Lent Day 19: Lent as a time of multiplying

What would we like to be in life? Would we want to be a source of healing through our prayers and compassion? Or would we want to be a poison, which spoils everything? Everything is looked upon negatively and those who think in terms of poison would want to poison even the minds of people by sowing seeds of doubt and anger in young and old minds. Poison has its effectiveness. The only problem is that it negates and devalues human life.

Leaven is not like that. It transforms the rest of the flour, almost miraculously. Being leaven in society means that we would sacrifice for the good of society. We would want to provide, add, multiply and value human life. The leavened bread used for communion is a sign of the positive element of community and human life. Communion should lead to life and life in abundance. The very reason for Holy Communion in society should be to be a source of life, miracles, healing, love and compassion.

In St. Luke 13: 21, Jesus speaks of comparing the kingdom of God to something. He says, “It is like leaven which a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was all leavened.” Communion is an act of healing and blessing. Lent is also an act of healing and blessing. Our fasting and lent should be a blessing to our family, community and more so to our society. There should be a multiplication of everything. A multiplication of love, a multiplication of food, a multiplication of compassion, a multiplication of giving and a multiplication of goodness.

The concept of communion and sharing is to break. During lent, we should first of all be the leaven which transforms. We should then break the bread that we are and share. Once in a house, the mother cooked two rotis each for her three children. But that day the middle child was still hungry. He could have grabbed the roti of the third child but he did not. The elder son then divides his remaining roti into two pieces and gives to his younger brother. In the house, the mother is the leaven and the son is the breaker of bread. Till the bread is broken and the food is shared, we will think of the division of the rotis as a just process. So, no one need give to the other because everyone has got two rotis. But hunger creates a problem which is then solved by the division of roti or bread by the elder child.

This lent, let us be the leaven and the breaker of bread. Everyone can take up one role and be a blessing in society. Lent is indeed a time to be broken and to break. May the breaking of bread in our houses and families provide for those who are hungry. Amen.

Break to make

Matthew 14:14-21
14 When he went ashore, he saw a great crowd; and he had compassion for them and cured their sick. 15 When it was evening, the disciples came to him and said, “This is a deserted place, and the hour is now late; send the crowds away so that they may go into the villages and buy food for themselves.” 16 Jesus said to them, “They need not go away; you give them something to eat.” 17 They replied, “We have nothing here but five loaves and two fish.” 18 And he said, “Bring them here to me.” 19 Then he ordered the crowds to sit down on the grass. Taking the five loaves and the two fish, he looked up to heaven, and blessed and broke the loaves, and gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the crowds. 20 And all ate and were filled; and they took up what was left over of the broken pieces, twelve baskets full. 21 And those who ate were about five thousand men, besides women and children.


Jesus finishes his ministry to the crowd and it is close to evening. The disciples request Jesus to send the crowd away so that they may eat something. Jesus asks his disciples to give the people something to eat. They reply that they have only 5 loaves and 2 fish. Jesus requests the crowd to sit on the grass. He then blesses and breaks the loaves and gives to the disciples to distribute. Everyone eats their fill and 12 baskets of broken pieces are collected.

The miracle story clearly talks of a symbolic communion as Jesus breaks bread and his disciples distribute it. The passage though gives a couple of pointers to think about.

Firstly, breaking bread or in essence breaking oneself for others is a clear moment of being able to offer a solution when none is available. The disciples cannot think about a solution to the crisis of having a hungry multitude of people. This is clearly something which comes from Jesus’ unique background and experience on earth. He was born in a manger, grew up as a refugee, and trained as a carpenter. This gave him certain mundane and critical skills which someone born in a palace would not have. In the time of a crisis, this comes to the forefront and he is able to offer a solution to hunger.

Secondly, Jesus’ solution is a third world outlook of life. Jesus’ wish to break bread is an ordinary step to share what he had. This is not what we usually do but definitely something which we can do. Indians are known in the business world and other places as people who can offer solutions when there appear to be none. Jesus does just that. “The wealth of one percent of the richest people in the world amounts to $110 trillion—15x more than the wealth held by the bottom 70 percent.” Yet we struggle with poverty and scarcity. There is enough in the world for everyone and yet the mind to share does not come through.

