|
Fr
Henry Paroi What do you think is the identity of the Melanesian Christians? Do we have to become something else in order to become Christian? These are the types of question we have to ask ourselves. What makes us true Melanesian Christians? Too many of us take it for granted that we have already been made Christian and so, no problem. We should try as best we can to do away with such a mentality because if we take Christianity as it is being presented to us, we will be living a very artificial life. We pretend to be something else, but we are not. We have to be truly Melanesian in order to become truly Christian. We cannot deny the fact that we are Melanesians, and on top of that we are Christians. Introduction Our world or our society as we know is very busy. There are a great many discoveries and inventions going on. Science and technology have played a major part in trying to make this world a better place for people to live in. As Christians, we believe that God has created this world, but his work of creation is still emerging. He gave the necessary intelligence to human beings to make this world a better world for people to live in. In other words, God expects us to continue the work of creation he has begun and to make it better. In the same way, our understanding of God has grown and developed. We are beginning to know him better through our own experiences, whatever situation we are in. This is also the result of the changes in our Church structures, the way we pray, the way we talk about God and the way we express our faith in him. These changes have taken place so that the way we express our faith in God will meet the demands and experiences of our time here and now. In other words, our Christian theology has grown and developed. We are trying to discover God more and more through our own life experiences. As the Melanesian people grow and develop, the way they think or perceive things will also change. Some of the factors that have influenced these changes would be education, influences that are coming from within Melanesian boundaries, from outside and, also from Christianity. Without doubt, we have good and bad influences coming into our societies. And these are the very ones that will shape the mentality and the way of life of Melanesians, whether we like it or not. While this is going on, some Melanesians are beginning to be aware of the dangers that might take place. They fear that there is a danger that the traditional cultural values could be lost. And so, they are trying to look back and get hold of these values. They believe that these values are very important because they keep the identity of being Melanesians. If those values go, then we would have no Melanesians. They believe that it is more profitable to use these cultural values in order to understand what is coming into their culture. That means that whatever good comes into their culture, they will be able to use their own cultures to interpret and evaluate the new things in their own terms. The majority of Melanesians are Christian, and they are beginning to realise that they can only understand God better and express their faith in God better, through their own terms in life. They want to discover God more and more as Melanesians. And, of course, this is not limited to the Melanesians alone. This is also happening in the other Third World countries. As a result, through their great thinkers or theologians, some of these Third World Christians are trying to discover God more, and are trying to talk about him according to their own context or experiences. As a result, there has arisen the Theology of Liberation, Black Theology and so on. When we speak of trying to understand or rediscover God within the real life situation of the Melanesians, we mean to say that we will put the Gospel values within the context of the life experiences of the people. We do not change anything from the teaching of Christ, but we try to find out how it could be meaningful to the Melanesians. The process whereby this could be carried out is called contextualisation, indigenisation or inculturation. At the very beginning, I have started off with some questions and I was searching for an identity for the Melanesian Christian. The three terms I have mentioned above can in some way help us to try and identify what would, or what could, be done in order that we may have a Melanesian identity that is at the same time, Christian. It is very important that we should have a kind of distructive mark that will show other people that we are Melanesian Christians. In this paper, I will try to explore the meaning of the three terms that I will be using, and will try to find out how they are related. They look quite frightening but they are not so difficult if we take time to think about them. All three of them in their own way have something to do with culture and the Gospel of Christ. In their own way, they try to help the message of the Gospel be understood more meaningfully within cultural terms. However, the main purpose of this paper is to help stir up our own Melanesian people who have the necessary background or tools to come forward and assist our people in their struggle to live a life that is expected of them as Christians. But this life is going to be lived within the life situations of the people. I believe that we have many good thinkers in Melanesia and so I call on them to come forward. The time has come, and let us make use of the limited resources we have and not leave them idle. Meaning of Contextualisation The term contextualisation is derived from the word, context. According to a dictionary, context would mean "circumstances in which something happens or in which something is to be considered".1 To support this, I will give an example. Let us take eating. Most people would agree that eating has a social dimension. Through our eating together, through our sharing of food together, we can learn to know others, we can understand them. Through eating, unity, togetherness is achieved. And so, from the context of eating together, we can build up our relationships. Having said that, what can we say about the term as it stands? Contextualisation is very hard to define, but we can describe it by saying that it implies a "... process in which the decision and actions are directed at local situations".2 As far as we are concerned, it means that it is a process whereby the message of Christ is preached and placed within the concrete life situations of the Melanesian people. One good example is this. Look at the prayers we have in our liturgical services. Many of them have been translated into our local languages. We are praying and singing in our own languages, and that is the work of contextualisation. People are talking to God in their own languages. And this is one of the greatest achievements we have in our churches so far. We can understand what we are saying. In the past, at least in the Catholic Church, prayers were said in Latin and the hyms were sung in Latin as well. But now, it is different because we know what we are talking about. Meaning of Indigenisation Again, the term indigenisation is borrowed from the word indigenous. It simply means, "belonging naturally (to a place)".3 In other words, some one who is born in a given place, therefore in a given culture or environment. What do we mean when we speak of indigenous Melanesians? What we mean here are the people who have been born and brought up in PNG, Irian Jaya, the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, New Caledonia and Fiji. Of course, there are some people who have been born in our