I. INTRODUCTION – Bro. Anthony Rogers, FSC
A New Vision and Revitalised Mission: Background and Overview of the Asian Colloquium
A New Vision and Revitalised Mission: Background and Overview of the Asian Colloquium
Our recollection of our history as a community in search of truth has been without doubt a journey as a Church with a vision moving us to a revitalised mission in the 21st century. We shared a common hope, seeking a fuller humanity born out of our ardent desire to make God’s divine plans for humanity. This was based on the sharing of our personal experience of the meaning of being truly human in a world experiencing the need of love, justice and peace.
The numerous papers from persons who have been involved for many years with the people of Asia and in touch with their profound religious-cultural heritage enabled us to have a deeper understanding of the ways in which the world of globalisation has affected both the workings of society and the ways of human persons. Our review of the past shows very clearly that it is our readiness to be in dialogue totally sensitive to the cries of our people of Asia taking into consideration the dramatic changes that were taking place in society and the transforming effects they had had on our very lives and being. This for us was a movement from the outside of our external realities to a return to the solitary confinement of our inner being with God and the sacred. It had to be an inner pilgrimage moving us away from looking at the superficial to discover the workings of the Spirit of God in our lives. We wanted to recall our past with a critical introspection, look at our present to recognise our growing differences but reaffirm our commitment to the vision that stand for the bonds of unity that we can offer as a path for the future of the whole of humanity.
We had the task in Part One of the Asian Colloquium on Harmony through Reconciliation to deepen our understanding of the World, 40 years after Gaudium et Spes. We searched together some meaningful answers to some basic and fundamental questions: How has the world changed? We wanted to describe the reality? (Describe) What are the forces that have changed humanity? We want to understand the forces that are intruding in our nations and our peoples. (Analyse) What has been the impact on the lives of the people of today? We wanted to know what is happening to our lives and especially the lives of the poor in Asia (Sympathize) and search for compassionate responses deep within ourselves as followers of Jesus and as a Church in Communion. This process was to lead us to the basis for formulating the new foundational principles for unity and peace.
In Part Two of the Asian Colloquium, we made a commitment to tracing our Way Forward in the 21st Century. We are all fully aware that the transformation of the world today has to begin with the renewal of the inner being of persons. This restoration of the image of God as reflected in the human being, living with human dignity and with the freedom to exercise human rights is what will result in the common good of humanity. As Church in Asia, we recognise the urgent task to build a new Spirituality of Communion that will lead us to redefine the meaning of the fundamental task of the Church to be at the service of the Reign of God. We hope to share the rest of the papers in the FABC Papers to follow.
The papers that were presented and the dialogue and discussions that followed cannot be fully documented but we hope that this attempt to put in print some of these thoughts and reflections will be the starting point for a greater commitment to a renewed vision and a revitalised mission in the context of Asia.
II. KEYNOTE ADDRESS: Joy And Hope Amidst Grief And
Anguish: The New Gospel For The 21st Century – Cardinal Renato Raffaele
Martino
| 1. |
I am most grateful to the Officers of the FABC for inviting me to offer the
Keynote Address on the theme "Joy and Hope
amidst Grief and Anguish – The New Gospel for the 21st Century", and I
congratulate them for this important initiative aimed at shedding light on
the Challenges to the Global Community in the 21st Century. In
dealing with the theme given to me, I shall draw upon the social teachings
of the Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes from the Second Vatican
Council; this year we are celebrating the fortieth anniversary of that
document. I shall dwell in particular on that part of the Council document
that can provide insights for a better understanding of the needs connected
with the proclamation of the Gospel in modern society. Gaudium et Spes
represents the first time that Ecumenical Council, in a systematic manner and
with great breadth, dealt with issues of social ethics, which include the
broad themes of economic development and work, democracy and peace. Although
these themes do not exhaust the teachings found in Gaudium et Spes —
we must not forget the important passages on faith and on atheism, on the
mission of believers in history, on the family — they do represent a
fundamental point of reference.
| |
| 2. |
Among the central themes taken up in Gaudiumet Spes is that of human activity in the universe, which therefore means that
the document speaks also of work, the economy and development. On one
hand, the Council text affirms the importance of Christian involvement in the
transformation of the world through work and emphasizes the important task —
also in the perspective of salvation — of making the world more human and
transforming it in view of the necessity of allowing men and women to
express their creative potential, beyond the simple satisfaction of their
fundamental needs. On the other hand, it shows very clearly the necessity of
recognizing the centrality of work in the manner that society is structured
and, therefore, the necessity of organizing human labour according to
justice.
