Asia Regional Consultation on
Ecumenical Learning in Partnership
Dumaguete City, Philippines
10-14 February 2001
(The following is a slightly
abridged version of the report written by the consultation participants.)
| I
Introduction
Thirty seven participants (13 women and
24 men) from Asia participated in a consultation on "Ecumenical Learning
in Partnership" in Dumaguete City, Philippines on 10-14 February 2001.
The consultation was sponsored by the World Council of Churches' Education
and Ecumenical Formation programme, in co-operation with the United
Church of Christ in the Philippines and the Divinity School of the Silliman
University. It took place in the framework of a WCC/EEF project on learning
ecumenically through congregations and partnerships and exchange. |
|
The consultation was prompted by recognition that:
in spite of an
overall consensus within the ecumenical movement that God’s purpose in Christ
is to bring about a new human community of communities and to renew creation,
large sections of the church are not wholeheartedly committed to achieving
this goal;
in spite of programmes
designed to combat reactionary forces such as capitalist exploitation, male
domination, racial discrimination and caste oppression, many churches remain
uncommitted to resistance to these systems of injustice;
in spite of innumerable
encounters between churches and congregations, faculty staff and students,
real ecumenical learning through such partnerships and encounters has not
always happened.
The gathering was
therefore an effort to identify, analyze and attempt to overcome the barriers
to a real exercise of learning ecumenically in partnership.
A preparatory document
was circulated to the participants. Once gathered in Dumaguete, regular
morning services expressed the dreams of the overall ecumenical vision,
and Bible studies challenged the participants to a wider and contextualized
perspective in doing ecumenism.
The participants
shared their experiences in ecumenical encounters and partnerships. Dividing
into small groups, they examined various models of congregational, institutional,
national and international programmes for ecumenical learning through partnership,
and attempted to suggest how best to take those models which have worked
well a step further, and to envisage new models and programmes.
II
The context
Considering that
learning between congregations, church districts and regions happens always
in context, the consultation attempted to describe some of the factors hindering
appropriate forms of ecumenical learning. It said that in order to enhance
the catholicity of the church and strengthen its unity, encounter programmes
need to tackle these issues:
Globalization
of the market economy and media power has a negative impact on the integrity
of churches and institutions. One example is the emergence of charismatic
prosperity cult promoters. Another is the development of a consumerist culture
among the "haves", while a majority of "have-nots" are not only being denied
satisfaction of real needs, but are also unable to satisfy newly-created
aspirations. Another result is the development of a culture of individualism,
and large-scale labour migration. A new effort to re-affirm identity
and a tendency to retreat into ghettos is another reaction to globalization.
This quest has a certain legitimacy, but creates insurmountable cultural
barriers that hinder ecumenical learning in partnership encounters.
A peculiar combination
of capitalist ideology and religious fundamentalism is fanning hatred
of people of other faiths. Many religious fundamentalists are ideologically
capitalist, though some may be nationalistic and against global market structures
and modes of production.
The systemic
abuse of power and authority in churches and church-related institutions
is a big handicap. When opportunities to promote ecumenical learning in
partnership are created, it is not uncommon for nepotistic and internal
political interests to dictate the choice of delegates. When unmotivated
people are brought together as learners, the result can only be unsatisfactory.
Undemocratic decision-making processes also dominate the setting of objectives
and funding of partnership programmes.
Male domination
in the church and institutional leadership is another barrier to ecumenical
learning in partnership. Such leaders do not help to facilitate the empowerment
of women. The consultation observed that the Decade of Churches in Solidarity
with Women has produced scant results in most churches.
In many institutions
there is a lack of ecumenically minded and trained leaders among the
younger generation. This is probably due to the unwillingness of senior
leaders to share power and delegate authority. Ecumenical learning programmes
provide few opportunities for youth participation. Thus, more and more young
people are unable to identify with the ways the ecumenical agenda is set.
Institutionalization
which, on the one hand, guarantees continuity, helps channel resources and
monitor their utilization often, on the other hand, acts as a dampening
influence, curbing dynamism and new initiatives.
Ecumenical learning
cannot happen without proper communication. At present, mass communication
hardware is unavailable to the poor, who do not have access to these tools
even as receivers.