countries, but they are not Melanesians because they do not share the same culture with us. Therefore, we cannot call them indigenous people of Melanesia. Sometimes we speak of the indigenous clergy. What we mean here is that there are priests or pastors who have been ordained to become ministers of the Church and yet they are typical Melanesians. Indigenisation "... is a term concerned with peoples’ cultural milieu ... (it) strives to take very seriously the traditional or native culture of a people".4 And so, within the process of indigenisation in the Christian context, the communicators of the Gospel message take into account very seriously the cultural background of the people. They have to consider where people are when they are talking about the Christian faith, morals, attitudes and so on. The term indigenisation is a subject for debate, especially in the mission countries. For many theologians, the concept is a theological one and is very much connected to the missions. Some of them even go further by saying that the term would imply a "self-governing, self-supporting and self-propagating church".5 This is how one of the authors tried to describe indigenisation: ... formation of the local community of Christians and training of the local clergy and religious, to their life-style or sociological adaptation, to the incarnation of the Gospel in actual life situations and in every sphere of personal and family life, social and civic activities, to economic and political systems and the cultures of each country; to theology, spirituality, the triple ministries of the Word (preaching, evangelisation, catechesis), worship (liturgy) and service (formation and organisation of Christian community towards Christian maturity, witness in society and humble service in love).6 Relationship between Contextualisation and Indigenisation We are aware that when we are doing contextualisation and indigenisation, we are doing theology. Both, in their own ways, will try to help the people to understand more fully the presence and message of Christ in their own life situations. On the other hand, we must be careful that we do not confuse the two terms because they are different in their own ways, and yet they can both help us to express our faith in God more meaningfully. It has been stated that the concept of indigenisation tends to "... pose some ambiguities and limitations in adequately conveying or even understanding the faith of the Third World Christians’’.7 Let us have a look at some more areas whereby the concept of indigenisation is said to have some limitations. The idea that is brought across by indigenisation implies the importation of Christ and then planting Christianity in the local situations. The idea of importation is hot very positive. Something foreign has been imposed on the local people. We can go a little bit further by saying that, the idea of indigenisation also implies that we use our cultural heritage or cultural values so that our expression of faith in Christ is meaningful. In order to do that, we would have to regain our traditional myths or stories, worship and so on. But, this will be difficult because the Churches have cleared out many of our cultural practices. The idea of localisation is also implied. We do not have localisation for its own sake; we have to have firm and reasonable resources in order to have that. We should have properly trained people before we can have localisation, and this also includes the Church personnel and finances. How many churches are still very much dependent on aid, both on money and church workers? If we take a closer look at the idea of indigenisation, we will further realise the problem it can bring. It can "portray the spirit of cultural self-contained prejudice and to some extent opposition against the theologies of other peoples".8 Considering all these reasons that limit the idea of indigenisation, we are then more inclined to accept the idea which is brought across by contextualisation. To accept more readily the concept of contextualisation does not suggest that we will completely forget the ideas and feelings that are brought across by indigenisation. The fact still remains that we will "retain the ideas and feelings as expressed in indigenisation and to relate them to their future meaning".9 Culture is not static, it changes. It can adapt, and is influenced in many different ways by other cultures. A culture has to do that in order to serve properly its members who are undergoing change. Considering the aspect of change in a culture, the idea of indigenisation will not adequately cater for this change, because it only tends to put emphasis on using traditional cultures as such. It is not future oriented, it tends to look back to its own way. It is not outward looking toward relations with other cultures. Having considered the limitations that indigenisation tends to have; I am very much convinced that we should work in the area of contextualisation. The concept that comes out here is very much open to any culture, whether in developing countries, or in very sophisticated societies or in very highly developed societies. The concept of contextualisation is open to the future, yet it focuses very much on the current situations of the people here and now. In other words, the concept moves or changes with the changes that are taking place in the life experiences of people here and now. I have been trying to make clear the difference between indigenisation and contextualisation, while at the same time stating that they are related so both are useful. Their difference will become very clear if we try to put them into practice. Indigenisation will tend to be stacked on traditions while contextualisation will very seriously consider the changes that are taking place. If we were going to accept that we should work with contextualisation, we would also have to include the idea of inculturation. The work of contextualisation is to point out, or identify, areas whereby the work of inculturation would go ahead. In the following pages, I shall be discussing at length the idea of inculturation, its meaning and how it works in different contexts. I believe that although the two terms are different from each other, they can work side by side. How can we know that our work of contextualisation is well orientated? Paul Hiebert uses another term. He talks about critical contextualisation. According to this concept, we are given some principles in order that we may use or adapt some traditional practices and transform them to be used in the church. Or we could even take those practices that are unchristian and transform them or change them so that they can have a Christian meaning.10 What is Authentic Contextualisation? Through the guidance of our leaders who have gone through cross-cultural experiences or have received some kind of training that is associated with this kind of work, we must first of all study our cultures very deeply. We have to gather information critically; we have to analyse our traditional beliefs and customs in whatever question or issue we are addressing. Then with our leaders we can move on to study the passages in the Scriptures, our Christian tradition that has been handed down, and also to listen to what our authorities are saying or teaching. This critical process will produce both negative and positive results. (a) Scriptural Basis The first thing we have to take note of here when we are doing inculturation is that we must be careful to maintain the scriptural basis. That would mean that some particular aspect of our culture could either be accepted or