(The Capuchin, Autumn 1991, pp. 5-6)
Ask an Irish man or woman the question, ‘What does the word “mission” mean to you?’ and the answer would likely be that there’s a collection for the missions in the church every now and then. If you probed a little further, you’d probably find that most Irish people have a relative or friend who is connected with missionary work in some way.
If you continued to examine the matter, you’d probably find that most people think of the missions in terms of giving and more giving. Missionaries are seen as giving themselves, their time and their effort to the missions while laypeople at home support them with prayer, money and perhaps technical assistance.
But do we receive anything from the missions, or is it all one-way traffic? I’ve often asked myself that question, and, from a personal standpoint, I think I’ve received a lot from being a missionary. I’ve learned to be patient and to know that the slowest change of all is a change in human attitudes. Structures and institutions can be changed quickly but a change in the human heart is the work of a lifetime.
In addition, I‘ve learned to value relationships more than getting jobs done. It’s more important to spend time with people, especially in listening to them – real listening, I mean, with the heart as well as the ears – than in organizing them to do things, even if those things are good and need to be done.
I’ve also learned to define more clearly what it means to be a priest. There was a school of thought in missionary circles that whatever needed to be done in a local community the priest should be involved in doing it. If it was managing schools, organizing development projects, or providing a one-man transport service, the missionary, priest or brother, should do it, and a great deal more besides. I don’t look at it like that now. I’ve learned that there’s a huge difference between doing things for people and doing things with people; it’s a difference between management and partnership. I see a missionary as being more of a motivator than an organizer, someone who helps to shape relationships rather than Mr. Fixit. However, it’s not an either-or choice, but a matter of priorities about both.
Looking more broadly at the question, I think that the Church in Zambia offers something to the Church in Europe if it has the humility to be willing to learn and receive.
The basic unit of the Church in Zambia is not the parish or even the local church but what is called the small Christian community, a group of about 12 to 15 people who meet weekly in one another’s homes for prayer and sharing in their understanding of living the Christian life. The people who come to these meetings are a cross-section of the community, including some who are simply enquiring about the faith, some who have lapsed and some non-Catholic Christians. They discuss the common problems of life that concern them and search for ways in which their faith can guide them and also serve as a spur to practical action. Using the bible as a constant guide they try to grow in understanding of the faith, to worship and work together, helping each other and the local community.
Could such an idea, suitably adapted, be of benefit to Irish Catholics, helping them to develop a sense of responsibility for the Church and participation in it? Could it help to rebuild a sense of community among the anonymity of city life? Could it be a forum for adult Christian education at local level within reach of all? Could it be the mainspring for developing lay leadership in the Church? I believe it could.
Small Christian communities require only the barest minimum of structures, organization and money. They are not a great deal more structured than having a few friends around to your home where you talk about things over a cup of tea. Take that as a starting point, add to it some prayer and shared study or reflection on the bible, a religious book, or a short simple talk, together with an openness to receive newcomers, and you’re off to a flying start. After all, that’s more or less how the early Christians began in New Testament times.
If the young Churches of Africa have something to teach the old Churches of Europe, that’s the way it should be… if we are ready to receive it. Saint Francis would surely have agreed.