In the following editorial, Riccardo Cascioli follows up aggressively on something already implied by Aldo Maria Valli in his Nov. 28 blogpost
from Myanmar. It was probably this apparent loss of the 'sense of mission' that prompted the words of Benedict XVI in his October 2014
message to the Pontifical Urbanian University run by the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith which is in charge of mission lands:
But does it [mission] still have value? - many today ask, inside and outside the Church - indeed, is mission still relevant? Would it not be more appropriate between religions to meet in dialogue together and serve the cause of peace in the world? The counter-question: can dialogue replace the mission?
Today, in fact, many people have the idea that religions should respect each other and, in the dialogue between them, become a joint peacekeeping force. In most cases this way of thinking takes for granted that the different religions are variants of one and the same reality; that "religion" is the common gender, which takes different forms according to the different cultures, but still expresses the same reality.
The question of truth, the one that originally moved the Christians more than anything else, here is put in parentheses. It is assumed that the real truth about God, in the final analysis, is unattainable and that at most it can make present what is ineffable only with a variety of symbols. This renunciation of the truth seems realistic and helpful for peace between world religions.
And yet it is lethal to the faith. Indeed, faith loses its binding nature and its seriousness if all boils down to basically interchangeable symbols, able to examine only from afar the inaccessible mystery of the divine.
- Benedict XVI
Does the pope still have a sense of mission?
The question is more relevant than ever after his recent Asian trip
where mission was never once invoked in classic mission territories
by Riccardo Cascioli
Editor
Translated from
December 4, 2017
There are many take-off points and questions arising from the pope’s recent trip to Myanmar and Bangladesh, which we may have to return to in the next few days. But there is one question that I believe must take priority because the pope’s words and actions during the trip – and even in his post-trip inflight news conference - have brought it to the foreground now more than ever.
Which is: the sense of mission. Or better – and excuse me for the brutal directness – to be consistent with the statements the pope has made, does he still have this sense of Catholic mission? Or are we now to shred the concept of mission as the Church has lived it in her first 2012 years?
The question is pressing especially since both Myanmar and Bangladesh are classic mission lands, where the Catholic faith arrived 500 years ago thanks to European missionaries, but where evangelization took on a new impulse in the 20th century. And although the Catholics represent only an insignificant minority in both countries (1% in Myanmar, even less in Bangladesh), those communities have an important history of fidelity to Christ which they have demonstrated even with martyrdom – again, with thanks to the missionaries who have worked in these two countries. Among them, there was Fr. Clemente Vizmara who spent 65 years in the jungles of Burma (former name of Myanmar) and was beatified in 2011.
It wasn’t just that the pope did not even mention this history of mission and martyrdom but that in his public statements, two aspects emerged clearly: the first is his open reluctance
[refusal???] to convert others to Catholicism, and his apparent rejection of everything else that is associated with ‘traditional’ Catholic mission.
He insists constantly that evangelization is not proselytism, and he did so again at the inflight news conference. And although the common perception is that proselytism means ‘aggressive’ missionary work [as for example, the Mormons and many Protestant churches do], that does not seem to be what he means when he uses the word
[which in its pure sense, simply means “the attempt of any religion or religious individuals to convert people to their beliefs”, which describes the generic function of Catholic mission, its specific function being to gain converts to Jesus and the Catholic faith], seeing as Catholics in general
[and Catholic missions after the Age of Conquest in the 15th and 16th centuries]- are never ‘aggressive’ in this sense .
Rather,
the pope seems to be distancing himself from mission, understood as announcing Christ to the world, of which we find numerous examples in the Acts of the Apostles which describes the initial evangelizing work of the early Church and in the letters of St. Paul, in which he synthesizes mission in his address at the Aeropagus in Athens:
“You Athenians, I see that in every respect you are very religious.For as I walked around looking carefully at your shrines, I even discovered an altar inscribed, ‘To an Unknown God.’* What therefore you unknowingly worship, I proclaim to you".
[This was the spirit in which Benedict XVI said at Aparecida in 2007:
Yet what did the acceptance of the Christian faith mean for the nations of Latin America and the Caribbean? For them, it meant knowing and welcoming Christ, the unknown God whom their ancestors were seeking, without realizing it, in their rich religious traditions. Christ is the Saviour for whom they were silently longing.
His statements, of course, caused a fleeting controversy at the time, with protests from representatives of so-called indigenous associations.
And yet at his news conference, the pope said:
“…we aren’t very enthusiastic about making conversions immediately – if they come [wishing to convert], wait for them to come, then speak to them, such that conversion is a reply to something that the Holy Spirit has inspired in someone’s heart by what they see of Christian witness… This is the power and gentleness of the Holy Spirit in the work of conversion. It is not about convincing others mentally with apologetics and reason – no! It is the Spirit who causes conversion. And we are witnesses of the Spirit, witnesses of the Gospel”.
There is no doubt that with respect to conversion, this pope gives precedence to coexistence among religions and reciprocal respect:
“Which has priority – peace or conversion? Yet if one lives giving witness to one’s faith and respect to other faiths, we make peace. But peace starts to break up when proselytism begins, and there are so many types of proselytism, but this is not evangelical”.
In short, we may well be mistaken, but it appears that
this pope’s ideal is for every religion to cultivate its own territory, because woe on us all if we changed the ‘equilibrium’ in any way.
One may object: “But the pope is continually urging us to give witness to the Gospel, to be a Church that ‘goes forth’”. And yet, this is precisely the second point that emerges from Bergoglio’s words and actions, namely,
what exactly does he mean by giving witness to the Gospel?
In his news conference,he said:
“It means to give witness to the Beatitudes, to Matthew 25 (“I was hungry and you fed me… etc”),to give witness to the Good Samaritan, to give witness to forgiving others seventy times seven”. And in expressing his appreciation for the Catholics of Myanmar, he said:
“In the midst of so much poverty and difficulties, many of you offer concrete assistance and solidarity to the poor and the suffering. Through the daily care of your bishops, priests,creligious and catechists, and especially through the praiseworthy work of the Catholic Karuna Myanmar and the generous assistance provided by the Pontificial Works of Mission, the Church in this nation is helping a great number of men, women and children regardless of religion or ethnic origin”.
The pope once again appears to be reducing evangelization to doing good works for the poor. The ideal is apparently to be good and kind. Of course, good works are important but we cannot help make a comparison: Jesus did good works
[but they were miraculous actions primarily meant to manifest his divinity, not 'humanitarian' work as Bergoglio seems to think is the primary meaning of 'giving witness to the Gospel'] but he also taught and gave the Great Mandate to the apostles to preach the Gospel to the world and to “teach the people”.
- The Acts of the Apostles tell us of the joy arising from converting pagans and their acceptance of the Word of God.
- And the history of the Church has been constellated with missionary martyrs who live to announce the Word of Go before constructing hospitals, schools and ‘welcome centers’.
- Mother Teresa, who was second to none in working for the poor, said: “The greatest misfortune of the Indian people is not knowing Jesus Christ”.
- As for apologetics, which this pope seems to disdain, was it not St. Peter who called on us to “give reason for the hope you have”?
Yet it’s not as if the missionary approach of providing educational, health and humanitarian assistance along with announcing the Gospel is a novelty at all, because
for decades, a part of the missionary world has emphasized the socio-economic aspects of their work over the religious and spiritual.
But if this is truly the priority of missionary work laid down by the Vatican, then let us go back to our initial question:
Does Catholic mission still mean anything? It would be desirable if missionaries in the field spoke out about this in order to open up a public debate.
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 06/12/2017 03:38]