The lengthy section of the conciliar Constitution devoted to social and economic life (Nos. 63 and following) is to be placed in this context. Excluding all purely economic viewpoints with respect to questions concerning the acquisition and use of the goods of the earth, and without entering into technical questions that are not within its area of competence, the Council offers a series of fundamental guidelines for an ethics of economics. At the centre of the Council’s reflection is the affirmation of the meaning and dignity of work (No. 67), the pre-eminence of which is confirmed with respect to other elements of economic life, including capital. In this perspective, the Council gives some essential indications of a practical nature. (a) The first of these indications concerns the right and duty to work, which arises directly from the recognition of the importance attributed to work for a person’s self-realization and for fulfilling God’s command with regard to the transformation and humanization of the world. Deliberately neglecting the duty to work means acting in opposition to God’s plan and refusing to participate in the redemptive work of Christ, who shed light on the close connection existing between work and obedience to God "when at Nazareth he worked with his own hands" (No. 67). At the same time, if a society actually prevented people from working, it would be depriving them of a fundamental means for their self-realization and for using their creative potential, and this would appear to be a grave injustice. This is the context for the Council’s indications regarding economic development at the service of man (No. 64). (b) This perspective includes the strong emphasis given by the Council to the centrality of the common good in the general organization of the economy (No. 69), which is proposed in close connection with and according to the perspective found in the principle of the universal destination of the goods of the earth. From this there arises the duty, on the part of those responsible for guiding the economy, to be committed to putting this principle effectively into practice, a task that is intrinsic to the economy, since social justice must also have as its goal a better division of the goods of the earth among all people[1]. Without embarking upon an in-depth analysis of the question, the Council clearly enunciates the principle of global solidarity, not out of simple philanthropic or humanitarian concerns, but in virtue of a precise obligation of justice. In the perspective of the preferential option for the poor formulated by the Council, there is an ethical duty to create structures that foster the promotion of all peoples. (c) The Council moreover emphasizes the need to develop institutions that are at the service of the family (No. 69), so that the family is made to participate in the benefits of economic development[2]. The Council appropriately places interventions on family policy in the discussion of the universal destination of the goods of the earth. The family would in fact be seriously penalized by the implementation of a rigid criterion for distribution of resources based on the principle of a formal correspondence in relation only to individual utility, because the weakest members of the family — children, the elderly, the handicapped — cannot compete in the production of income nor contribute to the accumulation of resources. The task of a humanity-based economy consists in removing natural inequalities and allowing every member of the community, even the non-productive members, to have access to the goods that are necessary for their human development. | |
| 3. |
The relationship between Christians and the
political community is the other great question of social ethics that
Gaudium et Spes deals with, devoting a lengthy and articulated
discussion to this. The principal areas of this complex text of the Council
concern the relations between Church and State and the concept of political
democracy. (a) The Council sees the relations between Church and State in terms of a reciprocal autonomy. In the Council’s perspective, this autonomy involves a healthy cooperation between civil society and religious society, without the Church being subjugated to the State, and without a manipulative use of the authority of the State for purposes of evangelization that are foreign to the State. In this regard, the great intuition of the Council was that of religious freedom as a necessary condition if the Church is fully to carry out her spiritual mission, to the point that, in this context, she must not hesitate to "give up the exercise of certain rights which have been legitimately acquired, if it becomes clear that their use will cast doubt on the sincerity of her witness or that new ways of life demand new methods" (No. 76). It was thus that, thanks to the Council, a definitive shape was given to the genuine concept of the secular State, which for a long time had been lost in the shadows of nineteenth-century secularism. The Council considers the State as the home of all people, which means that the State respects the rights of individuals and of the different religious communities, and that the State makes of no one religious community, however deeply rooted it may be in the history of the country, a "State religion", but respects the different legitimate expressions of religiosity and ensures an equitable space of freedom for all believers. This does not mean, however, that the Council is in favour of the social invisibility or insignificance of faith. On the contrary, the Church feels that she is part of civic life and intends to place herself at its service, whether by expressing her judgment "in those matters that regard public order" (No. 76), or by making her moral magisterium — starting with her social doctrine — available to all and inserting into civic life men and women who are motivated and competent, and who are ready to practise the art of politics, something that is difficult but at the same time also noble (cf. No. 75). (b) On the basis of recognizing the genuine secular character of the State, we can understand the choice that the Council makes in favour of a political democracy as the best form of government, even if the word "democracy" is not formally found in Gaudium et Spes. In fact, the definition for political community that is used in the text is substantially a definition of democracy, since a position is espoused that favours "juridico-political structures providing all citizens in an ever better fashion and without any discrimination the practical possibility of freely and actively taking part in the establishment of the juridical foundations of the political community and in the direction of public affairs, in fixing the terms of reference of the various public bodies and in the election of political leaders" (No. 75). Re-reading this description of the political community, it is not difficult to see the fundamental characteristics of political democracy: the participation of citizens in civic life and in the free election of those who govern; the exclusion of all discrimination between citizens and the acceptance of the principle of equality, even with regard to religion; the limitation and control of power and the distinction between legislative, judicial and executive powers. All the distinctive characteristics of what political philosophy and political science indicates as democracy are clearly found in this description given by the Council. | |
| 4. |
A third problematic area to which Gaudium et Spes
devotes special attention is that concerning the crucial question of
peace. This text from the Council is at one and the same time both
prophetic and realistic. In fact, there was a kind of confrontation between
— on one hand — the prophetic concern of not just a few Council Fathers who
would have liked a decisive and irreversible option for peace, and — on the
other hand — the need to avoid abandoning the principle of legitimate
defense. The attempt to reconcile these two tendencies can be seen in
the famous passage from paragraph 79 of the conciliar Constitution, where it
is affirmed that "as long as the danger of war remains and there is no
competent and sufficiently powerful authority at the international level,
governments cannot be denied the right to legitimate defense once every
means of peaceful settlement has been exhausted". For the Council Fathers,
however, war was seen as scandalously unacceptable to the Christian
conscience; only the principle of legitimate defense remains the sole
possibility for recognizing it. The prevalent orientation of Gaudium et
Spes is that of a frank, systematic, consistent option for peace. The Council, however, does not limit itself to a condemnation of war and the inhumanity of war — an inhumanity owing above all to the terrible destructive potential of modern war — but works out a veritable programme for peace, articulated in three points: the strengthening of international agencies, to which are entrusted the task of safeguarding peace by the prevention of conflicts (cf. Nos. 83 and 84); the overcoming of economic inequalities between different areas of the world, in view of the great threat to peace that these represent (cf. No. 83); the condemnation of the arms race, held to be a reason for which war is often not truly a last resort (cf. No. 81). In this context, the Council does not fail to make a heartfelt appeal calling believers to be peacemakers above all in the area of education: those who dedicate themselves to educational activities "should consider it their most weighty task to instruct all in fresh sentiments of peace" (No. 82). Peace arises first of all from the heart and from the spirit, even if it must then be incarnated within structures. It is therefore the task of believers to become peacemakers, above all providing to the younger generations formation in an authentic spirit of peace. More than seeking — in a negative sense — to prevent or hinder war, Gaudium et Spes seeks to promote — in a positive sense — a culture of peace. | |
