Mission Institutes --- Adapting to the New Reality?

                                                                                                                                                                                               

            Recent articles by Michael Amaladoss SJ on the future of mission institutes have given rise to helpful discussion. While some may dispute individual points he makes there is no doubt that he has surfaced many of the issues challenging missionaries today, especially those belonging to mission institutes Ad Gentes.

            As one who has spent forty years as a member of a mission institute in Asia I would like to take up some of these issues and hope I can be as frank and thought-provoking as Fr Amaladoss.

1. Origins of missionary motivation

Did the European missionary movements of the 19^th and 20^th centuries stem from a colonial enthusiasm as Fr Amaladoss suggests? Whatever colonial instincts may have existed among missionaries in the 19th century they had lost their impact by the 20^th. Ireland was not a colonial country and was in a rather anti-colonial mood when its missionary movement took off in the early 1900s. However, already Ireland and other western churches had a belief that Christianity was closely related with modern development. Missionaries were convinced they had social and economic benefits to bring to less developed countries which were non-Christian.

Until recent times combating famine, providing medical services and encouraging education in Third World countries were synonymous with mission. Yet the main impulse that moved the missionaries to leave their country and go to distant places was the conviction, embedded in the theology of that time, that the church and its sacraments were the most valuable aid they could provide.

Today the theology of salvation is more open and the pressure to set up local churches has been removed from mission institutes. It is now accepted that missionary motivation comes from a personal appreciation of what the Christian message offers the individual. This gratitude leads to a desire to share it with those who, for historical or cultural reasons, are unable to benefit from what it has to give. 

 I would suggest therefore that the origins of the missionary thrust are to be found not in a colonizing spirit but in a wish to share the “good news” whether it was seen (in earlier times) as essential for salvation and/or a help towards economic and social development or (in later times) as a starting point for spiritual awakening to a fuller life. 

2. But Where?

            Readers of Amaladoss’s articles might go on to ask, “But are those missionaries not needed just as much in the west today?”

            I am sure the majority of western missionaries would be the first to admit that their own countries are in need of evangelisation or re-evangelisation. Indeed evangelisation is an on-going and never ending task. However in the universal church there is a division of responsibilities and, traditionally, the special task of going out to unreached peoples has been given to missionaries Ad Gentes.

            Fr Amaladoss raises two other possible objections to their going out.

The first is that the church is already planted everywhere.

It is true that almost every country now has some form of local church. Yet a significant number of local churches are still too weak to tackle the challenges of evangelisation. China is but one example and today in China there are more people than there are Catholics in the whole world.

If the local Church, for example in China, is unable to meet the challenges it faces it needs help. Foreign missionaries, in a witnessing and serving capacity, can reach sectors of society that the local Christians are unable to touch. Their influence can attract young people to study the gospels and enquire about Christianity. An active local church is necessary to gather, form and guide the new Christians so helping to set up such a church is a logical goal for the missionaries and one to which they are accustomed.       

This brings up the second possible objection: foreign missionaries introduce the Graeco-Roman model of church and so hold back the development of a genuinely local church which responds to the Good News through the medium of the local culture.

It is true that the foreign missionaries brought a western church with them. Wherever local churches exist today they follow the western model and in many cases are “more Roman than Rome itself”. There are reasons why they are happy to remain this way. As young or minority churches they do not want to be seen as lacking in any aspect of orthodoxy – theologically, liturgically or ecclesiastically. They are encouraged by the universal church to conform to the Graeco-Roman model and chided if they diverge from it.

The international missionary institutes have belatedly come to realise the consequences of this and to promote inculturation. However they are already on the periphery of the local churches and are no longer in a position to directly influence the manner in which those churches develop. With their new cultural and theological sensitivity the institutes are likely to be more open to the need for inculturation than the majority of local Christians and freer to encourage and facilitate a drawing from “local wells”. 

Few others have the focus, commitment or resources for this task and so, for the foreseeable future, the presence and support of the mission institutes for inculturation will  be invaluable even in energetic young churches.  

3. Enrichment

            Another reason why mission institutes are needed is because of the contribution they can make to their home churches.

For many years lip-service has been given to the hope that the development of Asian and African churches would enrich the church in the west. So far this has not happened. Those most likely to stimulate the western church towards renewal are returned missionaries who have learnt from their experience in another religious tradition.

It is by seeing similarities and differences while traveling abroad that people become more aware of their own culture and even come to questioning some of it dearest assumptions. Similarly missionaries in a country with strong non-Christian religious traditions have the opportunity to see their faith in a new perspective. They will find themselves asking, “What is there in Christianity that is worth sharing with the people here?” All religions have much in common so what is unique in Christianity? Going deeper, what in our present church is particularly Christian and what was absorbed over the centuries from the universal heritage of religious beliefs, symbols and practices?

Returned missionaries are in the best position to raise these questions and they will find willing listeners among those seeking to renew their home church. From their experience in the non-Christian world they can help separate what is essential from what has been added and re-present from the original message what is fresh, inspiring and eternal.     

4.        A Future for Mission Institutes?

The need for mission institutes remains – to prepare and send personnel who can communicate across cultural barriers and also bring back to their home churches a fresh appreciation of Christianity. Therefore if a question mark hangs over the future of some institutes it comes from within. Can they meet the new demands?

Most of the existing institutes have an aging membership and may not be keen to see major changes. They had to struggle to find their feet in the debates after Vatican II. Are they Ad Gentes or Ad Extra? Should they be involved in dialogue, development or conscientisation? Should they be on “six continents” or only among unreached peoples?

They had renewal and discernment processes without, however, reaching any consensus. As a result their members had to work out a personal response, find a role for themselves in the new situation and become used to working independently. Now they are called upon to give up some of this independence and accept a communal vision of their identity in order that their institute may play a part in meeting the new needs of mission.

The fact that their numbers will be smaller is less of a problem – as long as those few are strategically positioned where they can make the greatest impact. There they will need to see themselves as facilitators of others rather than as individual servants and witnesses. By themselves they will at most do the work of two or three but by enabling others to take on the task they will have hundreds doing the work.

Can they adapt or must new institutions emerge to take on the task?

5. Conclusion

            A new image of mission as a specialized and demanding calling may not attract big numbers but the few who come will have the qualities and attitudes needed today.

            Even if they come from a variety of cultures it will not matter as the clear focus and sense of purpose set before them will help them put their differences into perspective.

However if an institute cannot adapt its future is not likely to be bright.

The myth that there are endless vocations in the young churches has been shown to be groundless and if candidates have a confused idea about the goals of mission there will be problems coordinating them later on.

Neither are lay missionaries the future until there is a radical reappraisal of ministry in the Catholic Church and laity are given the recognition and financial support that will make long term mission involvement practical for them.   

The new missionary situation is challenging but it can be a wake-up call for mission institutes rather than their death knell. However any revival should be motivated by more than just a desire to continue in existence. In a divided world where hope, concern for others and regard for the non-materialist is fading, the missionary has a special role and it is there that the Ad Gentes mission institutes can show their worth.     

   Hugh MacMahon 10/19/04

We Need to Work More on Our Identity

   

A recent article in a mission magazine provided me with some food for thought about our identity as missionaries today. One observation that caught my attention was how deeply the countries, or geographical regions, in which individual missionaries served have influenced their vision of mission.

  For instance, those working in China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan or Pakistan were surrounded by a population with little experience of Christianity. There the priority for missionaries was to try to introduce the Church as the sign of the Kingdom and encourage the local people to join them as Christians. While this meant finding ways of  sharing their beliefs across cultural differences, often the establishment of parishes, or even dioceses, to accommodate the new Christians and provide social projects for the wider community was given precedence. 

On the other hand, those appointed to Latin America and the Philippines found themselves among people with a Christian tradition but, perhaps do to a shortage of priests, Religious and trained laity, needed help in broadening their understanding of the Christian message and renewing their commitment. Since many of those people were overwhelmed by unjust economic and political systems, that context had to be addressed in a genuine renewal process. As a result there was an emphasis on solidarity with the poor and the social teaching of the Church. 

