Lent Day 8: Clean and pure as the antithesis of Lent

St. Luke 5: 12-13 showcases a man full of leprosy who asks Jesus to make him clean. Jesus responds positively and touches him and says “be clean.” I wonder how a man full of leprosy manages to get near to Jesus and the crowd he is addressing. It either happened by mistake, or the person managed to sneak in, or Jesus went to the place he stayed. Because people with leprosy were asked to stay away from others and were also asked not to touch anyone. There is a stigma of presence, touch and disease. However, the person gets close to Jesus.

Jesus’ miracle is special because he doesn’t just say “be clean” but he stretches out his hand, touches him and says, be clean. The element of acceptance, overcoming of the stigma of disease and the diseased and the move to break the rule of not touching by doing that itself comes out clearly in this passage. While we concentrate on the miracle and the curing of the person, there is much more in this passage than meets the eye.

Today, leprosy is curable and leper colonies and absolute stigma is not there anymore. But disease itself still has a stigma. People are reluctant to discuss their sickness and disease and reluctant to ask for prayers because they are judged. Others weave theories of why someone fell sick and the theories themselves are judgmental. Instead of holding people close and telling them that God loves them, we push them away and hope we never get the sickness. Skin diseases and diseases whereby the face is affected, hair loss happens, people lose weight and look different are still handled with discomfort.

Jesus only repeats what the person asks for. The person affected by leprosy asks to be made clean and Jesus answers in the affirmative. But the person does not ask Jesus to touch him. He is repeating what society would have told him. “You are not clean. So, stay away.” He then requests Jesus to make him clean. Jesus does not disappoint him but then adds the main thing, which is touch. The people did not want to touch the person and Jesus touches him. This is the essence of the miracle. It is not that Jesus made him clean but that Jesus touched him.

During lent, we are asked to purify ourselves and to make ourselves clean. These usages are dangerous and an antithesis to lent and the kingdom of God. Even today, people belonging to lower castes and women as a whole are kept away from churches and the altar. The idea behind it is purity and cleanness or shall we say, the notion of lack of purity and cleanness. Many women do not come to church or even if they come, do not come forward for communion or blessing, if they have their menstruation (menstrual cycle or period). Women are also kept away from the holy of holies due to this concept of impurity.

It is sad that the very own sons of such women argue for exclusion of their own mother because of this notion of impurity. Lent should be a time when we shed the impure and unjust thoughts in our mind and not in our body. It is a time when the church and the church community should be open and accepting to everyone. No one should be kept out on the basis of such wrong thoughts of impurity, disease and stigmas. Amen.    

(Photo credit: artofendingstigma.com)

 

Don’t discount the miracle of touch for healing

Touch and touch therapy have been found to be one of the most effective ways of healing. So much that many hospitals these days are teaching nurses touch therapy and many governments are releasing funds for more research and training of touch therapy. This touch is also called therapeutic touch involving touch with and without actual coming into contact with the body. The energy field of the body and the coming together of the energy fields of two bodies and the resulting healing using touch and channelizing of energy has been talked about for many years now. But what about the church and is the church using the power of touch or has the church discounted the power of touch and through that the power of healing?

The priest in church is asked to pray for church members and this is usually done by touching the forehead of a believer or a person who has come to church or whom you have seen in an outside setting. I have come across many people from other religions who have requested prayer even though they were seeing me for the first time. I have come to understand that this is not my greatness or power but the positive energy of spirituality through touch that they are seeking. It is not the power of my hands but the power of touch which Jesus has so effectively shown us through his ministry. This power is so much there and effective. It does not belong to the priest to use according to his whims and fancies but rather to be given freely just like the grace and mercy of God is given to us by God freely. In Daniel 10:18 it is written “Then this one with human appearance touched me again and strengthened me.”

Touch also in church includes much more than the touch for prayer and blessing. It includes our looks, gestures and all that we do while conducting ourselves in church. This leads to touch. Touch is not what we should be ashamed of or reluctant to give but should rather be a part of our conduct in and outside the church. If we are reluctant to touch it means we are reluctant to accept the person we come across and that means we are discriminating against people. Touch has now become such a difficult thing in church because people are watching when two people use the magic and miracle of touch to heal each other. They may pass comments or view touch with judgment even when it is one of the most powerful miracles we can initiate on a regular basis. It is amusing that the church does not allow women to be a part of the ministry of the church and at the same time will also judge a priest who is using the healing power of touch irrespective of gender in the church.