| 5. |
The extraordinary and demanding legacy of the social teachings contained in the
conciliar Constitution Gaudium et Spes has
been wholly taken up in the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the
Church, which has updated and integrated the content of these teachings
to make them more readily applicable to the needs of humanity in the
twenty-first century. The Compendium was presented to the press on 25 October
2004 and was put together by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace
according to the will of the Servant of God John Paul II[3]. The Compendium has a simple and straightforward structure. After an Introduction, there follow three parts: the first, composed of four chapters, deals with the fundamental presuppositions of social doctrine — God’s plan of love for humanity and for society, the Church’s mission and the nature of social doctrine, the human person and human rights, the principles and values of social doctrine; the second part, composed of seven chapters, deals with the contents and classical themes of social doctrine — the family, human work, economic life, the political community, the international community, the environment and peace; the third part — which is quite brief, being composed of one sole chapter — contains a series of indications for the use of social doctrine in the pastoral praxis of the Church and in the life of Christians, above all the lay faithful. The Conclusion, entitled "For a Civilization of Love", is an expression of the underlying purpose of the entire document. In No. 10 of the Compendium, we find the affirmation that the document "is presented as an instrument for the moral and pastoral discernment of the complex events that mark our time; as a guide to inspire, at the individual and community levels, attitudes and choices that will permit all people to look to the future with greater trust and hope". It is moreover an instrument put together for the precise purpose of promoting ‘new strategies suited to the demands of our time and in keeping with human needs and resources. But above all there can arise the motivation to rediscover the vocation proper to the different charisms within the Church that are destined to the evangelization of the social order, because ‘all the members of the Church are sharers in this secular dimension’[4]" (Compendium, 10). | |
| 6. |
The Compendium forcefully emphasizes that
social doctrine is placed at the heart of the Church’s mission. It shows,
above all in Chapter Two, the ecclesiological character of this social
doctrine, that is, its relation with the Church’s mission, with
evangelization and the proclamation of Christian salvation in temporal
realities. The subject that is most fitting to the nature of social doctrine
is, in fact, the entire ecclesial community: "The social doctrine belongs
to the Church because the Church is the subject that formulates it,
disseminates it and teaches it. It is not a prerogative of a certain
component of the ecclesial body but of the entire community; it is the
expression of the way that the Church understands society and of her
position regarding social structures and changes. The whole of the Church
community — priests, religious and laity — participates in the formulation
of this social doctrine, each according to the different tasks, charisms and
ministries found within her" (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the
Church, 79). The Compendium therefore concerns all Catholics: "The first
recipient of the Church’s social doctrine is the Church community in its
entire membership, because everyone has social responsibilities that must be
fulfilled … In the tasks of evangelization, that is to say, of teaching,
catechesis and formation that the Church’s social doctrine inspires, it is
addressed to every Christian, each according to the competence, charisms,
office and mission of proclamation that is proper to each one" (ibid.
No. 83). Social doctrine also implies responsibilities with respect to the
building up, organizing and functioning of society: political, economic and
administrative obligations, that is to say, obligations of a social nature
that belong in a particular way to the lay faithful by reason of the secular
condition of their state of life and the secular nature of their vocation:
by means of these responsibilities, the lay faithful put social teaching
into practice and fulfil the secular mission of the Church. It is my ardent
hope that the local Churches present on the Asian continent will be able to
see to the translation and dissemination of the Compendium of the Social
Doctrine of the Church, so that it will become an indispensable
instrument for the evangelization of social realities and for the formation
of the clergy and of the lay faithful. In this context I am pleased to
announce that the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, after the first
congress in America, is intending to hold its Second Continental Congress on
the Compendium of the Social Teaching of the Church in Asia and for
Asia before the end of this year in Bangkok. Arrangements to this end will
be taken as soon as possible. | |
| 7. |
The Compendium is proposed as an instrument
for fostering the ecumenical and interreligious dialogue of Catholics
with all those who sincerely desire the good of mankind. This purpose,
emphasized also in John Paul II’s Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation
Ecclesia in Asia, is especially important for those involved in pastoral
work on the immense continent of Asia. In fact, the Compendium affirms
"this document is proposed also to the brethren of other Churches and
Ecclesial Communities, to the followers of other religions, as well as to
all people of good will who are committed to serving the common good" (No.
12). In addition to being addressed primarily and specifically to the sons
and daughters of the Church, social doctrine has a universal destination.
The light of the Gospel, which social doctrine brings to shine on society,
illuminates all people: every conscience and intellect is able to grasp the
human depth of meanings and values expressed in it, and the burst of
humanity and humanization contained in its guidelines for action. Social doctrine invites Catholics to consider interreligious dialogue and cooperation as paths of strategic value for the future good of humanity. Looking at the events of the end of the twentieth century and of the start of the millennium just begun, we can identify at least two historical areas of primary importance for interreligious dialogue on social themes: these are the areas of peace and human rights. Everyone knows the many and heartfelt appeals of the great Pope John Paul II on these themes[5]. It is sufficient here to recall the Message for the 2002 World Day of Peace, where the Pope wrote: "The various Christian confessions, as well as the world’s great religions, need to work together to eliminate the social and cultural causes of terrorism. They can do this by teaching the greatness and dignity of the human person, and by spreading a clearer sense of the oneness of the human family. This is a specific area of ecumenical and interreligious dialogue and cooperation, a pressing service which religion can offer to world peace"[6]. The Holy Father Benedict XVI too, in his first Message for the World Day of Peace (2006), turned once more to the need to promote and increase ecumenical and interreligious dialogue (cf. No. 11). The field of human rights, of peace, of social and economic justice, of development in the near future will always be more and more at the centre of interreligious dialogue, in which Catholics must participate with their social doctrine, understood as a "doctrinal corpus" that stimulates but is also nourished by "the fruitful activity of many millions of people, who … have sought to make that teaching the inspiration for their involvement in the world"[7]. | |
| 8. |
I would like to conclude my remarks by responding to a
question that is and outdated? Although the consequences of the passing of
time and the subsequent changes in scenarios can be seen in certain
passages, Gaudium et Spes remains a fundamental point of reference for
Christian social thought. The Council’s words continue to show, at the
distance of forty years, a surprising relevance, and certain necessary
adjustments appear to be more a development rather than a sign of
obsolescence in the Council’s message. From these words the faithful can in
the future still draw certain fundamental criteria for action and the
essential elements for understanding their commitment in history. | |
| 9. |
No obsolescence, then, but on the contrary a permanent
need to make constantly relevant, a need that is answered in the
Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, which offers itself as
the pastoral instrument for making ever present to the Christians of the
twenty-first century the task of sharing in "the joys and the hopes, the
grief and the anxieties" (Gaudium et Spes, 1) of the men and women of
the twenty-first century, enlightening them with the light of the Gospel of
the Lord Jesus. This sharing must find expression in the need for personal
testimony on the one hand, and, on the other, in the need to come up with an
authentic humanism that engages social structures. These two dimensions, the
personal and the social, must never be separated. It is my ardent hope that
the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church will help bring
leading Christian men and women to a greater maturity and will inspire them
to be credible witnesses, capable of changing the mechanisms of modern
society by word and deed. There is always a need for witnesses, martyrs
and saints, even in the area of society. Popes have constantly made
reference to those who have lived their presence in society "bearing witness
to Christ the Saviour"[8].
