Amazon synod do stand against selfish business interests. The convenient
theological reading against the synod seems to use the language of faith to politicize and gather
support. Lobbying has been a holy politics with an innocent look.
What do the opponents say they are against?
1) Implicit pantheism — the
identification of God with the universe and nature where God and the world are
one
Amazon synod
does not call nature to be God, nor does it attach themselves to an absolute naturalism.
In original amazon culture there may have been the animistic outlook concerning
nature. That is to recognize different forms of life (anima) in nature, in
wind, waterfall, fire, tree. That was, of course, the initial form of religiosity. This vision
differs form a separated view as One God here and one World there. Neither of them was
their concern. They found life everywhere within their habitat and they related
to them recognizing their sacredness. Relating to nature as our habitat is the natural
way of being human. It is from where we have come from in the creative love of
God.
Our tendency
to distance from nature have been there from very early time. Those trends have
mistaken transcending to distancing from nature. Some early spiritualities which
were based on Platonian thinking emphasized on ‘spiritual things’ and
downplayed the significance of the physical, and approached it as something
negative and evil. Some ascetical trends in the medieval period also treated
body and nature as something evil, despicable and condemnable. Desacralization happened
in the modern period began to treat the nature only as usable good and
resources to be exploited. So those who find their lives as something integral
with the nature and to be respected may be seen as worshipers of nature and
pagans. This receptive and respective relationship with nature is clearly an
obstacle to the exploiting interests of multinational companies.
2) Accepting pagan superstitions as though they are sources of Divine
Revelation
After all what is paganism today
in our world, or what is the pure/non-pagan culture that is truly Christian. Though
the early Christians called Roman and Greek culture to be pagan, they became
part and parcel of Christianity afterwards. Then the ‘other than Greco-Romans’
were called pagans. Since ‘pagan’ ‘superstitions’ demand clarity of definition
today, the accusation on the synod of an attempt to accept pagan superstitions
as divine revelation is very much biased.
It is unfitting
to call traditions and customs of a culture ‘pagan’ only because they are
culturally different. Christian tradition has accepted and appreciated the
values of truth goodness and beauty found in various cultures it has reached, but
has rejected their elements of exploitative possibility and inhuman customs. Church has been meeting the presence of Christ
which has been already present within them, perhaps an unknown and unnamed
Christ. It is the humble recognition of the Word active in human conscience and
culture. It does deserve dialogue and acceptance by the Church. If the patterns
of Greco-Roman traditions could enter into Christian faith why not the
spontaneous cultural symbols of the Amazonians be used to experience and
express Christian faith? The then ‘pagan’ Greco-Roman cultural symbols can not
claim a more perfect potentiality to hold a revelatory function.
It is Christ
who is revealed, and in him we have the revelation. But it is not necessary
that our understanding of Christ has an exclusive revelatory content. That is
why we continue to seek him in dialogue with the indigenous cultures. In doing
so we are not seeking alternative pathways for salvation.
If it is
paganism that it is blamed for, we must understand that it is in our approach that
an idol is made and worshipped. Is the rest of the catholic world free of
superstitions? What about burying a statue of St Joseph in order that a land may
be sold? Is it devotion or superstition? On one hand we can easily accept the
influence of demons and devils behind every strange phenomenon, and appoint
even exorcists to deal with them. On the other hand, we are reluctant to see
the life forms around, and blame it pagan. It only shows a conservative scrupulosity
and suspicion, not a matter of faith.
Making efforts
to see the presence of the logos in the archaic forms of cultural traditions is
our openness to see Christ more fully. If it is called as relativization of
God’s revelation, it is nothing other than absolutization of a preferred cultural
pattern which is given an exclusivity of divine revelation. The diverse
cultural patters have nothing to do with what Christ has revealed.
3) The Catholic Church in the Amazon should undergo a ‘missionary and
pastoral conversion.’
Though they
affirm that the evangelization is not a cultural enrichment, they contradict
themselves in the implications they give for evangelization as adapting into
their cultural patterns. They are using their own categories of describing ‘missionary
and pastoral conversion’. Christ’s message can enter into the indigenous
culture of Amazon which the opponents might see uncivilized or pagan. The ‘intercultural
enrichment’ might aim at the enabling of efforts to identify and accept the
Christ-presence within their cultural symbols.