I would not like to draw too clear of a distinction here, as if one group was concerned only with a spiritual dialogue and the other only with raising Christian social awareness. In both situations there was a blending of the social and spiritual messages but the different contexts inevitably meant that in certain situations more attention was given to one aspect of the Good News than to the other. The contrasting experiences and priorities that ensued were to have important consequences for the development of our Society’s identity.

On the one hand, it led to considerable expertise in the fields of international justice and the environmental threat. However, our knowledge of the field of religious studies was not refined to the same extent. For example, there is an opinion among a surprising large number in our Society that all religions are much the same and, therefore, going out to encourage people in non-Christian cultures to become Christian is out-dated.

I hope I am not misrepresenting the mind of the author mentioned above when I read one of his sentences in that light: “These realizations have demolished any lingering geographical basis for mission and made quite impractical any distinctions between a people, a culture, a community, an individual alleged to have heard the Gospel and those alleged to have not.”

There could be a number of reasons for this misunderstanding. One may be disillusionment with the sad state of the Church in the western world. Another, a belief that every generation needs to be re-evangelized so the task in no one culture is more urgent than in any other. A third could come from the observation that religious practices have a great similarity throughout the world and that thinking Christianity is better is just the relic of a Western superiority complex.

I think the third objection points to a key issue. There is no doubt that religious similarities and parallels do exist around the world when people, for economic or social reasons, depend on, or hope for, divine intervention to solve their more urgent financial, health and personal needs. I have seen this is places as disparate as Taoist and Buddhist temples in Korea and China, a cathedral in Cebu and a shrine to a Holy Man in Lahore. In each place the scene or ritual was similar: the devotees formally approaching a holy image, often on their knees, carrying candles or incense and presenting their requests with great respect. Usually they recited a prayer.

In their private lives those believers were probably aware of precepts, similar to the Ten Commandments, which they knew they should be observing and felt guilty about if they fail to keep them. They were good people, trying to do their best as their traditions taught them. Only the identity of the deity differentiated what they were doing. If comparisons were to be made between such religious practices, it would be in terms of which of the deities concerned was the more powerful or successful in providing help.   

But in many parts of the world today most material needs can now be solved by human resources. In the 1980s and 90s when tens of thousand of young Koreans were drawn to the Church it was not in the hope of economic or other immediate benefits but in a search to satisfy their deeper and inner yearnings. The Church’s stand for democracy and human rights on the national level gave grounds for thinking it might have the answers.

What they were looking for was inspiration in their lives, a source of encouragement and strength, a sense of their individual and personal worth.  Today young people in China are showing the same needs.

I believe Christianity, and no other religion today outside the small circle of mystics, has the answers to this search. The message of Jesus uniquely offers:   

--a relationship with God that is direct and personal, giving a sense of being valued, of being wanted or called; 

--a path in life that is inspiring, enlightening, encouraging rather than prohibitive, compassionate rather than judgemental;

-- a world view that is positive, with an active role for humans and uniting people.  

Again, I do not want to make too strong a distinction between people with a ‘favor seeking’ faith and a ‘spiritual search’ faith. The reality is that the two are intermixed though, in individuals and in certain cultures, one can dominate the other.

Unfortunately, many of the young Koreans in the 1980s and 90s did not find what they were expecting. The Church in Korea at that time, despite it public stances, proved on closer inspection  to be traditional, hierarchical, restrictive and too dependent on foreign theologies. Many of the young people soon left unsatisfied. But that does not prove that Christianity is deficient, it just shows that in many Churches practice still has to catch up on teachings. There are enough credible mainstream theologians in the Church today to reassure missionaries that what people in other cultures are seeking can indeed be found in the heart of the scriptures.

It is possible then, and indeed it is stating the obvious, to say that there are geographical areas of the world today where the vast majority of people have not heard the message of the person Jesus, and could benefit from it. The prime example is Asia, with a third of the world’s population. There is much to respect in, and learn from, the traditions of the East but that should not dampen our confidence and enthusiasm for offering to them what we are fortunate to have inherited.

A problem remains in our Society of two streams of experience talking across each other rather than to each other. The loss is not just to the Society but to the world of mission in general.    

                                                 Hugh MacMahon.             11/15/07

Whatever Happened to Mission?

            Recently I noted in a Furrow book review of D. Vincent Twomey’s The End of Irish Catholicism? that the author “suggests that missionary congregations lacked any coherent theological vision and so devoted their energies to issues of justice, peace and, latterly, ecology as a substitute for what they were originally founded to do”. Here in Hong Kong the  book itself is not available but the above statement on its own has a ring of truth that makes me want to pause and consider how mission arrived at such a critical state and what this might have to say to the Church today, in Ireland and elsewhere.

            I will draw on my own forty years experience of mission to reflect on what happened. Allowing for situational differences, I believe it is similar to what missionaries elsewhere also encountered during those years.   

The Accepted Attitude

            Back in the early 1900s, when the Columbans were founded as the Maynooth Mission to China, one of the first serious missiological debates was taking place. In question was the primary goal of mission and the discussion was in terms of which was more urgent: baptizing those in need or establishing the Church?

Some held that giving baptism, even to dying infants, was the more pressing need because the immortal life of people depended on it while others insisted that establishing the Church had priority because, once active, it would be more effective in providing the sacraments to greater numbers. 

            When I arrived in Korea in 1963 both approaches were still alive though in practice the priority was on establishing the Church: setting up new parishes and establishing dioceses in every province. Through parish work the missionaries offered the means of salvation but also gave material assistance to a population still suffering from the effects of the Korean War.

The Vision Eroded

            Vatican II undermined this understanding of mission on two fronts. The Council stated, cautiously at first, that neither baptism nor the Church was essential for the eternal welfare of individuals. The second blow to classical missionary thinking was the clarification that the Church is to be established not for its own sake but as a means of furthering the Kingdom of God in the world.

For the Columbans the implications of Vatican II were to surface in the marathon General Assembly of 1970. Normally General Assemblies last for some weeks but on that occasion discussions went on for three months. They were also heated. To quote the Assembly Report, “There are violent tensions in the Church today; many of them are reflected in our Columban family.” The notion of replacing a faith system hinging largely on fears for eternity with one emphasising love and hope in this life was too sensitive for many to accept immediately. The 200-page report of the Assembly tried to record faithfully the different viewpoints and sought respect for diversity. In doing so the pain of facing up to the new reality was postponed and subsequent Assemblies were reluctant to renew such a potentially divisive debate.

On the positive side, a new understanding of the Kingdom as active in the world was evident in the Assembly Report and for the first time issues such as socio-economic activity, witness among the poor and dialogue with other religions were mentioned.

            I was fortunate in having the chance to catch up on Vatican II at the end of the 60s while studying mission science in Canada. On my return to Korea in 1970 I joined the majority of my confreres in the expanding urban parish apostolate. However, I now saw the role of the Church differently: as spreading Kingdom values and forming Christians who would actively contribute to the improvement of their families and society. It was a time when young Korean professionals were flocking to the church and involving themselves actively in parish councils. Life was hectic but happy, with a strong sense of achievement. 

However not everyone remained satisfied with parish work. During the 70s some young missionaries began to move into “special apostolates”: areas not normally covered by parish work such as involvement with university students, factory workers, farmers and the handicapped.

Offering What?

I remember one incident from those days. During a classroom session with older catechumens I was trying to explain how the Mass was both sacrament and sacrifice. Between using church terminology unfamiliar to them and trying to preserve doctrinal orthodoxy I succeeded in tying myself up in verbal knots. The fact that oriental people, such as Koreans, are happier with concrete matters than with abstract ideas did not help. When the hour mercifully came to an end one man comforted me, “Don’t worry Father – we accept whatever you were trying to say.”

