02 November 2022
Maryknoll Father William LaRousse, Assistant Secretary-General of the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences, says questions have been raised against the structure of the FABC founded 50 years ago.
The federation began to discuss whether its structure, which was laid out 50 years ago, is still relevant to serve the national conferences considering the changed socio-political realities of Asia, says the 69-year priest based in Bangkok.
Father LaRousse, a New Yorker who came to Asia four decades ago, is the point of contact for FABC matters. He spoke with UCA News on Oct. 23 on the sidelines of the two-week-long first general conference, which concluded on Oct. 30.
In the following interview, the missionary priest explains the current state of the federation and the changes discussed.
Why a general conference now?
There never has been a general conference earlier. The FABC structure is that every four years we hold what is called the plenary assembly, which has fewer numbers of bishops attending. It has a specific theme. We have had about 11 of those already. Each plenary assembly has officials of national bishops' conferences plus delegates from the conference depending on the size of the conference.
The country's oldest Catholic icon helps its people channel their faith to deal with political, social, and economic circumstances
The tombs of Fathers Krick and Bourry, martyred 169 years ago, are in the Tibet area of China, where no priest can go
This general conference is different. We invited every national Church to send a higher number of bishop delegates. This is a general conference, meaning there is not one particular theme like that of a plenary assembly. It covers the whole situation of the Church in Asia.
What were your criteria for selecting these delegates?
One criterion was to limit the numbers from India and the Philippines — because they are the largest ones — so that other smaller ones could attend. Every country was invited. For example, a unified bishops’ conference like Laos and Cambodia was specifically told that they should have at least one delegate from each country. It was the same for smaller nations such as Malaysia, Singapore, and Brunei. But Brunei has only three parishes and three priests, so they could not send anyone.
The conferences named their delegates. There was a designated number of delegates for each conference, depending on its size. But then again, it was not strictly on size because if it was based on size India and the Philippines, which have more than half of the dioceses in Asia, would have majority delegates.
What's the idea behind having a general conference?
The idea of having a general conference started in 2014 when Cardinal (Oswald) Gracias (of Mumbai) was the president. He then met with the Episcopal Conference of Latin America (CELAM) and MISEREOR (Catholic Central Agency for Development Aid), which were involved with the Latin American conferences. He considered CELAM as a kind of model, and the idea was to have a general conference (in the CELAM model).
The preparation took a few years, and then finally when they got around to it, someone said suggested having it in 2020, the 50th anniversary of FABC. It was seen as a good occasion to hold it. The thinking about it started in 2014 but particular planning started only in 2018. But then Covid came and it was postponed.
Is there a plan to remodel FABC after CELAM?
No. The CELAM model of the general conference is what is kind of being followed here with some changes. The CELAM conference has a duration of four weeks. Nobody would be interested in spending four weeks. Even the two-and-a-half-week duration of this conference was too much. An FABC plenary would be around 5 to 7 days at the most. So, the duration of this meeting is much longer (than any usual gathering of Asian bishops).
The meeting is going very well. When they arrived, many said that this meeting is too long. But by the end of the second week, no one's talking like that. I think people are kind of enjoying it and are participating in it. You can see that everyone is very involved in the discussions. So that's a good sign.
Why the CELAM model general conference? Is it because the FABC model has not been working?
The current model of the FABC is 50 years old. Reality has changed. The FABC started 50 years ago, and so did many bishops’ conferences. Now, bishops’ conferences have been around for a long time, and they are much more solid.
The question is: What do they want? What do they need? The structure of the FABC is the question. Is it properly serving all the conferences? It’s these questions that have come up in the past couple of years. What is going to happen is still unclear.
Is there any plan for restructuring the FABC?
That is one of the side topics that may be addressed afterward. It will be brought up here, but it will be addressed after the conference concludes. A committee was formed to come up with ideas. They are meeting one of these days. They will have some brainstorming with others to know what they think on the subject.
How are your life and work in Bangkok?
I started in the FABC as a secretary of its Office of Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs in 2018. I was asked by Cardinal Gracias to go to Hong Kong to be the one in the office there. We are now based in Bangkok.
The opportunity to be here in Bangkok is good in the sense that many meetings have always been held in Thailand because of (its low) cost. Also because of the easy flight connections. Time wise, Bangkok is in the middle of the FABC time zone, and visas to Thailand are generally not that difficult.
What are the biggest achievements of the FABC in the last 50 years?
I think the biggest achievement and impact of the FABC is the concept of dialogue of life that has been picked up by others. Cardinal (Michael Louis) Fitzgerald, (an expert on Christian–Muslim relations) himself mentioned that the idea of a dialogue of life came from Asia and was picked up by the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue in some of their documents.
The very first FABC assembly in 1974 came up with the triple dialogue — dialogue with religions, cultures, and with the poor. That has remained as kind of a thing. Now the idea is, maybe, we should expand it. But this triple dialogue has been a kind of a mainstay of the FABC.
Is there any pastoral plan to tackle the issues affecting the Asian church such as increasing fanaticism and poverty?
Those things have been mentioned. The whole geopolitical situation of Asia was discussed. Some of the newer ones discussed include the level of digitalization.
But the FABC does not have any jurisdiction (over the individual bishops’ conferences). So, each conference would have its own plan. I think it has only an advisory jurisdiction because of the bishops here. They hear one another and things like that. When they go back to their conferences, they are bringing with them this experience.
The FABC does not directly impact people on what it does. It should impact the conferences and then the dioceses of the conference. It has to cascade down to people. Because the FABC is more about animation and motivation.
We could say, for example, synodality, bringing the conferences together, and communication among the conferences. They learn from one another, and they encourage one another. I think that is a big thing. So, the FABC is not intended to run things.
What about the synodal process of the Church in Asia?
We are waiting for the Document for the Continental Stage of the synod from the Vatican. That document is going to come out this week. (The Vatican released that document on Oct. 27, three day after he spoke). We have to plan on, how to address that document and what they want from the continental response.
The continental response begins with the dioceses and conferences. We would have to look at the synodal documents (from each country) and then find a way of coming together to make a unified response to it. So, when that comes out, we have to plan for another big conference which will not be this big though.
But when you have the voice of so many people brought in, everyone will say, “Well, what I said is not there.” To synthesize all the responses into 10 pages is a huge task. For example, India has more than 170 dioceses. If you have to synthesize the responses into 10 pages, that is a lot of work. From all these country reports, I presume we have to have the continental response.
Share your comments