We are speaking here of all those whom Rerum Novarum considered
"worthy of all praise"[9]
for their commitment to improving, in their day, the condition of workers;
of those who, in the words of Centesimus Annus, "succeeded time after
time in finding effective ways of bearing witness to the truth"[10],
of those who, "spurred on by the social Magisterium, have sought to make
that teaching the inspiration for their involvement in the world. Acting
either as individuals or joined together in various groups, associations and
organizations, these people represent a great movement for the defence of
the human person and the safeguarding of human dignity"[11].
We are speaking here of the countless Christians, many of them laymen and
women, "who attained holiness in the most ordinary circumstances of life"[12].
Personal witness, the fruit of an adult Christian life that is profound and
mature, can only be firmly established also on the building up of a new
civilization, in dialogue with other religions and with all men and
women of good will, in order to bring about an integral humanism in
solidarity. |
FOOTNOTES
| 1 | We find here an anticipation of what will become a central theme of Paul VI’s Populorum Progressio (1967) and afterwards of John Paul II’s Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (1987). | |
| 2 | We find expressed here a principle that will undergo important developments in a series of successive interventions on the part of the Church, from Familiaris Consortio to the Charter of the Rights of the Family. | |
| 3 | The Compendium offers a complete overview of the fundamental framework of the doctrinal corpus of Catholic social teaching, as requested by John Paul II in No. 54 of the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Ecclesia in America (cf. Compendium, 8). | |
| 4 | John Paul II, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles Laici, 15. | |
| 5 | It suffices to review the Addresses to the Diplomatic Corps accredited to the Holy See given by John Paul II in his 26 years of pontificate to get an idea of how frequent and insistent his appeals are, calling for cooperation among world religions in working for peace in the spirit of Assisi. | |
| 6 | John Paul II, "No Peace Without Justice, No Justice Without Forgiveness", Message for the 2002 World Day of Peace, 1 January 2002, 12. | |
| 7 | John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, 3. | |
| 8 | John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, 5. | |
| 9 | Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum, 55. | |
| 10 | John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, 23. | |
| 11 | John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, 3. | |
| 12 | John Paul II, Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte, 31. |
III. ASIAN CHRISTIANITY AND MODERNITY 40 YEARS AFTER
GAUDIUM ET SPES – Fr.
Felix Wilfred, University of Madras, India
Significant developments have taken place in Asia during the past forty years after the close of the Council Vatican II and the publication of its document Gaudium et Spes. The different parts of Asia have undergone rapid and amazing changes in the political, economic, cultural and social realms. Several Asian countries have moved from a situation of under-development to become fastest developing nations of the globe, and are competing in every sphere with the developed nations of the West. This process of modernization and globalisation has created also deep contradictions in the Asian societies.
On its part, Asian Christianity itself has made, if not giant steps, at least significant strides, towards greater self-understanding about itself and its mission in relation to the developing situations in the continent. We need to only think of the journey official bodies like the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences (FABC) and Christian Conference of Asia (CCA) have made in this direction, not to speak of many grassroots Christian movements and initiatives in relation to the modernizing and globalising Asian situation.
It is from this current situation of an Asia in rapid transformation and an Asian Christianity in evolution that we want to revisit the Vatican document of Gaudium et Spes. We shall reflect on the significance of its spirit, content and orientation from the evolving Asian situation, and identify as well its limitations. In the second part of the article, we shall ask what are some of the pointers for the future in the encounter of Asian Christianity with modernity.
Part I: ASIA REVISITS GAUDIUM ET SPES
A Mission Document Par Excellence
In spite of all its historic limitations, Gaudium et Spes may be the most significant mission document for Asia, though mission is not its explicit theme. This is so even after forty years of its publication. Here is a document that provides the basis to begin a serious dialogue with Asia.
First of all, the method, the spirit and vision of Gaudium et Spes find resonance among the Asians. For one thing, in Gaudium et Spes, absent is the triumphalism that is perceived by neighbours of other faiths as an expression of arrogance. The genuine spirit of dialogue and the sense of modesty in admitting that the Church has no solutions to all the problems of humanity, and the readiness to cooperate with others set the right tone for a proper approach to mission in the Asian continent. The fact that, serious mission engagement in the Asian continent has been pursued more in the spirit of Gaudium et Spes than, perhaps, any other document is only a confirmation of the validity it has even today for Asian Christianity.
Secondly, from a deeper theological perspective, the document provides a proper approach to mission, since it does not contrast "the natural" against "the supernatural", the former identified with the temporal realities of life. To view the question of economy, politics, culture and other areas of life as interwoven into the process of salvation and emancipation, is to acknowledge at the same time the theological and religious character of all these realities of life. They are not simply extension of Christian faith or fields in which to practice one’s faith, as if they have nothing directly to do with faith itself. From this position it is possible to construct an integralist approach, meaning the subjugation of all temporal realities to the spiritual. That would be simply to revive political Augustinianism. Gaudium et Spes did not follow this line. What Gaudium et Spes did was to relate this religious and theological character of temporal realities with the affirmation of their autonomy. This has deep implications for the understanding and practice of mission in Asia.
A third significant aspect of Gaudium et Spes for Asia is its recognition of the role of the subject and her agency, departing unmistakably from some of the earlier orientations in the history of Christianity. The spirit of this new orientation can be discerned also in the document on Religious Freedom (Nostra Aetate). In earlier classical approaches (which are being followed even today in many Christian circles) what dominates is truth understood as an "objective" order completely dissociated from the subject – an order which one has only to adhere to. In more basic terms Gaudium et Spes did not give in to an approach that divorces truth from freedom. This has serious implications for Asia, especially in our relationship with neighbours of other faiths, and our joint collaboration with them regarding the transformation of the Asian societies. An approach based simply on "objective" order will tend to be self-imposing, doctrinaire and even authoritarian, and not open to dialogue which is possible only where the pursuit of truth in freedom by the subject – individual and collective – is acknowledged. This latter kind of approach which Gaudium et spes pursues does not give up the quest for truth, but takes into account the important role of the subject and the fidelity to her conscience. In former times, this was ruled out on the plea that error has no right to exist.
