Ecclesia in Asia and the Challenges of
Evangelization
Fr. Felix Wilfred
Madras University
In the past few decades there has been, as
is well known, a serious preoccupation with
the mission of the Church. The developments
taking place in different parts of the world,
especially in Asia raised critical questions
regarding the understanding of
mission, and more radically about the very
necessity for mission. In particular
theology of religions and the practice of
dialogue as developed in Asia have given
rise to serious concerns regarding mission
and the recognition of the central place of
Christ in Christian faith and the need to
proclaim the message of the Gospel. The
Roman Documents on mission in recent times
such as Redemptoris Missio and
Dominus Iesus reflect such
preoccupations. There was a feeling that the
Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences (FABC)
may be moving fast and with more and more
radical views that could spell a danger to
the task of mission in Asia.
This was the impression evoked when in 1990
FABC assembled for its Vth
General Assembly in Bandung in which some
Cardinals from the Roman dicasteries and
Nuncios from some of the countries from Asia
were present.
There was some tension regarding the
understanding of mission as to how most
Asians felt and how the Roman
representatives viewed it.
The Roman Synod of 1998 on Asia needs to be
placed against this background; so too the
document Ecclesia in Asia which tried
to bring together and synthesize the
deliberations of that synod. There are very
laudable aspects in this document. But one
thing which strikes me is that I am not able
to hear the voices of Asian Bishops in this
document as I have heard them speak in the
Asian meetings! It is a different voice and
a language that is not quite the same as
they speak in Asia and at FABC. This is
something very important to hold in mind to
be able to understand the spirit, tone and
contents of Ecclesia in Asia- coming
out of a synod of Asian Bishops held in Rome.
With these introductory remarks, let me now
highlight thematically some of the salient
features of Ecclesia in Asia with
some comments.
Presentation of the context
Ecclesia in Asia seeks to
contextualize its thoughts on mission by
describing the overall political, social and
cultural situation in the continent. The
context is completed by presenting the
ecclesial situation in Asia in the process
of which it paints in broad strokes the
history of mission in this continent. The
motive for this kind of tour de horizons
is clearly enunciated: “A critical
awareness of the diverse and complex
realities of Asia is essential if the People
of God on the continent are to respond to
God’s will for them in the new
evangelization” (no. 5). The document
sketching the complex reality of Asia,
recognizes the fast pace of changes in the
continent. It refers to the demographic fact
of population growth and recalls such
situations as urbanization, migration, the
condition of women, indigenous peoples, and
appalling labour condition in the
present-day Asian economic growth. It points
to military dictatorships, corruption in
public life and growing disparity between
the rich and the poor. Ecclesia in Asia
expresses concern about the changes in
cultural values, growing consumerism and
individualism and the threat of external
influences in Asian ways of life. This
presentation of the situation is meant, also
to evoke the challenges posed to the
evangelizing mission of the Church.
The situation the document presents is true
and the intention is clear. However, we miss
on the whole a deeper analysis of the
situation with causal connections. The
presentation is more in the form of
enumerating some aspects of the
situation and describing others, and
there seems to be a preoccupation to be
comprehensive at the expense of going deep
into the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of the described
situation of the Asian context. A deeper
analysis would have led the document to take
note of the role being played by market and
by financial capitalism in Asian societies
and see many of the situations it describes
in relation to market and capitalist forces.
The Asian situation is one in which these
new forces are in connivance with the
oppressive traditional forces such as feudal
ways and caste system, to make the Asian
societies all the more oppressive.
The document goes then into the ecclesial
context of Asia. Rightly does the document
bring us to the awareness that Christianity
had its presence in India, right from the
times of the Apostle St Thomas. It reminds
us that there was a flourishing Church in
China from 7th to 9th
century, and the missionary efforts made in
the same country in the 13th
century. Later in the 16th
century St Francis Xavier did his memorable
missionary labour in Asia. The survey of
mission history, unfortunately, is not
critical and appears somewhat simplistic.