There is also the problem in society of abuse using touch when men without permission touch children and women leading to abuse. The fear of abuse is also making the church and its people paranoid about touch which is such a shame. Touch can only be upon the comfort and the permission of the person we are touching. Any other touch is not acceptable as it will not bring about healing. Even the touch between husband and wife and parents and children has to be with comfort and permission as otherwise it will only be the touch and expression of power and not healing.

What was so special about Jesus’ ministry? Was it that he healed so many people? Yes, but what did he do before the healing process was initiated. He touched people and in all cases he touched the most unlikely people including women, lepers, the blind and the lame. They were all people Jesus was not supposed to touch. In Mark 8:22 we must note what the people did “And they came to Bethsaida and they brought a blind man to Jesus and implored Him to touch him.” In Luke 18:15 touch even brings discomfort to Jesus’ disciples as we see “And they were bringing even their babies to Him so that He would touch them, but when the disciples saw it, they began rebuking them.” In Mark 7:33 “Jesus took him aside from the crowd, by himself, and put His fingers into his ears, and after spitting, He touched his tongue with the saliva.” And in Matthew 8:3 “Jesus stretched out His hand and touched him, saying, "I am willing; be cleansed. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.” There are many other examples which prove that Jesus touched and touched and touched and thereby the miracle of healing was so prevalent among different kinds of people. He did not leave anyone out.

Today a priest, a missionary, a lay leader and any person who has any role in ministry is given a list of people who are not supposed to be touched. Of course this is not a written down official list but a list which is culturally passed on and expected to be followed. What happens in the process is that the power of healing is lost in church and in the area of ministry. This is sad and wrong. Jesus’ touch was acceptable to the people he touched. He did not touch inappropriately and unwantedly from the perspective of those he touched. He also submitted himself to touch. Such is the healing of touch!

Touch does not just come from above from the bishop, then to the priest, then to the deacon and then to the lay leader. The healing power of touch plays around in various kinds of relationships. This is what we have to revive in church and in the sphere of the church. For that we have to see people equally as otherwise touch will become a very difficult thing to practice. The father and mother have to touch their child/children, the wife her husband and the husband his wife, the child the parent, the siblings, friends and in all kinds of relationships touch will enhance healing and happy living. Even while praying we are unknowingly touching. Folded hands mean that one hand is touching the other. Some hold on to the table, some to the book and some elsewhere. We are all touching because it is part of the healing process of the body.

Isn’t it time we brought back touch? Why are we reluctant to practice healing through touch? Isn’t it because we have unequal relationships, discriminatory relationships and the sins of gender, caste and class posing hurdles? This needs to be corrected in the church context and we have to become Jesus people who use the power of touch to question wrong notions in society and through that perform miracles. Each one of us is a miracle worker. God has given us the unique power of being a miracle worker and the power is in our hand. But unless we exercise it and unless we use it unabashedly without any hurdle we can’t become Christ’s church. We will just continue to be collectives of people who come and go without following Jesus in particular!




Picture www.npr.org

It is time to root out the rampant misuse of morality from the church

The Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church has put a good foot forward by encouraging congregations to have 35% reservation for women in the managing committee of the church. When we read into it what it means is that all women and men can attend the general body of the church. Thus far women are not allowed to attend the general body as voting members unless a woman has lost her husband.

Even though these are good steps on behalf of the church one does get the feeling that the church which includes priest leaders, lay leaders and church members are not completely ready for equality in the church even though the church believes in equality of gender as there is nothing like inequality in the theology of the church. Despite this we can see that all spheres of the church are very unwelcoming and unequal for women and men. What could be the reason if the church maintains that the church believes in equality of both women and men? One of the strongest factors is morality.

Morality apart from being a framework for living is the form of standards for life and is also a way of drawing lines and saying for sure that this is what the church believes in and there is no other option. It is also the measure through which groups or certain people are prevented from being who they are and as they want to be. Take a look at the unending list of things starting from childhood.


