|
|
|
The aim of this paper is to make people aware of the situation of the
Church in Papua New Guinea and of the issues which confront it. The purpose
is not to give solutions or argue alternatives, but simply to present the
issues, highlighting the theological and anthropological components of
them. Obviously, I do argue for something: I argue that the issues must be
taken seriously.
I decided to treat the topic which was given to me - the transforming
role of the Church - by looking at what the Church has done in the past
and at what it needs to do in the future. I shall try to show the link
between the past achievements and the future tasks.
I shall speak from the standpoint of the present with the advantage of
hindsight and of better tools of analysis. Finally, I speak as somebody
who for over thirty years was part of that past and hopes to be part of the
future as well.
2. THE TRANSFORMING ROLE OF THE CHURCH IN THE PAST
I. The Successes
The first Roman Catholic missionaries - the Sacred Heart Missionaries -
came to New Britain in 1882, and to the South coast of the mainland -
Papua - in 1884. The Divine Word Missionaries or SVD went to the North
coast of what is now Papua New Guinea in 1896. The interior of Papua New
Guinea was only discovered in 1933, by Fr Schafer, SVD., who led the
missionaries into the Simbu and began the missionary work in the highlands
of Papua New Guinea.
Today, a century later we have a nation which, in its Constitution, calls
itself Christian. The people who on the eve of Independence in 1975,
inspired by Gospel values, wrote that beautiful Constitution, are an
example of the Christian elite of Papua New Guinea. There is a growing
local clergy and a flourishing religious life. There is a local Church with
eighteen dioceses divided into four regions, each headed by an Archbishop.
Where sixty years ago Alphonse Schafer began the work of evangelisation,
today we find a Diocese where already half the clergy is local with a good
number of young men in the major seminary. In Papua New Guinea there is an
active laity whose slogan is 'we are the Church'. There is a proud Church,
suffering all the usual problems, but very much alive and active.
Ecumenically, the Catholic Church in Papua New Guinea was one of the first
in the world to join the National Council of Churches. In its service for
the Kingdom of God the Roman Catholic Church works together with the other
Churches who are willing to cooperate, enhancing in this way the quality of
service offered to the people. Education, medical services, and Word
Publishing, are examples of this cooperation. There is also an ecumenical
body for the religious programmes on national television. Lately the
Churches were able to get a Religious Studies Department at the National
University main campus in Port Moresby and on the Goroka Campus where the
Faculty of Education is located. At Goroka, for instance, all future high
school teachers will have access to a three year programme in religious
studies which allows them to earn a Bachelor degree in Education with a
Major in Religious Studies. This way the Church influences the religious
attitudes of the future high school educators of the whole of Papua New
Guinea. The Melanesian Institute, which is a missiological research centre,
is also ecumenical.
This is the success of the past and the foundation for the future. We
missionaries are proud of what has been achieved through the grace of God.
All the limitations we shall discover cannot turn this success into
failure. We established a strong local Church which bids well for the
future. If I am critical, it is not because we missionaries were failures.
It is the classical case of the wisdom of hindsight. The reason for my
criticism is to make sure that the future will be as great a success as the
past.
II. The Other Side of Success
We saw the tremendous results of the missionary effort in Papua New Guinea.
They are like the two faces of a medal. Let us turn the medal over and see
the reverse.
II.a) Foreign Initiative
In the past, till about thirty years ago, there was no Church but a
mission. There were no Bishops but Apostolic Vicars. They were representing
- vicarii - the Pope who had sent them.
The missionaries, as a rule, were members of missionary societies, which
had received from the Pope the responsibility for a certain area and were
supposed to convert the people and establish a Church there.
So if we speak of the role of the Church in the past, we must be aware that
till the end of the fifties there was no Church but missions. This is more
than just pedantic legalism. It means that, first, the authority, the
initiative, the planning was not local, but foreign. What grew was not
shaped by local people or by the spirit of their cultures, but was erected
by foreign authority which knew best how things should be. Secondly, it
means also that the people got used to having things done for them from
outside. If something was needed one asked for it and it would come - at
least in theory. Initiative was not expected or even less demanded. To be
honest, everything which was done was, usually, so much bigger and more
complicated than what they were used to, that often the local people could
not use their own initiative, even if they wanted. The Christians were
helped into dependency.
Today there is a local Church. The mission societies lost their rights over
specific territories and now work under the authority of the local Bishops.
However, decades of benevolent ecclesial colonialism are not forgotten
overnight.
II.b) Material Infrastructures
The missionaries to achieve their goal, built a great infrastructure of
schools, hospitals, workshops, aviation, shipping, farms, plantations, etc.
That powerful infrastructure helped the success of the missionary effort,
the reconstruction after the war and the opening up of the newly discovered
highlands. Today the local Church is blessed with those structures,
impressive but expensive in terms of personnel and finance. An asset or a
liability?
The expatriate missionaries in the last decade or so tried to get rid of
many of the economic enterprises like plantations; however, often local
people complained that while the expenses got bigger the expatriate
missionaries were getting rid of the local sources of income! The shipping
and flying enterprises have been mostly closed down and the Church makes
use, as far as possible, of commercial companies. However, schools and
hospitals and a few other ventures remain. An asset or a liability?