Do we want to continue the
colonial domination over peoples? Does God not grant the right to people to
worship within their natural habitat? there is no connection with reality to
say that the colonisation never forced a distancing from pre-columbian
cultures.
4) “tailoring Catholic ordained ministries to the ancestral customs of
the aboriginal people, granting official ministries to women and ordaining
married leaders of the community as second-class priests, deprived of part of
their ministerial powers but able to perform shamanic rituals.”
To say “deprived of part
of their ministerial powers but able to perform shamanic rituals” is to read what
is not written. The ordination of married men to be considered to administer
sacraments where men in clerical status are not able to reach today due to various
situations. It is narrowminded interpretation and misguiding to say that they
are meant to perform shamanic rituals.
Also there is a lot of commotions about considering married priests in the coming synod. It is obvious that this consideration is restricted to a particular locality (Amazonian region), and to elder virtuous men that they could administer sacraments to the faithful who are deprived of them. However, there is nothing improper even if the debate is open globally. The debate needs to be to see whether it emerges from the community of the faithful. Our debates need to be led by inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit. It is not because of there is some problem morally or pastorally, but see whether the conscience of the community feels to see the priesthood differently.
Church is understood as the people of God who makes up the body of Christ. We have many functions in a body. Similarly priesthood is one of the functions (ministries) in the body of Christ. Growing as people of God, living as the body of Christ, the community can choose from the ordained among them (who are living in their families) to administer sacraments for them. The community makes this choice according to their life of virtue, and knowledge in faith and contemporary society and life.
Priests functioning above the community as a ruling power does hurt the community especially when the community is taken for granted. The community of the faithful need not be priest-oriented or priest-dependent. There are many contexts which we have made priest-dependent in occassions where a priest is not necessary at all. Rather community itself possesses power, and may the priests be ordinary men of family.
Unmarried status is not an indispensable element in priesthood, nor it is an integral part of it, nor does it diminish the sanctity of priesthood. There have always been married priests in the non-Latin rites, like Ukrainian Catholicism or Maronite Catholicism. These churches are fully Catholic, obedient to the pope, but they ordain married men, although they do not allow unmarried priests to get married. Celibacy may be a gift to some, but it is accepted as a (voluntary?) choice. Latin rite made it compulsory only in the eleventh century. How and why it emerged as a discipline in the life of priests has historical reasons. Those contexts, and the theology that was formed to support them have given ways to newer understanding of priesthood and the church. We need to have courage to consider structures that can facilitate the people of god to be the body of Christ in a meaningful way today.
The angelic purity which is connected with celibacy have also contributed to the deification of priests, and the attribution of ruling power in the community. This deification has kept them on high places, and they on their part have at times abused their power. As deified persons they closed themselves in 'holy rituals' and have resulted in many forms of stagnation. The angelic purity in order to behold the face of god has already given way to the image of conjugal unity in imagining our relationship with God. A negative way of looking at body, flesh, sexuality has also contributed to approach marriage as something polluting the purity of priests. It is wrong to relate marriage with sexuality alone and see it something low. It is to be recognized and affirmed that marriage has a sacred context of companionship which will rather better the ways a priest functions in a christian community.
5) Implicit pantheistic views
It is part
of an ultra-catholic sensitivity which says that the care for nature and the
concerns over environmental issues are ‘things of the earth’ and so they don’t
deserve attention as of the ‘heavenly things.’ These are things that invite out
attention if we are searching for things that are merely spiritual: How did we
think about living waters if we did not feel water? How can we think of the
fire or wind of the holy spirit if we can't feel natural fire and wind? How do
we sense of eternity unless we walk through the shortness of time? How do we
imagine of a heavenly banquet unless we have enjoyed the taste of the fruits
and grain of the earth? “if we were to be in the moon the way we imagine heaven
would be a dry lifeless space.”
They blame
the preparatory paper for relativizing Christian anthropology considering man a mere link in nature’s
ecological chain. In fact. the synod does not intent to hold a reductionist
view as implied in the accusation. But it invites us to place ourselves within
the web of life where we are able to relate with our earthlings in a more humane
way.
Though they mark it as something negative, it is urgent need to correct
the aggressive and attitude of socioeconomic development. It has hurt the earth
and thrown her children away whether they are humans or animals other than
humans. That is why the synod would emphatically say that the technological
progress is bound up with sin considering its exploitative potential. Church as mother, and one body must feel the pain of these
indigenous people who are victims of exploitation by corporate companies.