We could see the seeds of a deep theology of religions in the orientations of Gaudium et Spes. Nostra Aetate, the document directly dealing with the relationship of Christianity to other religious traditions, treats the matter from a theological perspective. But the anthropological basis and the presuppositions of such a theology of religions, it appears to me, are to be found in Gaudium et Spes and in Dignitatis Humanae which deals with religious freedom. This is very significant for Asian Christianity at the present moment as well as for its future. By highlighting the role of freedom and the subject, Gaudium et Spes responds both to the challenges of modernity as well as to the presuppositions of a theology of religion with which Asians could vibrate. There can be no proper understanding of mission in Asia without drawing into the picture two important dimensions: modernity and religions.
A fourth area of significance of Gaudium et Spes concerns the affirmation of the universal destiny of earthly goods. Though this insight has been present in the Christian tradition and in the teachings of the Fathers, the fact that the Council highlighted this in the circumstances of today is something very noteworthy. Private possession itself is relativized vis-à-vis the universal destiny of the goods of the earth. It is an antidote to the growing individualism under the aegis of modernity and to the philosophy of competition and self-seeking nurtured by globalisation. In this connection we may recall here the reference the documents makes to the customs and traditions among certain peoples which have strong community orientation, and are expressive of solidarity.
In economically less developed societies it often happens that the common destination of goods is partly achieved by a system of community customs and traditions which guarantee a minimum of necessities to each one…[one] should not rashly do away with respectable customs..’ (GS 69).
Limitations of Gaudium et Spes – An Asian Perspectivee
The first major limitation of Gaudium et Spes relates to its understanding of modernity. This understanding goes back to the heritage of European Enlightenment, its world-view, and particularly its affirmation of critical reason. Gaudium et Spes was a response to the "adult world" that had come of age. It is the modern world. The adulthood and "coming of age" could be looked at in their historical and cultural implications. Historically it means that the modern world is no more an infant under the tutelage of the Church, but is freed from this stage of dependence and control. From a cultural and philosophical perspective it means that the modern world is one, which has come to be through the exercise of critical reason. Modern technology, science, and other marvelous developments are to be viewed as expressions of critical reason dominating and controlling the nature and its powers. In short, the defining and interpretative key for modernity was critical reason, which is also the driving principle for a linear human progress. It is to this understanding of modernity and human progress Gaudium et Spes responded.
Looking back from an Asian perspective we note that this interpretation of the modern world as progressing (Enlightenment optimism) is only partial. What is lacking is the exercise of moral reason. I think, as long as this is absent the modern world should not be considered as having come of age – a presupposition on which Gaudium et Spes operates. That the West had to respond to a modernity created by critical reason was a historical necessity. It is understandable against the background of the gulf between faith and the modern world. In the face of an incomplete rationality, what Asia seeks is a more complete "coming of age" by the exercise of moral reason expressing itself through ethical and humane quest.
In the West, there has been, of course, a tradition of critique on modernity. This critique has been associated with the so-called "critical theory",[1] or in its more radical form by some versions of postmodern theorizing. Asian critique on the other hand is directed to the failure of modernity to respond to the moral demands of humanity, specially its vulnerable ones, and the absence of the spirit of solidarity and collective responsibility. Those who exercise the critique of modernity in Asia are not theorists in the first place, but the victims of modernity and globalisation. By their very situation of being exploited, marginalized and excluded, the poor of Asia are the most effective critiques who constantly challenge the ambiguities of modernity and globalisation built on science and technology without regard to moral responsibility and solidarity.
A second limitation is the absence of attention to the issues of conflicts, struggles and contradictions in understanding modernity. This is not surprising, since the predominant concern in the document was to bridge the gap between faith and the modern world. Approaching modernity from this perspective, the Council needed to affirm the secular realities of the world with a sense of optimism after a long period of negative attitudes towards modern developments. Further, the document was an attempt to overcome the "Augustinianism" which tends to subordinate the secular and temporal realities to the superior and supernatural reality of faith and bring them under the "City of God".[2] This background also explains its concentration in affirming the autonomy of temporal realities, on the one hand, and the inattention to the incontrovertible fact of conflicts, struggles and contradictions, on the other. These latter aspects, which we do not find in the document, are important today for an Asian response to modernity. Besides, Gaudium et Spes does not address some crucial questions of significance for the life of Asia. These are, for example, of poverty, ethnicity, race, religious conflicts, minorities, gender issues, economic exploitation, and so on.[3]
Thirdly, if we go deeper into the question, the approach to the society that transpires in Gaudium et Spes is one of "common good" the attainment of which is reached through deliberation, consensusbuilding, etc.[4] The common good approach does not do justice to the experiences in Asia and in other parts of the developing world. The basic orientation of common good approach is harmony. It does not take into account the asymmetry of power, social conflicts and systematic exclusion of peoples and groups from participation and consensus building. This could be seen in the Asian experience of the marginalized peoples who are systemically excluded like the Dalits, the indigenous peoples and tribals. The point is that the pre-conditions for an approach to common good through participation and consensus-building is not yet present in most Asian societies. What we have are various expressions of centralization, hierarchal structures and exclusion, depending on the different Asian societies. The traditional Catholic understanding of state is related to the pursuit of common good. This traditional doctrine is repeated also in Gaudium et Spes.[5] But the idea of common good is vague. It serves as a middle-point between individualism and collectivism. It does not, however, take into account the deep division and conflicts, which characterize the Asian societies – something that has been further aggravated by the process of globalisation. On these issues of Asia, Gaudium et Spes is of little help.
Finally, it is the merit of Gaudium et Spes to have brought the relationship to the world within the spirit of dialogue, acknowledging that the Church alone cannot solve all the problems of humanity. The background to such a spirit and affirmation was probably the realization about the role secular movements and ideologies – including atheistic ones – could contribute to the transformation of the world. Important as these are, what is lacking in the document, however, is the affirmation of the role of religious traditions and collaboration with them for the creation of a transformed world. This is an area to which Asian Christianity could contribute a lot from its actual experiences.
PART II : POINTERS TO THE FUTURE
The meeting of Asian Christianity with modernity took place earlier under different conditions and historical circumstances. The experiences of present-times, on their part, call for a new and different stage of this encounter. However, we will not fail to notice a certain continuity of paradigm underlying the relationship of Asian Christianity to modernity.
