UCA News
Contribute
Interview

with

Father Vimal Tirimanna

Bishops should teach continental theology in Asia

Christopher Joseph
By Christopher Joseph

28 October 2022

Redemptorist Father Vimal Tirimanna, one of the leading theologians in Asia, says bishops in Asia should help develop and teach contextual continental theology in Asia, rather than limiting themselves exclusively to Roman theology in the seminaries in Asia.

Father Tirimanna, a member of the Theological Commission of the General Secretariat for the Synod on Synodality (2021-2024), says the Church will be “turned upside down” with more lay participation if the Church takes the synodal process seriously.

He also speaks about the importance of ending clericalism and encouraging lay participation to make the Church more participatory and responsive to the social realities of Asia, as so clearly wished by Vatican-II.

The following is second part of an interview UCA News conducted with him in Bangkok. The theologian was in the Thai capital to attend the first general conference (Oct. 12-30) of the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences (FABC) organized as part of its golden jubilee celebrations.

Read the first part of the interview -- "Asian Church should become 'more Asian, less Roman'"

What impact do you expect from the current synodal process?

I think the current synodal process is going to turn the Church upside down if you take it seriously. The synodal process aims to make the Church more participatory, which would naturally mean a diminishing of the present clerical dominance. That’s what Francis wants but many conservatives in influential ecclesial positions do not want that to happen. Some bishops, even in Asian nations such as Sri Lanka and India, are waving a red flag against this process though almost all of them pay lip service to it.

Recent Interviews

If you want to restore the role of the lay people again in the Church as so clearly wished by Vatican-II, the only solution is the synodal process. As a member of the drafting group, at Frascati last month, I read about 57-58 synodal reports from all over the world, and that included almost all from Asia.  Everywhere they are saying that clericalism is continuing to suffocate the lay vocation. So one way to destroy clericalism and give a helping hand to the lay people to regain their due place in the Church is to bring back the theology of Vatican II, particularly that of Lumen Gentium.

What is the church? It's not the clergy, definitely not the bishops. It is the whole People of God… all the baptized, that is, all the bishops and priests, the religious and the laity, together. Through them the Holy Spirit continues to be present in the world, the Holy Father says. He is not original at all because that is the teaching of Lumen Gentium. It is a very important theological point. Asian bishops, together with theologians like Father Felix Wilfred have been saying it for decades in the FABC. Once we are baptized, the Holy Spirit is in us. And as Saint Paul says each one of us then becomes “a temple of the Holy Spirit.”

I may be a bishop, you may be a layman, but the Holy Spirit speaks through each of us. And, each of us has a special role to play in the Church. A bishop or a priest has a special function. But lay people also have their special calls, and through them also the Holy Spirit speaks and acts. So, the clergy should listen to the whole People of God.

When you say People of God, I remember a good incident. One morning a group of bishops went to meet Pope Francis during their ad limina visit last year, and he asked them about the synodal process in their country. The lead bishop began to say: “Your Holiness, we and the People of God…”  Pope Francis is reported as having duly interrupted him saying: “Please correct yourself. There's no we and the people of God. You are also part of the People of God.” It is precisely this prevalent clerical mindset that the Pope is trying to break. The day that is broken, clericalism will also be broken.

How soon will that change happen in Asia?

It will be very, very far from present times. One reason is that Asia is very patriarchal, or matriarchal, culturally. So it will be hard culturally.  But I think it will happen gradually in time to come because I am quite positive after reading the national Episcopal synod responses. Lay people have expressed things that I never expected to be so bluntly and sincerely to be mentioned in those reports. Everywhere, they are seeking a chance to play greater roles in the Church, of course, according to the charisms/gifts showered on them by the Holy Spirit.

In one country report, they questioned the consulting only of priests about the appointment of bishops. They are asserting their position in the Church (as baptized persons) to be consulted about the selection of bishops. Sure, as things stand now, in some places a few lay people are consulted. But only a few, often, those who are close to the clergy are consulted. In my opinion, segments of lay people (whether they are close to the clergy or not) also should be consulted on the appointment of bishops. Here is my reason: A bishop is a bishop of the whole People of God, not just of the priests.

In Sri Lanka, at times I hear some saying that such and such a person will not be appointed as bishop because priests don't like him. But should we consider only the fact whether the priests like a certain candidate or not? What if people like him? Of course, a bishop should be able to work with the priests. They are his immediate collaborators in a given diocese. But, if we are considering only what the priests think about a candidate and ignore what the lay people have got to say about him, we are perpetuating the system— clericalism.

Do we need the hierarchy, including the papacy, as we see it today?

As some perceive it today, it may not be relevant. But we need to change this perception. Of course, the way some priests and bishops have been behaving has been quite destructive to the institutional hierarchical structure of the Church. But that is not enough reason to make a general statement that we do not need the hierarchy. We need the hierarchy. I differ from a few other friends of mine in the theological circles on this. We need the institutional aspects of the Church because without that the Church cannot function. Without an institution or structure, even this meeting of the FABC is not possible.

So, institutions are necessary, but not the way they have been functioning. In some circles, such institutions are canonized. Let’s not forget that institutions are only means or structures to work for an end – the kingdom. Even the Church is there for the Kingdom of God, as Pope John Paul II himself said so many times. Jesus appointed apostles as a means to spread the liberating message of the gospel. But what has happened is that oftentimes the Church has become the end in herself… the clergy has become an end in themselves… the hierarchy has become an end in itself. Structures become a doctrine and the doctrine has become an end in itself. Doctrines are to help us reach Jesus of Nazareth. If we are worshipping the doctrines, that's heresy. So the long and the short of what I am saying is that means should never become the end. Neither should we present the means as the end. Unfortunately, often, we are presenting means as the end.

How can we change it?

