Introduction
1. Acting upon the recommendations of the 1998 second seminar of the
Asian Movement for Christian Unity (AMCU II) the Christian Conference
of Asia (CCA) and the Federation of Asian Bishops’Conferences (FABC)
jointly pledged that ecumenical formation is to be given priority for
the churches in Asia. AMCU II, which had as its theme“ecumenical formation,”was
even emphatic that ecumenical formation has to be done ecumenically
where the participation and contribution of each partner had to be full
and equal.
2. Thus, the first Joint Ecumenical Formation (JEF I) was held in Bangalore,
India, in 1999 where it was described as a“50-50”effort as each side
contributed about 50% share to the number of participants, resource
persons and all other aspects of organizing the program. The second
Joint Ecumenical Formation (JEF II) was no different from the first
except that it was even hosted by one of the few national council of
churches in Asia where the Roman Catholic Church is a full participating
member. JEF II, which was held from 2 – 13 September 2002 in Taiwan
R.O.C. was thus hosted by the National Council of Churches in Taiwan
(NCCT). We, the 45 participants and resource persons of JEF II coming
from 15 countries of Asia, have been through a very fruitful experience
of ecumenical learning and living and now would like to invite the local
churches to join us in our reflections on the praxis of ecumenism.
3. In his opening
message, Rev. William Lo, the Chairperson of NCCT, encouraged the participants
of JEF II to proclaim the good news of the Kingdom of God through justice
and peace and the integrity of creation as well as people’s security
(ref. Lk 8: 1-3; Rm 14: 17-18). Urging that we, as Christians, be fully
committed to God’s mission, or the missio Dei, he reminded us that in
the Lord’s Prayer“your kingdom come”is closely followed by“your will
be done on earth.”Thus, unless we are united in Christ and actively
cultivating a culture of justice and peace here on earth, we would not
be playing our role in ushering in God’s Kingdom. In other words, it
is our Christian duty to be the voice of the voiceless and the power
of the powerless so that God’s Kingdom may come.
4. Adopting the pastoral cycle/spiral as the methodological approach
for our formation, the JEF II took us through the following stages:
Exposure Experience, Social Analyses, Theological Reflections, and Action
Planning.
Our Exposure Experience
5. Our “exposure” experience took us to a variety of places in and
around Taipei where we were able to witness first-hand the realities
of the suffering and tears of Taiwan’s society, as well as interact
with persons who helped shed light on our understandings of the various
socio-political issues. Throughout the two-day experience, we were enriched
by the otherness of the “other” and developed a wider perspective for
understanding the people and historical context of Asia.
6. We looked at the issue of ethnicity and specifically at how the
indigenous and other ethnic minorities have suffered discrimination
over the years. We were disturbed by the ethnophobia which prevailed
but realized that such discrimination is also very much present in most
of our own countries. We also looked at the issue of political oppression
and realized that this has often claimed the lives of many innocent
victims. In particular, we were disturbed by the drastic consequences
which the abuse of political power brings about, especially for those
who lack education and others from marginalized communities. We identified
a “spirit of Formosa,” which is a spirit characterized by national self-determination,
peace, justice and democracy. We also looked at the issue of transnational
migration and sympathized with the dilemma of the migrant workers whose
pain, as a result of being exploited, calls for our involvement. We
realized that ignorance of the law, a low standard of education and
the lack of awareness of migrants’ rights are contributory factors to
their plight. We aspire to be a “bridge” towards their liberation and
pray especially for more who will act as hope for these helpless, so
that fullness of life may be attainable.
7. We also looked at the various communities of churches or “koinonia”
and especially at how they perform the mission of service for God’s
Kingdom. We were encouraged by the ecumenical spirit of working together
and the sharing of resources, as well as the truly prophetic stance
which some of the churches take, despite Christianity being a minority
religion in Taiwan. At the same time, we also witnessed that some churches
have yet to be truly committed to ecumenism and the dialogue with other
religions as their preoccupation is more with the protection of their
churches’ self-interests. Likewise, we looked at the various religious
traditions and especially at how they relate with one another as different
“streams of life.” We were encouraged by the true spirit of friendship
existing between those involved in interreligious dialogue and are convinced
that it is this personal friendship which has made authentic and respectful
dialogue possible. At the same time, we are also challenged by what
it means to be Christian in a pluralistic society and have questions,
especially on how we ought to understand the church’s teachings of Jesus
being the one and only way to salvation.