Christianity as Entry-point to Modernity
It may be strange but true that, whereas Christianity in the West dissociated itself from modernity for a long time, and was in conflict with it, in Asia it has been irrevocably associated with modernity. In simple terms, for Asians to be Christians meant to be modern. In general, Christianity as a culture and tradition has been welcomed in Asia as an entryway to modernity. I do not want to go at this point into the Western discussion whether there is continuity between Christianity and modernity, or whether modernity results from the obsolescence of Christianity, or whether modernity is the extrapolation of Christianity and its spirit in the secular realm.
Let me instead pointed out that the perception of Asian Christians both in the past and in present times is one in terms of continuity rather than a caesura between Christianity and modernity. It is this that has evoked their interest. When Matteo Ricci paid his homage to the Chinese Emperor and presented him with two clocks, the interest was more in the clocks than in anything else. When the clock stopped, they found in Ricci a fantastic clock repairer (!), and that interested them most, rather than all the doctrines of heaven that he came to proclaim. So also the maps of Ricci was object of much curiosity. We also note how the Chinese were in praise of the astronomer-missionary Johann Adam Schall von Bell when he predicted the eclipse in 1623 & 1624, which the Chinese experts could not do.[6] From history we also learn how when Emperor Yongzheng expelled all Christian missionaries, he saw to it that those of them who were astronomers and scientists were allowed to stay. This basic matrix of an association of Christianity as long as it serves the scientific and technological purpose seems to be at work today with the ‘cultural Christians’ in some parts of Asia who avidly read and study Christianity, if the sign of the many proliferating literature on Christianity is any indication. Besides ideological background for this trend,[7] there are also pragmatic considerations of the affinity of Christianity with the Western science and technology.
If we shift our attention to India, the mass conversion of the Dalits ("the untouchables") and other lower caste groups signified stepping into the world of modernity and its institutions (education, healthcare, mobility, equality before law, etc), and thus get liberated from the traditional yoke of caste hierarchy and its oppression. This aspiration for fulfillment of the material needs of life and Christianity in the view of the marginalized groups, facilitated entry into the world of modernity.[8] It is not so much through the preaching of the Gospel as through indirect means that Christianity has been able to make a dent on the society. Numerous educational institutions, medical services, the legal reforms, etc. stand as example of this.
But we stand today in a fresh encounter with modernity and its advanced form of globalisation, with all their ambiguities and contradictions as well as the prospects they offer. We need to reflect deeply on this new stage of encounter. Here let me highlight some aspects of the new stage of encounter in the vastly changed situation.
Civil Society – The Meeting Ground
In most Asian countries, the situation of Christianity is one of isolation. This could derive from the prejudice, discrimination and opposition Christian communities experience from the larger society on account of its ‘foreign’ origin and colonial connections. But there are also intrinsic reasons, turning isolation into self-isolation. It is a fact that Christianity has not made any significant effort to reach out to the larger society and dialogue with it. The manner of engagement by the Christian communities has given the impression that they act parallel with other institutions like the state. There is the unexpressed message that the Church can do all by itself without needing others, and indeed better than others. We may cite here the examples of educational, welfare and health sectors in which traditionally Christianity has been involved. Christian Churches do not really read the "signs of the times" if they continue basically with their strong institutionalisation, with some marginal adaptations. Christianity could do more to meet the challenges of modernity and globalisation. Opting for the poor in this age of modernity and globalisation calls for new means, strategies and mediation.[9] It is here we realize the importance of civil society and its mediation for an effective response.
Civil society is the space that is open for citizens to meet together, to discuss, debate, voice their views, and also to critique and make their contestations.[10] The civil society or the public sphere is so very crucial today for the democratisation of the society at all levels, to make the voices of the poor and the marginalized heard, and to check the excesses of the state. The contours of civil society and its mode of functioning will differ from country to country, depending upon the nature of the society and its composition, past history and so on. Participation and dialogue in the sphere of civil society can help individual Christians and Christian communities to make important contributions and thus affect the society and its transformation.
The picture of civil society in Asia is very diverse. In some countries it is vibrant; in others dormant; and in still others it is practically absent because of centralization and totalitarian tendencies. The basic task of committed Christians would be to contribute to the creation of civil society where there is none, and make alive and vibrant where they exist, by their participation and involvement. Through engagement in civil society, Christians could contribute in such important areas as the practice of democracy, defence of the dignity and rights of persons and groups. They could create discourses, form opinions and make these available through modern social media of communication. All this is truly required in a situation in which, as a result of modernity and globalisation, the poor of Asia are being more and more exploited and displaced as migrants and refugees. Such an involvement in civil society would, in effect, be an exercise in prophetism, and indeed, with other citizens across religious borders and boundaries. The negotiation in the terrain of civil society is the surest means also to break the persisting general isolation of the Christian communities in Asia.
Civil society is also an opportunity for Christianity to be a critical voice in the political realm. Given the minority position of Asian Christian communities, the confrontation with the state in matters of justice could have serious practical consequences, if it is exercised in the name of religion. On the contrary, if it is done in civil society along with other citizens, especially the poor and the marginalized, it will have the important effect of holding the state under check and challenging it to fulfil its obligations. After all, the totality of the good of the society is not identified with the state and its role. Here is not a question of direct interference with the state (given the autonomy of temporal realities, including the political order), but a matter of involvement for the good of the society, which goes beyond the sphere of the state. Asian Christianity needs to seize the opportunity the civil society offers to contribute to the transformation of the modern political order.
Engagement with the civil society can help Asian Christianity to overcome some of the vulnerabilities it is subjected to as a result of its minority position.[11] Minority situation need not mean lesser capability to contribute to the society. On the other hand, the issue of minorities and the claims of minority rights themselves need the mediating role of the civil society. Civil society can also help project a proper self-image of Christianity in these modern times. As it is, there is a yawning gap between the actual realities in the Christian communities and the public image of Christianity. Except for a token appreciation of the works of Christians in the educational, medical and other humanitarian fields, the public image is that of a Christianity associated with colonialism and imperialism. To be active participants in the civil society is the way to bring to public awareness the new image of Asian Christianity. It offers the opportunity also to clear many misunderstandings, especially in what concerns mission and conversion.
