Posted April 5, 2006
What Do We Mean When We Say International Priests Need To Be Inculturated?
Taken From the Study International Priests in America
[Already cited on our website]
by Dr. Seung Ai Yang
In addressing the question of “how” priests of other countries should be
brought in, this study reports the words of many who emphasize the
importance of the acculturation and orientation of international priests. As
much as I agree on its importance, I believe that we must deliberate on the
meaning of “acculturation” first if we don’t want to perpetuate the
postcolonial tragedy.
What do we mean by acculturation of international priests? If we mean that
we teach them to think and behave just like “American” Catholics, it is not
only unfeasible but also unethical. It is unfeasible because one’s patterns
of thought and behavior are cumulatively shaped by one’s cultural location
through a long shared history and traditions. The cultural locations of
international priests and American Catholics are quite different. It is
unethical because it often requires international priests to deny who they
are and to abandon the “home” traditions that have nourished them. This is
actually a hidden expression of cultural imperialism patronizing the
international priests.
If acculturation means a process that helps international priests to be
capable of ministering to Catholics in America and to advance the mission of
the church while keeping their integrity as who they are, then it must
happen in both directions. For the sake of convenience, let us imagine an
American parish of predominately white members that receives an
international priest. Both the international priest and the parish community
need to learn the differences of their cultural contexts to understand why
they think and behave in the ways they do. Understanding the different
contexts will involve self-reflection. The international priest might find
that he is internalizing the colonists’ version of Christianity as well as
the mindset of colonist insisting that it is “universal.” The parish
community could find that they are, in site of themselves, racists who judge
people based on skin color and have a tendency to look down upon different
cultures and ideas, believing that their own is superior or absolutely
correct. Both sides might realize that when one blames the other for
narrow-mindedness and rigidity, it is actually oneself who is narrow-minded
or rigid.
The self-reflections, then, enable us to understand why we think and behave
directly and to make room for listening and acknowledging different voices
and cultures. We then find the need to be willing to negotiate to find our
common ground. The negotiation should be made on the basis of the gospel and
the mission of the church, which will lead the people not to impose their
own culturally bound ideas as absolutely correct or “universal.” We will
also be able to understand that the differences among us are often God’s
gracious gift to us to recognize the limitedness of our nature and to
recover from it by learning from each other and working together. Then we
will no longer hate or blame others for our differences, but will be able to
give thanks to God, who graciously provided us with abundant diversity.
|