II.c) Power Structures
To achieve their success the mission societies invested very much in
personnel and the infrastructure, as already mentioned. The present
dioceses come from those areas of religious influence. The strength of the
past becomes a problem for the pres-ent. It is difficult for the diocesan
clergy to find its own footing in such a situation. Everything speaks of
the missionary societies which established the local Church.
The traditional mission societies realised this and tried to break down
their traditional power bases. For instance the SVD asked to be allowed to
work in Bougainville, a Marist stronghold, and the Marists asked to work in
the Simbu, an SVD stronghold. The MSC work in Hagen, a former SVD
stronghold, the SVD in turn, accepted the call to work in Port Moresby, the
former stronghold of the MSC. The SVD made known that it preferred non SVD
Bishops for their former territories. Bishops, on the other hand,
cooperated and requested other religious congregations to work in their
Diocese. There was an effort to lessen the power of the former mission.
However, one must recognise the problem to be motivated to tackle it. The
power of yesterday can harm the Church of today.
II.d) Personal Efficiency
Missionary societies were rather selective in their recruiting in their
Western bases. Not only did they choose only those who had a clear vocation
ad gentes, but also selected them very carefully, toughened them and
trained them well. The people who came to the so-called missions, were not
ordinary people. The Marist Sisters (SMSM) who went to the Pacific last
century and stayed alone in God's forsaken islands were not just ordinary
women. The Marists and the PIME who opened Papua New Guinea to the Gospel
were not average priests and brothers. They were unusual people. They were
above average. It was the quality of these men and women which helped the
success of the mission.
What caused the success yesterday might be the cause of tensions today. I
do not envy the local head master or headmistress who has to take over from
one of those outstanding missionaries, who seemed to understand all the
problems and - in the eyes of the people - could face and solve any
difficulty. That person had better be top quality or he or she will get an
inferiority complex. I do not envy the diocesan priest who has to take over
a parish from a workaholic, Jack of all trades, 'fix everything'
missionary. A person, who in his own country was by no means average, has
to be replaced by somebody who is good but not necessarily exceptional. If
that happens too often and in too many areas, there can develop an attitude
of animosity between the foreign missionaries and those who are supposed to
take over. If sometimes foreign missionaries are resented by the local
Church workers, one of the reasons could well be their outstanding
personalities and achievements.
One must remember that Melanesian society is a meritocratic one, meaning,
the true authority is not gained through an ordination, or appointment, but
is given by the community which experiences the charism of a person. It is
a typical 'big man' society. I am accepted and respected because society
has experienced my qualities. A local community might be full of admiration
for the outstanding foreign missionary and the young local priest or the
young local sister who replaces him or her will feel it. The workaholics of
yesterday might be out of order today!
Summarising: the powerful bases erected by the missionary societies in
order to establish the local Church are being dismantled; however, they are
still there to hamper the growth of the local Church. The efficiency and
dedication of the past can cause frustration and resentment in the present.
III. The Spirit of the Enlightenment
We saw the back of the medal of success: what is a relief on one side is a
groove on the other. Now I would like to analyse the alloy used for the
medal itself.
III.a. The Enlightenment Mentality
The missionaries loved the people they came to serve. Especially before the
development of antimalarials, many gave their young lives for the service.
Papua New Guinea for decades was a graveyard of young missionaries. The
love and dedication of the missionaries is out of question. However, the
missionaries were children of their time and they could not be anything
else. What was that time and what are the consequences for the Church
today?
What are Some of the Elements of that World View?
Even if evolutionism was rejected, still, people believed in a certain type
of evolution and development. The West was at the top of the ladder of
evolution. Melanesians were people who were pretty low on the ladder both
in terms of mind and spirit; they were still primitive. There was great
hope, however, because Enlightenment and the Catholic Church believed in
nature being basically sound and capable of good. They needed help and that
was provided through civilisation and evangelisation. Teaching and training
was the word. The aim was to help them climb the ladder and become like
Western people.
Because the West was at the top of the ladder, it could not learn anything
from people down at the bottom. The Westerner was the understanding parent
helping young children. Melanesians were thinking, but not logically
enough; they had morals, but not good enough; they were religious, but the
wrong way. If there were customs and ideas that contradicted the
Western ones, they were obviously wrong, and had to be eradicated as
primitive and pagan. No questions were asked.
Besides, science had clearly shown the evolution of religion from animism
to polytheism to monotheism. Melanesians were animists who believed and
worshipped spirits and powers and were practicing magic. There was no
question but that magic had to be eradicated and replaced by true religion.
Spirits could only be either angels or demons. There were no other powers.
The powers people were talking about, either did not exist - people were
primitive, childish - or they were devilish - people were pagans,
living in darkness.
Moreover, because of the Rites Controversy, any discussion about ancestors
was forbidden in the Roman Catholic Church. Missionaries going to China had
to sign a document in which they promised not to discuss the issue or to
allow their communities to do so. The founder of the Papua New Guinea
mission on the North coast of the present
Papua New Guinea was an ex-China missionary. So, even if the missionaries
wanted, there was no chance of correcting the then current ideas about
animism. The best the missionaries could do was to follow the policy of
accommodation.
