Novena of Grace (Day 8) Year A

We are now entering the penultimate night of the novena. The 8th day and it is good to touch, by way of passing, Francis’ endeavour in this part of the world. He spent most, if not his entire, Jesuit life as a missionary in Asia. I think he is the only missionary that can hold a candle to St Paul the Apostle. The spread of his missionary activity covers an entire swathe of the continent of Asia—sailing the sea of humanity from India to Indonesia and all the way to Japan.

The Gospel today lends itself to our reflexion on what Francis’ endeavour means for us. Jesus speaks of His Father in terms of His intimate knowledge with Him. “What the Father has taught me is what I preach”. He is the mouthpiece of the Father. His knowledge of His Father is the substance of His preaching. Knowledge of His Father becomes the impetus for His preaching. Likewise, knowledge in the case of Francis is to be translated into his missionary enterprise in Asia. How to bring to Asia the knowledge of God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ?

On this front, there is agreement that Francis blazed a trail for subsequent generation of missionaries to Asia. However, in the context of revisionist history, Francis remained just a tool of the colonial expansion of what is now looked upon as the ugly Western hegemony or colonial domination. And there is one criticism I would like to take up.

One of the criticisms has been that the Church is foreign. “Foreign” seems to be the only explanation because the 400 years of Christianity’s presence in Asia has yielded nothing but a miserable 3 percent of Asia claiming to be Christians. “Foreign” seems to be the reason for Asia’s rejection of Christianity. It is an easy and a convenient criticism to make. It makes the Church something so foreign that her presence in Asia is at best tolerated or at worst considered an imposition, a yoke to be freed of. Maybe this will jolt you: Pendatang. This word is an example of how even after 3 or 4 generations, people of South Indian extraction or people of Oriental ancestry are “tolerated” in this country. We’ve been told time and again, “Go back if you do not like it here”.

Since “foreign” is a ghost to be exorcised, the Church, in order for it to succeed, is asked to aim for greater “inculturation”, to shed a lot more of her European features.

If the Church is culturally European, she is therefore a foreign imposition. Fortunately, we have on our side what I would consider to be the porosity or the permeability of cultural boundaries. Because cultural boundaries are porous, it does assimilate and make for its own something which is in the first place “foreign”. For example, where does one get prawn “tempura”? Japanese restaurants! But, its origin is actually Portuguese. Shipwrecked Portuguese sailors cast upon Japanese shores introduced it to the Japanese. On certain days where they had to abstain from eating red meat, they ate fried prawns... the holy days were known in Portuguese as “Quattuor tempora”... We think prawn tempura is Japanese but its presence so entrenched in Japanese cuisine shows that culture is more adaptable. So, if the Church were foreign and we like to draw a more distinct line between foreign and indigenous, then perhaps, we should do away with this microphone and everything that the foreign culture has brought us. [The bra that women wear is a Western importation. Asian women were freer [more liberated] but now Western women don’t want to wear bra but we have kept them]. (Remember the tualang tree).

Technology or the application of science is not a respecter of culture. What every culture does is to adapt technology for its convenience and thus, it is convenience which really is the agent for the inculturation or the reception of technology. Let me give another example: the mobile phone is a technology which is used everywhere. But here in Asia, we’ve made far greater use of this service than say the Europeans or the Americans.

Thus, the basis for the rejection of something or another basically follows along the criterion of convenience. That has always been the way cultures work. Two examples: it is far easier and more convenient to wear the “western suit” when attending Parliament or any of these functions of governance than to wear something which is dangling here or there. Secondly, and you find this amongst people who for whatever reason convert to Christianity. How often have these people returned to their “roots” because they consider Christianity as foreign? Few. I know that people visit this medium or that bomoh because Jesus is quiet and it is more convenient to get the answer from a medium or a bomoh. Often we reject something local or foreign because it is not convenient.

And, the knowledge of Christ is never convenient. At the end of mass, in many parishes, the priest and the servers will process right to the front to meet the people. It is a wonderful practice. Some people have asked me why I am not doing that. Why do I want to miss out on meeting people? The secret is this. When we recess into the sacristy, we wind up with a prayer. It may be routine or habitual. But, I have begun to pull the servers and make them look at the Crucifix. Sometimes they think it is funny but it is not because I tell him, “Look at Him on the Cross. It is your sin that puts Him there”. This is a reminder to each of them that knowledge of Christ will always bring us into the shadow of the Cross. The knowledge of Christ will always entail the Cross. Anytime we know Him better, be prepared for the Cross to come unbidden. The knowledge of Christ is never easy.

Perhaps, that is why Christianity has failed in Asia. Christianity failed because following Christ is too hard. In a homily, which I preached at the beginning of the year, I did mention that Christianity is actually an Asian religion. Christianity failed because it is not easy to live Christ. And the failure is our individual failure. Perhaps, it is unfair. We live amongst the very venerable traditions of Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, Hinduism, Islam and Sikhkism. Let me repeat some from a previous homily. “We are so unremarkable that Asia does not see our light—the light of Christ. So, Gandhi was right to say, “I believe in Christ but I don’t believe in Christianity”. But, the blame is not on Christianity. The shame is upon us Asians. We have failed our home-grown Christ. We have failed to be Christ. We have dimmed his light”. Indeed, the standard exacted upon the disciples of Christ is much higher. We can do better but always with the grace of God. We ask that Francis pray for us in this area that where Francis left off, we will continue to take up his mission of bringing to Asia the Good News of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world.