Our Social Analyses
8. We then experimented with doing social analysis, based primarily
upon our exposure experience but also upon our wider experience of the
realities in the Asian context. From the outset, we were consciously
aware that our efforts of engaging in social analysis stem from a desire
to understand, as well as to be more deeply connected with the people.
Significantly, we began by identifying the pain, the cries and the tears
of the people and attempted to look at the root causes of these suffering.
We identified the victims and those most prone to being victimized,
at times merely on the basis of their race, caste, nationality, political
affiliation and/or socio-economic status. We also explored how the environment
and the ecosphere have suffered and been victimized merely on account
of the greed and the profit of a very few.
9. Next, we looked at the various “actors” involved in each specific
situation of injustice and discrimination to identify the underlying
values and/or goals which motivate their actions. The love of money
and power and the need to preserve one’s own privileged position and
the status quo seem to be at the root of many of these evils. We also
noticed that often there is a mutually reinforcing relationship between
powerful political leaders, those who hold economic power, the military,
the media, and other elites, whose position depends upon the preservation
of the status quo.
10. We were also aware that while some of these evils are sporadic
and the result of the actions of particular individuals, others may
be structurally rooted and are deliberate actions of institutions. Any
proposals for change, therefore, have to take into account the long-term
and deep-seated dynamics which perpetuate the evils directly or indirectly.
This, in turn, demands more thorough analyses so that the power for
change and the chances of success may be increased in any strategic
actions. In this regard, education and awareness programs are indispensable
for the conscientization of the perpetrators of violence as well as
their victims.
11. We noted that the socio-political realities of Taiwan are but a
reflection of the realities in many of our countries where the common
people are continuously crying out for justice, sovereignity and respect
for human rights. Reflecting upon the struggles of the peoples of Taiwan,
we are hopeful that persistence and faith will eventually result in
the triumph of justice and freedom. We in Asia, therefore, have to be
similarly committed in our struggles for change and transformation so
that freedom and peace will be the order of the day.
12. In this regard, we are challenged by the prophet Jeremiah’s call
that we uproot and pull down, destroy and overthrow, build and plant
(Jer. 1: 10) so that more of Asia will eventually evolve social structures
based on justice and love, as well as compassion and the dignity of
persons. Psalm 34: 15 also challenges us to depart from evil (i.e. stop
the oppression) and do good (i.e. help in the liberation of peoples);
seek peace (between God and people as well as between people and people)
and pursue it (salvation and liberation for all).
Our Theological Reflections
13. We then engaged in theological reflections and realized from the
outset that just as we, in twenty-first century Asia, experience situations
of injustice and discrimination, so Jesus of Nazareth, who lived in
first century Palestine, was also a witness to similar situations of
dehumanization. So, as Christians, whose mission is to bring about a
culture of peace, we gave more attention to how our brother Jesus went
about in his mission of cultivating a culture of peace through the proclamation
of the Kingdom of God.
14. We began by reflecting upon Jesus’ double baptism: first, of water
at the river Jordan, and then, of blood which culminated on Calvary.
The Jordan baptism by John the Baptist was Jesus’ immersion into God’s
cause expressed in his fundamental option for the poor and proclaimed
as the Reign of God among us. This is Good News mainly for the “nobodies”
of the world: the outcast, lepers, sick, oppressed, women and children.