This is when a third world mentality helps, because it associates with the mentality of Jesus. This is not easy but has to be experienced in several ways. In India, the poor share what they have in a very matter of fact way. Several of us would have noticed how the poor share the food they get on the street with one another. This is a normal reaction.

Many of us have come from an ordinary background. Today things might have changed but we can’t forget that we have been brought up in a culture of sharing. This is our strength. Jesus associated with the same culture. He continued to share even in his richness and continued to give even in his power and glory. This is what is being asked of us today. We have shown our creativity and hard work in offering solutions for business and creating jobs. Can we use the same creativity and hard work for alleviating poverty and suffering? Can we break ourselves like Jesus did and understand that in breaking and sharing lies our richness? Amen.



(Picture courtesy www.saviorsite.com)

Maundy Thursday: A call to be equal

The breaking of bread, sharing of the cup and washing of the feet is perhaps the strongest message of love and sacrifice that comes from Christian belief. It is the message which comes from the top that as disciples and believers we are called to sacrifice ourselves just as Christ sacrificed himself for us. The sacrifice though is not to say that we are to continue serving and be servants but rather that we are called to humiliate and embarrass ourselves in a culture where respect and honour are important.

Jesus’ sharing of bread and drink was profound in itself but more powerful was his message that this sharing was a call to say that all are equal and there is no master but only servant in the kindom of God. The message of servitude has almost been mis- interpreted to suggest that women, the weak and the poor should serve in continuance with the message of Jesus. This message though is more about being equal than anything else.

We forget this in church and in our lives. Why don’t men cut mangoes for pickle for Good Friday rice gruel in church? Why do people make fun of a husband who is concerned and caring about his wife? Why are children in church treated during service like they know nothing and are there to make the numbers than contribute to worship? Why do preachers turn towards the side of women while preaching about the responsibility of serving and why are the rich excused from serving in any manner?

Jesus’ act of washing his disciples’ feet is such a strong act of equality and acceptance that Peter is against this and says that this can never be. Jesus then insists and says that without this there can be no true sharing. Peter then agrees with full enthusiasm. Galatians 3:28 clearly reflects this feeling in the verse “There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.” Hierarchy is done away with and all kinds of classifications and differences based on gender, class, caste, sexuality and other baseless categories are negated. The act of communion and feet washing is thus liberating.

Instead, the most powerful acts of communion and feet washing continue to become acts of expressing and legitimising one’s position in the hierarchy and celebrating that position of power, rather than becoming vulnerable and humiliating and embarrassing oneself for the sake of the true expression of God’s will on earth. Jesus celebrates his decision to become an equal and a co-sufferer rather than an over seer. His act is humiliating and embarrassing as it questions the very notion of hierarchy. The baseless explanation that hierarchy is essential for stability in society is undone by Jesus who does away with hierarchy itself and sacrifices himself for the undoing of hierarchy.

It is humbling to note that Maundy Thursday becomes a reminder that once we have become a part of hierarchy we have to undo hierarchy itself instead of strengthening it for our own gains. Communion and washing of feet should then become the liberating acts that they are supposed to be. This poses a serious challenge to us to become the true followers of Christ who broke hierarchy to come down, break bread, share drink and wash feet. This is the real experience of Maundy Thursday when we don’t get away with just saying that we have to love one another and share but to say that we have to give up the superior places that we have gained, occupied, and unquestioningly accepted. By this we become the table/s of true communion and go through the really embarrassing experience of washing of feet.




Picture courtesy www.sanctussimplicitus.com

An Ecumenical view on Churches view of Eucharist: A critical discussion .

Introduction
This paper is an attempt at looking at the Eucharist, its meaning and relevance for the church today. How relevant is the Eucharist when seen from the view of various churches? Is the Eucharist which is supposed to unite Christians also the divisive element among churches and people? What then is the future of the Eucharist in the context of the changing needs of the church in India? How should churches change in their view of the Eucharist and what changes should be made in the Eucharist so that both churches and the Eucharist complement each other?

