EDITORIAL Asia Synod ends, but its impact is far from over
Roman Catholicism came to the Far East during the past 500 years
largely as the result of expanding European empires. Initially a religion of
conquerors, Catholicism became, in the eyes of many Asians, a religion of those
who collaborate with outside forces. This has been Asian Catholicisms
historical burden.
However else one might view the fruits of the work of Western
missionaries in Asia, their works cannot be divorced from centuries of human
subjugation and humiliation, the exploitation of the East by the West.
Meanwhile, the religions of Asia have been as much of that
continents soul as Christianity has been essential to our own Western
heritage. The difference is that Asias story is told through Hindu
rituals, Buddhist chants, Confucian courts, Taoist mysticism and Islamic
pilgrimages.
Only in this century, with the breakup of Western colonialism, did
it become belatedly clear to church fathers that Catholicism needed an Asian
face. No other would do.
Grasping this insight and energized by the Second Vatican Council,
Pope Paul VI flew to the Philippines in November 1970, at a time when popes
seldom left Rome and hardly ever Europe. There he commissioned the bishops of
Asia to get on with the task of inculturating their churches.
Paul VI was present for the first gathering of the Federation of
Asian Bishops Conferences. The organization, a network of smaller
committees, set out on the difficult task of reclaiming the Asian carpenter
Jesus Christ, taking him back from the West. That decision spawned an
inevitable contradiction. The Asian bishops had to break away from their
historical burden, from traditional Catholic patterns, without
cutting ties to Rome itself. At issue was a question we have all come to share:
How do we become a truly global church?
Not breaking out of old patterns, the bishops reasoned, assured
that Asian Catholicism would never grow. Moving forward would mean coming into
conflict with Rome -- unless wise authorities understood the Asian dilemma.
Greater freedom and autonomy were called for. The answer: a new language of
church. The Asian bishops developed the idea of building church as a
communion of communities.
It has taken a quarter century for the Asian bishops to work out
their 21st century vision. And it is still emerging. Development of the vision
has been aided by periodic gatherings of the Federation of Asian Bishops
Conferences. The visions development has been assisted by Western
missionaries sensitive to Asian realities.
A quarter century later, the bishops brought this vision to the
Synod for Asia, to the global stage. These bishops speak about their mission as
nothing less than a new way of being church in Asia.
Central to the vision is the establishment of a truly local
church. The Asian bishops have described it as a church incarnate
in a people, a church indigenous and inculturated. They explain the life
of the local church as very much shaped by its relationship with the
Asian world and the society around it. By extension, they write,
the concrete mode of its evangelization is molded by the history,
tradition and culture of the peoples of this ancient continent.
This is the entry point into what the bishops speak of as the
churchs triple dialogue with culture, other religions and the
poor. Evangelical conversion is not an end; it is a potential by-product, one
seen as dependent on the Holy Spirit. They see Catholics as being faithful
disciples of Jesus Christ, living in solidarity with the poor and the
marginalized who make up most of the continent.
In many nations, Asian Catholicism has emerged as a beacon of
light celebrating human dignity. In South Korea, people have flocked to the
church because of its human rights posture.
Interfaith dialogue is essential to the vision. The Asian bishops
see the hand of God in the other religions of Asia and seek to cooperate with
them in building communities that support life. Community-building can involve
but is not limited to the Christian disciples.
That is why some bishops during the synod suggested that readings
during eucharistic celebration not be limited to Christian texts. Why not Hindu
or Islamic texts as well?
Even in the origins of the synod there was irony. Pope John Paul
II called for it and chose its theme, Jesus Christ the Savior and His
Mission of Love and Service in Asia, to emphasize the need for faithful
evangelization, focused on Jesus Christ as savior. This is precisely the focus
the bishops of Asia have given to their mission. At issue before and during the
synod has been the method of evangelization. While the curia may have thought
it necessary to teach the Asian bishops how to evangelize, how to proclaim
Jesus as savior, the Asian bishops ended up carrying their evangelization
message back to the center of the old European empire. It was their subdued
hope they might evangelize Rome itself.
The Asian bishops came without a political purpose or strategy but
not without an understanding of the ways of Rome. As one bishop remarked:
Maybe weve got to go to Rome to show them Christianity is alive in
the church.
Whose evangelization method will be the more enduring remains to
be seen.
The Asian bishops are a formidable group. Unlike many
bishops conferences in the West, their ranks are not divided. This is
because they seek out consensus. For these bishops, Vatican II renewal was more
of a beginning than a moment of change. So there has been almost no backlash in
the post-conciliar era.
The Asian bishops showed integrity during the synod. They lived
what they preached. Always kind, reflective, open, they treated everyone with
equal respect. They would have wanted a far more open gathering with fewer
rules and more time to share experiences. But they went along, despite curial
manipulations. They spoke openly and honestly. They showed admiration for their
pontiff. They see in John Paul an elderly and holy man.
Meanwhile, Asian Catholicisms growth has been concurrent
with an even larger growth within the church. Catholicisms historic
European/North American axis during the past quarter century has shifted south
and east. Unlike a quarter century ago, most Catholics today are non-European
and non-North American. At the close of the 20th century, Roman Catholicism is
no longer a Western religion; it is a global religion. The Asian bishops see
themselves as helping give birth to a new global Catholicism, a faith that is
at once local and universal.
The synod itself, as currently configured, is intended to be a
consultative forum aimed at assisting the pope. It is by no means the
expression of the functional, collegial decision-making some had envisioned.
Its strict adherence to laws and process provides much room for manipulation
for narrow purposes. And that happens a lot.
If measured solely by the propositions that emerged from the
month-long event, the synods costs and its effectiveness are
questionable. Yet the event brought together for the first time the bishops of
the Middle East and Far East. They found much mutual support and shared many
similar experiences. Bishops from both ends of the continent resoundingly
agreed that church administration has become far too centralized. Change, they
said repeatedly, is needed.
The synods final 59 propositions are only vague shadows of
the original ideas the bishops expressed during the gathering. Calls for the
consideration of new, non-Latin, Asian rites will not reach John Pauls
desk. Yet he was present for all of the synods early sessions. He heard
the unfiltered interventions of 191 synod participants.
Curial staff often treat the pope as if he needs to be protected
from ideas that might differ from his (or their) own. Others hope he can
listen, but dont expect change at his age or at this stage in his
pontificate.
The airing that took place during the synod, many observers note,
was nevertheless significant. Some said the speeches and subsequent discussions
have more to do with the next pontificate than with this one.
That would be the first time the deeper questions raised in the
synod -- those having to do with how authority operates within the church --
could reasonably be assessed.
Students of this synod would find it to be a case study of misused
authority. Bishops who came to Rome at times expressed bewilderment; many felt
demeaned. Many wanted out. Some left. Were it not for the fact we have to
sign in for each session, one bishop remarked, the synod hall would be
largely vacant. Not much real collaboration occurred.
At the same time, this synod provided hope. It reminded us that
the seemingly endless debate between those who support post-conciliar renewal
and those who have opposed it is not limited to Western boundaries. It is far
broader. The Asian bishops are forcing the discussion into every corner of the
church.
In the final analysis, the synod was a gathering of hope. It
provided the universal church with a reminder that Jesus Christs
resurrection was not just a moment in time. It is a forever occurrence. It is,
as the Asian bishops tell us, always a call to a new way of being
church.
National Catholic Reporter, May 29,
1998
|