rejected as far as the teaching of the Bible is concerned. For example, in many of our societies in Melanesia, women are forbidden to stand up in front of the people, especially when men are gathered. This will also mean that women are not allowed to stand up and read the Scriptures during prayer services. Is that particular custom acceptable as far as the teaching of the Bible is concerned? The Bible teaches us that each and every Christian has a duty and a right to preach about God. By Baptism every one is entitled to share the word of God in many different ways. Therefore, this particular custom is going to be challenged by the word of God. The more positive example would be this. In my area back in the Shortlands, there existed a custom that a group of women would prepare food with their husbands and then take it to the chief of the village. The chief would then redistribute this food to the people and those who had come to see him. Furthermore, the way in which the food was brought to the chief was quite ceremonious. I would think that this could be used at the time of the Offertory during Mass. It could be quite fitting because, after the priest has consecrated the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, it is then distributed to the congregation. (b) Modification or Transformation Some aspects of our culture could be in a middle position. They could be reworked or reorganised in order that they express the message of Christ in a more meaningful way. One example is the songs and prayers our people used to pray to their traditional gods. We could get some of these and perhaps change some of the words so that they can bring out the true Christian meaning of what we are saying or singing. Another example is that in my village we have a custom when a chief dies. There is a special kind of dance, which is called "Sagini". It is mainly performed by women and is done in a very solemn way. It involves the waving of hands and some ceremonious wavy movement created by the legs. We are already using this on Good Fridays. We have changed some things so that it will give us the true meaning of what we want to get. It is adapted here because the people believe that since Christ is the Chief, then we have to express the death of our Chief in the way we do to our chiefs. (c) Substitution We have to be aware all the time that the reason why we are putting some aspects of our cultures into our Christian life and worship is because we want our life in God to be meaningful to us. We want to express our life in him in the way that is meaningful to us. In some cases we will find that some of our customs do not really fit in well with the teaching of Christ. Therefore, in order to have something meaningful to us we might have to make substitutes or we may have to borrow from other cultures, so that in this way our adaptation brings us a true Christian meaning. A good example of this would be the term God. It is an English word and many people in Melanesia are using this term because they believe that it brings out the real meaning of Christian God. They fear that if they use their own terms that were used for their traditional gods, they would not be thinking about the Christian God. And so they want to use the term God as is being presented by the missionaries. This then is an example of borrowing something from another culture. (d) Christian Heritage or Experience Sometimes we may find ourselves in a position where we cannot modify or make any substitution in order to bring out the message of Christ more meaningfully in the way we live and worship. If that is the case, we can go back and have a look at our Christian heritage or tradition and to see whether we could use some of those practices and adapt them so they become meaningful to us in our life with God. An example of this is our traditional attitude to the graveyard. In the past these places were out of bounds and no one could hang around there. This could be seen more so among children who were not allowed to go anywhere near graveyards or even to look at them. The dead were buried and only stones and flowers were placed beside the grave in order to mark the space where a person was buried. Now that Christianity has influenced us a lot, our traditional attitudes have changed to some extent. We are not afraid to go to the graveyard anymore and children go there on their own too. More importantly, we now find in every Christian society that a cross (sign of Christians) is always placed on the grave of a person who has died. And so, our attitude towards the dead has been Christianised. Our traditional understanding of the dead has been replaced by our Christian understanding of what death means. (e) Creativity in the Community There is always room for creativity. We can all do something which can help our life in God become mature in the kind of life we are living here and now. There are times when we have to use our own imagination and thinking. I remember that at the time of my ordination, there was something very new added to the liturgy. Just before I was called to go forward towards the Bishop, a kind of dialogue came in. One did not want me to be ordained and was asking what was going on, while the other was trying to explain things. Through this very simple play or drama, the meaning of the ordination and the priesthood were clarified. People came to understand things a little bit better. Furthermore, we have to realise that what Christian theology does is proclaim and at the same time it reflects the life of the faithful who are living in Christ. The way societies encounter God is very much associated with their own experiences in whatever situation they are, in a given time and at a particular place. Therefore, Christian theology has to come out of contextual encounter. Take a look at the history of Christianity; the doctrines and the structures have been the results of God encountering the people in a particular time and place. As Christianity continues to grow and develop and the social order changes, naturally the way in which people will encounter God will change. That is why we have further to develop the work of contextualisation, so that God may encounter his people in their own situation here and now, not tomorrow and not yesterday either. Dilemma between Culture and Christian Religion Before we can do any work on contextualisation or inculturation, it is very important that we should be clear in our minds about the relationship between culture and religion. The problem of trying to discern the real relationship between the two goes back to the beginning of Christian religion itself. Therefore, this needs our attention very seriously because human beings could be torn apart by one or the other. We know from the Bible and from the other sources that there was always a tension between the two. The Gentiles, at first, were forced to observe the customs of the Jews in order to become Christians. The Jewish Christians already included Greek customs in their Christian life. This shows us very clearly that the tension between culture and religion is not a new thing, and it will probably continue to go on as long as the world continues to exist. It is true that most people would hold that culture and religion are very much linked together. However, what I am concerned with here is that there is certainly a dilemma between what we can call the culture of Christianity and the cultures of many indigenous people where the Gospel has been preached. Melanesian culture is to some extent different from that of Christianity. Readers are reminded that while we hold that