6) Against an integral ecological conversion
The document
suggests an integral ecological conversion which includes the adoption of the
collective social model of aboriginal tribes. The opponents accuse it of
undermining individual personality and freedom. There has been a trend to
place individuality and freedom even above personhood, and we can see the
effect of that alienating view. In fact, though an individual person one remains
connected to other people and even nature. This enrooted model is more integral
and sustainable for the vision of the human; human as community being, and
church as a community that makes one body of Christ.
To summarise
Their accusation
on the Amazon Church of continuing and attempting to affirm their life in
pantheism, paganism and superstitions is biased cultural absolutist tendency.
Since it cannot open itself towards the diverse possibilities of the presence
of the Word it cannot be seen even as a catholic approach. It also appears to be
consciously blind towards the devastating impact of our so-called socioeconomic
developments with purely commercial interests and thus indirectly favoring the
business interests.
___________________________________________________________
The contents
of the Preparatory Working Document “The
Amazon: New Paths for the Church and for Integral Ecology; The
Synod of Bishops Special Assembly for the Pan-Amazon”
PART I THE VOICE OF THE AMAZON
Chapter I
Life
The Amazon, source of life
Life in abundance
"Good living” (buen vivir)
Life threatened
Defending life, confronting exploitation
Crying out for life
Chapter II
Territory
Territory, life and God’s revelation
A territory in which everything is connected
The beauty of and threat to the territory
Territory of hope and of “good living”
Chapter III
Time (Kairós)
A time of grace
A time of inculturation and interculturality
A time of serious and urgent challenges
A time of hope
Chapter IV
Dialogue
New paths of dialogue
Dialogue and mission
Dialogue with the peoples of the Amazon
Dialogue and learning
Dialogue and resistance
Conclusion
PART II INTEGRAL ECOLOGY: THE CRY OF THE EARTH AND OF THE
POOR
Chapter I
Extractivist Destruction
The cry of the Amazon
Integral Ecology
Integral ecology in the Amazon
No to the destruction of the Amazon
Suggestions
Chapter II
Indigenous Peoples in Voluntary Isolation (PIAV): Threats and Protection
Peoples in the peripheries
Vulnerable peoples
Suggestions
Chapter III
Migration
Peoples of the Amazon who leave
Causes of migration
Consequences of migration
Suggestions
Chapter IV
Urbanization
Urbanization of the Amazon
Urban culture
Urban challenges
Suggestions
Chapter V
Family and Community
Families of the Amazon
Social changes and family vulnerability
Suggestions
Chapter VI
Corruption
Corruption in the Amazon
A structural moral scourge
Suggestions
Chapter VII
The Question of Integral Health
Health in the Amazon
Appreciation and development of traditional medicines
Suggestions
Chapter VIII
Integral Education
A synodal Church: disciple and teacher
Education as an encounter
Education in an integral ecology
Suggestions
Chapter IX
Ecological Conversion
Christ calls us to conversion (Mk 1:15)
Integral conversion
Ecclesial conversion in the Amazon
Suggestions
PART III A PROPHETIC CHURCH IN THE AMAZON: CHALLENGES AND HOPE
Chapter I
A Church with an Amazon and Missionary Face
A richly expressive face
A local face with a universal dimension
A defiant face facing injustices
An inculturated and missionary face
Chapter II
Challenges of Inculturation and Interculturality
On the path to a Church with an Amazonian and indigenous face
Suggestions
Evangelization in cultures
Suggestions
Chapter III
The Celebration of the Faith: an Enculturated Liturgy
Suggestions
Chapter IV
The Organization of the Communities
The worldview of indigenous people
Geographic and pastoral distances
Suggestions
Chapter V
Evangelization in the Cities
Urban mission
Urban challenges
Suggestions
Chapter VI
Ecumenical and Interreligious Dialogue
Suggestions
Chapter VII
Mission of the Media and Communications
Media, ideologies and cultures
Church media
Suggestions (cf. DAp. 486)
Chapter VII
The prophetic Role of the Church and Integral Human Promotion
The Church reaching out
The Church listening
The Church and power
Suggestions
Conclusion