For example, the connection between
Christian mission and the colonial powers is
underplayed, and is confined to just one
statement: “Despite her centuries-long
presence and her many apostolic endeavours,
the Church in many places was still
considered as foreign to Asia, and indeed
was often associated in people’s minds with
the colonial powers” (no. 9). We would
expect a little more detailed treatment of
the issue, since this is a question that has
its effects even today in the relationship
of Christianity to Asian societies. In fact,
in the responses of the various Asian
Bishops’ Conferences, concern was expressed
that the connection between Christianity and
colonialism be seriously taken into account,
so that the mission history does not appear
as a success story. For example, the Indian
Bishops in their response stated:
[A]mong
the liabilities is Christianity’s link with
colonial oppressors... [in that] along with
the spread of Christianity by so many
missionaries — clerics, religious and lay —
also inevitably came behaviour that was
repugnant to basic rights and religious
sensibilities. As a result, still today the
image projected by some Christians seems
definitely foreign both to Gospel teaching
and Indian culture... We Christians in India
recall especially the colonial period, when
some of those professing to be disciples of
Jesus were intolerant and unjust towards
followers of other religious traditions.
There were also certainly harsh apologetics,
offensive propaganda, and a disregard for
the cultural values and beliefs of those who
followed other religions besides
Christianity.
The voice of Indian Bishops was not
isolated; similar thoughts were expressed by
Bishops of Taiwan, Philippines, Vietnam and
so on, which shows a certain common
perception in the Asian Churches about the
history of mission. Moreover, we need to ask
whether the connection between colonialism
and Christianity is a matter of the past,
and whether it does not continue even today
in many subtle forms preventing the true
agency and selfhood of the Asian Churches.
This survey lacks also in the presentation
of the involvement of Asians themselves in
the work of mission. More and more studies
have enlightened us on the role played by
local Christians, catechists, and others who
were active agents of mission, and the
Korean Church in fact owes to the missionary
efforts of lay people.
Presentation of Jesus Christ and Theology of
Religions
It should be duly acknowledged that
Ecclesia in Asia does make efforts lest
it be misunderstood as if the proclamation
of Jesus Christ were against positive
relationship to other religions. The
document recognizes the importance of
'building unity, working for reconciliation,
forging bonds of solidarity, promoting
dialogue among religions and cultures,
eradicating prejudices and engendering trust
among peoples are all essential to the
Church's evangelising mission on the
continent.' It also takes pain to
distinguish clearly conversion from
proselytization.
In spite of such efforts, the document, on
the whole, comes across to many Christians
of Asia and as not giving due value to the
religious traditions of their neighbours,
and as aggressively promoting the work of
conversion. How has that come about? The
answer could be found in some of the
programmatic statements of the document
which seems to inspire the ultimate purpose
of the entire body of the text. Let me quote
one such statement which appears as a
concluding sentence of the very first
number.
[J]ust as in the first millennium the Cross
was planted on the soil of Europe, and in
the second on that of the Americas and
Africa, we can pray that in the Third
Christian Millennium a great harvest of
faith will be reaped in this vast and
vital continent. (no. 1)
This statement formed part of the speech of
Pope John Paul II when he officially
promulgated this Apostolic Exhortation
during his visit to India in November 1999.
The reaction in the secular press to this
statement was that Pope was encouraging
conversion in the old way in a veiled new
language. The Hindu fundamentalist groups
found it highly aggressive, while on the
other extreme, there were reactions to say
that there is no danger of such conversion
in India (and in Asia as a whole), since
numerically the Christians have remained for
the past several decades constantly under 3%
of the population. In short, the Pope in
promulgating this document left a debate
behind, and the overall assessment and
impression Ecclesia in Asia evoked
was not one that would bring Christianity
closer to Asian peoples. This is
unfortunate, considering the efforts that
have gone in bringing together the fruits of
the Asian Synod and very valuable thoughts
and insights Ecclesia in Asia
contains.