culture and religion can never be separated, they should also realize that there is a difference between Christianity and the Melanesian culture. If things are not being explained properly and no attempt is made to make clear the distinction between two, then our Melanesian people will be torn between Christianity on the one hand and Melanesian culture on the other. Culture and religion have to be open to each other, they need to learn from each other, they need to influence each other so that they can meet the needs of the people who are religiously and culturally growing. Having to be open to each other does not mean that they will each lose their identity. For instance, I know a person and we share our lot very intimately. We influence each other and we learn from each other at a very deep level. But, that does not mean that he or she will loose his or her identity. We will still be very different for we are unique human beings. Now, what then is the identity of Christians? There is only one identity in Christian religion, and that is the spirit of Jesus Christ. We express this by our commitment of our mutual love and fellowship with our brothers and sisters in Christ. The phrase "in Christ" is very important here because we believe that Christ influences our exercise of love. It is Christ who is giving us the power to love. All others are cultural identities made by people so that Christ, who is working in us, may be expressed well and in a meaningful way. (a) Meaning of Inculturation The term inculturation is a relatively new concept, and again it is as old as the Christian religion itself. The idea it brings out is very much related to the incarnation, God the Son becoming a human being like us. Jesus Christ was introduced into a certain culture; it was the Hebrew culture. Jesus Christ became a Jew following their customs. Inculturation is an issue that the Church has had to come to terms with. Throughout the history of Christianity, many different nations with its peoples saw the importance of getting Christ integrated into their own life situations. In other words, they saw the importance of expressing their faith in God as influenced by their own cultures. One of the results of the work of inculturation that has taken place was the formulation of rites in certain countries. E.g., we have the Ukrainian Rite, the Melkites, the Russian and so on.11 People did this in order to express their faith in God in the way that is meaningful to them. Likewise, the Christians who became missionaries to the people of Melanesia had received the faith from other people who had presented the same message, but as influenced by their own cultures. These missionaries to Melanesia had accepted the faith and had lived, expressed and proclaimed it in their own way as influenced by their own cultures. And that was the work of inculturation. Whether we like it or not, it will continue to operate in our lives whether we are aware of it or not. It has been argued that inculturation is not an anthropological term, but a theological one.12 I agree with that because what we are trying to do is to put the message of God in a way that could be lived, expressed and proclaimed in a more meaningful way to the people in their own life situations. According to one author, inculturation "is a process of growth to the fullness of Christian experience in the cultural setting specific for a local church".13 In other words, we do not, and we will never change the message of Christ to suit our own circumstances. But that message of Christ will be interpreted, expressed and proclaimed according to life situations. There have been many arguments raised against the idea of inculturation. Some think that if the Church employs the good cultural values of the indigenous people, then the Christian religion will lose its identity because it will be absorbed into the practices of the local religions. Perhaps that was one of the reasons why the missionaries were asked to preach only the pure, simple and neutral Gospel. It meant that the Gospel was going to be presented without any reference to the indigenous socio-cultural expressions in the mission territories.14 Without realising it probably, or maybe they did, the missionaries were presenting or imposing their Western culture at the expense of Christianity. Without fully anticipating the consequences of the tactics used to preach the Gospel of Christ, the missionaries left some serious psychological problems among the indigenous people. When the colonial masters left the shores of the Melanesian countries and the leadership of the Church was handed over to the locals, the fact was accepted as such. But now there is great resentment and hostility among the indigenous people if an outsider starts to talk about contextualisation, indigenisation or inculturation. They feel that they are empty, and they do not know what to do because at one time they were told that their practices were bad and evil, and now they are asked to do the very things that were rejected in the first place. That is why when someone asks someone if they have any cultural practices that could be used in the Church, the answer is most likely to be, "mi no save". This is a reaction against being alienated; it is a reaction that is hidden. The concept of inculturation in today’s language is very much connected to the following of the Theology of the Incarnation. God the Son became a human person; he was born through a woman called Mary. This Son of God came to share our humanity; he came to live in a given society in a particular culture belonging to the Jews. This Son of God whom we know as Jesus Christ then used that particular Hebrew culture to communicate to the world the message of salvation he has brought from God the Father. He used every means available to him in that culture to teach about God and his love for the whole world. Bringing Jesus Christ into the life experiences of the people in their own cultures follows the incarnation of the Son of God. Therefore today, the Melanesians are trying to grow and develop with the help of their own ways as influenced by their cultures and their way of life in whatever situation they are in. They desire that life of God to become part of their own life. They have now realised that they can only know God and express their faith in him more meaningfully as they are. The Melanesians believe that in this way they can experience God’s presence in a more unique way. (b) Inculturation and Universality We are aware already that there are many people who do not agree to the work of inculturation, indigenisation and contextualisation. They cannot see the link between these three concepts and the universality of the message of Christ. They are afraid that these could create divisions and nationalism, which will in turn destroy the very character of the universality of the Church. For this kind of person, to be one and the same in all spheres of life of the Church is a means to unity and oneness. Uniformity is acceptable and pluriformity is not acceptable. For this kind of person, to be loyal and to let the Church remain authentic will mean that they have to accept a certain model of culture. People who have this kind of mentality have failed to realise that "universality can only be realised through particularities, unity only through variety, and authenticity through originality".15 The birth of Jesus Christ into a given culture has taught us the lesson of God’s total identification with the people. We can also realise that having to do what he did, Christ also showed us that his mission or his work is universal