I was grateful for his sympathy but it made me wonder what aspect of the Church attracted him and, indeed, what I was offering him. Obviously it was not the relevance of all its doctrines. When asked why they came out to the church most newcomers said they liked its atmosphere of order, solemnity and community. They had a strong natural sense of the sacred and the Church helped them express it through conformity to set practices. But was this mirror image of a Church that was losing its relevance in the West all that we had to offer? Only later did it strike me that our tradition of worshipping a merciful but remote God did little to introduce individuals to Jesus’ image of an accessible and accompanying Father. At that time I just felt that something was missing and wondered what it might be.   

At the end of the 70s I returned to Ireland to work for the Irish Mission Union and had the pleasure of working alongside a well known Irish theologian. Most days we went out to lunch together and I would say to him, “Now, what is unique about Christianity that it has to offer to the world and to other religions?” He would begin his reply by saying, “Well, actually that is not the right question,” and proceed to tell me what he thought the right question was. But for me it was the key question for mission: if Christianity had nothing unique to offer mankind in the area of religion why bother to share it? It was only when I moved to China, and a new missionary situation, in the mid-1990s that I began to see where the crux of the problem lay.  

China: Recovery of Mission

Because it puts limits on direct evangelization, China challenges traditional mission. Foreigners cannot get involved in church work so their contribution must be through witness and service. When approached by young Chinese wanting to know where their patience and lack of self interest came from, they had to search for words to express adequately what inspired them. Young Chinese are immune to indoctrination so dogmatic and impersonal statements are of no avail.

Perhaps for the first time the Christian has to ask “What motivates me?” and seek to express their basic belief in simple language. The answer is in their relationship with the Father they know through Jesus. It is this faith that has molded their own life and led them to want to share it with others. Spiritual and scriptural imagery are best suited to describing their convictions.

The new generation of missionaries in places like China insists that their approach is not a second class way – a temporary measure until restrictions are removed and the Church can once more become the principal agent for spreading the gospel. The natural, and original, process of sharing the message is to show what it means in practice, explain the reasons behind it to those who ask and then gather the new believers together for support, witness and worship as a community. They are the ones who, eventually and in dialogue with the universal Church, should develop the structures, theologies and liturgies that will help them implement and share the Good News in their own culture.   

Revaluating the Past

In Korea we had started at the other end: we believed that providing the structures, theologies and liturgy of our Western Church would lead the people to unearth for themselves the original message and inspiration of Jesus. However, this did not happen. We were following a tradition, going back to the Middle Ages, which was God-centered rather than Christ-centered. Hence the hierarchical system we brought with us — clergy as representative of a distant God/Judge, acceptance of doctrines rather than an understanding of the gospel teaching, the practice of popular devotions rather than the development of a personal spirituality.

In Korea, when the parish appeared too inward-looking to exemplify the message of Christ to the world, it was thought necessary to promote Kingdom values directly: solidarity with the poor, the struggle for justice and democracy and concern for the earth. We hoped that such efforts would stir up an interest in Christianity and lead people to encounter Jesus. But more often than not, while our stand and support was appreciated by activists in those fields and often by the general population, it failed to lead them on to enquire about Christ, the Kingdom and the Church. And those who came to the Church, expecting it to be an example of equality and dialogue, were likely to find its institutions as impersonal, rule-bound and narrow as society itself.

The Chinese would call such a situation, “Releasing a captive before capturing him.” People do not change their habits easily, even if they are made aware that their present life style is not good for themselves, for the majority (who are poor) or for the world we live in. Only a deep awareness of God’s presence, and the rest of the gospel story, can open people to move beyond selfishness. First they must be caught by a personal faith, and then released to express it in care of each other and the earth.

Test for Missionaries

If proof is needed that somewhere along the line missionaries wandered from their original task, it can be found in the lack of Catholic scholars specializing in the key mission issues.

The questions ordinary people ask are basic: what sort of being is God, what is God’s attitude to me, why does God let his believers suffer hardship, how can I enter into a close relationship with God? Responding to those queries in a country like China is not simple.

The missionary is immediately faced with challenges such as the following. How far can we go in isolating the basic message of Jesus? (Downplaying our Western interpretation of it and presenting it as impartially as possible.)  Is Christianity for the few or the many? (Practicing folk Catholicism is often more popular than seeking a personal relationship with Christ.) How much freedom can a local Church be given to develop its own theology, liturgy and structures? How to balance charismatic and fundamentalist tendencies? (Chinese today are attracted to evangelistic fundamentalism.) How to revitalise a Church that is caught in the past without damaging the faith of its people? (Another problem in China.)  How much at one with humanity is God? (A question facing Christians in dialogue with Oriental spirituality.)

            Rather than suggesting solutions to these questions, the few theologians with mission connections are inclined to specialise in areas such as ecology, globalisation and genetic engineering. They see themselves as conveying the concerns of the Third World to a largely uninformed West. While they are making a valuable contribution in these fields, and get the local Church involved, they are not giving their colleagues in the field the support they need. As a result many of today’s missionaries face considerable frustration in their work and can easily drift from the down-to-earth issues of transmitting the faith to the geo-political concerns of the day.    

And Ireland

            By now some readers may recognize challenges that are as pertinent for Ireland as for China, or other non-Christian societies, because Ireland is close to becoming a post-Christian country. The external authority of the Church no longer commands obedience and moral teachings are neglected because no deeper foundation has been shown for them.

            People need to be helped to recover a sense of God in their life and in the world, just as Irish spirituality once did.

            Let me summarise my reflection in more precise terms.

            Dr James Fowler, the pioneer of faith development studies, divides faith progress into six steps. The majority of believers progress to stage three: from childhood imagination to unreflecting religious conformity. Only some, usually in their mid-thirties, go on to stage four at which they begin a serious search into who they are and how they relate to God and others.  This is the moment at which missionaries would like to reach out to individuals in a non-Christian society – stimulating their interest in religion by witness of life and deepening it though discussion.

            It is only after further reflection and growth at Stage Five that the believer reaches the final stage at which he/she is ready to commit themselves to a vision such as the Kingdom and it associated values of justice, peace and ecological concern.

            The missionary’s rightful field is at stages four and five, where they can sow the seed and till the newly cultivated soil. Reaping the harvest of a committed faith (at Stage Six) and calling for involvement in the great social issues is the task of others – the pastoral prophets in a developed Church.

                                                                                                      Hugh MacMahon      2/3/04

                                                                                                           

Enthusiasm for the Message

            On a visit to Hong Kong in 2007, Cardinal Jozef Tomko, the former Prefect of the Congregation for Evangelization, addressed a group of mainly foreign missionaries and religious and put a question to them that left me pondering for some time. He asked, “What is it that animates you to continue to spread the Christian message so enthusiastically among non-Christian peoples? We in the West seem to have lost that eagerness and may have something to learn from your experience.”

            The responses he received may have disappointed him. They were mainly positive accounts of what each group was doing in different parts of China and seemed to miss the point of his question: what is it that motivates missionaries today and keeps them excited about their work?

            I was one of those who failed to come up with an immediate response. Most of us never reflect on why we do something, we take it for granted. It takes time to sift through forty years of mission in Asia and sort out the useful from the irrelevant. Was my experience all that different from that of post-Vatican ll priests in parishes in Ireland? How much of what I learnt was due to personal circumstances and of little significance for others? Only recently did it occur to me that I might be approaching the question from the wrong angle, it was not what I had learned during that time that was significant but what I had to unlearn.

As young priests, setting out from Ireland for Korea, the one thing we did not lack was confidence. Even though there was talk, and hope, that Vatican ll would renew the Church this was seen in terms of minor adjustments to a successful model, not any need for major change. We had no doubt about the uniqueness and value of the Catholic Church. I still don’t doubt it but what has changed in the meantime is my understanding of where the uniqueness and value lie.

Working with the Laity

The model of Church which we had in mind when we came to Korea had the priest at its center. We went to set up dioceses and parishes. The priest was there to serve the people and the people were there to be served. After Vatican ll there was talk of sharing responsibilities with the laity but

we had to invite reputable theologians to seminars to be reassured that it was admissible to do so. 