III
Affirmations
Having identified
the above problems, the consultation observed that the ecumenical movement
is often unable to live up to its own vision and that, in many cases, it
has become a "routine movement" devoted mainly to securing vested interests.
Participants therefore
made the following affirmations:
Programmes like
the Ecumenical Decade of Churches in Solidarity with Women, the Programme
to Combat Racism (PCR), or the facilitation of peace initiatives have all
promoted considerable ecumenical learning by bringing people together to
share across boundaries. Efforts to defend the rights of Indigenous peoples,
including their right to self-determination, have led to the creation of
advocacy platforms that contribute to a wider understanding of the churches'
ecumenical task., while those involved have learned ecumenically and aquired
deeper insight into the suffering and hopes of people of other cultures
and traditions.
In spite of the
wide variety of encounters organized in the context of the Decade of Churches
in Solidarity with Women, there is still a significant lack of ecumenical
awareness. Equal opportunities, equal status, and recognition for their
unique contribution to social life in general and to the churches in particular,
is still a far-off dream for most women. Some exceptions to the rule include
churches like those in the Philippines which now have a larger proportion
of women in leadership. It seems that some churches at least have worked
out their traditional bias against women as inferior beings.
By raising awareness
about the effects of racism, casteism, oppression of women, and economic
globalization (in rural as well as in urban settings), encounter programmes
have helped to internationalize local experiences and, thus, to attract
solidarity.
IV
Models and methodologies
After assessing
existing models to discern what works and what needs to be altered, the
consultation tried to identify whether new contexts demand new models and
methodologies in ecumenical encounters.
Two basic models
of encounter were identified: internal encounters within a region or a country,
and encounters and partnerships that cross country, church or continental
boundaries. Obviously, cultural awareness as well as language affects how
the encounter is classified.
Encounters tended
to be either issue-centred, whether short- or long-term (partnerships),
accredited programmes or faculty development programmes.
V
Insights: what has worked well and what has not
The consultation
commented on the following models:
The immersion-incarnation
model has proved to be effective, but has sometimes been implemented in
a token and partial manner. The methodology needs to be applied at the local,
community level. Ecumenical learning encounters like internship programmes
that provide opportunities to learn from the poor, or from people of other
faiths contribute to the growth of solidarity with the oppressed and to
a deeper commitment to ecumenical learning. The fact that immresion-incarnation
programmes contribute to leadership formation on the local level as well
as for those "exposed" is one of the benefits of this model.
Before anyone is
afforded an opportunity for ecumenical exchange encounter outside his/her
own culture, a careful evaluation should be made as to what learning in
partnership has already taken place in the candidate's own context. This
will ensure that only potential real learners are provided with opportunities
to widen their horizons and to use the learning to facilitate others.
Clear definition
of objectives and goals prior to commencement will help avoid overburdening
local hosts in the hosting region.
Faculty and
student exchange programmes are another model of ecumenical encounter.
Many theological institutions have long-established student exchange, faculty
exchange and internship programmes that are essential in order to prepare
future ecumenical leadership. Could more resources be set aside to facilitate
people to people encounters in addition to existing exchange programme among
theologians? For example, could a group of Dalits meet a group of Minjung
to share their stories and plan common strategies rather than bringing Minjung
theologians and Dalit theologians together? The quality and effectiveness
of ecumenical learning in partnership programmes could be greatly enhanced
if the following points were given careful attention: - carefully structured
preparation to ensure that learning in partnership in the candidate/students’
own context has taken place; - preparation for re-entry back to the student's
own original context; - a deliberate plan to share what has been learned
with the sending church/group/institution; - continuous monitoring and follow-up
of the interns/faculty/church workers, agreed upon and implemented by both
the sending and receiving bodies.
Solidarity
and advocacy action model: Advocacy and lobbying, for example, for third-world
debt cancellation, to abolish child labour, to fight against child abuse,
child prostitution and trafficking of women, among others, has provided
ecumenical learning experience sfor large groups of people across national
and international boundaries.
Interfaith
dialogue has been a long-standing way of promoting better understanding
between and among people of different faits. However, rather only than facilitating
formal dialogue, opportunities should be created for working together in
conflict resolution, in advocacy for human rights, in income-generating
activities... This may reduce defensive attitudes and provide opportunities
for spontaneous faith-sharing; the approach applies as well for intra-Christian
faith relations.