Joint Asian Critical Response to Modernity and Globalisation
Christianity with its immense spiritual heritage and long historical experiences will be an important actor and force in responding critically to modernity – a response already being given by the victims. This would be more in tune with Vatican II, and not a conservative option, which, in the face of the challenges of Asian modernity, may isolate Christianity from the stream of actual realities. In other words, instead of adopting what could be a Church-centred approach, Christianity needs to adopt a collaborative approach. It is more important to be on the way with others, than try to reach the goal before others, which could be an expression of selfishness. It is more important to work with others, even though things are not done perfectly, than try to do everything perfectly all by oneself. If the Christian praxis in Asia adopts this kind of attitude, it will never suffer isolation, nor will it be exposed to the temptation of triumphal and "holier than thou" attitude. In short, in the face of the crisis modernity and globalisation have triggered, Christianity should respond jointly with others to a commonly shared historical situation.
What I have said would receive further confirmation if we look at the matter in more basic terms as an issue of the relationship of religion to modernity and globalisation. Peter Beyer in an interesting study notes that in present times of growing specialization religions, which concern themselves with wholeness and totality, are left with no space of operation. Of course, they could continue to function with their traditional roles (rituals, worship, devotion, etc), but with no effective influence in other social systems or in public sphere. He contrasts "function" of religion with "performance".
In the present context, function refers to ‘pure’ religious communication. Religious performance by contrast, occurs when religion is ‘applied’ to problems generated in other systems but not solved there, or simply not addressed elsewhere. Examples of such problems are economic poverty, political oppression, familial estrangement, environmental degradation, and personal identity. Through performance relations, religion establishes its importance for the ‘profane’ aspects of life.[12]
Asian Theology of Religions as a Response to Modernity
The pursuit of an Asian theology of religions is not merely a theological issue. It is an issue of modernity, and indeed a response to some of the characteristics of modernity impacting on religion and its practice. One such major characteristic is relativity (which is not the same thing as relativism) understood as a dynamic principle of mutual interaction, which includes as well the religious realm. What the Asian theology of religions could do is to contribute to harmonious living, peace and tolerance today. A wrong theology of religion is a dangerous source of fundamentalism, religious bigotry and obscurantism (antimodern or pre-modern) that is not respectful of the religious sentiments and expressions of peoples of other faiths. An insensitive theology of religion is ammunition for communal conflicts, and social dissension in an Asia where there are already convulsions on the basis of ethnicity, language, religion, and so on.
Hence Asian theology of religions will be critical of any theological position that is based on the "dogma of intolerance" In fact in the West, the birth of modernity coincided with the Enlightenment attempt to overcome religious conflicts by bringing to the fore the idea of tolerance and peace.[13] The idea of tolerance and peace were further deepened by the application of modern scientific methods of study as was evident in the field of comparative religion. When Vatican II came out with a document on Religious Freedom (Dignitaries Humanae), it was a belated response to one of the challenges of the Enlightenment and modernity. In the present times, the spirit of religious freedom and scientific enquiry should characterize Asian theology of religions. This has important consequences for the social and political life in different Asian countries. If all theologies are answerable and ought to be socially responsible, this should be so all the more in the case of theology of religions.
Awareness of diversity and plurality (of world-views, ways of life, religious expressions, practices, and so on) is another important characteristic of modernity. But interestingly this has been the millennial tradition of Asian cultures and civilizations. In that sense, through its unambiguous affirmation of plurality and diversity, Asia has been in the age of modernity and post modernity since millennia! What came about through many struggles and conflicts in the West has been so naturally imprinted in the Asian civilizations. Thus we can speak of a convergence of modernity and Asian tradition in the issue of diversity and tolerance, understood as a positive and proactive reality. Asian theology of religions should be so developed as to respond to the exigencies of modernity and in the spirit of Asian heritage.
There is a second aspect to the relationship of theology of religion to modernity. The question about modernity is something in which all the religious traditions can and should collaborate. In Gaudium et Spes, it is viewed mainly from the perspective of the Church. The very title of the document reads: "Pastoral Constitution of the Church in the Modern World". It does not fall within the purview of this document that the relationship to the modern world is something to which all religions bear responsibility. We realize in Asia that the Church could make greater contribution, if it does it in collaboration with peoples of other faiths. Facing of modernity jointly calls for a theology of religion that is attuned to this urgent need of the times. This may not be possible without a basic rethinking also on the traditional Christian soteriology and the understanding of mission, conversion, and so on.
Christian Studies – the Twilight Discipline
I think today we need a new and distinct discipline of study called Christian Studies to be a twilight discipline – meeting point of many issues and concerns relating to Asian Christianity and modernity. It appears to me that such a discipline is the need of the hour. It will take different contours in different regions and continents in relation to the situation of Christianity and its relationship with the wider society in specific contexts. However, we could already think of some broad lines of general orientation in our Asian context.
The questions and issues Christian Studies will respond to may not be adequately met neither by theology, phenomenology or sociology of religion. Christian studies will not be a discipline, which will pursue a purely confessional approach to the study of Christianity. Christian Studies will include the study of world-Christianity from a historical, cultural, theological, sociological and phenomenological perspectives. But it will be more than that. In multireligious and pluralistic societies more and more people would like to have an understanding of Christianity that is developed in intense conversation with the broader society as well as the religious experiences of peoples of other faiths.[14] This discipline will take up issues that should engage Christianity in relation to modernity, globalisation, civil society and public sphere. A discipline that develops through such a practice of interaction with the society will be able, on the one hand, help the Christians to develop the art of negotiating the boundaries, and on the other hand, make people of other religious traditions feel comfortable by vibrating with their questions, issues and concerns.
In this regard, one of the important functions of Christian Studies, as I envisage, would be to focus attention on the interpretation of Christianity, and Christian truths and spirituality by people belonging to other religious traditions. This discipline will take into account also their critical reflections regarding Christianity and its mode of presence in the modernizing Asian societies. Ultimately, this will help to develop, from an academic point of view, a deeper and more critical understanding of Christianity, while from a practical perspective, it will encourage interreligious understanding and harmony. In this sense, it will also be doing a great service by stimulating theological reflections in the wider horizon of a fast modernizing and globalising Asia.