Six years later, when I was given the task of setting up a new parish in Seoul, I had no alternative but to turn to volunteers among the few Catholics there and set up my first parish council. From then on, and in later parishes, the council took on responsibility for financial affairs, paying my salary and collecting the funds to build a church. They kept me in touch with what was happening in the area. They organized parts of the liturgy, ran celebrations and led small groups. This left me free to concentrate on guiding and encouraging the various groups and bringing them together as a community.

The Korean people are energetic by nature and prefer to be involved in activities rather than participate passively. It was providential that they became opened to the Church at a time when lay involvement was being encouraged. Today the amazing growth and the achievements of the Korean Church, at home and abroad, are legendary. It was the receptivity and support of the people that gave me and my fellow missionaries the energy and satisfaction to keep on working with them. If I needed any proof of the value in empowering the laity, they were the one who provided it.  

Communicating the Message

            Looking back on our preparation for going to the missions, they were typical of other seminaries at that time and were heavily theological. The formation was neither exciting nor thought-provoking but we believed it covered all the important aspects of religion in an authoritative and accurate manner. Today, theological training seems more holistic and personal but a glance at pastoral magazines and listening to clerical talk suggests that there is still an emphasis on orthodoxy and intellectual study. 

            In a developing country like Korea that rational approach to faith seemed to speak the desired language of reason and modernity. Our new Catholics had only to recite the catechism and prescribed prayers, and practice the laws of God and the regulations of the Church.

            One day, when explaining to catechumens that the Mass was both sacrament and sacrifice, I struggled to make the distinction clear using Korean terminology. At the end of the session an elderly gentleman came up to consoled me, saying, “Don’t worry Father, we believe it whatever it is.”

            Orientals, in general, are practical people and not given to spending time in intellectual speculation. What immediately interests them is the relationship between the Christian message and their own traditional ideas of God, and how the scriptures can help them to improve their inner self by deepening their relationship with God and their neighbor. Those living closer to subsistence level would also want to know what the Church thought of evil spirits and how to achieve blessings and good luck in this life.

The people retain a healthy sense of mystery. After a number of invitations to exorcise evil spirits I had a greater respect for the spirit world and realized why our catechetical approach to religion could seem dry and remote.

However, it was the way the Catholics lived out the Christian message that had the greatest impact on outsiders. Their enthusiasm in supporting the parish and encouraging each other gradually spread out into the neighborhood. A group devoted itself to helping at funerals, a stressful time for families newly moved into the city. Another group set up a night school for young factory workers. There was a simple form of ‘meals on wheels’ for the sick and elderly, though instead of ‘wheels’ the dishes were brought by foot up narrow alleys.

It was these activities which showed the people in the area what the Church stands for and many were attracted to it. In missionary circles we say that missiology should not be rocket science and I suspect that instruction on how to live a Christian life should not be either.

A Minority Church  

            When we first arrived in Korea we had the vague goal of converting the whole country. For a while it seemed almost possible. There were many good Korean priests, religious and laity as well as other foreign missionaries already involved in the task, and the numbers doubled from half a million Catholics to a million and then to two million. Today there are five million in a population of over forty million. However, there is no longer an expectation that the whole country will become Christian and the advantages of being a minority have become more apparent.   

            In Korea, and many parts of the non-Western world, religion is a neutral subject like sport or the weather. Taxi drivers discuss it freely, newspapers treat it with respect and nearly everyone regards it with a curious and open mind. There is none of the tension and negative feeling that a powerful majority church can provoke.

            While the pros and cons of Catholic schools are still debated, there is much to be said for well-run ‘Sunday schools’. In Korea the swarms of primary and secondary school students around the church on weekends brought vitality to the compound, gave the young people a sense of parish-centered community and involved many of the adults in the management and teaching. Often the quality of the teachers’ skills left much to be desired but on the other hand the bonds forged there and the example of service that the students experienced had a lasting value.     

            Another advantage of belonging to a minority church is the tendency of adult Catholics, as well as young people, to join together in groups based on age, locality or common interests. All of the groups had some form of Christian study and service as their focus but they also met a need for people to support and encourage each other in their faith.

            The advantages of being in a minority can also be seen, perhaps to a lesser extent, in the United States, Australia and Britain. If that is the future in Ireland also, it will have its positive aspects.

   

A Balanced Liturgy

            Early in our time in Korea the language of the liturgy changed from Latin to Korean and there was a tendency towards less formal liturgies with greater participation of the congregation. Korea gave me two insights into ritual: the importance of solemnity at crucial moments and the vitality that only communal participation can provide.

            Confucianism uses ritual in a very effective manner. It is not only a means of expressing reverence and gratitude to the supreme being and to ancestors, but also an educational tool. The formal language and postures adopted during key passages of a celebration teach the participants the appropriate feelings of awe and respect, and how these should be expressed. Repetition forms habits that influence everyday thinking and behavior.          

As for the value of music, even if there were only three Korean Catholics at a Mass they would insist on singing a number of hymns. For them, a Mass without singing would be lifeless and while they might complain about the length of homilies they would not mind prolonging the liturgy for the sake of an extra hymn.

            A longer liturgy is not necessarily a better liturgy, so the ideal would seem to be a balance between solemn moments when the congregation remains silent and the times when they sing and express their active participation.  

Uniqueness of the Message

            We went to Korea believing that the Catholic Church was unique not only in its teachings and structure but also in its morality, its devotional practices and its method of spiritual cultivation. However, my first impression was that many aspects of Korean attitudes and behavior resembled, and even refined, those of traditional Ireland.

            I was struck by the show of deference to others. This was brought home in a practical way during our early language studies. Korean is difficult to learn because of the variety of ways it addresses people depending on their age, status and relationship. The whole notion of ‘I’ is downplayed, the nearest equivalent being ‘we’. It is said that the Irish can be indirect or oblique in their approach but the Koreans are even better at it and, if the intention is to avoid hurting the feelings of others, there is nothing to be ashamed of.

            Later I became familiar with their strong religious sense which enabled them to recognize the sacred in trees, rocks, water and even people. They prayed, using beads that looked like rosary beads, they fasted, they sprinkled ‘holy’ water, they used incense, they remembered their dead, they conscientiously attended annual festivals. I had to ask myself, “Where did all this come from? Obviously none of these practices have their origin in Christianity.”

            Eventually I discovered that the people’s social sensitivity was molded by the Confucian tradition which had so impressed the early Jesuit missionaries in China. Those priests from the Mediterranean world were amazed that such a generous and refined approach to life could develop outside Christianity. Confucian self-cultivation began with self-criticism and there is a similar tradition of self-reflection in Buddhism. Taoist paintings and poetry provide constant reminders of mankind’s relative unimportance in the universe.

If Christianity has something of unique value to offer it is not, obviously, to be found in its Roman-derived ritual, religious sensitivity or even much of its practical morality.

So what has the Church to offer? Faith statements aside, there is no intellectual argument that proves our religion is superior to others. Indeed, there are many Christians today, including missionaries, who seem convinced that all religions are similar and the Church should be making its contribution in the social arena rather than in the religious. The only possible proof of Christianity’s unique value is that which comes from encounter and involvement. It is the way non-Christians respond to the Christian message that reveals its worth.

In Korea, sooner or later, most of us came to admire the local religions for the reasons mentioned above. Indeed it was similarities between Confucianism and Catholicism that led many people to the Church. Yet, they came looking for something more. The young wanted fresh values and ideals to live by in a changing world. Older people needed support in coping with the frustrations of a more individualistic and materialistic society.

However there was more to Christianity than community and social values. From the Christian experience people got an inner sense of worth, of a calling and of divine compassion that had been absent in their lives up till then. The older religions, while preserving many exemplary aspects, no longer had the vitality to inspire. And so they came to the Church. It was their enthusiastic receptivity and response that ultimately reassured us, who worked there, of the value and uniqueness of our own religion.  

