What Faith!!

 The Canaanite woman who approaches Jesus for a cure for her ill daughter, the woman suffering with hemorrhage, the Centurion who seeks a cure for his servant all have something in common... great and deep faith.  

The Canaanite woman is 'insulted and humiliated' by Jesus himself when he asks if it is justified to offer the dogs the food of the master!  She does not retort or feel insulted.  She acknowledge the insult, but claims what even a 'dog' is permitted: crumbs, fallen from the masters table.  She does not ask for the meal of the master. Not even the leftovers. All she asks for is crumbs!  

The woman suffering with the hemorrhage chases Jesus, in the midst of the crowd, with one clear intent. Just one clear intent.  Only to touch the fringe of his garment. Not be touched by Jesus. Not to hold Jesus' hand or feet.  Not even to get hold of the whole garment of Jesus.  Just the fringe of Jesus' garment - FRINGE! 

The Centurion asks Jesus only to say a word. He not say that he will get his servant into Jesus' presence.  He does not ask Jesus to send one of his trusted apostle to the bedside of his sick servant, leave alone pester Jesus to visit his servant.  All that the Centurion asks is Jesus' word.  'Just say a word and my servant will get well!' Not a person, not a big prayer service, not long prayer, just a word! 

In each instance we see the depth of their faith.  Of the three persons, two are not even Jews!  From their own personal observation and experience they trusted him so much that all they wanted was not a full-fledged presence of Jesus or his full attention or an extensive time-slot; but merely a crumb, the fringe of his garment, one word from his mouth!!

Presence and accompaniment

 In an era where AI is making significant waves, for good and for bad, one reflection that I came across that makes profound sense to me as a Salesian, an educator: 

The AI offers answers, not necessarily a presence. The AI may provide solutions, but not necessarily consolation and accompaniment.  When God chose to reach humanity, he did not send information. He chose to be present in person. 

However, I am also aware of the danger of side-lining this AI wave as not overriding. Wisdom and happiness lies in striving for balance, making the most of the opportunities without compromising on basics and values. 

Lizards around the tabernacle!

 In his sermon today, Santiagu spoke of four ways in which we who claim to be men of God, can turn to be Godless men.  

It was his description of the second stage that amused me most.  He spoke that in the second stage we use God for our survival.  Rather than Him being the centre of our lives, he becomes a tool we use to make a living for ourselves.  

The analogy he offered was the best: lizards around the tabernacle.  Those creatures who practically live around the tabernacle, do so not out of love for the Blessed Sacrament or because they have a personal relationship with Jesus (perhaps they do!), but because that's the easiest place to secure their food.  With the tabernacle lamp glowing day in and day out, insects naturally get attracted to the light and become prey to the lizards. Moreover, most tabernacles are placed in such a way that there is enough space to hide behind or around it.  

Great!  Fits some (or most) of the lives of priests and religious!

Interchange Jesus and Daniel

 A couple of weeks ago there was this reading where we hear of the trial of Susanna and the smart judicial move of Daniel, the young prophet.  The same day Gospel narrated of the incident where Jesus defends the woman caught in adultery.  

Attributed to François-Guillaume Méneageot circa 1779

All through the Mass that day and for a couple of days I couldn't get a particular weird imagery that flashed across my mind: what if the two, Jesus and Daniel, were to be interchanged! Would the incidents unfold the same way as we read them in the Bible?  In other words, would Jesus have forgiven the two corrupt officials, rather than them being sentenced to death.  Would Daniel have scripted the woman to now throw stones at the men gathered to put her to death, or atleast the one(s) who forced her into prostitution or adultery?  

Perhaps this has been plaguing my mind, since I too am faced with a similar situation wherein I need to take a stand.  However, I have in a way made up my mind... after much tussle and inner turmoil.  

More than the final outcome of the incidents with the interchanged characters, I seek to understand the process or the rationale or the principles that would guide each of them to come to whatever conclusions they would arrive at. 

Betrayal

 The most intense battles are those with the closest. In Jesus' case too it was the same.  The very people whom he chose to assist, are the ones who rebelled the worst.  Even among the ones he himself choose to be his inner circle, deserted him when the time was the most challenging. 