The result of this attitude of the West was that no dialogue could take
place. Missionaries did know the customs of their people and wrote valuable
ethnographic material. However, their background was not conducive to a
deeper understanding of the cultural system as such. They knew and
described the shells - the customs - but could not see the beautiful and
strange pattern of the necklace those shells formed - the system, the
culture itself.
A sad and embarrassing example of this attitude can be found in the
'Manuale Missionariorum' which was prepared in a Japanese concentration
camp during the Second World War. The missionaries under the guidance of
the Bishop used their free time to discuss their experiences and prepare a
training manual for future missionaries. I know of a Melanesian priest who
took upon himself the task to check all the libraries on the mission
stations he visited and to burn every single copy of that Manuale. The
opinions expressed about the Melanesians in that manual testify to the
ignorance of the Melanesian value system, a system which would have helped
to see things in a different perspective and present them in a positive,
less offensive and denigrating way. Anthropologically, the missionaries
could not see the wood for the trees!
The theological tenet that 'outside the Church there is not salvation' did
not prepare the missionaries to discover other ways of salvation. It is
impossible to discover something unless one believes that such a reality
can and does exist. What did not resemble the biblical data was wrong, it
was superstition. The only myths that could be considered for adaptation
were the creation myths. The rest were human fantasies, not perceptions of
God's revelation. One cannot blame the missionaries for not practicing
dialogue, for seeing only animism, for condemning what they thought was a
pervasive magic mentality.
However, even if we cannot condemn them, it does not mean that the Church
in Melanesia today does not suffer from the consequences of this. Besides,
a century is long enough to create a tradition. Anybody today who tries to
dialogue and move towards inculturation, will have to reckon with the
strong opposition of the traditional Christian communities. As one of the
great Bishops of Papua New Guinea said: 'It would have been better, if we
had started differently. However, now it is too late. If we change now,
people will get confused'. Inculturation is theologically necessary, but it
represents a serious pastoral problem.
Summarising: the alloy of which the medal was made, reveals serious
deficiencies. The ideas of evolution and consequent superiority of the
Western culture did not admit to the possibility or even necessity of
learning from so-called 'primitives'. The missionaries knew best. Even if
the missionaries believed and practised accommodation, they took on only
the leaves of the culture but refused the roots of the same. Many
Melanesians whether rightly or wrongly accuse them of having destroyed
their cultures. The conviction of the impossibility of any salvific
revelation outside the Bible hindered the possibility of discovering the
presence of God waiting for the missionary to come, and explains the heavy
handedness in theological judgement and pastoral praxis.
3. THE TRANSFORMING ROLE OF THE CHURCH IN THE FUTURE
I. Perfect Society or Salt of the Earth?
In the past the mission used an extensive and expensive infrastructure to
achieve its aim of founding a local Church. The need was the overt reason
for it. However, there was another hidden ideological component. The idea
of Christianity as a perfect society, creating its own parallel
institutions to the world: its own schools, its own hospitals, its own
political parties. The world was bad, Christians had to move out of it,
and create and live in a Christian world of their own. A kind of ghetto
mentality.
Today we realise that the Church should not flee the world and reject it
but live in it and transform it from within. It should be in the world and
use the rules of participation and democracy to influence it. Concretely,
does the Church need its own schooling system or should the Church not have
dedicated Christians in the national education system? Should the Church
maintain expensive hospitals or have its own committed people in the
Government health system? One does not deny the advantages of the
traditional system. However, the underlying idea of the perfect society is
theologically wrong: we should be salt, yeast, in the secular dough. We
should not provide society with our own better bread: we make the common
bread better through the Christian leaven.
Beside the issue of the theological understanding of the role of the Church
today, there is another contextual issue. The issue of true independence of
the local Church.
These parallel structures are very expensive to run. They often make
necessary the financial dependence from overseas. Interdependence is an
aspect of the catholicity of the Church; however, the economic dependency
of the South upon the North is not interdependency but naked dependency. It
is a new form of colonialism. The Church must take a serious look at this
situation. Structures mean expense beyond what the simple village people
can give. This forces dependency from abroad. These structures can be seen
as the way to keep the power in the West: new-colonialism.
It is not necessarily the local Church which creates or maintains these
structures. Very often they are the former missionary societies, the former
expatriate missionaries, who maintain their former schools, hospitals,
etc., with the excuse of handing them over to the local Church. Their
justification is that the local Church wants them.
Human nature always wants what is for free and starts reflecting only when
the costs of receiving become higher than the advantages from the gift. If
the local Church really wants them and by local Church I mean the grass
roots people see whether they are willing and capable of paying the bill
to stop the crippling dependency from the powerful West. Real independence
in the present post colonial and post mission context is more important
than so-called efficiency and visible success. It is sociologically wrong
to think that one can limit dependency to only one aspect of society.
Dependency in one field generates dependency in other fields as well. One
cannot be financially dependent and theologically and philosophically
objective and balanced.
End of Part I.