           

The challenge for missionaries today remains the one billion people, mostly in Asia, whose cultural or political circumstances exclude them from hearing the Christian message.  They are not accessible through the traditional parish system. Bringing the gospel to them means giving up many of the concepts and practices that the missionaries had acquired in their homeland. If they cannot do so, they will not appreciate the people’s goodness and their different approach to life, to the sacred and to each other. Nor will they be able to respond in ways which the local people find comfortable and meaningful.

Perhaps this situation is not much different from the challenge facing the Church in Ireland today. A generation has emerged which has grown up with different ideas as to what matters. Communicating with them will mean giving up much of the traditional language and thinking of the Church. This is where the un-learning process that Irish missionaries had to undergo abroad may be a help and encouragement. Beneath the cultural layer, that we once thought immutable and permanent, the Christian message does have a vitality and universal validity that can bring joy and hope to the new generation, if they can be helped to hear it.    

                                                                       Hugh MacMahon       4/12/10

A Lack of Confidence?

           Is there a danger that missionaries, especially priests, are becoming more involved in social issues than in religious? Or at least, they are tending to put more emphasis on community service than religious leadership?

In a March 2010 speech, Pope Benedict spoke of the danger of priests being seen as social workers rather than as spiritual intermediaries.

A recent IMU Report (2010, No1) summarized a discussion among missionaries as to whether they had anything special to offer in the field to development. Their suggestions included: missionaries live closer to the people, witness by their lives, involve locals, look at development in holistic terms and so on. What was surprisingly missing was the absence of a religious element.

Perhaps the missionary focus on community development took the spiritual for granted but the writer of the report reflects an opinion that Vatican II “portrayed the missionary as an agent of human development, liberation, dialogue with other religions, justice and social change.”

            Should we be concerned? Recent history does show a deliberate move to downplay the religious aspect of mission. How this occurred is described by Oborji (Concept of Mission, p. 134 ff), Yale historian, Lamin Sanneh, (‘Disciples of all Nations’, p. 272 ff) and others. I will summarize Sanneh’s version.

            After World War I, there was a crisis of confidence about the value of the gospel following the mutual slaughter of so-called Christians. If ‘Christians’ could kill each other like that, what had the churches to offer the non-Christian world?

            At the second World Missionary Conference in 1928, the idea spread that the uniqueness and finality of Christ was no longer tenable in view of the reality of other faiths. In the spirit of the growing ecumenical movement, there was a further call for Christians to show an attitude of humility, equality and interdependence toward other religions. The mission of the Church would no longer be to share its spiritual message with the world. Rather, it should renounce any goal of conversion and devote its energies to improving economic and social life. A new international order of cooperation and autonomy would be initiated. There was a call to “End Mission Imperialism Now!”    

            At the beginning this was mainly a Protestant movement and at the 1960 conference of the World’s Student Christian Federation at Strasbourg the decisive step was taken of calling on Christians to shun primacy of doctrine and to commit instead to contextual social engagement. As a report from the World Council of Churches put it, it is the world, not the Church, that now writes God’s agenda. It did not take long for Catholic groups to join the movement and from then on Catholic missionary documents began to reflect the new attitude.

            Were there other reasons for this shift in mission focus?

            In a recent interview, Cardinal Danneels, former Primate of Belgium, stated, “The biggest obstacle to the proclamation of the gospel is the lack of confidence in those who want to evangelize.” There does seem be something holding back missionaries from addressing strictly religious concerns. Confidence in the message itself seems to remain but there is less confidence in the way it is expressed or practiced. Today, the Church’s traditional language, explanations and activities fail to attract, not just the millions of Asia, but people in the Americas and Europe.

            Many missionaries have experienced the problem of talking about faith matters with their own younger relatives back home. It is easier to chat with nephews and nieces about poverty, injustice, global warming or even sport.

The first question this poses is an alarming one: Do we consider our own faith worth sharing with them? Do we really believer it can make a useful contribution to their lives? This deserves more than a minute’s consideration, but we will take the answer as ‘Yes’.

The next question to be answered is whether it is just our type of religion that fails to interest them. Might they have their own valid ideas on religion? If we believe they have no religious sense at all, then we and they are in deep trouble. It would indeed be time to abandon any hope of talking with them about matters of the spirit and to turn our show of concern to financial, health or emotional areas.

If however we believe that everyone has a spiritual side to them, and that this can express itself in different ways, then we should be making efforts to understand where they are and how we can find common ground with them.

As professional missionaries we should have been trained in how to do this properly but our formations was designed for life within traditional parish structures and priestly activity. Those who saw the need to move out beyond those limits in order to engage the unreached had to find their own way by trial and error. Missionary work is not rocket science and some of the most valuable insights were gained, not from books, but from working with people.  It would be a pity if the experience gained by such interaction was not shared and built upon. So I am thinking of setting up a blog or discussion group to gather people’s ideas on topics like the following.

Listening: How do we listen without letting our own interests, such as a wish to talk about a particular spirituality, poverty alleviation program or caring apostolate get in the way?

Distinguish: How do I separate in my own faith what is essentially Christian and what are cultural and non-essential expressions I have inherited?

Articulate: How do I express my faith in ways that make sense to others, allowing for their particular background and concerns? Faith is not isolated from life. As Christians we should all be involved in the economic, cultural and social realities around us but, at the same time, how do I highlight the essential element for human wellbeing that only religion can offer?

               Hugh MacMahon     4/27/10

How A Missionary Society Can Change Its Identity Without Noticing it

My New Year got off to a good start with a book that gave me a valuable insight into where we are as Columbans today. The book’s title is Concepts of Mission and what attracted me was that its author, a Nigerian priest, is professor of missiology at the Urban University in Rome. With his qualifications he is well placed to provide definitive statements on missionary issues.

The author, Fr Francis Oborji, begins by acknowledging that mission is in crisis today and goes on to try to unravel the reasons why. His first chapter alone should have satisfied me. In it the author spells out in detail his reasons for stating, AThe development in mission theology after Vatican ll has brought to the fore the importance of safeguarding the validity of mission ad gentes.@

 Drawing on John Paul ll=s Redemptoris Missio, he explains: “The expression (mission ad gentes), when properly used, describes the mission of the church directed to >peoples, groups and socio-cultural contexts in which Christ and his Gospel are not known, or which lack Christian communities sufficiently mature= (RM 34). Mission ad gentes is the effort of evangelization directed to people or groups who do not yet believe in Christ, who are far from Christ, in whom the church has not yet taken root and whose culture has not yet been influenced by the gospel.@

He proceeds to distinguish it from evangelization in general, pastoral activity at home or abroad and re-evangelization or the new evangelization.

I went on to read his chapters on mission as conversion, as church planting and growth, as adaptation and inculturation, as dialogue, as Missio Dei and as service in God’s reign. The section on Missio Dei held my attention. When I delved more into it, bits of a jigsaw that that troubled me for years began to come together and make sense. I began to see where the confusion about our identity and role originated.  

According to Professor Oborji, the idea of Missio Dei as the basis for mission emerged from the writings of Karl Barth as developed at the mission meeting in Willingen (Germany) in 1952. At that time, the world was recovering from the shock of thousands of missionaries being expelled from China. Some thought that this indicated an end to church planting and was a wake-up call to get involved in the great issues of the time, political and economical. God is the author of all movements seeking peace and justice (shalom or the Kingdom), including mission. The church, they said, is only an instrument of God=s work so maybe it was time to move beyond a focus on institution to participate in God-inspired world-bettering movements.

This concept of God being active outside the church had the positive effect of encouraging a more open approach to other religions and an appreciation of the secular. However, since 1972 it also led to a split in Protestant missionary circles between those working to establish churches and those moving beyond church concerns to getting involved in the great issues of the day. Among Catholics influenced by this thinking was the theologian Ludwig Rutti who does not accept conversion to the faith or to the church as any part of the goal of mission. It must also be said that this radical reading of Missio Dei never caught on among the majority of Catholic or Protestant missionaries.