Betrayal therefore takes different forms: the emotional betrayal of Peter when he denies him; the selfish monetary betrayal of Judas who 'sells' Jesus for thirty pieces of silver; the silent betrayal of the other apostles who stood by dumb or 'disappeared' without the slightest of protest; the mass betrayal of the population who followed Jesus and witnessed his personality and intent at close quarters for a considerable time... 

History often repeats itself. Good to observe what Jesus did! 

The power of personal experience

We believe not because you said so, but because we have seen and met Him ourselves.

This is the line that the Samaritans state to the woman whom Jesus interacts with at the well (today's Gospel passage).  There is a whole lot of boundaries or social taboos that Jesus breaks or goes beyond - just in today's gospel passage.  He is interacting with a non-Jew.  That too a Samaritan.  All the more a woman.  That too a woman, of not so good repute.  

And Jesus feels filled.  "I have food that you do not know of!" 

Jesus sees beyond each of these social barriers and obstacles and reaches out to a human being.  

And that decision of Jesus, followed by his action of seeing through his mission, wins him a whole village!  

The villagers now believe in Jesus not because he performed a miracle or a great favour.  He merely interacted with them as a human being, a fellow creature.  

This particular image is the only one I came across where the woman is seated and Jesus is the one standing.  

Jonah's obedience

Abraham obeyed Yahweh and we become the children of faith. 

Due to Moses' obedience, the Israelites were saved from Pharoah's wrath. 

Because of Jonah's obedience the Ninevites were protected from Yahweh's anger. 

Since Jesus was obedient, we received salvation. 

Not every one who obeyed knew or consented to what they agreed to do or be. Nor did they all have perfect trust in the one who was asking them to do something different or abnormal - yet, they obeyed. 

And others benefited! 

Sheep and the shepherd

 In the Christian tradition the imagery of the sheep and the shepherd dates back to Jesus himself. In the gospels we read the umpteen number of times Jesus speaks of these two characters while driving home a point.

While many exegeses and commentaries ha e been recorded, there is one quite common misinterpretation that I've not come across much. Of course, there are references quite close to it. It is about the character of the sheep. 

Shepherds today tend to look upon the sheep as dumb, naive and worth nothing but being bossed over. This is not the fault of the sheep. It is due to the prise and arrogance of the shepherd. Jesus' concern and action towards the sheep was purely out of love for the sheep; not out of pity for them, not out of a false sense of doling out charity just to boost his own ego, not out of looking down on them, not as a means of self-glorification. 

Jesus loved the sheep. Period. There was nothing about himself in any of his thoughts, plans, and actions.

The 12 apostles - common folk

 The British judiciary has a style of functioning that whenever there is a trial, as part of the process 12 people are randomly chosen to be part of the jury.  Of course, not any 12 but those residential in the country (perhaps even the same county) and those who have been part of the British culture, or grown up in Britain since 13 years of age.  

Anyway, those criteria apart, there is no other qualification that decides whether they are part of the jury or not. They need not be holding prestigious positions in the society or specialists in law, leave alone be highly education. Mere common folk! 

The Jury, by John Morgan

In his essay "The Twelve Men", dealing with this British jury system, G. K. Chesterton wrote: "Whenever our civilization wants a library to be catalogued, or a solar system discovered, or any other trifle of this kind, it uses up its specialists. But when it wishes anything done which is really serious, it collects twelve of the ordinary men standing around… The same thing was done, if I remember right, by the Founder of Christianity!”

Jesus too chose 12 men, all 'ordinary men standing around'... but it is interesting also to note, that it was those men standing around HIM; not total strangers.  Those 12 were already his disciples. 

Redeeming all alone!

 As soon as the Israelites of the Old Testament start to grumble about the food (manna) that they are surviving on in the desert, on route to the Promised Land, Moses is upset.  He calls up to Yahweh and he moans and groans to the extent of telling Yahweh, to do something about it, or bump him off!! Now, that's a bit of an extreme.  

Nonetheless, I can understand his position.  He is in the same situation as they are. Although brought up in a royal palace, he is now facing the heat and harsh desert.  One could say that the Israelites by this time are used to hardships, but not Moses.  And so, his anguish is palpable.  

Moreover, it is the common attitude about food. Those of us living and working in the south of India know how much food matters in one's life.  So the notion doing the rounds in Moses head could be, 'After all, it is food. Can He not provide them some chicken and mutton? Surely He can, so why isn't he?'  