in nature. The Church has to be localised, indigenised or inculturated so that her universality is fully realised. In every particular local church we find the universality of the presence of Christ. "(Inculturation) necessarily supposes particular cultural expressions in all domains; but universality and unity are realised by the One Spirit, by the same faith and by communion in the values of the Gospel".16 And so, we come to a conclusion here that there is no way we can realise the universality of the Church if we impose one particular expression of culture onto Christians who have many different cultures. (c) Inculturation and Evangelisation What is the relationship between inculturation and evangelisation? Although the two concepts bring out two different ideas, they could be used interchangeably. Both of them in their own domain try to describe the changes that have taken place as a result of the power of the message of Christ. In other words, changes in people’s lives will come about if there is an authentic encounter between the Gospel and a given culture. I have stated earlier that the Gospel has to be open to culture and vice-versa. While the Gospel is preached to a particular people, then the culture of this particular people has to find some expressions that will make the message of the Gospel more meaningful. And this is exactly the task of inculturation. The spirit of the Gospel is lived and expressed within the context of the current life situation of a given people. To realise whether inculturation has taken place, we only have to see whether that particular aspect of culture is in tune with the spirit of the Gospel, and that there is conversion and change in life. Now, evangelisation is "specifically addressing the changes generated not within the Gospel but within the culture when the two encounter each other".17 In other words, in order to realise the work of evangelisation we only have to see the changes of people’s lives in a given culture. This would be the result of the challenge of the Gospel. Furthermore, there should be a harmony between inculturation and evangelisation in order that they can function. Inculturation does not change the truth of the Gospel, but it will make a way for this truth to penetrate into the lives of the people in their own situations. We are aware that the Gospel is the manifestation of the truthfulness of God, and that the Melanesian culture will help to make this truthfulness of God more meaningful. There may be a problem if we are not very careful. One or the other will tend to dominate. I mean to say that if evangelisation is stressed too much then inculturation will loose its value. On the other hand, if inculturation is stressed too much then the concept of evangelisation is going to be overlooked. The two have to work together. Since we believe that God is in every culture, the Gospel will have no choice but to find its expression in cultures. It is our belief that Christ came into the world not to abolish cultures, but to confirm and transform them. At the same time, we are aware that cultures are not above the Gospel, but they help the seeds of the Gospel germinate in the lives of the people. The truth we must always be aware of is that the "Gospel can never be completely detached from a particular culture, and that no one culture can be considered as the paradigmatic expression of the gospel incarnated".18 Therefore, the Gospel transcends all cultures. Where do we start to find the Melanesian Christian Identity? (a) PNG and SI situation No one can deny the fact that the people of Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands are very religious people. Their life as a whole, economic, social, political, fertility and so on, were and are very much influenced by the spirits. There have been many different gods that looked after different areas of life. They were to be appeased for a better life or prosperity in many different ways. On the other hand, they were also to be addressed or prayed to for punishment upon the members of the group who needed to be punished because of what they had done. The gods were to be respected and worshiped so that the whole clan or tribe could survive. In other words, the people of Melanesia had their own religions; they were and are very religious people. Because of this background, the people of Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands are very readily prepared to accept the Christian God that has been brought by the missionaries. Today, we realise that the majority of the people of both countries are Christians. They have accepted Christ as their God, they believe that he will look after their whole life. The belief that they had for their traditional gods has been challenged and changed to the belief in the Christian God. Since the Melanesians have accepted Christ as their God, they are now trying to live and express their faith in their own ways and in their own environment. Because of the Gospel, many changes have taken place in their lives. The question we then have to ask is this: "Has the message of Christ fully penetrated and fully integrated into the lives of the Melanesian people?". I personally believe that in many parts of our countries we have many good and committed Christians. As far as they are able to, they try to live a life that is worthy of being a Christian. But on the other hand, I feel that there is a lot more to be done yet. A Korean sister has identified a problem that is still hanging around. And this is very true with us as well. She calls this the "culture of the heart".19 The heart is deep down within a person and no one can see that apart from the person himself or herself. It is an attitude that has been influenced, determined or conditioned by a culture. If we take a look around us today within our societies, we will realise that we are trying to tackle problems according to our own ways. The missionaries or even the Churches and the Governments are encouraging us to solve problems and do things in a Melanesian way. And this is very good and we have to use our own wisdom for a better life. We have to use our culture to help us deal with our life as Melanesians. However, we may run into problems if we are caught saying that this is my way, this is the way my culture taught me to act and behave. I have to do it whether it is good or bad in the eyes of the Christian God. In other words, I have a feeling that, even though we are Christians we are more ready to do or act upon things the way our cultures tell us to. On the other hand, it seems that if Christianity demands that I should not do such a thing, we face a problem here. People are more inclined, and are more ready to do what their culture tells them to do than what Christianity demands. In our societies, we find that forgiveness is very difficult to come to terms with and that coming to a compromise in Christian terms is equally very difficult. I tend to handle these problems according to what my culture has taught me. If somebody hurts me, my only response is that I have to take revenge; or that I have to pay back what has been done to me. It is true enough to say that forgiveness has been found in every human society to be very difficult to put into practice, and yet it is one of the identities of being a Christian. Therefore, I feel very uneasy when people demand to handle their problems in their own way. It is good in one sense and bad in the other. Christianity has to challenge some of the ways of Melanesians. It would be very unjust to say, that is their way and let them solve it themselves. Too many people nowadays