Exactly fifty years later, in August 2002, another meeting was held at Willingen to review the situation. The positive aspects of Missio Dei theory were again acknowledged: the fact that mission comes from God and not the church, and that there is need for the church to escape from self-engrossment by taking the side of the weak in the social and political issues of the day. However, the shortcoming of some Missio Dei thinking had also become apparent. By accentuating the role of God the creator, it downplayed the importance of Christ the Son and the Holy Spirit. It did nothing to help clarify the distinction between the Kingdom of God and human actions, between Christian faith and the value of other religions, between the unity of the church and the need for inculturation and between God=s particular activity in the Church and God=s overall activity in creation.

Thinking over this, I began to understand a major shift that has changed Columban identity. It was something I first experienced at the General Assembly of 1982, without understanding the background. The context in which it emerged was the call for solidarity with the oppressed. I was in the committee given the task of drawing up a statement on the Society=s commitment to solidarity and I completely agreed with the concept. I was also at home with the idea of a Trinitarian or Missio Dei approach to mission although I was not conscious of its more radical interpretation and it was never openly mentioned. However in our group discussions I felt there was something missing, something I knew to be important from my almost twenty years in Korea.

It is only now, looking back, that I can put words on it: it was the lack of interest by many of my fellow-committee members in topics such as inculturation, dialogue or better ways of expressing, sharing and practicing the wider Christian message. I have been critical of the Church in my time (and still am occasionally) but I still see it as an integral part of life for followers of Christ and the Kingdom. Believers need to gather in communities to support each other, expand their understanding of scripture and to work with others for the Kingdom. Eventually communities evolve into a church (or churches).

Since then, radical Missio Dei thinking has found a place in our Society, mainly in our formation and lay mission programs. To a large degree it now determines where our younger members want to go, what they are qualified to do and how they see their future.  

How did this version of Missio Dei come to influence our decision making process? My view is that, after Vatican ll, there was a reluctance in the Society to take up the radical implications of the council for the motivation and practice of mission. For instance, even though we are officially an ad gentes mission Society, when was the last time a General Assembly, or other Columban gathering, grappled with any of the topics listed in Fr Oborji’s book: the challenges of direct evangelization, church development, inculturation, dialogue and witness?

A vacuum was created after Vatican ll and a minority view seeped in to dominate key decisions in areas in which the majority of members had little interest or say, but were of major consequence. It happened quietly, probably unconsciously. No one noted that we had taken a new direction, it just happened.

So what can we do about it now?

We must begin by becoming a Society that is no longer afraid to publicly and formally address the issues that challenge us, beginning with the question: What does it mean to be an ad gentes Society today? Reading and discussing Professor Oborji’s book would be a good starting point to reach agreement on terminology and clarify the key issues.

We also need to ensure that all future assessments of our formation and lay mission programs be done by qualified people outside the current programs, with the participation of all interested members. In-house reviews tend to build on present trends rather than correct them.

Finally, all present members should be reassured that efforts to re-focus on ad gentes mission will not mean major changes in their lives. The goal is long-term and geared to the future, no criticism is intended of present day involvements.    Hugh MacMahon.  1

Are We Really ‘God’s Entrepreneurs’?

   

                                                                             

During the summer I spotted a book entitled ‘God’s Entrepreneurs’ in a Dublin bookshop. The subtitle was, ‘How Irish Missionaries tried to change the world’. My first reaction was to wonder, “Why have I not heard of this book, it was published in 2010?” and my second was to get it. 

It was written by an Irish Times journalist, Joe Humphreys, and while I am a bit wary of  contemporary Irish journalists, a quick look at the book suggested that he was trying to be fair. A surprising number of his sources were Columban. Society members interviewed or mentioned include Pat Raleigh, Malachy Smyth, Neill Collins, Tommy Murphy, Dan Fitzgerald, Michael Healy, Donal Hogan, Alo Connaughton, Liam O’Callaghan and Shay Cullen. The Society’s origins and history are highlighted as important elements of the story.

The Preface explains what the author wanted to investigate and why.

He had observed that a generation of extraordinary people was disappearing who had never been given proper recognition or understanding. He was thinking of Irish missionaries but what he has to say is relevant to many other countries with a strong Catholic missionary background.

He wanted to know:  Why did these men and women join the missions? What motivated them?  Do they have regrets? Do they still feel an attachment to their native country?

He had examined existing resources on mission. There was the self-congratulatory missionary propaganda of mission societies. There were also the superficial expressions of approval by celebrities, politicians and journalists. Neither did much to deepen the general public’s  understanding of the real issues.

There were publications that expressed a less positive view: some saw missionaries as well-meaning but outdated, others believed missions were a failed and much-flawed enterprise. A growing number was openly suspicious and hostile, perhaps influenced by recent revelations of clerical abuse both at home and abroad.

The author went on to describe some of the difficulties he encountered in trying to cover the missionary reality.

First, each missionary society is different and independent of others. None of them are good at assessing or recording their activities. Their excuse is that immediate concerns take up all their energies. Most missionaries are not comfortable talking about their achievements, they do not seek publicity lest they be misunderstood. The variety of works that missionaries do makes it difficult to describe them as a unit: there are mavericks and pioneers, conformists, rebels, revolutionaries, conservatives and liberals. Each claims his or her own charism and that often outweighs whatever local policy may exist.

The Preface goes on to explain that the book is divided into two parts. The first is the historical background, based on interviews, and here the Columban experience is seen as trend-setting. The second part is thematic: the nature of mission today and the ideology, legacy and the future of missionaries.   

Interestingly, for a book by a secular journalist, each chapter is headed by a biblical quotation. The reason for this is, “They (the quotations) are used as a reminder that, for good or ill, missionaries are inescapably religious. It is tempting sometime to portray the best of them as somehow divorced from the Church, or even secularized, but that would be a clear misrepresentation… They are the Good News army. They are God’s entrepreneurs.”

Now for some of his conclusions. 

First, the criticisms. Some prominent Western historians and local writers, while holding great personal affection for individual Irish priests, nuns and brothers, accuse the missionaries of  furthering ‘Western imperialism’ through education that alienates the young from their traditional values. Moreover, in both religious and developmental fields, they are inclined to focus on local and immediate needs and lack a wider, strategic vision: “They carve out their own little space and then don’t go outside that.”

Yet, many recognize the positive sides. The missionaries did much to meet the needs of large numbers of people in dire poverty in Africa and bring their plight to the attention of the western world. In the field of evangelization, they were relatively successful in that they left many local Churches in a healthier state then when they found them. Yet, some missionaries insisted that their congregations had moved away from the ‘conversion’ model. Here, the author and some of those he interviewed seem to regard ‘evangelization’ as efforts to increase church membership rather than to engage with the people’s existing religious outlook.

He noted that missionaries often insist that their work cannot be evaluated in human terms because of it spiritual nature. He pointed out that this could become an excuse to avoid scrutiny and a source of self-delusion.

Here are some of the comments made concerning the future of missionary societies.

“A particular phase of missionary work is coming to an end.” (Donal Dorr)

“Idealistic young people today have different –and maybe better—ways to make a difference… Having a religious faith is not necessary to do this kind of work.”

“Whether the Columbans opened up (to local vocations) in sufficient time to secure their future is uncertain.”

“Once missionaries commanded awe, they now tend to attract pity.”

 “What’s worse, this predicament is part of their own making. Reluctance to investigate abuses within, and loath to discuss past mistakes, missionary congregations are actively contributing to their own self-alienation.”

He agrees with many of the missionaries he met that, “To tap into the idealism of young people, you need to offer them certainty and a unique life-goal, rather than a wishy-washy notion of religious commitment.”