But I think there is a significant line in the first reading of today, towards the end, which persists throughout today's Gospel - although very very subtly! Moses petitions Yahweh saying, 'I cannot handle it ALONE anymore'.  For Moses to think that it is he who is actually leading the people of Israel out of Egypt, to Israel, is a great hallucination!  But I guess, it is in our human nature.  We always feel that whatever good is happening, is because of me!  So, Moses feels the burden, being ALONE!!  

This attitude of doing all the good ALONE is the inherent feeling of most of us - and perhaps one of most deadliest sin of us, priests and religious.  Leaving out God, is perhaps our biggest reason for failure.  It undermines our basic relevance and meaning as religious. Jesus first tells his apostles to feed the five thousand themselves!  And they give him what they have: five loaves and two fish. Jesus multiplies those.  He does not do magic or create ex nihilo. 

What would Jesus do?

 One of the insights that again came to my rescue, getting me out of my muddled thoughts and plans, was the acronym: WWJD... What would Jesus do? 

This one simple phrase has been the easiest answer to most of my toughest questions.  Couldn't have asked for a better, simpler and clearer way forward.  

As part of the reflection along that line, it occurred to me that Jesus did not set up any institution.  He merely worked in teams (apostles, two-by-two...).  He initiated movements, processes. 

So why not work in teams, with individuals who are not corrupted, willing to see and strive for something noble rather than be happy to play victims or engage in power struggles.   

The smart sheep

There is the NT passage where the call is to have one shepherd and one flock (John 10).  We read that prior to our discussion about the GC 29.  

Jesus is talking about bringing the sheep into one fold. That there are some sheep who are already with him; that there are others which are not yet in his fold, but will eventually find their way to him... 

The fact that struck me was that the purpose of the sheep or the mission of the sheep is known and envisioned, not by the sheep, but by the shepherd!! What each sheep is meant for, what is to be achieved by the whole flock or some sheep, why the sheep need to do what they are told to do... all of this is the plan of the shepherd.  From deciding where to graze and when to sheer the wool, to which sheep to cull for the feast and when to vaccinate, it is all by the shepherd. 

So, what then are the sheep? Dumb sheep? Have they nothing to contribute to their own life and growth?  Far from being dumb, they are called to be smart; smart enough to know the shepherd!  And when they know him well enough, to be so attached to him that they let him decide what's best for them; because they know that he wants nothing but the best for them.  

This understanding is what makes Jesus, the good shepherd!  And us, the smart sheep! 

Working hard vs Working with a purpose

Jesus' mission of sending out the 72 disciples to the places he himself intended to visit, with the clear instructions as to what to do, and not to do, in practically each and every possible situation has a strange twist to it at the end of that passage.  This is the gospel of the coming Sunday (Luke 10; early verses).  

He sends out the disciples with clear instructions; a specific list of do's and don'ts - a perfect SEPP, with lines of action (as said by Sarath).  However, when they return and recall the great things they were able to achieve, (the evaluation of the same SEPP!!), Jesus states something he has not said a word about earlier! What they have achieved, and for which he congratulates them, is something he never spoke to them about!! 

Jesus tells them not to rejoice because they were able to work miracles, see Satan fall from heaven, heal the sick, cure diseases and what not; rather he tells them to be happy because their names are written in heaven!  Now that's not something he told them about before their departure.  

I take it as a lesson not to get lost in the immediate results or achievements; the petty victories or even the activities we so meticulously plan, implement and are proud of carrying out. The real progress and achievement is in setting in motion a PROCESS; a deep rooted change or IMPACT that works as a ripple effect, well after any of us has stopped working or even left the place altogether.  

The disciples being with Jesus learnt that he was not just DOING good things; there was something deeper and greater he was working at.  When following his steps, they subconsciously fulfilled what he had in mind; now he was calling their attention to becoming conscious of that purpose, while continuing doing the good things! 

Maundy Thursday mandate

The Maundy Thursday derives its name from the Latin word mandatum, meaning the same as in English today... a mandate, a command, an order.  

And that mandate is simple and direct: To serve, with love.  

Most preachers and thinkers split hairs to explain the significance of the day.  Some state (as prescribed by the Church teaching) that there are three significant events of the day: the institution of the Eucharist, the institution of the Priesthood and the washing of the feet.  Unfortunately, that is what they have each become: institutions!! 