Certainly, as is clear from some of the
significant interventions in the synod,
there were important questions raised by the
Asian Bishops and approaches suggested. Had
these been assumed into the text of
Ecclesia in Asia, the document would
have been less likely to be misunderstood in
the way it has happened. For example, an
exhortation that Jesus, son of the Asian
soil, and his message be made known to the
peoples of Asia would have found positive
echo among peoples of other faiths. In fact,
some of the Bishops Conferences of Asia in
their response to the Lineamenta of
the Synod had precisely suggested an
orientation along these lines. It shows
again the importance of listening to the
local Churches and the way they relate
themselves to neighbours of other faiths and
to their context. Though the document is
supposed to be from the Synod of Asian
Bishops, but in fact, it is cast in a mould
that does not represent Asian approach and
practice of mission.
A central point Ecclesia in Asia
makes is the necessity and duty of
proclaiming Jesus Christ as the saviour. In
reminding about this, the document tells us
that this proclamation should not be
interpreted as proselytization. The
principle it evokes and the spirit it
suggests in proclaiming Jesus Christ are
noteworthy: It should be done with “respect
for man (sic) in his quest for answers to
the deepest questions of his life and
respect for the action of the Spirit in man“
(no. 20). We see here reflected an important
achievement of Vatican Council II. In the
document on Dignitatis Huamanae, the
Council recognized the freedom of religion,
which means the acknowledgement of and
respect to the subjecthood of the believers
in their spiritual quest. History of mission
shows that, by and large, this principle was
not respected, and the failure to accept
Jesus Christ was taken as something morally
wrong and condemnable. In the spirit of
Dignitatis Humanae, the mode of
proclamation should be such that the growth
process and religious quest of the people to
whom Jesus Christ is proclaimed need to be
respected. It is gratifying to note that a
second principle highlighted in Ecclesia
in Asia is a thought that has been
emphasized in the reflections of FABC and by
Asian theologians, namely the action of the
Spirit. In this way, the theological basis
for the respect for others is underlined.
The religious quest of our neighbours is not
simply human efforts. There is the mystery
of the working of the Spirit in the hearts
of the people.
The document reflects on the difficulties
that have been put forward in the
intervention of bishops at the synod in
regard to the proclamation of Jesus Christ.
In an attempt to classify those
difficulties, the document notes how
proclamation of Jesus Christ as saviour is
“fraught with philosophical, cultural and
theological difficulties, especially in
light of the beliefs of Asia‘s great
religions, deeply intertwined with cultural
values and specific world views“ (no. 20 ).
The document does not go into a discussion
of these difficulties and propose solutions.
Rather, it takes a more practical route on
the assumption that those difficulties could
be mitigated by a pedagogical approach.
We find here some novelty in the document.
It suggests that we need to present Jesus in
categories and symbols which are familiar to
Asians and which can vibrate with their
cultures. Recalling the suggestions made by
Asian Bishops at the synod, the document
notes:
In this perspective, the Synod Fathers
stressed mainly the need to evangelize in a
way that appeals to the sensibilities of
Asian minds and cultures and, at the same
time, faithful to Sacred Scriptures and
Tradition. Among them were ‘Jesus Christ as
the Teacher of Wisdom, the Healer, the
Liberator, the Spiritual Guide, the
Enlightened One, the Compassionate Friend of
the Poor, the Good Samaritan, the Good
Shepherd, the Obedient One’(no. 20).
The document speaks also how narrative
methods and story-telling could help the
presentation of Jesus in Asia. The novelty
of these suggestions, however, gets dampened
when the document speaks of the “ontological
notions involved ” in the presentation of
Jesus. The question is inevitable, whether
here we have the case of one step forward
and two steps backwards. The pedagogy the
document has suggested, however, remains a
very valuable insight.