are hurting each other, and it even reaches the point of death. In my opinion, the cause of this is that we are conditioned by our cultures. If someone hurts us, we must take revenge otherwise we will bring an insult on our clan, tribe or community. The pressure to take revenge comes from these institutions. And so, where does Christianity come into play in this sort of a situation? What we need most is an authentic conversion of the heart, which is conditioned and determined by our cultures. Our perception of life and the way we behave that are not in conformity with the Gospel message are the very things needing to be Christianised in the first place. If we are pre-occupied with our hearts as conditioned and determined by our cultures, then the work of contextualisation and inculturation will be very difficult to put into action. (b) Formation of Conscience Trying to help our people to become mature Christians would also imply a proper formation of conscience. Every human person has a very grave responsibility to form his or her conscience properly. Sometimes people will believe that they are doing something good, which is in fact not good and vice versa. It is here that people need to be properly formed in their conscience. Some of their ideas and principles have to be challenged so that the conscience is brought in tune with the spirit of the Gospel. It is very unchristian to say, that is just the way we behave as Melanesians. Every Christian has also a corresponding duty to help form other people’s conscience properly. Most of us are aware of the problem of high demands for compensation, for tribal fighting, or for bride price. All these concepts are the result of the culture that is being handed down to the members of a society. We have been born into this sort of concept and so they become part of us, we grow up with them and they are very much in our flesh and lood. Our cultures have taught us that they are the ways or norms of behaviour that we should follow. Our conscience is influenced by these concepts. And so, our conscience could be in error and we really have to check it very seriously. While we must be faithful to our cultures, our conscience must be properly formed in the light of the message of Christ. I may have to sacrifice some aspects of my culture in order to become a truly Melanesian Christian. What I am suggesting here is that there has to be a thorough study on the ideas and concepts of our people. What is their thinking, and why are they thinking in the way they do? What do they hope to achieve in behaving in the way they do? These questions and more have to be answered in order that people can be helped to form their conscience properly within the spirit of Christ’s teaching. As a Melanesian, I have a feeling that although we have many good and committed Christians, we still have to challenge ourselves whether we are truly, and in all honesty loyal to the message of Christ. I think that many of us are Christians "long skin nating". I have encountered this quite a number of times when people did something not good. They said that what they had done had nothing to do with their belief in God. What they did was outside of the church. They really believed that they could do whatever they wanted to do, but they still considered themselves as good Christians. I see here that their conscience is not properly formed. Of course, to be a true Christian, one’s behaviour should be in conformity with one’s belief. Committed Christians show that they are truly Christian by the way they behave in the community. My own opinion about people who think this way is that they have separated the two different realities. That means, what I do outside of the church building has nothing to do with my behaviour inside a church building. I believe this is where the formation of conscience is necessary. (c) Life and Worship The way in which we express that we are followers of Christ is through our life of prayer (worship) and our general behaviour in a society in which we live. But, as Christians our good behaviour has to go beyond the boundaries of our own society. We will contradict our being Christians if our actions outside of our own society are different. In other words, the way we behave and our attitude to people in general outside of our own society has to be the same as our behaviour in our own society. What we consider to be good or bad is determined by our clan, tribe or our group. What we consider to be bad in our own clan or tribe could be considered good if we use it outside of our own community. With regard to our life of worship, we must be constantly asking: Am I preparing a prayer service that is meaningful to my congregation? Are the gestures and expressions used at home with my congregation? I have a feeling that those who prepare prayer services or liturgical services have done so according to how they see them to be meaningful without considering and giving a chance to the people themselves together with their leaders to think about it. To feed our generation spiritually today, we must listen to what the people are saying and thinking. Our people today are very much mixed both in age and experience in many different ways. Now, to be able to prepare a liturgy, which could be meaningful to these people, then we must consider the many people although they may be one in culture. If we try to look ahead, we will also be confronted with a problem. We are somehow caught in the middle. If we employ some aspects of traditional culture into our worship, this may not apply to our generation today. On the other hand, if we use some aspects of culture that we borrow from outside we will equally be questioned by the older generation. I am more inclined to help and prepare the younger generation. I believe that the future of the Christian faith is in their hands. Our liturgical worship has to be prepared in a way that is meaningful to the people of today, here and now. The songs and the prayers we use must be in tune and must be meaningful to the people of today. The types of musical instrument are also very much part of this. I had an experience myself a year ago. I had arranged that we should buy an electric guitar and some other musical instruments for the young people of the parish. Eventually, we bought an electric guitar. To my surprise the young people were interested and felt that something meaningful had come about. Some would argue that the young people were interested because they were mad the so-called modern music. I agree with that, but we are human beings and therefore we need these man-made things in order to come closer to God. The point is that we have to begin somewhere. While we are being faithful to our culture so that we do not do away with it, we are also aware that our culture can adapt, it can borrow from other cultures so that our experiences today are meaningful. We learn from other cultures in order to grow and develop. God’s world is not Melanesia alone, we must learn beyond our cultural boundaries. If we are open to life outside our own, then our prayer services or worship will "become for our people, a more rewarding experience than the celebration of (our) customary rites at (our) shrines and homes".20 Let us have a look at some of the gestures we use in our worship of God. One of them is the striking of the breast. According to our own Christian understanding of this gesture, it is an act of sorrow. We express ourselves that we have failed God and that we are unworthy. And I do not hesitate to say that this expression is an imported one, not a Melanesian way of expressing sorrow or