Through conversion of each and every member of the People of God. I remember when we were seminarians in the 1980s, it was the time of Latin American liberation theology, and we were talking about structural change. At the time we were taught correctly that with structural change, the person also should change. It is because, behind structures, there are always persons. Structures do not jump onto our lap by themselves and stay there. It is we who create, maintain, and sustain them. So it’s we who can change them, but first we should change ourselves.

But despite the talks, why don’t we have lay participation in the FABC?

Some people speak about the lack of lay participation in the FABC. I have been closely involved in the FABC from 1996 to 2012, that’s for 16 years, first as a member, and then, as the executive secretary of the Office of Theological Concerns (OTC) of the FABC. I saw first-hand the change with regard to lay participation in the FABC plenary assemblies. There was a time we in Asia had almost 50 percent of lay involvement even at FABC plenaries. Such lay participation continued till 2004, that is till the plenary assembly in Daejon, Korea. Roughly half of the participants there were lay people, grassroots-level people. But unfortunately, one lay participant was so harsh in criticizing the Church and the hierarchy. Consequently, it was decided not to invite so many lay people anymore for the plenaries. They said: After all, it is a bishops’ meeting, let us keep it as a bishops’ meeting. Ever since, quite a reduced number of lay people, especially those working with the FABC offices and a few other experts are invited for the plenaries of the FABC. That’s history.

Why should the hierarchy be afraid of criticism?

I don’t think they are afraid of criticism. But the incident I mentioned was not to do with any constructive criticism. It was a destructive, unjust, and wrong way of criticizing. I do not think that the Asian bishops are afraid of constructive criticism. That’s not my experience! However, it is also true that quite a number of bishops just don’t want to face reality. If you or I were bishop, we would have had our close circles around us. They would always say what we want to hear as bishops. Realities thus would be masked before them, and they would be cut off from real people. This is why Francis asks the pastors to go to the margins and ask: Why are you not coming to the church?  Why have you left the Church?  The responses may be threatening to me as a bishop, and may be threatening to the institutional church. Unfortunately, many shepherds today don’t want to face that.

Do you think teaching Asian theology in Asian seminaries could help?

It was already proposed. In 2012 at the FABC plenary meeting in Vietnam, I proposed that Asian theological texts as formulated by the FABC be made parts of the curriculum in Asian seminaries. I still remember how some bishops, particularly Bishop Joseph Vianney Fernando of Kandy, Sri Lanka (who was a respected bishop in the FABC then) fully supported it. Quite a number of other bishops, too, supported it.  But nothing happened thereafter.

Even today in the seminaries where I teach, including the National Seminary in Kandy, I have told clearly why not include FABC’s Asian theology as part of the curriculum, at least as one subject. Everybody says it is a good idea. But nothing is happening. Even the Urbaniana University allows three main contextual theses to be included at their BTh examinations at the seminaries that are affiliated to it.

If our future Asian priests in Asian seminaries don't have knowledge of a contextual, FABC theology and instead are only given heavy doses of pre-Vatican-II Roman theology, what can you expect? When the FABC itself is not stressing the need for her own contextual theology in pastoral care, I’m scandalized, shocked, and disappointed, as someone closely associated with the FABC.

But why are they not implementing?

They are still conditioned to presume that real theology is Roman theology. Once during an FABC plenary meeting, I presented the OTC report, stressing the need for contextual theology. That evening one influential cardinal was sitting next to me at the dinner table and asked me if contextual theology is not “another name for theology that is influenced by Marxism.” I told him: “Cardinal, I am surprised that a person of your caliber could ask a question like that! How can it be? Marxism is a certain political ideology. We are talking about contextual theology! Can you mention one thing in contextual theology that is Marxist?” He did not say anything! So, you see, they have all bizarre ideas about contextual theology, whatever the reason is.  Pope Francis is insisting on contextual theology. He is asking us to develop contextual continental theologies, as already done by the FABC. Read his letters…Evangelii Gaudium in particular. You will see that.

But why are the bishops reluctant?

Are they reluctant? I would say most are ignorant about what the FABC has developed as a contextual Asian theology. But I think it's better to ask them why they are not considering Asian theology as part of the seminary curriculum in Asia. Do they have other reasons not to promote FABC theology? If so, why did they develop this theology, and why did they approve it? If the theology they developed has no place in their own churches in Asia, who else will be interested in such a theology?

Most Asian bishops don't want to know about what was created in Asia by Asian theologians because almost all of them were trained in Rome. That's ok. But these bishops are also the ones who appoint members to represent them in the OTC and other theological commissions, and so, they have to own that FABC theology. It is our duty to persuade for change and work to improve the available ecclesial structures especially by promoting the FABC theology of the Asian bishops.

As a matter of fact, it's we and our bishops in Asia who should be asking the Pope to give us more room, more space for developing our own theologies. But when he has given us more room (as is the case right now), we should be making the best use of the opportunity. That's why I say it's a blessed moment. But will we take advantage of the moment? This is a God-given opportunity, a kairos moment for us. I repeat, I know I am repeating this, but most of our bishops are ignorant of our own FABC theology.

Forget about the Church today. Let's think and work for tomorrow. Let's give our young seminarians a dose of FABC theology.  We have the full backing of the Vatican to develop and include contextual theologies and include them in the curriculum of our seminaries. If our bishops have approved this FABC theology, I simply cannot see what's the problem they have in implementing it. I hope and pray that this FABC meeting to celebrate the golden jubilee will take some constructive steps towards achieving this noble goal.

 

Read the first part of the interview --  " Asian Church should become more Asian, less Roman "

comment

Share your comments

Latest News

UCA News Catholic Dioceses in Asia
UCA News Catholic Dioceses in Asia
UCA News Catholic Dioceses in Asia