We may ask why this insistence on the
proclamation of Jesus Christ straight away
after presenting the context of Asia and the
ecclesial context? This may be accounted by
the fact there has been some debates and
controversies regarding the understanding of
mission and the mystery of Jesus Christ in
the theologies pursued in Asia and in the
statements of FABC. In particular, the
importance Asian Churches have given to
dialogue was perceived as a neglect to
courageously proclaim Jesus Christ. I may
refer here another reason for this way of
approaching mission by Ecclesia in Asia.
It has to do with a central thought that
gets repeated throughout the document: It is
the assumption that Asian people are in a
spiritual yearning, and this yearning is
responded to and the thirst is quenched by
proclaiming Jesus Christ as saviour. But the
point is that the thirst of Asian peoples
for Jesus Christ is a theoretical
assumption, and shall we say, a wishful
thinking. But the actual realities at the
ground are different. Our neighbours of
others other faiths seek Jesus Christ with
great devotion, not because they feel that
they lack something in their religious
tradition. It is the sense of the sacred and
the mystery that brings them to seek a
greater understanding and experience of
Jesus. The document basically reshapes the
traditional fulfilment approach to
religions. But development in theology of
religions in Asia has gone far ahead and
these developments which can be found also
in the statements of the FABC do not get
reflected in Ecclesia in Asia.
The chapter on the proclamation of Jesus
Christ is intimately linked in the document
to what it says in a few pages on the Holy
Spirit. There is an inspiring passage which
acknowledges the role of the Spirit in
unifying people and building relationships.
The forces of death isolate people,
societies and religious communities from one
another, and generate the suspicion and
rivalry that lead to conflict. The Holy
Spirit, by contrast, sustains people in
their search for mutual understanding and
acceptance. The Synod was therefore right to
see the Spirit of God as the prime agent of
the Church’s dialogue with all peoples,
cultures and religions (no. 15).
We wish this inspiring opening were further
developed and related to mission. But we
find the document at this point being
weighed down by suspicion that the role of
the Spirit may be used in Asia “as an excuse
for a failure to proclaim Jesus Christ
explicitly as the one and only Saviour” (no.
16).
In Ecclesia in Asia, dialogue is seen
as a matter primarily of a doctrinal nature.
Christians with their firm faith-conviction
enter into dialogue with their neighbours of
other religions. On the other hand, in Asia,
dialogue is seen in a much more
comprehensive way, of which doctrinal
questions of faith is but one. Dialogue is a
matter of forging relationships, and it
starts with “dialogue of life” which also
creates the proper climate for sharing of
faith-convictions. Moreover, given the fact
that Christians share with their neighbours
of other faiths the same conditions of daily
life, it is important that dialogue reaches
out to others and bears fruit in common
engagement for the welfare of all and the
transformation of the society. Dialogue for
example helps Christians and others come
together and jointly respond to issues of
justice, defence of life, violation of human
rights, questions relating to religious
freedom, etc., and to act together
transcending religious barriers, especially,
in times of tragedies and natural
calamities. Experience in different Asian
countries shows that this involvement of
Christians with others has contributed to a
refreshing understanding of dialogue.
Ecclesia in Asia, for fear of any
possible compromise of Christian faith
through dialogue has not been able to
incorporate all these rich dimensions which
make up the practice of dialogue in the
Asian situation.
Evangelization through Witnessing
The entire chapter seven is dedicated
exclusively to witnessing to the Gospel as
an integral part of evangelization. This is
a very positive point of the document.
Though the issue is recognized as crucial in
Asia, however, the line of development
Ecclesia in Asia pursues is one of
exhortation to the various agents in the
Church for a life of witness since it has
evangelizing potential. Thus pastors,
clergy, religious, laity are addressed about
the importance of witnessing in their lives
and through the modern means of social
communication. The chapter ends with martyrs
as supreme witnesses.