Definition
“The Holy Eucharist is a sacrament and a sacrifice. In the Holy Eucharist, under the appearances of bread and wine, the Lord Christ is contained, offered, and received.”1 Furthermore “The Sacrament of Communion is a Holy Sacrament by which the believer eats the Holy Body and Precious Blood of Jesus Christ, presented by the Bread and Wine. This Sacrament has the greatest importance among the Seven Church Sacraments. It is sometimes called the ‘Mystery of Mysteries’ or the ‘Crown of Sacraments’; for all the Sacraments are crowned by the Eucharist.”2

How the Eucharist is interpreted
Eucharist is the Lord’s table or the coming together of people around the Lord’s table commemorating the event of the sharing of bread and wine by Jesus Christ with his disciples. The event is also given importance because it is about the transformation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. The commemoration present in the verse “Do this in remembrance of me” suggests that we have to come together and partake of the elements (the body and blood) to be one in Christ. In the early church there was an understanding that “Thus the bread and wine in the celebration actually united the participant to Christ and to all true Christians. In this way, the eucharist not only symbolized but actually effected the unity of Christians in Christ. Participation in the eucharist, therefore, was the appropriate ritual of adherence to the unity of the church. Those who refused to accept the behavioral obligations which accompanied eucharistic fellowship were outside the church and would be excluded from the kingdom of heaven.”3

Eucharist also suggests a faith proclamation or expression whereby the church declares what it believes and how it believes. The dogma or teaching of the church is expressed clearly and the eucharist forms a clear form of this expression. In this sense the eucharist is a clarity of where one stands (which side of the fence) and what one is prepared to do. The eucharist has become limiting because it is now institutionalized in and therefore only available within gated communities or denominations. What was earlier available in open, free spaces (as in the feeding of the four thousand and five thousand) is now available in limited spaces which are not fit for such eucharist events. Philip Sheldrake explains this phenomenon and says “The trouble is that some versions of a theology of spirituality of the Eucharist concentrate on building up the community of the Church in and for itself. In this case the Eucharist ends up as the celebration of the spiritual equivalent of the well secured “gated communities”…”4 He further says “To live eucharistically beyond the church doors commits us to cross the boundaries of fear and prejudice in an embrace of strangers in the public square in whom we are challenged to recognize the Real Presence of God.”5 In a positive way Eucharist is also a celebration or coming together whereby the people who belong to a particular group or community commune together to celebrate the oneness they possess and the one they believe in. This is a celebration of their history, tradition, story, and growth.

Eucharist is a food for the way whereby church members are given strength to do good and profess their mission statement to the world. The eucharist becomes a great opportunity whereby the people are called forth to do this good by being part of a community of faith. “Whoever eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood has eternal life and I will raise him up at the last day. He who eats this Bread will live forever”6 As food develops the body and keeps it healthy, so too the spiritual food, which is the Holy Body and Blood of Christ, strengthens the soul so that it may grow continually in grace. “It provides remedy to the soul, body and spirit, as we say in the Offertory Mystery: “That they (Holy Body and Precious Blood) may become to us all for participation and healing and salvation for our souls, bodies and our spirits”.7

Eucharist is a memory. Memory can be selective but it is still memory. It is a memory of what has happened. This memory is kept alive so that no one forgets what happened and how we are linked to that. It is a memory that Jesus Christ lived, died and resurrected for us. This has been initiated into our collective memory and the eucharist keeps this memory fresh and alive by making us repeat what we have learnt as children. It is also a memory of the sacrifice through protest of Christ and the similar protests that are present in our own society. The Eucharist becomes a time when we then link the past, present and future through this memory.8