The Jordan baptism was, thus, Jesus’ immersion and acceptance of God’s
pact with the poor. The baptism at Calvary, on the other hand, was Jesus’
own immersion into the struggles and suffering of the poor. It was,
therefore, his struggle against all the dehumanizing influences of his
time, including the socio-religious and political structures which were
oppressive to the common peoples. Through his healing ministry and meal
or table-fellowship with all without distinction, Jesus revealed God’s
Kingdom as one concerned for the liberation of all, but especially the
poor. Thus, Calvary was God’s pact against Mammon, which is anyone,
anything or any structure which undermines human beings and dehumanizes
them. Thus, just as Yahweh delivered the Israelites from Egypt, this
same Yahweh will also deliver the peoples from their bondage and slavery
to Mammon, wherever these may occur (Ref. Mic. 6: 4).
15. A second point of our reflection was that in Asia the majority
of the poor belong to religious traditions other than Christianity.
So, our Christian mission for a culture of peace has to be a mission
together with the peoples of other religions, as well as for and on
behalf of the peoples of other religions. Baptized, therefore, in the
Jordan of Asia’s religiousness and in the Calvary of Asia’s poor, we
Christians learn from our neighbors of other faiths the cardinal virtues
of simplicity, non-attachment and the commitment to alleviate the suffering
of Asia’s poor. Hence, the challenge for Christian mission is not only
to struggle for the poor, but to be poor as well. It is, therefore,
in the embrace of this “voluntary poverty” that we Christians can contribute
more effectively to the alleviation of the “forced poverty” of Asia’s
poor. While the former (those who embrace poverty by choice) are the
disciples of Christ, it is the latter (those who are poor by circumstance)
who are the vicars of Christ (ref. Mt. 25: 34-40).
16. A third point of our reflection was that, as we grow in our understanding
of the Christian mission, Jesus of Nazareth also grew in his understanding
of the mission of God’s Kingdom. Reflecting upon the feeding of the
five thousand (Mt. 14: 13-21; Mk. 6: 30-44), the crossing of Jesus to
the other side of the lake (Mt. 14: 22-33; Mk. 6: 45-52), the healing
of the Canaanite woman’s daughter (Mt. 15: 21-28; Mk. 7: 24-30), and
then the feeding of the four thousand (Mt. 15: 32-39; Mk. 8: 1-10),
we noted that the greater openness and concern of Jesus for the four
thousand in the predominantly Gentile territory came after his encounter
with the faith of the Canaanite woman and after he had crossed to the
“other side” of the lake. If the feeding of the five thousand was prompted
by Jesus’ disciples, the feeding of the four thousand revealed more
of Jesus’ own deliberate initiative. If he was initially reluctant to
heal the Canaanite woman’s daughter, it was the woman’s persistence
and faith that reveal the rightful claim of the Gentiles upon the Kingdom.
So, it was in crossing to the “other side,” to Gentile lands, that Jesus’
vision of God’s Kingdom was broadened. In the same way, it was through
the ministry of the woman that Jesus’ horizons of God’s Kingdom was
stretched beyond the house of Israel.
17. Using the analogy of a tree with its roots, trunk and leaves, we
reflected on the three components of religious traditions and how they
help or hinder understanding between religions. These are the core or
roots (the experience that gave birth to a particular tradition), the
collective memory or trunk (the scriptures, codes for living, etc. that
relate the core to believers) and the interpretation or the leaves (the
articulation and communication of the core experience so that succeeding
generations may come to believe). Religions usually meet on the level
of interpretation. As the interpretation is far from the core, it can
become the breeding ground for clashes, misunderstandings and violence
between the different traditions. In a spirit of humility, Christians
are challenged to divest themselves of any prejudice or misconceptions
about the “other” and to be ready to take risks in going to the core
experience of other religious traditions. This exposure to what God
wishes to teach us at the heart of the “other” is the beginning of a
culture of peace between the religions.
Our Experience As
Church
18. It was only after we had placed the JEF II within the context and
realities of Asia that we began to explore the issue of inter-Church
relationships. This showed us that our ecumenical task has, as its foundation,
the joys and sorrows of the peoples of our lands. With that as background,
we began our exploration of the history of schism and unity in the church.
