MULTICULTURAL RELIGIOUS EDUCATORS:”A relational model of dynamic pluralism encountered at a water-hole in John 4:1-42.”
FR. Vinh-Quang Tran. Med., B.th.
The following is a part of my research project for the degree of Master of Education (Religion Education) in 1994. In the third week of Lent, we will listen to the story of the Samaritan at the well. So I present this work as a part of our reflection on how to develop our faith in a multicultural society. This reflection focuses on an encounter between the Samaritan woman and Jesus and on developing an alternative model for religious educators in a multi-faith/-cultural/-ethnic society such as in Australia.
In what follows, I will not try to carry out a biblical exegesis of John 4:1-42 [1]. Rather, I will identify some characteristics of a religious multicultural educator, based on my understanding of John 4:1-42, and I have named it: “A relational model of dynamic pluralism encountered at a water-hole.”[2]
Before I present its characteristics, I want to highlight some similar situations between this encounter and our Australian multicultural education.
1. SIMILARITIES BETWEEN TWO SITUATIONS.
The situation of this encounter is very similar with the Australian multicultural education situation in a number of ways:
1.1. Similar contexts.
John 4:1-42 was written in the context of rejection and hostility as is illustrated in its setting. (Jn 4:1-3). Jesus moves away from Judea, a place of political and religious problems, to Galilee via Samaria, a place where Jesus encounters the Samaritan woman, a dynamic experience.
This situation is very similar to the plight of many people who have left their home-land because of political, economical, religious problems, to live in Australia, a new adventure, to encounter many different cultures and religions.
1.2. Breaking a cultural and religious barrier to establish a new relationship.
Jesus, as a male Jew, the Samaritan, as a female, did not mix because of their religious beliefs and cultural law. (v.9). However, Jesus breaks this ritual taboo and communicates with her on an equal basis by respecting who she is and her territory [3]. In asking her “give me a drink” (v.6), Jesus acknowledges her as a necessity for his well being and even for his survival.[4] Jesus and the woman break down the wall of division for their own benefit and in fact for the benefit of all the world as we will see.
This is a real challenge to our current political, migrant and multicultural education debate. In our Australian history, White people invaded Australia in 1788 and treated Aborigines badly. The Assimilation policy implemented and expected that all ethnic people became Australian Anglo-Celtic. The ethnic people responded by establishing a “ghetto group”.
This is also a real challenge to our modern view of the person as an extreme form of individualism and competition.[5] This view is still transmitted as we often hear in our education language with phrases such as “personal fulfillment, self-esteem, doing one”s own thing or the development of human excellence”.
In John 4:1-42, Jesus and the Samaritan woman set an intercultural/-racial/-religious/-political/-gender challenge. Like Jesus and the woman, we must break this extreme form of individualism, racialism and competition. We must have the courage to deal with our historical mistakes of the past and learn how to relate to each other as Jesus did in John 4:1-42.
In this quest, the water-hole becomes a meeting place of mutual understanding for diverse cultures, races and religions, and Jesus becomes the example of “God-In-Mutual Relationship”.[6] I hope that Jesus and the Samaritan can assist us to journey in this dry land of Australia to eternity.
2. THE MOST EFFECTIVE MODEL FOR MULTICULTURAL RELIGIOUS EDUCATORS: “A relational model of dynamic pluralism encountered at a water-hole in John 4:1-42”.
This relational model has the following characteristics:
2.1. Respecting others as equal human beings.
In a dialogue about the water, there is a real recognition and respect: Jesus and the Samaritan woman are equal in power. She has one kind of water; He has another. He is recognised as a male Jew, she as a female Samaritan. After establishing a minimal level of equality of gender and respect for who they are and what they have to offer, the dialogue proceeds with fruitful results: She asks for the “Water welling up to eternal life” (v.14).
2.2 The well or water-hole.
The well is the biblical term for a meeting place, a place of encounter, a place of courtship, a place where a relationship can be developed. The water-hole is an Australian Aboriginal symbol for the source of spiritual and physical life. It is a place from which come the spirits of the new born offspring and to which their spirits will return when they die. I relate this concept to the Australian Multicultural Religious Education (AMRE). “Water-hole” or religious education in Catholic schools is an environment where people with diverse cultural and religious backgrounds can be multi-culturally and multi-religiously educated, where people genuinely respect, accept and trust each other, where their identity and personality can mutually be developed [7] and their diverse spiritualities can expand and grow.
2.3 Their encounter is developed gradually in many different stages.
There is a gradual revelation of Jesus in John 4:1-42: A Jew, a giver of Living water, a prophet, a Messiah. People living in Australia have gradually learnt how to recognise each other through many stages: Invasion of the Land, Assimilation, Integration, Multiculturalism.
There is another secular and divine stage in the story. After establishing a human relationship, (vv. 5-19), Jesus invited the woman to establish a divine relationship in worshipping the Father through Jesus himself. (vv. 20-26). Then, she was transformed with her new mission: “She put down her water jar and hurried back to the town to tell the people” (v.28). Truly, this is a multicultural/-political/-racial/-religious/-genders encounter in action !
2.4. Making a distinction between Jesus as a Jew and Jesus as the Saviour of the World.
As a Jew, Jesus encountered the woman with mutual respect. But only as the “Saviour of the world”, can Jesus offer to the Samaritan woman what she cannot find any where else.
Due to a lack of this distinction, white people often consider themselves as “Jesus”, (the Saviour of the world), who have more power and higher technology. So, therefore, are better than others. This mentality is a product of modern individualism. It is a product of an individualistic and self-centred culture. These are not compatible with and are contrary to, the spirit of the teaching of Jesus, as we shall see in the following section.