Moral standard
1. Girls have to cover their head.
Reason
1. 1. It is mentioned clearly in the bible.
Flip side
1. 1 Cor 11:15- “but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering.” Meaning that women already have covering and don’t need extra covering.

Moral standard
2. Girls/women should not pollute the church by their presence if they are having their period because they need to undergo the time for recovering and purity.
Reason
2. This is what is said in Leviticus 15.
Flip side
2. Read Leviticus 15 again. The first part talks about the discharge of men and what they should do. Which church talks about this?

Moral standard
3. Women should dress properly.
Reason
3. The bible says so.
Flip side
3. 1 Peter 3:2-5 says “Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight. For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful.”It is suggesting the inner beauty of women and not necessarily what to wear and what not to wear!

Moral standard
4. Disease is brought about by an immoral life style by women and men. Women are also now smoking and drinking like men!
Reason
4. Women should be modest, and cancer and other diseases are increasing because of an immoral life style followed by men and women.
Flip side
4. In Mathew 8 Jesus heals a person with leprosy, heals the helper of the Centurion who is paralyzed and heals Peter’s mother in law. 8:17 says ““He took up our infirmities and bore our diseases.” Jesus never associates disease with sin and morality but rather heals.

Moral standard
5. Women and men should always live within the framework of marriage. If you are unmarried you are susceptible to an immoral and sinful life. People in church always have an eye on a man and a woman talking, to ensure they stay within moral standards of the church.
Reason
5. The bible is always moral conscious. Proverbs 12:4 says “A wife of noble character is her husband’s crown but a disgraceful wife is like decay in his bones.” So morality is important.
Flip side
5. In John 8:7 Jesus says “Let anyone among you without sin be the first to through a stone at her.” Further Jesus says again in Mathew 5:28 “But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” If so then what difference is it going to make by watching people and commenting on their single hood or marriage?

I can go on and on about different forms of moral standards and moral policing in the church. But does the bible and does God through Jesus and the Holy Spirit expect us to fulfill moral standards and be morally solid or does God want us to be God’s creation reflecting God’s love, assurance, equality and justice in this world?

When we examine different rules and regulations in the church we understand that many of them are a result of morality and how we look at people with the lens of morality. Women are usually on the receiving end of this but men also find themselves stuck in a moral debate of what is good and bad. There has been a call by the World Council of Churches to root out caste from the church. Caste, gender and other oppression are also a result of moral standards of purity, colour and piety. The church then has to also address the issue of morality in the church to make the church closer to what the early church was and also near to what Jesus envisioned it to be.






Picture credit:christpantokrator.blogspot.com

Left, right, left: The impending crisis of religion in a Left majority polity

The Left is back in power in Kerala. Comrade Pinarayi Vijayan is at the helm of affairs and Comrade Achuthanandan is rumoured to being given an advisor’s role with a cabinet rank. The public may have a lot of opinions on who should be Chief Minister and who not but ultimately it does depend on the decision of the party or coalition who has won the election. We may even have our own theories and opinions about the ministers without actually knowing them but it is within their rights to be given the chance to head a particular ministry.

As a church member what intrigues me though is the way that churches and other religions have conducted themselves during the course of this election and afterwards. On the one hand various churches find the Left alliance anathema and completely against the church values and on the other hand you also have churches or church leaders, priests and laity who have embraced the Left because of a perceived closeness to the Kindom values preached by Jesus. Many have given press conferences, preached against and even openly threatened candidates in their own religious way. Some of those candidates lost while some others won. Interestingly many churches have followed the easy route of immediately claiming the victory of candidates who have won, as theirs, and also claiming to be the spoil sport in the case of certain losses. We do not know how far this is true but what we do know is that there is a tendency to side with the party or alliance that has won.

This is now what is also happening in Kerala. The BJP has campaigned hard and won a lot of votes but only one seat, the Congress is cooling its heals waiting for a come back the next time around and the CPI(M) led Left alliance is basking in glory with a well-deserved victory. Political parties have their ideology and their election agendas. But what about various religions and churches? Are they supposed to change their ideology and belief with every election or is it a given that they will follow one particular ideology and that is based primarily on love?