It may be remarked here that, while talking
about witnessing, the approach Asian Bishops
take, as seen in the various FABC documents
as well as in their response to
Lineamenta, is of fundamental
significance. Whereas for Ecclesia in
Asia the mission begins with the
proclamation of Jesus Christ, Asian Bishops,
while not denying this, trace out a
different path and approach to mission in
Asia. For Asian Bishops mission begins not
with the proclamation but with witnessing.
This is the crucial difference we note in
Ecclesia in Asia and in the documents of
FABC. In the context of plurality of
religions, cultures, philosophies,
worldviews and ethical conceptions,
evangelization begins with presence
following the mystery of incarnation and the
way Jesus related himself to the people and
society of his time. For the Asian Bishops,
evangelization begins with presence and
forging relationships, and moves towards
Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom of God. In
Ecclesia in Asia, we have a different
approach, dictated perhaps by the fear that
the place of Jesus Christ may not be
sufficiently affirmed. It starts with the
proclamation of Jesus Christ as a gift to
Asia. Witnessing is seen by and large as a
means to this proclamation.
Dialogue and Inculturation
Given the above-sketched orientation to
mission, we realize that dialogue that has
been a theme developed in depth in Asia in
the past several decades, is downplayed in
Ecclesia in Asia. There is just one
number that speaks about interreligious
dialogue (no. 31). Even in that one number,
the dominant tone is that of caution
regarding dialogue, rather than positive
encouragement. Beneath the surface, there
seems to be a sense of serious apprehension
in the document that dialogue could become a
practice opposed to the duty of proclaiming
Jesus Christ. This dominant preoccupation
leads the document to state the following:
From the Christian point of view,
interreligious dialogue is more than a way
of fostering mutual knowledge and
enrichment; it is a part of the Church’s
evangelizing mission, an expression of the
mission ad gentes. Christians bring
to interreligious dialogue the firm belief
that the fullness of salvation comes from
Christ alone and that the Church community
to which they belong is the ordinary
means of salvation (no. 31).
Asian Christians who are involved in
relationship with neighbours of other faiths
know that an attitude such as the one
expressed in this statement is far from
helpful. It could serve more as extinguisher
of dialogue than promoter of it. They also
know that position as this could only foment
the suspicion about the real intention of
dialogue on the part of Christians. The
relationship between dialogue and
evangelization is a theme that has gone
through a lot of reflections among Asian
theologians and bishops, and has involved
also ecumenical reflections. To cite one
example, the first ever common meeting of
the FABC with the Christian Conference of
Asia (CCA) held in Singapore in 1987 was
precisely on the theme of dialogue, and it
went on to explore the relationship between
dialogue and proclamation. It was said that
both dialogue and mission have their own
autonomy and one is not to be made
instrument of the other.
As for inculturation, the document, as I
noted above, has spoken of a pedagogical
method consonant with Asian cultures.
Moreover, trying to capture the discussions
in the synod, the document notes that
inculturation should happen in the fields of
“theology, liturgy, formation of priests and
religious, catechesis and spirituality” (no.
21). That is well taken. There is certainly
encouragement to pursue inculturation. On
the other hand, the perspective in which
inculturation is viewed is that of
evangelization. Like in the case of
dialogue, inculturation is also presented as
a means for evangelization. Here a
more biblically oriented understanding of
inculturation would have taken the document
to relate it to the mystery of incarnation,
and see it as the very mode of the existence
of the Church-community and its various
expressions. It is this latter kind of
orientation which has been followed in the
Asian Churches. This orientation involves an
encounter of the Gospel message with the
cultures of people in a process in which our
understanding of the Gospel itself gets
enriched, and therefore inculturation may
not be reduced to simply a pedagogical
device.
Mission and Human Promotion
Asia is a continent in which most numerous
poor of the world live. Today with
globalisation, the gap between the rich and
the poor has widened as never before. There
are numerous social issues to be addressed.