The challenge for our next General Assembly is to come up with such a fresh, clear and challenging expression of what we are about. However, while ‘God’s Entrepreneurs’ may encourage us to do this it will not tell us how, as the author is a journalist and not a missionary. What will guide us is a reflection on our own history:  how the first generation of Columbans broke new ground in the unfamiliar cultural landscape of China, the second generation built up the Churches of Asia and Latin America and now the third generation is called to help those Churches make the Christian message more their own, in their particular situation and traditions.

                                    Hugh MacMahon    9/12/10

Good Reading On Mission

Is it just by chance that I have already come across two excellent mission-defining books in 2009? Not long after I had finished Oborji’s Concepts of Mission, I encountered Translating the Message by Lamin Sanneh.

Sanneh was born in Gambia, brought up as a traditional Muslim family, became a Catholic, is professor of history in Yale and is a member of two Pontifical Commissions. His main interest is religion in the world and, in particular, the influence Christianity has, and can, have.

His specialty is history, not mission as such, and that brings a fresh perspective to a field that can easily get sidetracked in theological disputes over unhelpful definitions. What interests him is the practical challenge of bringing the Christian message to people and cultures unfamiliar with it, and missionaries happen to be those who have been historically entrusted with that task.  

Being brought up in an Islamic background, Sanneh has a valuable viewpoint from which to interpret many of the problem facing religious believers today. He sees the basic difference between Christianity and Islam as coming from the fact that Christian scripture is open to translation into many tongues while Islam restricts itself to Arabic. In the process of translating the bible into local languages missionaries have had to study the culture and traditions of the people and came to discover positive elements which they sought to preserve. Islam, on the other hand, does not have to dialogue with local cultures.

Reading his description of this phenomenon, missionaries will recall their own early efforts to find equivalent words for god, grace and sin, and how this led them to find out more about the people’s historical religious experience and vocabulary.      

A benefit of Translating the Message is the fresh approach it brings to describing the task of mission today. We are at a moment when the old ways of presenting mission, which were useful in their time, no longer have the same impact. Meanwhile, the new expressions we are grasping at in our desperation to be relevant are being shown to lack depth and lasting value. Sanneh articulates the missionary challenge in a way which is both true to its roots and speaks to the spiritual thirst in the modern world.

He recognizes the inevitably tension in the Church between those whose task it is to preserve truth and unity and those responsible for bringing the Christian message to a variety of cultures and situations. The tendency of the first is to seek uniformity in expression and practice, the task of the latter is to promote variety so the Church can grow in different environments. At present the emphasis is on the former and attention to the second is being sacrificed.

Sanneh does not take up this issue in his book, he just describes the historical influence the Church has had due to its openness, first to the Greek world and later to other civilizations. Today missionaries are responsible for continuing that openness, to help people find God in their own traditions, to leaven the seeds of the Gospels found there with the message of the scriptures and the accumulate experience of the Church.

This is a challenge that has to be faced both at the cautious highest levels of the Vatican and each time a missionary open their mouth to share their faith in a new situation. It is not only a matter of making the scriptures available to all people but has the potential of enriching cultures, churches and the spirituality of individuals. Expressed that way, it has the ability to capture imaginations today.

One thing Columbans have is a treasury of missionary experience. A book like Sanneh’s can help them reflect on it, evaluate it and draw valuable lessons for our future. 

                                                                Hugh MacMahon 4/16/09

New Insights into the Birth of the Modern Chinese Church

In recent years, attempts to understand China have moved from general descriptions of the nation=s long and complex past to more focused and detailed studies of people and events which have influenced its progress. 

One book which is broadening our appreciation of the role of the early Jesuits in China is Liam Brockey=s >Journey to the East: The Jesuit Mission to China, 1579 - 1727'.

Here, Hugh MacMahon  draws some lessons from the early Jesuits= efforts

 which laid the foundations not only of the present Chinese Church but also of the Church in Korea and, to a lesser extent, Japan.

For too long there has been a perception that the Jesuits concentrated their energy on the educated elite of 16^th and 17^th century China and had little involvement with the ordinary people. The facts show a different picture. In 1582 when Ruggieri, the predecessor of Ricci by one year, entered China there were no Christians there but, due to his efforts and those of his colleagues, by 1606 there were 1000 Catholics and in 1610 there were 2,500.

By 1665 the Jesuits were administering the sacraments annually to over 105,000 people and in 1695 there were over 200,000 Catholics in the empire. Of that number only a handful were influential on the national level, a small number had some authority on the provincial level and the vast majority were lower class Chinese, living in small towns and rural villages scattered over wide areas of China.

Preparations

Valignano, the Jesuit superior who masterminded the shape the mission would take, saw the need for a clear strategy if the efforts of a small band of missionaries were not be wasted in such a vast and complex country. From the mistakes made in the Japan mission he realized the importance of language and cultural studies before getting directly involved in the work of  evangelization. Newcomers were to spend their first three to four years in the country learning the language and the texts used were the Confucian classics. As a result students got a grounding in the culture at the same time as they learned to speak Chinese.

It was no accident, then, that the Jesuits were the first to study Mandarin in a formal way and the first to discover and crack the mystery of its tonal nature.

When it came to making contacts in China, the plan was to find patrons who would provide introductions and protection for the missionaries. If this meant cultivating the interest of the Chinese scholar class in Western science, then it was worth committing the first group of missionaries to introducing Western instruments, maps and astrology and in the process gaining their friendship.

Some might have had hopes that this approach would also gain speedy admission for the missionaries to the presence of the Emperor in his northern capital, and ultimately lead to his conversion. Then, if the rest of the population followed his example as happened in post-Reformation Europe where >the ruler=s faith became the faith of the people=, the whole empire would become Christian.

However they quickly realized this was not going to happen in China and instead they concentrated their energy on winning over a number of influential officials who would provide them with the political protection they needed to be present in the country. Only a few of these scholar-administrators actually became Christians but in the safely provided by this net of influential  friends the Jesuits were able to move among the lower classes who were to be the greatest source of converts. 

Attracting the Attention of the Populace

After establishing their presence in an area, the  next step for the missionaries was to find way of attracting the interest of ordinary people who were totally unfamiliar with Christian beliefs and world view. There was already a natural antipathy among them towards foreign beliefs due to their attachment to family religious traditions, the wide use of Buddhist emblems and charms, the popular practice of Buddhist fasts, a morality that encouraged more than one wife among the rich and a weakness for fortune telling and exorcisms.

What proved to have the greatest impact on the imagination and attitude of the people was the lifestyle of the missionaries. The Jesuits were recognized as men of learning and morality. The respect shown to them by high officials, their scholarly image, the simplicity of their houses, their ability to fit in with local society and the solemnity of their liturgy all made an immediate impression. People began to visit them either out of curiosity or on the recommendation of a friend.

 However, the early Jesuits also took a pro-active approach. Some of them instituted the practice, when visiting remote villages, of setting up an altar, waiting for a crowd to gather, bowing reverently to the image on the altar and the begin explaining about the God whom they honored. This often led to invitations to stay and explain further.    

Building on the Interest

As soon as people showed enough interest in learning more about their teaching, the Jesuits explained about the creator God, the human soul and salvation through a moral life. Those who eventually received baptism were given further instruction as opportunities allowed and were encouraged to keep the ten commandments, recite prayers regularly and join in community devotions. The latter became a daily routine in Christian villages where, morning and evening, under the direction of a local leader they recited or chanted responsorial prayers such as the >Our Father, the >Hail Mary= and other popular invocations. This custom survived in Catholic communities for many centuries and can still be found in traditional parts of China.

The use of rosaries, pendants, holy water and prayers for healing and exorcism were encouraged as ways of providing a Catholic alternative to traditional signs of religious allegiance and seeking other-worldly help. Marian devotions became popular in the Chinese Church due to the spirituality of the Jesuits though it was Joseph, not Mary, whom they made the patron of China. 

The Structure of Communities

Besides setting up local communities, often on a clan or family basis, the Jesuits developed the role of fraternities or hui to ensure that the newly baptized continued to practice and deepen their faith. In this development two cultural patterns merge, one Western and the other Eastern.