Is the Left coming back to power bad news for churches in Kerala? It depends on how you look at the Left and what about them you are discussing? It is true that the churches should have no problem to accept liberation of the masses, upliftment of the poor and equality for all even if the Left takes that forward. The interpretation of the Left as a Godless movement has changed over the years with several leaders openly professing their faith in God. But churches or church leaders will have a problem with the Left if churches are pro-rich, anti-poor and against equality. On the other hand blindly supporting the Left need not be what a particular church has to do. Violent and revenge filled politics practiced by certain sections of the Left can’t be accepted and justified by the church as okay and acceptable.

Religion and churches in particular will find themselves immersed in a crisis by supporting whichever party that comes to power for their own needs at any particular time. This is because the people in the church will understand the double standards being played out. It may be true that the Left may have not been able to rule out gender and caste issues within their flock but they have been able to do something about it. It may be true that all Left leaders are not living a simple life style but there are many people who are called with respect as a “Communist comrade” (going on to mean just not a leader but a person respected by all for his/her simple life style ) by people from all walks of life. It may also be true that the Left has not reinvented itself to attract the modern generation but there are educated and inspirational leaders who are doing just that.

When the church is pleased with the victory of the Left, is happy that it has come to power, shouldn’t there be an introspection as to why God may have allowed such a thing to happen? Will the church when supporting the Left work on deep and contentious issues of gender and caste within the church so that a Left leader who has come up from a very difficult background is truly and honestly welcomed into the church? Will the church start preaching simplicity and ordinary living by practicing it at different levels in the church starting from the top? Will the church reinvent itself to prevent being obliterated and becoming completely irrelevant for the younger generation?

The coming of the Left is a nice thing in a state like Kerala. Kerala has seen much change happening through successive Left governments and no one can take that away from them. The church aligning with the Left is not anti-religious or non- Christian anymore. The church, however inspired it is by the word of God and by God’s revelation can go wrong when leaders misread the sign of God because they misunderstand their way as God’s way. Movements like the Left have shown through UPA I that an irritant is necessary to keep bad things at bay. The church can learn a bit from the Left movement about gender and caste consciousness, about simplistic living and about new trends in society. Similarly a close proximity with the church can also make the Left realize that violence won’t lead to solutions and positive results.

It is a welcome change to see the Left and the church together. But unless it is used by both to bring about quick change and benefit for the people, this is going to be an alliance of convenience which is going to give more strength to caste-gender- power and violent politics, which will be such a shame after showing so much promise.


Picture courtesy: www.foxnews.com
Bolivian President Evo Morales presents Pope Francis with a crucifix carved into a wooden hammer and sickle.

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

Onam: The festival of hope (A sermon using John 20:11-20)

The tradition of Onam revolves around a story of the king Mahabali who was seen as a just king who ruled over Kerala. He was seen as a king who ensured a period when all people were seen as the same. For us this indeed will come as a surprise as to how it is possible to live in a period when people are seen as the same. India still cannot figure out a way where all women and men will be seen as equal. With our own problems of caste and gender, the story of Mahabali will definitely seem unlikely and therefore has the problem of being limited to a celebration where people of a state get together, arrange flowers, sing songs and eat a meal with close to twenty side dishes. But is it just a festival or is it much more than that?

The story of Mahabali when continued sees that the Gods became jealous of his popularity and the simple fact that he brought about the imminence of everyone being the same into the lives of people. This was supposed to be an after life reality. The Gods were indeed fuming because Mahabali was doing their job and doing a better job of it. It had to stop because this was upsetting the way they had intended society to be.

Of course one should also be aware that the said Gods were also the constructs of high caste religious priests. The story continues and the Gods send their representative Vamana to Mahabali. Vamana asks for three feet or foot of land. Mahabali perhaps undone by the small demeanour of Vamana or offering his usual hospitality readily agrees although there may have been an element of doubt in his mind about the intentions of Vamana. Vamana then assumes his real size with which he covers up all the space available with two of his foot steps. He then asks Mahabali where he will put his third step. Mahabali then offers his own head and he is pushed down into the earth by Vamana. Before being pushed down Mahabali asks for the opportunity to visit his people every year and he is granted this wish.

Onam is then the time that people in Kerala believe that Mahabali visits them and they want it to be a special time when there is a lot of sharing and coming together of families and communities. People belonging to all religions celebrate this as Mahabali is seen as a leader of all people. Food which is predominantly vegetarian has undergone certain changes and has got its own additions depending on the different communities celebrating Onam.