unworthiness. Laurenti Magesa spells it out very clearly that kind of gesture according to the Africans is very much against what is intended. He said that the striking of the breast is a sign of challenge, and that there is no humility involved. When I came cross this point, I was very much struck with what Laurenti was saying.21 In my area, back in the Shortland Islands, the striking of the breast implies superiority, it means power, and is a form of boasting. It says, I am not prepared to repent. In a culture where I have been brought up, it could be more meaningful to strike the head. That is more appropriate since you always hear people talk about "tingting" rather than the heart. When they make a mistake, they strike their head, and not the heart. In Melanesian societies in general, when a big man comes to speak to the people the normal thing is that the people will have to be seated. It is an insult to a big man if people stand up while he speaks. Sitting down has something to do with being lower than the one who is speaking. It is an act of humility and also an act of courtesy. To be seated is also a form of an acknowledgment that someone who, is speaking has an authority, that he or she has power. While the speaker is saying what he or she has to say, it is normal that people will have to listen while they remain seated. I think that the fact that we stand up while the Gospel is being read to us is misleading. The gesture is not conveying what it means to be seated in the Melanesian cultures. It is giving the opposite of what it is supposed to put across. This may sound simple and not very important, but I feel that this is one of the areas that has to be looked at very seriously if we are going to act upon the message of Christ within our own context. To stand up while the gospel is being read is to disregard Christ who is speaking to us through the one who is reading the word of God. In our churches today, we are experiencing something quite new. The members of our churches are drifting away, to join other new churches that are coming in. We have to ask ourselves, what is the cause of such a drift? Too often, we blame and condemn the people who leave us. We do not realise that we might be the cause of the problem. Sometimes people may find that they are not at home in their own churches and so they depart. They feel neglected and they feel deprived of the pastoral care that is due to them. They feel alienated from their own experiences because something foreign has been imposed on them. They feel empty. This is the result of pastors and church workers who do not work for their people and preach the Gospel of Christ in terms of what people can understand and receive as something that has meaning for their lives. Making Disciples in the PNG and SI Perspective It has been argued that there is an absolute need for re-evangelisation in this modern world. That would imply that we have to start all over again in presenting the Gospel to our people. However, I am convinced that is not the problem. An African student has somewhat brought out what is supposed to be the necessary work that is needed to be done in our situation today. This student said, "... our problem is not evangelisation, ... but discipling".22 In other words, our people have already been Christianised, they have already heard of Christ. They have received the teachings of Christ and they know what Christ expects of them. The task for the committed Christian, and more so for those who have received the mandate to preach the Gospel of Christ is to help people to become mature followers of Christ. In other words, the task is to help our people to become mature disciples of Christ in their own day to day living experiences, in their own time and place. They are to be guided in order that Christ will come to be fully integrated in their own life situations. We have to find means and ways to help our people become mature in their life with God and one another. To have heard of Christ through evangelisation is one thing, but to live that message that has been given to our people is quite a different thing. We are to help our people strengthen their faith in God, so that God will become part of their life. Where do we start in our attempt to help our people to become mature followers of Christ? If we take the whole of humanity, we will realise that in most cases, peace, justice, harmony and being religious will depend to some extent on how individuals are raised in a family. And so, it would mean that our work should begin in and with families wherever they are. First, the authorities in a family have to be the ones to be helped to become mature in their lives with God before others can be guided and helped. It is the authorities in families that will help the members to become mature Christians. Furthermore, we must search for suitable places for people to come and talk about their faith in God freely. I think that too much attention is given as to what sort of a building to use for discussions, or even for courses and workshops. We are giving too much attention to the fact that we should have a house with chairs, tables and so on. In the rural areas where most of the population lives, we do not expect to have these items. The situation there is very different, and we have to adapt to their life situation. The Melanesian people are not a people of a building. They talk things over outside a building in most cases. They could sit on the ground or even under a tree to discuss matters that concern them. Somehow, being in a building does not give them a freedom to speak; somehow it limits them. They are more at home and are free to express themselves when they are under a tree or on the ground. Therefore, if we are going to help our people to become mature followers of Christ, we might have to reconsider the suitable places or the environment that is more suited to our people. We must guide them in their own situations. Further Observations There is no doubt that there have been many questions asked as to what aspect of the Gospel could be inculturated into a Melanesian context. Some think in terms of doing theology as such, which means that the message of Christ has to be presented and lived in local terms, expressions, concepts and so on. We can always go further and can learn from what the others are saying. Their ideas could be very helpful to us. A Korean theologian has identified three areas in which inculturation or putting the values of the Gospel within the context of the indigenous people could be carried out. Theology — this includes the devotional life and spirituality. It would mean that we have to develop or initiate a kind of theology that is in accord with the life of our modern Melanesian people, with their concepts and how they perceive life here and now. Liturgy — this includes the whole area of worship; our music, dance and art and the kind of gestures we use. Then, we also have to look at the structure of our church buildings because that can hinder or disturb our worship if the buildings are not in keeping with our local situations. Human relationships — we are all aware that our churches are very much institutionalised. What are the possibilities if our relationships are going to be carried out in that sort of an environment? We have to think very seriously of what human relationships mean to us when we are adapting them into our Melanesian cultures.23 Some people would go as far as asking a question: Are we saying that we are going to Melanesianise, as it were, the Gospel of Christ, or are we saying that we are going to Christianise the Melanesian