Conclusion
The stimulus from Vatican II was developed in Asia predominantly in terms of culture. Consequently, the issue of "inculturation" took a very important place during the past forty years of the post-conciliar period. The challenge of Vatican II for Asia is much larger than the issue of culture, which could – in spite of all good intentions to the contrary – make Christianity recoil on itself and get engrossed on its own survival. Relating Asian Christianity with modernity is a call to overcome the approach of Christianity in terms of culture, and see Asian societies as dynamic and historically evolving with new questions, problems, and prospects.[15] Such an approach is, evidently, much larger and closer to the actual experiences in Asia and the understanding of mission in this continent.
We need to respond critically to the challenges of modernity and globalisation, which is not happening unfortunately in the required measure and degree. However, it is a heartening to see this taking place in a small but in an intense way at the grassroots level with engaged Christians and Christian groups. Their experiences also provide important clues and leads to develop a proper understanding and theorizing regarding the relationship of Asian Christianity and modernity, going in new directions and avenues, not contemplated in Gaudium et Spes, while affirming its achievements.
It is interesting to note that, whereas in the West modernity led to a process of alienation from Christianity and secularisation, in Asia, modernity is bringing many Asians closer to Christianity. There is an increasing search for ethical values and even "transcendence" in the context of the crisis caused by modernity in the personal lives of many people. In some countries, especially in East Asia, people turn to Christianity since, in their view, modernity is closely associated with Christianity, and may also have elements for overcoming the crisis resulting from modernity and globalisation. They look for resources within Christianity to surmount the crisis. This may not be interpreted in the traditional sense of a confessional belonging to Christianity. That will be a complete misunderstanding of the phenomenon. What is happening is an attempt by Asians to discover for themselves in Christianity a system of values, ethics, and orientations, which may help them in their encounter with modernity. The growing interest among the "cultural Christians" in China and other parts of Asia could be considered an important expression of this search.
Finally, one of the great things about Gaudium et Spes is that here we have an understanding of a Christianity that wants to learn from the world and society. In fact this document as well as the one on Religious Freedom are examples of the influence the secular developments and history have exerted on the thought of the Church. We could state that today only a Christianity that learns from the Asian realities, its secular traditions and sacred history will draw the attention of Asians. The significance of Christianity in Asia of the future will depend upon the ethical and moral perspectives it could bring into the institutional structures and ways of life in Asian societies. For this to happen, there needs to be attentive listening to the voices of Asia and its distinct languages. Only a learning Christianity will be able to make its contribution to the developing modern societies of the Asian continent.
FOOTNOTES
| 1 | Cf. David Couzens Hoy and Thomas McCarthy, Critical Theory, Blackwell, Oxford, 1994. | |
| 2 | We need to only think of the debates in the 1950’s regarding " political Catholicism", "Catholic State" or the Spain of General Franco - not to speak of medieval Christendom. Cf. Yves Congar, "A Letter on Religious Liberty With Reference to the Position of Protestants in Spain", in his Dialogue Between Christians, Geoffrey Chapman, London Dublin, 1966, pp. 312–332. | |
| 3 | Cf. Colloquium on Church in Asia in the 21st Century, Office for Human Development, FABC, Manila, n.d. | |
| 4 | For the background of this concept, its history and its use in Christian theology and tradition, see David Hollenbach, The Common Good. Christian Ethics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002. | |
| 5 | "The political community, then, exists for that common good" (G.S. 74). | |
| 6 | Cf. Stephen Neill, A history of Christian Missions, Penguin Books, London, 1990 (reprint), p. 160. | |
| 7 | The roots of this phenomenon of "cultural Christians" may go back to the experience of the persecuted intellectuals at the time of the Cultural Revolution. There was on the one hand disappointment with the Marxist-Communist ideology, and on the other hand, serious doubts about the capacity of the traditional Chinese heritage to respond to the crisis in Chinese society. This particular cultural and intellectual situation made them turn to Christianity and its theological and philosophical traditions as more suited to answer to the basic questions of human life in a technological and scientific world. Cf. George Evers, Kirche und Katholizismus seit 1945. Die Laender Asiens, Ferdinand Schoeningh, Paderborn, 2003, pp. 125 ff. | |
| 8 | The position of Ambedkar, the foremost Dalit leader of modern times, went along these lines. He welcomed modernity and its institutions (democracy, educational and legal systems, etc.) as important means for the liberation of the outcastes of India from the longstanding yoke of oppression by the traditional high castes. Many Dalits viewed Christianity as the mediator of modernity. Cf. Gail Omvedt, Dalits and the Democratic Revolution, Sage Publications, Delhi, 1994. | |
| 9 | Cf. Felix Wilfred, Asian Dreams and Christian Hope, ISPCK, Delhi, 2003. | |
| 10 | Cf. Adam B. Seligman, The Idea of Civil Society, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1992; Jean L. Cohen – Andrew Arato, Civil Society and Political Theory, The MIIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts, 1999 (fifth printing); Neera Chandhoke, State and Civil Society. Explorations in Political Theory, Sage Publications, Delhi, 1995; Sudipta Kaviraj – Sunil Khilnani (eds), Civil Society. History and Possibilities, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2001. | |
| 11 | Cf. Felix Wilfred, The Sling of Utopia. Struggles for a Different Society, ISPCK, Delhi, 2005. | |
| 12 | Peter Beyer, Religion and Globalisation, Sage Publications, London, 2000 (reprint), p. 80. | |
| 13 | Franz Wolfinger, "Niedergang der Missionen in der Zeit der Aufklaerung: Toleranz kontra Mission?", in Warum Mission? EOS Verlag Erzabtei St. Ottilien, Munich, 1984, pp. 63 – 94. | |
| 14 | There has been growing interest in the study of Christianity in China. See Zhuo Xinping, "The Study of Christianity by Chinese Scholars in the Twentieth Century and its Significance for the Future", in Quest. An Interdisciplinary Journal for Asian Christian Scholars, Vol. 2, No. 1 (June 2003), pp. 49 - 61 | |
| 15 | This sort of approach is well meant, and it has its advantages, given the cultural estrangement of Christianity in the Asian continent. However, what I am suggesting is that in so doing Christianity has been following the Western trajectory, which studies the non-Western societies as cultural entities. This is contrasted with the study of the West in terms of society. This could be seen in the reservation of "anthropology" for the developing societies, whereas sociology was for the developed Western societies! The underlying assumption is that whereas the societies of Asia and other developing world are stagnant and static (hence object of the study of a de-historicized anthropology), the study of the dynamic societies of the West is studied through sociology. |