Mahabali can be seen on similar lines with Jesus because of the way Jesus positioned himself and how he was done away with by high priests because he started doing things which they thought were meant for God and were anyway disturbing their well established system. Mahabali and Jesus are similar because
1. Both Mahabali and Jesus were leaders who were passionate about equal rights and justice.
2. Both of them sacrificed their lives for the sake of their subjects.
3. Their commitment goes beyond the earthly life. Those who believed in their ideology, especially the poor and the oppressed were not left to fend for themselves. Their commitment to ensure justice leads them to extend their involvement beyond life as we see it here.
4. Both of them are done in by a conspiracy and although they agree to being sacrificed are actually murdered in cold blood.
5. Both Mahabali and Jesus offer hope as can be seen in the past, present and future.

Onam is a festival and also has characteristics of a festival. A festival brings forth happiness, celebration and above all, hope. Without hope, there is no life. In the read passage in John 20 Mary is filled with this hope and she waits with expectation to see the fulfilment of this hope. Hope is a right of the poor and the downtrodden. In this sense celebrations which do not include the poor are mainline, dominant and market based celebrations. But true festivals are people’s festivals which are a celebration of protest, dissent and non-conformity. The Onam festival goes beyond region and community. In Kerala it has become the festival of all people. But it is not just a festival of conformity to certain high caste traditions. The spirit of the King Bali also moves beyond the borders of Kerala. M.E. Sharp in his book “Reinventing revolution: New Social Movements and the Socialist Tradition in India says that Bali has been taken as the major symbol of the oppressed shudra-dalit peasantry in Phule’s interpretation of the Aryan-Brahman conquest. The hope filled slogan in Marathi is “Ida pida javo, Bali-ca rajya yeva” (let troubles and sorrows go and the kingdom of Bali come). This has great similarity to the expectation of the arrival of the kingdom of God. A slogan is very much important to provide hope for the people and the slogan of the getting back of power is indeed very powerful. Mahabali the Asura King or the king from a lower caste, who ruled justly and provided equal opportunities for his people, is unceremoniously done away with. His re-installation means the bringing back of a glorious era where the practise of untouchability, inequality and other social evils did not exist. It also gives power to the people. Just as protest is a right of the poor, hope is also the right of the poor.

Mary exercises this very hope which is her right as a woman. Her visit to the tomb before anyone else reflects the hope that she and not any other disciple had. There is a sense of dissonance in the passage. It is not the apostles who go first but Mary who goes first. Mary is then seen as going to tell Peter about what she sees. Here there is a legitimization of established orders within the church. But Mary offers the essential piece of information first. The story becomes more exciting because Mary then goes and expresses her hope in full by standing and crying outside the tomb. This is a cry of protest which she hopes will bring back the one who will let all sorrows to go.

India is now going through a period of uncertainty where FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) has been allowed in the aviation and retail sectors. More sectors will be added in the near future. There is huge protest against this. Some of it is political but mostly it is the public expression of the aspirations of people who want to decide their own futures. The protest against the Koodankulam nuclear project also reflects the same aspirations of the local populace. When state and central governments have closed their eyes to nuclear waste and the risks involved so that they can have electricity, the only choice for people of the land is to protest. Protest needs a figure to inspire. Mahabali is one such figure and the inspiration of Onam is to live in harmony with one’s brothers and sisters. Mary seeks this inspiration from Jesus.

Perhaps festivals like Onam should inspire us to seek freedom for the masses and to effectually improve the lives of people. Festivals should also become a more common and repetitive part of our lives. Without this we make the festival and its commemoration and meaning making a once a year event which has no more significance than eating variety of food, meeting people and buying consumer goods. The festival of Onam has to transcend this in theological colleges and society at large. It can be a time when we vow and strive for equal opportunities for all and reservation for those who have been thrust behind. It can also be a time when we try to do away with all the corruptions that have crept into society. This could be a time for cleansing. Festivals in churches are no different. Two major festivals in the church I belong to are the festival of St. George and the festival of St. Mary. Both are very special for the people of the church. But consumerism and the evils of structure and power have crept in and limited it to an event. In the midst of this, ordinary people still find meaning out of these festivals. Mary Magdalene tries to question while initiating the quest to finding Jesus. Here is a festival procession which tries to go beyond certain fixed constructs. Her short pilgrimage to find Jesus inspires Peter to conduct the same journey.