The eucharist is also associated with food and with the great commission of sharing food. Limited means are not the problem but the mind to share what we have makes the eucharist a beautiful act which teaches us that poverty and hunger are human made and not natural. It also teaches us that Christians are called to do away with poverty and hunger and not accentuate it and increase it. Those of us who think that poverty and hunger are not the concern of the church have got the commitment and call of the church totally wrong. One has to therefore know that the act of the eucharist strengthens us to do good and this meal for the way keeps us in the path of goodness. It gives us the promise of eternal life : It provides growth in the Spirit and spiritual perfection and life in Jesus Christ, for He said: “For My Flesh is food indeed and My Blood is drink indeed .... As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who feeds on Me will live because of Me”.9 Jesus was quite explicit with this attitude to share. “When people do come together for a meal, it’s not just to nourish their bodies but to enjoy each other’s company, to build up their relationships, to share what’s been happening in their lives. Food gives life, so the sharing of food is the sharing of life. Jesus invites us to share in his divine life when we accept the sacred food he provides for us. Jesus ate meals with people of all levels of society though he showed a preference for eating with the lowest classes. Not only was this most unusual it was breaking one of the strict taboos of Jewish culture.”10 Monika Hellwig says that “The simple, central action of the Eucharist is the sharing of food- not only eating but sharing.”11

Church and churches in India
The church is a gathering of people who belong to a subscribed faith proclamation. The gathering will be a part of what the group stands for and is a visible union of people. The church also suggests that there is but one church and therefore divisions are not part of this. It also means that there is an attempt to make the church as part of a visible union and all people are brought under this union with or without their permission. The usage of church also suggests that there is a union of different people and communities who are in different places and under different cultures. The usage then could be misleading and will cause a misunderstanding as to what the church actually means. It could also be that several denominations will use it very loosely but actually only mean the existence of their own denominational church.

Churches on the other hand suggest and explicitly state that there are not one but several churches. This could also mean that every church has truth present but will also have things which may not be accepted by other churches. This means that there are several representations of one truth. Just like we try to get an inter-religious understanding of life, we then try to get an inter-denomination, ecumenical view of life. It is also argued whether the churches come under the church.12

Churches in India are divided into the mainline, traditional, ritualistic, free, protestant, Orthodox, Catholic, Pentecostal, free and various other groupings.13 Some accept others unconditionally, conditionally and in and for certain things. In many cases a total coming together and working with each other happens in the time of some sort of persecution from other religions or from the government in the form of any legislation or special measure being followed. Each church then has its own set of beliefs, traditions, liturgy and Eucharistic model. Each church has its own understanding of the nature of the bread and wine during the eucharist and its transformation and the extent of the transformation. Every church also then has the case of acceptance in which some condition is put forth to be a part of the eucharist undertaking whereby the body and blood of Christ is given and shared on the completion of a particular clause. The belief in the nature of the bread and wine and its transformation into the body and blood of Christ itself forms a basis of division instead of unity between churches. This division is played out very strongly in the case of different churches where this becomes a very emotive and strong case of how people understand the very concept of unity.

Churches are also divided on the lines of caste and colour whereby this becomes a basis for exclusive churches which then do not accept people who they feel do not fulfill certain conditions for membership and communion during eucharist. The concept of church brings everyone under one umbrella but the challenge is that it is a concept which is hollow and not true. Unless everyone is brought under the one umbrella, it cannot be one church. The other way of looking at it would be to say that everyone is different in their own way and the struggle is to bring about unity in this diversity. Church, ecclesia and communion becomes a way of understanding the possibilities offered by the church/churches but it also brings out challenges which ask for a critical view of the church as well. This is the case in India as well where there are so many different churches. Each church is unique in its own way and people of one church do not necessarily have much idea of people of other churches and their eucharist service. This short coming many a time prevents any actual ground unity.

Challenges facing the church and possibilities for the future
Can the eucharist lead to unity rather than being a divisive element? Should we thus broaden the very horizon of the eucharist as an official act in the church or should it be seen as much more expansive and elaborate? Has the eucharist from being an act to instil the habit of sharing in people become an act which is a part of institutionalized religion? This is now further and farther from sharing and does not truly and fully make people understand the concept of sharing as part of Christian witness.

As part of the commission of Jesus to his disciples to do this in remembrance of him, the passage in the bible is referred to as the last supper. One critical part of this was the feet washing which Jesus performed. In it he tells Peter that unless Peter allows him to do this, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. This then suggests that feet washing becomes the epitome of humbling oneself and therefore without this humbling and humility one cannot hope to be a part of the true Eucharist experience. Even when we do feet washing it is limited to men and to certain men only. The true spirit of the feet washing goes much beyond this and is suggestive of washing the feet of a representation of people belonging to all genders, communities, regions, and caste.