The document names with a lot of empathy
some of these social and developmental
issues: The plight of women, children,
immigrants, refugees, asylum seekers,
tribals, aboriginal peoples, etc. It speaks
of violation of human rights in Asia and the
situation of illiteracy and the condition of
workers.
In response to such a plight, the document
recalls certain basic principles of
Christian faith: The dignity of human
person, preferential option for the poor,
solidarity, etc. In this context it
advocates the need to put into effect the
Social Teachings of the Church. There are
many helpful insights and suggestions.
However, as in the case of the first chapter
in which the context of evangelization was
set forth, here too a deeper analysis of the
social issues is wanting. Socially conscious
South Asian Christians will be disappointed
not to find any mention about caste and
about the social and economic oppression of
Dalit people. These are issues touching the
life of millions of Asians, even if it is
something related to South Asia.
Ever since the Synod on Evangelization
(1974) and the Apostolic Exhortation of Paul
VI Evangelii Nuntiandi, there have
been efforts to view mission in a more
comprehensive way by pointing to various
dimensions of it. Ecclesia in Asia
reflects that orientation in that its
understanding of mission is presented with
various aspects such as proclamation,
witness, human promotion, etc. While
admitting the validity of all these aspects,
what seems to be important in Asia (and
elsewhere in the world) is the way these
various aspects are integrated. Here lies
the crux of a new and different
understanding of mission. In Ecclesia in
Asia these aspects seem to be
juxtaposed, and there has not been the
effort to bring them together.
Speaking of human promotion, it will be too
little to reduce the matter to a question of
education, charity, development, etc.
Obviously we need to understand human
promotion in an integral way.
But there is another aspect that has come up
through the experience of marginalized
people in Asia, which needs to be woven into
our understanding of evangelization. I mean
to say that it is of utmost importance that
human promotion be understood first and
foremost as enabling the agency of the
people and their subjecthood.
Conclusion
It
would be interesting to study to what extent
this synod and the apostolic exhortation
that followed have had impact on the
leaders, priests, religious and the laity of
Asia. Certainly it has found some
enthusiastic support, but that is outweighed
by a general neglect of this document in
Asia, supposed to promote mission in the
continent. This need not surprise us, since
for many Asians the method the document has
adopted, the presupposition it makes and the
analyses it does, do not vibrate with their
concerns. Moreover, for many critically
thinking Asian Christians, the document
neither really captures the mood of Asia,
nor represent adequately the situation
prevailing here.
You may raise the question as to what is new
in Ecclesia in Asia.
It is remarkable that the questions treated
in the document have been already treated
extensively in the study and reflections of
Asian Bishops as clear from the FABC
documents, and indeed in a much more
incisive manner, and these have been found
most helpful in understanding Asian
Christianity and responding to the
challenges of the continent.
This again underlies the importance of
reflection on mission in the local Churches
in relating to specific contexts. These
reflections need to be promoted today.
However, we must recognize that there was an
important achievement made through the Asian
Synod and the document Ecclesia in Asia.
The voice of Asian Bishops and the concerns
of Asian Churches were given a Roman forum
for expression, and thanks to the synod, the
issues and questions Asian Churches had been
dealing with came to be known in other
continents and local Churches. What has been
said need not prevent us from continuing to
reflect on the task of evangelization in a
continuously evolving Asia and the
challenges of Asian continent. The Asian
Synod could be taken as a special moment in
the life of Asian Churches to pause and
recapture what has been reflected upon in
the continent in the last few decades on the
manner of Christian presence, involvement
and mission. The synod and the document
Ecclesia in Asia will help us to pursue
the great task of evangelization in our
societies in fidelity to the Gospel and the
promptings of the Spirit. They have also
been wonderful opportunities to share with
the rest of the world our issues and
questions, our problems and hopes. Some of
the issues which have found expression in
the synod and the document will, hopefully,
be of service to the other sister Churches.
+
FAX ++39 06 85443212 