Onam as the festival of hope has huge potential and offers valuable lessons for all. In situations of conflict and lack of harmony, festivals like Onam remind us of a time when humans lived together as one and that this is the opportunity we should use to try and reconcile. Nothing is beyond reconciliation and one should put out one’s hand in a reconciliatory mood of accepting and respecting the other. Even in the hardest and most difficult of times hope stands as the reason to live on. Mahabali offers this hope through his presence with us in this worship today. Jesus lives inside us as an ever present hope that there is nothing which cannot be redeemed.

The festival of Onam then is a once a year festival of forgetting all differences and coming together. It is an opportunity to re-learn our commitment to stand for justice, peace and reconciliation. This is not just one community’s celebration attended by others. It is the celebration and commitment of all that we hope for a better today and tomorrow. Justice has no boundaries and regions. Festivals cannot be limited to one caste or region. Let us all come together to remember a time when all people were treated with respect. Let us all be inspired by a man who did not belong to a high caste but shook the entire establishment by following the simple and yet hard formulae of not favouring anyone. Let us learn from the woman who hoped and stood strong in her hope even when others were not sure. Let us be steadfast in our faith and love for Jesus, the son of the carpenter, who took a stand and stood for the poor, the outcasts and the different people in society. I wish you peace, justice and reconciliation. Onam greetings. Amen.

(Preached this in UTC for the Onam worship on October 3, 2012)

“Dubara mat poochna…don’t ask again…” (part 2)

To understand a nation and its people we have to look at the various culture industries and its tributaries. This is because the culture industries reflect the length and breadth of the people. Marx had other notions, placing the culture industries in the same conduit of economic forces in society. My blog yesterday put advertisements into perspective, each into a separate category. Categorization is problematic but unavoidable as well.
Advertisements form a part (some say the part that powers the media) of the media, which in turn is a part of the culture industry of the nation. So, advertisements reflect how society is moving forward (or backwards as some would like to say). To the run up to the independence day we can extract some meaning from these ads, which lead us to what India has developed into and what still remains unchanged despite all other claims.
India has been an oral culture (things have changed over the years). We do not necessarily write down what we have on mind (there are exceptions now), but we like to share it never the less. This is done through poems, songs and stories. Priyadarshan, a Malayalam director cum producer who then ventured into Hindi cinema was asked whether India could get rid of its song sequences in movies. He replied in the negative saying that songs and their cinematisation are what makes Indian cinema Indian. The vicks ad leads in this direction. We like verbal repetitions and therefore a catchy one-liner for the ad.
India despite being a country of diversity has been able to come together at times of war, calamity and sports. This is due to the patriotism which still exists in the minds of the public and how it is twisted and used by the media. Amul, the taste of India gives us an identification that we might be North Indian, North East Indian or South Indian, but we are ‘Indians’. So patriotism may have its low ebbs, but it comes back into the picture when it matters.
Globalisation has made changes the world over and similarly in India. Its negative outcome has been to sow doubts in our minds about what is good and bad. Coca-cola could be one of the companies who use marketing as a way of re-inventing concepts in the minds of the people. Doubt causes a void and the company tries to fill this void. India in this sense goes through a questioning of concepts syndrome.
In the midst of change certain things remain unchanged. Two of these are patriarchy and caste and class discrimination. The ads of Bajaj Pulsar and the like are full of male idealisms of power, strength, class and uniqueness making out the male species as ‘the’ species in the world today. What we use reflects what we believe in. Caste and class discrimination follows the same route. We may have come a long way, but certain things remain rock solid and stubborn.
What we have seen above is an India which has evolved from an oral culture (not entirely), with its patriotic sense but changing concepts and ideals, and having managed to continue with the discriminations that continue to haunt the world today.
India is trying to build a new image for itself. More participation in the affairs of the country (as being asked by Rahul Gandhi and other young political leaders) is being mooted and encouraged, but we also face a very impatient population of more than half of India, the youth. The picture is murky for the time being and therefore we cannot make grandiose statements about India as we climb the podium for the all important independence day, not yet anyway.