Eucharist today also has some problems with the concept of purity and untouchability. Purity and untouchability form the basis of caste and race divisions. Anyone who comes to the Lord’s table should be given the body and blood. It is not our decision and prerogative as to who should be given and who should not. We are not supposed to decide the fashion of distribution too. The problem of purity existed in the early church as well. “When Christian rituals of baptism and eucharist were performed outside and in opposition to the unity of the church, however, they not only failed to sanctify but polluted their participants in the same way as the idolatrous ceremonies of Roman polytheism.”14

Different denominations are comfortable within their own comfortable spaces and do not want to risk any sort of problem by thinking outside the box. This forms a problem as it only brings about name sake ecumenism without really taking any risks as far as property, churches and wealth is concerned. The challenge of full unity and the fear of failure prevents small attempts at church unity. “Sykes suggests that Christianity is an 'essentially contested concept' and that what Christian unity amounts to is 'contained diversity'. He characterises Christian identity in dynamic terms: 'Christian identity is … not a state but a process; a process, moreover, which entails the restlessness of a dialectic, impelled by criticism. ' For Sykes, it is imperative that the community in which this process is worked out is a community held in unity by common worship.”15 On the other hand “for Chretian Duquoc, the churches are 'provisional societies', whose provisionality consists in 'the condition of innovation, of continual creation, of presence in changing situations'. He finds that it is 'in the positive acceptance of plurality that the churches, by their capacity for communion, bear witness to the ultimate.”16

Eucharist does bring about the possibility of commonness and unity among churches when common causes are taken seriously. “One of the major concerns of the early Church was for the Eucharist to be a sign of unity, especially when persecution threatened to divide the assembly. Eating from the same loaf, drinking from the same cup, gathered around the same table – these were symbols of a united people. This sense of belonging is still very important today.”17 Communities have to work together for this. “The liturgy is an act of the community. This is even indicated in the etymology of the term "liturgy" - leitourgia - service of the people. It is not a clerical solo performance but a concert of the whole Christian community, in which certain of its members play a special part, in accordance with their different charisms and mandates.”18

Eucharist also shows Jesus breaking himself and showing his brokenness for the sake of people. Unless we break bread we are not the true followers of Jesus. Breaking bread and ourselves is possible when we stand for the right causes. This can be done through liberative ecumenism. Such ecumenism looks at various challenges like caste, gender and ecological violence that face us today. We then come together in a unified expression against such violence.19

Conclusion
One can look at the future from the perspective of what can be done. Stanley Harakas suggests “that the main aim of ecumenism should be to bring about unity and not anything else. It does not involve human knowledge, ground realities but the unity which exists in God.”20 He suggests a moving beyond a dogmatic rigid model for ecumenism through the Eucharist. Gideon Goose on the other hand suggests using emancipatory theory for disassembling structures of dominance, dependence and inequality.21 Erin Michelle Brigham uses the communicative action theory of Jurgen Habermas to suggest how change can be brought about. “Habermas suggests that communicative rationality avoids the pitfalls of relativism and positivism, providing a helpful framework for addressing our post-metaphysical age. On one hand, the framework of communicative rationality acknowledges that truth is historically located and open to critique. On the other hand, it affirms the rational character of knowledge, opening the possibility for reaching a shared truth through inter-subjective understanding.”22 The concept of a people’s Eucharist may also suggest a future course of action. This may come about by a movement from below which has the blessings of the church hierarchy as well.23

1. http://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/eucha1a.htm

2. http://www.copticchurch.net/topics/thecopticchurch/sacraments/4_eucharist.html

3. J. Patout Burns Jr., Cyprian the Bishop, Routledge: London, 2002, p. 172.

4. Philip F. Sheldrake, Explorations in Spirituality. History, Theology and Social Practice, Paulist Press: New Jersey, 2010, p. 176.