cultures? To be sure, we will have to let Christ Christianise our cultures and it will never be the other way round. Our cultures have to be Christianised in order that we become truly Melanesian Christians. Our concepts or ideas, our attitudes, our behaviour and in fact our whole life as Melanesians have to be Christianised. We do not mean to change our cultures and become something else, but we are letting Christ come and dwell with us in our own life situations. Let us have a brief look at the situation of the early Jewish Christians. There was a big argument as to the admittance of non-Jews to Christianity. This had led to a great assembly in Jerusalem.24 The conclusion this Council reached was that the Gentile Christians were not obliged to observe the customs of the Jews in order to become Christians. They did not have to become Jews in order to become Christians. This resolution of the Council of Jerusalem should be our starting point and should encourage us. We have to remain as Melanesians and we do not have to become Western people in order that we become Christians. The Jerusalem Council clearly shows us the fact that God is in every society, and in that society there are persons who have a particular way of life. This will also mean that if God is in every human person in every society, then he is in every culture because a person and culture will never be separated from each other. Every culture is the best tool in bringing God’s life more alive and active in people’s lives. Furthermore, we have to be aware that our cultures are not perfect and so have defects in them. There is always room to borrow and adapt from other cultures in order that our expression of faith in God could become more meaningful to us. The culture of the early Christians was put together by their being followers of Christ. Look at the rite of Baptism in the Catholic Church. Many of the elements that are employed in this particular rite were the result of borrowing from many surrounding cultures. One can see that this is very obvious especially when one looks at the sacramental signs and symbols. This is only one example but there have been more borrowings and adaptations than we realise. Our concern is that we do not want to fall into the trap which the Jewish Christians had fallen into. We must try to avoid at all costs what the Jewish Christians did by putting unnecessary inauthentic aspects of their culture into the Good News of Christ. For them to become a Christian, one must observe Jewish customs and laws. By demanding that of others, they put an obstacle to the Gospel message. Likewise, we as Melanesians have to be very selective and we have to make sure that our work of inculturation does not block the movement or the work of the Gospel. Evaluation Since our churches are very much structured and institutionalised, I have a firm belief that whatever we want to do, in the way of contextualisation and inculturation, will have to be initiated from the top. The reason being of course that once any movement appears from the ordinary people who make up the majority of the church membership, that in itself may be censored. There is little private or personal initiative, whether from individuals or from a group. It is also clear to me that the catholicity of the Church is realised and experienced better when faith in God is lived, expressed and proclaimed according to whatever circumstances the people are in. The universality of the Gospel is lived authentically when it is lived and expressed in different cultures in given societies. Let us have a look at the term Catholic, since we use this all the time. This term implies universality. The question that still remains is this: Is the Catholic Church really the universal Church? In my opinion, we speak of our church as universal, but it is not. Look at the symbols, the terms, the gestures and so on, that we use at our worship. Are they really giving us an idea that our church is universal? For me, these symbols we use that are so familiar to us have been imposed on us by Western civilisation. In the name of Christ, the Melanesians are to accept what the Western civilisation has brought in. Is this being universal? There is no other way than to let the Gospel message be lived and expressed in local situations. If Christ were experienced in each given society, people in their own ways living out this experience, that would mean that the catholicity of the Church is authentic. This same Christ, this same faith, is life expressed and proclaimed in many different ways. It is in this way that we experience the universality of the Church. We can talk about inculturation as long as we live, but obstacles could be great. I just want to mention here one as an example. Let us have a look at the objects we use for the Eucharist, namely the bread and wine. We all know that bread and wine are not Melanesian food and drink. The question is, could we use something else instead of bread and wine? This is a question that I find very hard to answer. I believe that whatever we use to replace these two, we really have to have something that could bring out the same theology that bread and wine give. The other question we have to ask is this. What would happen if the church allowed every culture to live, express and proclaim Christ in its own way as determined by their respective cultures? This could be an interesting exercise, but it could have problems. The other question that comes out of this is: How are we going to see our relationship with Rome, which is the visible sign of unity as understood by the Catholics? I have no answers to give, but I hope that these questions will help clarify a little bit our limitations in our work of inculturation and contextualisation. We now realise that we need order and a legal system so that all members of the Church will somehow indirectly feel one with the others who are very far away from them, and whom they have never met. .Conclusion To conclude, I would like to say that the material of this article has come not just because of my own personal interest. This is an interest of our local churches as well. I have tried to the best of my ability to take a balanced view from different sides of the argument. We are aware that there are pros and cons as well. Most of the ideas that I have used have been the result of my reading of various articles and books that are available to us and also from other people to whom I have spoken. Actually to sit down and do the work of inculturation is a difficult task, and yet that is what we have to do in order to understand God more and better in our lives as Melanesians. This article may sound like an academic exercise, but I do want to bring out a point from this exercise. We talk about expressing our faith in God in our own ways; we talk about Melanesian Christians. What do we really mean? We cannot talk about Melanesian Christians if we just take and accept Christianity as is it being presented to us. Now is the time. No expatriate is going to do it but we have to do this ourselves. We have to find an identity of Melanesians who are at the same time Christians. On the other hand, we cannot do that without proper discussions or without proper planning and evaluations. I am just hoping that this article will create an awareness that we can do something, that it is not too late, and that it is just the beginning. Notes: 1.Cowie,
A.P., (Ed.), Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, 4th Ed., Great Britain,
BPCC Hazell Books Ltd., 1990, p. 254.
Ref.: Catalyst (Social Pastoral Journal for Melanesia), Vol. 30, n. 2, 2000.
|