In particular, we noted that Christian division and disunity over the
centuries was the result of both theological as well as non-theological
factors. The latter include conflicts arising from cultural, political,
social, economic, ethnic and ideological differences. Similarly, the
ecumenical venture and Christian unity have always been motivated by
both theological as well as non-theological factors.
19. We then explored the case of the Church in Taiwan, specifically
from the perspective of its effort to be ecumenical as well as contextual.
In particular, the mission of the Church was discerned from the backdrop
of the socio-political and historical context of Taiwan. For example,
the ecumenical understanding of the missio Dei, emphasizing social involvement
and mission work for the marginalized, characterized the thrust of the
contextual theologies which evolved through the New Century Mission
Movement of the Presbyterian Church in Taiwan. The movement emphasized
the quality of Christian life rather than its quantity. The “salt of
the earth” theme was key to understanding what it means to be Church.
Specifically, the theology of identification with Taiwanese history,
cultures, sufferings and hopes became a principal motif for doing theology.
Such a theology enables the Christian churches to participate in the
building of God’s Kingdom and the koinonia, whilst they become both
contextual as well as ecumenical.
20. We then looked at the modern ecumenical movement as an attempt
to end the scandal of a divided Christianity. The scandal is more embarrassing,
given Christianity’s minority status in most of our countries. In particular,
we looked at the events which led to and followed the founding of the
World Council of Churches, as well as the spirit which brought about
the renewal of the Second Vatican Council in the Roman Catholic Church.
These renewal currents, which found their contextual expressions in
the Christian Conference of Asia and the Federation of Asian Bishops’
Conferences, continue to inspire as well as challenge all of us. Specifically,
we are inspired by the theology of communion, which invites us to be
accepting of unity in diversity. Likewise, we are challenged to discover
new forms of partnership so that our Christian witness can respond more
meaningfully to Jesus’ prayer “that they may be one” (Jn. 17: 11).
21. As a result of these explorations, we experimented with doing contextual
theology from our own local contexts. Specifically, we used stories
to relate theology with our contexts. We are convinced that theology
must begin from the dusty soils of our countries and thus be in dialogue
with the peoples, their religions, their cultures, and especially their
pain and sufferings. Such an approach in doing theology takes as its
starting point the experience and context of the peoples which must
then be brought into dialogue with the Christian tradition and its texts.
The approach of the whole JEF II program was both contextual and ecumenical.
At its heart were extensive periods of meditative exercise, reflection,
Bible-study and Gospel-sharing.
Our Action Planning
22. As a result of our experience and explorations at JEF II, we committed
ourselves to:
A. deepening our personal prayer and spiritual life through contemplative
meditation, as well as our Christian life through Gospel-sharing, Bible-study
and theological updating, especially on what it means to be ecumenical
and contextual.
B. promoting established ecumenical activities, such as the Week of
Prayer for Christian Unity and praying for the needs of the different
Christian communities throughout the year.
C. initiating new ecumenical ventures such as local joint ecumenical
formation programs, sharing of resources across denominations, networking
across churches, as well as jointly participating in social action.
D. fostering an ecumenical consciousness in all areas of Church life,
especially in the basic formation programs, fundamental church apostolates,
media news and programs.
E. developing new friendships across other churches and other religions
so that they may develop into new partnerships, especially in cultivating
a culture of peace.
23. We also propose that the Churches in Asia, in particular the CCA
and FABC:
A. continue to organize joint ecumenical formation programs, especially
those which aim at training lay and grassroot leaders and youth.
B. provide user-friendly resources for ecumenical training.
C. promote both ecumenical relations and interreligious dialogue, as
the latter continues to be crucial for all Christians in the context
of our pluralistic cultures and societies.
D. encourage local churches in all countries to disseminate the fruits
of our Second Joint Ecumenical Formation so that many more Christians
in Asia will take seriously the importance of ecumenism and contextualization.
E. encourage church leaders to establish more inclusive and effective
ecumenical structures at national as well as local levels, so that ecumenical
activities can be better promoted.
Up...