5. Ibid.

6. John 6: 54, 58.

7. http://www.copticchurch.net/topics/thecopticchurch/sacraments/4_eucharist.html

8. Margaret Scott, The Eucharist and Social Justice, Paulist Press: New Jersey, 2009, p. 76.

9. John 6:55,57

10. http://theeucharist.wordpress.com/index/chapter-11-eucharist-as-nourishment/

11. Monika K. Hellwig, The Eucharist and the Hunger of the World, Sheed and Ward: Lanham, 1992, p. 2.

12. G.R. Evans, The Church and The Churches, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1994, p. 29.

13. M. Thomas Thankaraj, Indian Christian Tradition in Religions of South Asia, An Introduction, Sushil Mittal and Gene Thursby (eds), Routledge: New York, 2006, p. 195.

14. J. Patout Burns Jr., Cyprian the Bishop, Routledge: London, 2002, p. 132.

15. Nicholas Sagosvy, Ecumenism, Christian Origins, and the Practice of Communion, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 2000, p. 201.

16. Ibid., p. 202.

17. http://theeucharist.wordpress.com/index/chapter-1/

18. http://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/wcc-programmes/unity-mission-evangelism-and-spirituality/spirituality-and-worship/the-eucharistic-liturgy-of-lima

19. Martin L. Daneel, Liberative Ecumenism at the African Grassroots, in Fullness of Life for All: Challenges for Mission in Early 21st Century, Inus Daneel, Charles Van Engen and Hendrik Vroom (eds), Rodopi: Amsterdam, 2003, pp. 324, 325.

20. Stanley Harakas, What Orthodox Christian Ethics Can Offer Ecumenism, Journal of Ecumenical Studies, Volume: 45. Issue: 3, 2010, p. 376.

21. Gideon Goose, Ecumenism and Interreligious Dialogue Seen through an Emancipatory Theory, Journal of Ecumenical Studies. Volume: 42. Issue: 2, Spring 2007, p.280.

22. Erin Michelle Brigham, Communicative Action as an Approach to Ecumenical Dialogue, The Ecumenical Review. Volume: 60. Issue: 3, July 2008, p. 288.

23. A point in case is how the NCCI meeting in April, 2012 experimented with an unconventional method of the Eucharist which resulted in everyone partaking of it.



(This paper was presented in the Ecumenical Christian Centre (ECC), Whitefield, Bangalore to a group of theological students on 15-5-2013)

Picture courtesy http://resurrectionde.org/new/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/PrayBelieveLivetheEucharist-001.jpg

International women’s day. Women as the womb (bread) of life: From the floor to the table

March 8th is being celebrated as the International Women’s Day and women all over the world will get together to do things the way they want it done. To see and let see the way they perceive things. As it comes during the season of prayer and fasting as well, it warrants a Christian response to what this day should then be.

Traditionally women have always been seen as child bearers, as surrogate mothers who help to bring children into the world. Their place has been relegated to a spot which suggests inferiority in comparison with males. The church has never been able to break free of this culture of discrimination and in turn has maintained a male caucus in the form of a halo around the church and its institutions. The bubble (halo) can never be justified and yet it has never been broken because no one has tried to pierce the hollowness it contains.

As we experience (I won’t say celebrate as that would be derogatory to some women who are in constant suffering) the international women’s day it is imperative to suggest a lenten involvement towards the setting right of many wrong’s that have penetrated our society. Fasting and prayer are meant to set right what has gone wrong and therefore we should also set right what is inarguably wrong.

Mother Teresa and sister Alphonso recently have been pushed up to the pinnacle of sainthood and yet these women were never near the table of the Lord, the altar (the holy of holies for Christians). They stood down faithfully on the cold floor waiting for the bread of life to be brought to them. Yet today they have been brought up to glory by a body of men in vestments.

The concept of communion or fellowship among Christians is to come together and partake of the body of the Lord Jesus. It is symbolic and real at the same time. The bread of life is prepared through a process which starts in the field and ends up at the table. So life is inherent and implicit in it. But what about the womb of life present in each woman? The life which begins in communion and ends with the creation of life. Indeed the womb (bread) of life! And yet women are kept at a safe distance. Life is kept away from life!

So this women’s day my prayer is simple. Let us as men move away from the two life giving realities of this world; the bread of life and the womb of life. Let there be a connection and a unification of the floor and the table. Let life meet life.




(Logo from http://www.bloggersunite.org/event/international-womens-day)