2.5. Relational approach.
Instead of competitive, individualistic and self-centred approaches, I use a relational approach and the Chinese concept of “Yin -Yang” [8]and “The doctrine of the Mean”,[9] in interpreting this gospel. That is, whether White, or Black, Christian or Buddhist, Male or Female, if we are true to ourselves, we must not go to one extreme and we must realise that we need others to be fully developed, and without our contributions, others cannot be fully developed: “No man (sic) is an island”.
2.6. Counselling techniques.
Jesus uses different counselling techniques in John 4:1-42. Jesus helps the Samaritan woman to discover for herself who He is by initiating a dialogue with her and this helps her gradually to respond to Him in faith.[10]
The woman”s recognition of Jesus as a prophet (v.19) leads her to raise the most burning religious issue between Samaritans and Jews, namely the place where God should be worshipped.[11] Using different counselling techniques again, Jesus leads her into a deeper and more spiritual dialogue. She gradually responds in faith to Jesus as the Messiah (vv. 25,29)
I believe that this gradual and skillful counselling technique is an important aspect of on-going multicultural religious education today. These techniques are the foundation-stone to encountering productively. Only as a Saviour of the world can Jesus offer to us an alternative direction in AMRE.
2.7. An alternative direction.
As I have already begun to illustrate, Jesus, not just as a Jew, but as the Saviour of the world, can offer our multicultural education an alternative, as we now study the dialogue about the place of true worship. (vv. 20-26.)
There is a new shift in this passage. The woman acknowledges Jesus as a prophet. This leads the woman to discuss a true place of worship. At that time, the Samaritans” worship grew out of national and political motivations. And Jesus affirms her belief: “For salvation comes from the Jews” (v.22), but quickly, he makes his subsequent statement in v.23 about the “hour” coming when “the true worship is neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, and the true worshippers will worship the Father “in spirit and in truth”. This “the hour will come — in fact it is here already” (v.23) means that, in Jesus, the type of perfect worship sought by the Father is already present ! (cf. also 2:13-25 and 11:25 and Peter Ellis, 1985, page 71).
This helps us to understand what Jesus says to the woman : “I who am speaking to you” (v. 25) which is ultimately revealed at the “Hour of Jesus” death” on the cross. This is the ultimate revelation of God”s love for the whole world, but not yet fully completed. This “I am He” is a divine, transcendent manifestation of God. This “I am He” is our alternative.
3. CONCLUSION.
This understanding challenges our current multicultural educational and political debate: Who should learn from whom ? It transforms our approach to multicultural education, especially to multicultural religious education. Only in Jesus as the Saviour of the world, can our AMRE be fulfilled. We, standing before God, must leave room for wonder and awe before the mystery of God working through different people, different cultures, in different languages, in different life situations and most fundamentally, through the death and resurrection of Jesus on the cross. This mystery is the eschatological one which is completely revealed in Jesus but not fully yet.
This is hard for some educators who are self-centred in education. They are like the disciples of Jesus in John”s gospel. They don”t understand what Jesus did with the Samaritan woman. [12] Sometimes, they are too dogmatic and self-centred in their approach to life and to education. They tend to quickly criticize those who are different from themselves, who teach religion with multicultural and transcendental emphasis.
This study offers an alternative approach to AMRE today. While we are living on earth, we should learn about and from each other as Jesus did with the Samaritan woman. Only in Jesus (as a Jew and the Saviour of the world), can our multicultural religious education be transformed and fully developed. We can only hope for this Australian multicultural Christian religious education, if each one of us learns from Jesus, who is the model of religious educator, by always putting the other first. “He comes to serve, not to be served”. This is a true personal, relational and transcendental model in life and in education.
[1] For exegesis of this passage please consult F. Ellis (1985); James McPolin (1984) and R. Schnakenburg (1968).
[2] I rather use the water-hole symbol which speaks more powerfully to Australians. We currently are very conscious of Aboriginal cultural significances.
[3] The well was understood biblically and culturally to be a place that belonged to women.
[4] “Jesus, tired by the journey, sat straight down by the well” (Jn. 4:6)
[5] Charles Taylor presents a proper view of our modern individualism. Taylor suggests that neither total rejection, nor enthusiastic acceptance, of the modern view of the human person is appropriate. Taylor says,”one has to see what is great in the culture of modernity, as well as what is shallow or dangerous.” (Taylor 1991, pages 120-121)
[6] This concept is borrowed from Denis Edwards (1994, page 7) when he reflects on Charles Taylor”s concept of “personal authenticity” in modern society.
[7] See Ferguson”s account on searching our own identity together as I presented in chapter I, part 2.2.5)
[8] The Chinese believe that the universe is full of opposites which they call “Yin and Yang”. The healthiest approach is not to destroy one or the other, but to embrace them and unite them to form a harmonious whole. These two concepts give rise to the spirit of inclusiveness, of relatedness and seeing things as a whole.
[9] This concept guards against going toward extremes and seeks a way to ease tensions between differing views or forces.
[10] For example, in the dialogue of exchanging water: Jesus asks for water to drink, (v.7). Then he introduces a living water. She thinks of the fresh, flowing, spring water (v.12). Jesus reveals to her: “A spring of water welling up to eternal life” (v.14). Then suddenly, Jesus changes the topic: ” Go, call your husband, and come here” (v16) But Jesus helps her to realise and admit the truth that she does not have a husband: “you spoke the truth there” (v.18). After establishing this, Jesus helps her to discover more deeply who He is as she says:” Sir, I perceive that you are a prophet.” (v. 19).
[11] I will explore this aspect shortly.
[12] “The disciples returned and were surprised to find Jesus speaking to a woman, though none of them asked, “what do you want from her ?” or ” why are you talking to her ?”” (v.27).
