii Nuntiandi, n. 20). Thus inculturation becomes an other-centred process. It is a process through which the Gospel becomes a life-giving element for each culture, especially for the victim of the selfishness of the respective cultures. Hence it is a process of making the message of Jesus Christ a Good News to the people, especially those on the periphery. The parable of the Good Samaritan verifies inculturation today (Lk 10:25ff). In a way the entire ministry of Jesus was a transformation of the Jewish culture. It was identification, identifying with the poor and contestation, challenging whatever was dehumanizing in the Jewish culture. This led him to the cross. In this sense the cross becomes the sublime paradigm for incluturation today. What we have in Ecclesia in Asia is a mere "borrowing of elements from human cultures", so that the faith can become "part of a people’s cultural heritage", and different cultures can become "expressions of the one Christian faith". The primary concern is to offer the Good News of Redemption to all. To achieve this, certain particular areas, like theological reflection, liturgy, formation of priests and religious, etc., are identified for inculturation. Though they are important they still remain part of the over-all project of presenting Jesus Christ. The key question in genuine inculturation is, does the faith become a transforming prophetic presence from within, as the salt, light and leaven? Even in the ministry of Jesus the Good News is experienced differently by different people. What the paralytic experienced is different from what Zaccheus or the Samaritan woman at the well experienced. What the woman caught in adultery experienced is different from what the widow who lost her only son experienced. The same is true even today. Inculturation is the search to respond creatively and relevantly to the context so that the Gospel becomes a Good News to the particular context. In the context of the theological inculturation, the Document stresses the need for taking the sensibilities of the Christians into consideration. Probably we must stress equally the human right of the Christians for accurate information. Should we allow them to continue in the wrong information? Right catechesis is part of the process of inculturation. Concluding Remarks Ecclesia in Asia is very much couched in the Western language of uniqueness and suffers from the preoccupation of saving Jesus Christ from other saviours. Mission is still anchored on salvation. All these are out of tune with the ground realities in Asia. Similarly certain phenomenological and historical considerations would have enabled the document to have a more realistic approach and to articulate a paradigm shift in mission for Asia. One wonders if it were the proclamation of Jesus Christ as the only Saviour or the political will that eventually made Europe Christian! Was the evangelization of Americas a religious activity of sharing the Good News or a fall out of colonialism causing millions to lose their lives? Why is it that all appreciable inroads Christianity has made, are only among the followers of primal or disintegrating religions? Equally intriguing is the fact of the alarming rate of de-Christianization in the West. It would be interesting to study how far the salvation-oriented teachings of Redemptoris Missio helped mission in Asia. Mission in Asia must move away from superiority complexes and claims of paternalism and must anchor itself on the practice of Jesus Christ. As Cardinal Darmaatmadja highlighted in his response to the Apostolic Exhortation, Asia needs "a new Evangelization which includes within it the attempt to reshape the concrete form of a New Presence of the Churches of Asia, as a constitutive part of the Evangelization of Asia".8 He emphasized that this new presence has to take into account how Jesus Christ has always been present and working in the Asian world. What we have outlined is an attempt to paint some of the contours of this new form of presence of the Church in Asia. Confrontational language cannot carry out mission in Asia. Rather "in the framework of complementarity and harmony, the Church can communicate the Gospel in a way which is faithful both to her own Tradition and to the Asian soul" (n.6).
Notes: 1.
Cardinal Jozef Tomko, "Proclaiming Christ the World’s only Saviour",
L’Osservatore Romano, (Eng.), 15 April, 1991, p. 4. Partly the
description was a misrepresentation. For instance what the Cardinal
quoted as an Indian theologian’s views on conversion was in fact only
that which the concerned theologian described as the Hindu view of conversion.
Ref.: Text from the author.
|