In renewing communities in post-Reformation Europe, the Jesuits had discovered the value of fraternities, sodalities and associations in  providing mutual spiritual support, deepening knowledge of the faith and encouraging involvement in works of charity.  

In China, too, there had long been a practice of people gathering in groups or hui for fellowship, cooperation and mutual benefit. Usually they were composed of  those of similar age, social class or commercial interests.

Thus, when the Jesuits introduced the sodalities and fraternities to China they were an immediate success and soon played an important role in developing and preserving the Church. There were devotional groups called the Sheng-mu hui (Our Lady=s Association,)  Funeral Societies (hui) that oversaw arrangements for Christian burials, St Francis Xavier hui for catechists and Holy Angels= hui for those teaching children.

Each hui had a leader, called a hui-zhang (zhang is pronounced jang, as in Korean, and means >leader=). The word was also used to denote both the honorary head of a community and the local catechist so each community was likely to have a number of huizhang.  The various hui enabled Catholics communities to survive in the1600s and 1700s when priests were few and the communities were small and scattered. As the priests left the country or went into hiding because of later persecutions it was the hui that kept the Catholics together and made sure the church survived

Continuity of the Legacy

Columbans working in China, Korea and Japan in the early and mid 20^th century would come across and used, not only the hui, but many of the words, practices and institutions established by the Jesuits in China. It was the Jesuits who standardized the terms used in the Church for god, soul, grace, sin, sacrament and a hundred other basic words used in preaching and catechetics. They also introduced a system of registration for families. The community hui-zhang complied a list of those who were absent when the priest visited, the sick, those ready for baptism and the recently deceased. 

In China today, while the role of  huizhang survives as catechist or community leader,  hui as associations of the faithful no longer exist perhaps because the government fears their potential in organizing people outside state control.

Cultural Similarities

The story of the Jesuit=s cultural  breakthrough in China, as related above, might appear to have been a remarkable successful achievement. To their great credit the early missionaries were prepared to show a genuine respect for local tradition and language and put careful thought into how they could make the most of their limited opportunities and resources.

Some important elements in the culture favored them. The god preached by the Jesuits was remarkably familiar to that of the Chinese and the Church=s hierarchical system had its shadow in the paternalism and structures of Confucianism.  

The image of God, brought by the Jesuits to China, was heavily influenced by the contemporary European situation. In the heresy-fearing atmosphere of the post-Reformation Church, teaching correct doctrine was more important than encouraging private or communal study of the bible. The catechisms which were the gateway to baptism and the sacraments taught an unquestioning faith in the one creator God, the mysteries of the Church, the sacraments, the ten commandments and the laws of the Church. Jesus Christ was secondary, with emphasis on his role in the history of eternal salvation. As an African theologian noted recently, it was the time when mission moved from evangelizing to catechizing.

As it happened, Confucian society was also based on the belief in one god, Heaven, who set the moral standard for humans and who regulated society from far. Solemn ritual emphasized the supreme dignity and power of this remote Heaven. One of the Confucian criticisms of Buddhism was that it had created a myriad of unnecessary minor gods, reincarnated Buddha and esoteric dogmas. In siding with the Confucians, rather than the Buddhists, the Jesuits had further reason to emphasize the oneness of the Creator God and give less attention to a Son of God who had his own distinctive message, who had been executed and who rose from the dead.        

It was no accident, therefore, that the Catholic Church was, and still is, known as the >Church of the Lord of Heaven=, that is, of the One God.. The early writings of Ricci mentioned Jesus only incidently since it might have been difficult, at that stage, to explain how the One God had a son. Rather, the Jesuits concentrated on teaching the one creator God, his plan for salvation and the morality necessary to live a blameless life. It was only later, and with great care, that they introduced the mysteries of the Incarnation, the Trinity and the sacraments. Eventually sections of the bible were translated into Chinese but scripture never became the main teaching tool. 

Lessons for Today?  

This focus on a transcendent God was to continue in the Chinese Church, and indeed much of the universal Church,  into the 20^th century and it was only with Vatican ll that the centrality of Christology in Catholic belief was reaffirmed. In China the effect of this change was delayed because the Church was suppressed by the government and deprived of a full generation of post-1950 leaders.

In the meantime, forced study of  Mao=s atheistic materialism had weakened the people=s  awareness of a heavenly creator. Today they are moving away from a hierarchical mindset and, as in the West, developing a more independent, personal and self-chosen life style. The questions they are now asking in their more reflective moments are more world-related and sophisticated than those in the 17^th century.

While a new openness to the West has brought an initial interest in Christianity to China,  as in Korea and Japan secularization has a more immediate appeal and there is no reason to think there will be any more mass conversions or huge congregations. It will soon be obvious that the spiritual quest of a more individualistic, cosmopolitan and demanding population will not be met by traditional catechetical methods. The questions of modern Chinese will only be answered through a guided study of the bible with all its complexity and seeming contradictions.

A Role for Missionaries?

Today a Chinese Church exists and has limited freedom to operate but foreigners are not  allowed to participate openly in its ministerial or evangelical mission. This, however, does not mean there is no role for foreigners. There are a number of contributions they can still make to the development of the Church in China. However, they need to be as careful as the early Jesuits in planning what their contribution should be and how best to prepare for it. Today the number of trained missionaries is still comparatively small and the complexity of the Chinese situation has increased.

One opening for foreign missionaries is to facilitate Chinese Church leaders in acquiring  the vision, knowledge and skills they need to bring the spirit of Vatican ll into Chinese society today. 

This has already begun by those who are helping Chinese Church leaders to attend courses, and get experience of recent Church developments, both inside and outside their country. International Congregations are also making efforts to recruit candidates within China for the contribution they will be able to make within their own country from their contact with the wider Church. The lessons of using hui and of living in low-visibility communities or houses will need to be kept in mind. 

Another contribution foreigners can make is to make use of their >foreignness=. Through their service in China, as teachers, medical personnel or social workers, they can show what Christianity is in practice. Like the Jesuits, four hundred years ago, they can share the benefits of modern science while witnessing to the fact that the human mind is not limited to the material realm. As in the case of the Jesuits, it is the selflessness and authenticity of their witness that will make them credible. 

Something to be Brought Home

In the 16^th and 17^th centuries it was missionaries from the West who were journeying enthusiastically to the East, confident they had something valuable to share. Half of those who set out never arrived because of shipwreck or disease. Those who got there had no expectations of ever returning home. Yet their commitment never faltered.

Today it is different. The excitement of mission is gone from the West. Faith is less important  in people=s lives, it is more individualistic and Christianity is assumed as having nothing valuable or unique enough to warrant sharing it with others, especially those far away. Young people are willing to travel abroad to offer their services in humanitarian causes but do not regard any one faith as better than another. This would seem either to spell an end for mission in the Catholic church, or to leave it in the hands of fundamentalists who would not be the best facilitators of inculturation in Local Churches.

If the mainstream Western missionary movement is to continue in the spirit of Valignano, Ruggieri and Ricci, it may be time for missionaries who have worked in a predominantly non-Christian environment, such as China=s, to use that experience to help revitalize the faith in their home countries.

In their efforts to communicate the heart of the Christian message to people of different religious backgrounds they had to peel off the layers of later cultural additions and try to uncover the core message.

 If they have survived this far as missionaries it is because they have seen the value, even the urgency, of the message for themselves and others and this has motivated them to want to share it cross-culturally. Today that clarity of vision and ability to apply the Word to the questions of modern life is also needed in their home countries if the missionary spirit is ever to revive there.

 The human figure of Christ with his message of a compassionate God, of the Spirit active in the individual, the call to be part of a new creation, an answer to evil in the world and a spirituality that seeks the transcendent in ordinary life, reaffirm the individual while challenging him or her in the West as in the East.

Four hundred years ago missionaries took a confident faith from the West to the East. Now it is time to take that faith, refined and renewed, back to their home Churches to help meet the searching of the people there. 

                                                                  Hugh MacMahon 11/21/07