Personally I believe, the focus and directive is clear: Serve everyone, with much love.  And this is not a new commandment or directive the Lord is offering us on Maundy Thursday.  This is what he spoke and did all his life!!  This was actually his mission. While the ultimate MISSION was to make known God's love, this love was explicated and made tangible in service. So the MISSION is to love; and the mission is to serve. But there is no duplicity or multiplication here.  They are one and the same!  That's the mandate: To serve, with love! 

Most of us, especially religious, including myself, tend to do the first part of this mission; but very often and mostly do not strive for the actual mission or the greater purpose of this mission, namely to love.  We serve, but fail to love sufficiently! 

Therefore it is important to see everything and all things from this perspective. That love is the ultimate mission of every Christian, especially of a religious.  Once that decision to genuinely love is made, service automatically follows.  Unfortunately, love cannot be taught. It is caught; it is felt; it is experienced!  

Shut up and keep quiet

Hearing today's gospel reading I was reminded of one of Papa's quotes, which we still fondly use at home: Shut up and keep quiet!

Jesus preached to the people with authority.  If so why did he have to give the demon a double command: Be quiet and get out!  He could have either told it to be silent or asked it to get out all together. Either way, the person would have been healed - at least mostly.  But from experience of Papa's use of this statement, I think, unless the demon left and left silently, the harm done would be equally bad, if it were only silent and still plaguing the person from within. 

No Jesus?

 Interesting article challenging the belief that Jesus was a historical figure! .... There was no Jesus

Different groups of people who look at the person and the history of Jesus from different angles: The Christian theologians, who believe that Jesus was real... including all his miracles, resurrection... 

Then there are the liberal Christians, who separate faith from history.  They are willing to review and accept evidence about the non-existence of Jesus, without actually disrupting their traditional belief. 

The third group who would believe in a historical Jesus, sans the miracle-rich aspects of the New Testament. 

The author of the above article claims to be of the fourth minor group which doubts altogether the earthly existence of Jesus.  The theory suggests that Jesus was a mythological figure, like Romulus or Robin Hood. 

Major argument being: No historical records of Jesus during his lifetime.  All posthumous records. 

But I think the closest the author gets to proving is (as in his own words): ... if Jesus did exist, we know next to nothing about him. 

To see me, but not me!

"To have seen me is to have seen the Father!"

Jesus is very confident of himself.  That to know him is actually to not know him, but the Father.  He knows that there is nothing in him that obstructs anyone looking at him from being able to see his Father.  He is so transparent that one interacting with him is actually interacting with the Father himself.  Nothing in him that limits the one interacting with him to see Jesus alone.  All of what he does and is, is a reflection of the Father.  

I wonder how many of us will be able to say that same of oneself.  In all honesty and sincerity.  "To have lived and worked with me is to have seen Jesus or God himself!" 

Jesus and the twelve

When the time came for Jesus to begin his public ministry, and he chose the twelve apostles, it is quite strange to see that he chose all strangers!  There is hardly any evidence that the twelve men knew Jesus before Him calling them out.  We only hear some anonymous person exclaiming, "Is he not the son of the carpenter?"  Had any of the twelve known Jesus earlier, I think at least one of them would have made that statement!!  

Nicolas Poussin

But did Jesus know them before hand??  

Jesus never went far or beyond Israel, or for that matter his hometown.  And so, during those 30 years that he spent in the same place, would he not have known most of those men?  He was a carpenter and surely he would have met and interacted with a lot of people of varied backgrounds.  Everyone would have sought the services of a carpenter at some time of their life, for some work.  My guess is that Jesus did have a rough list but not for long, perhaps just about the time he began his ministry.  And Luke records that he spent the night in prayer and when morning came, called out the twelve who were to be called his apostles.  

The reason(s) he chose those twelve and not some others, I guess were privy just to him.  We can only guess and theorize.  But none of those reasons would be applicable to all the twelve!! 

Another strange fact that find is that of the chose twelve none was a carpenter.  Jesus did not select anyone from among those whom knew him!! 

Jesus' team today

 If Jesus were to walk on this earth today and were to pick and choose his team of apostles from those living here and now, whom would he choose?  

I guess his criteria would be the same: common folk from everyday life... construction workers, teachers, journalists, nhs staff, delivery guys, social media users and so on. 

Surely there would be non-Christians as well.  Women, most certainly.  Members of the LGBT+ group. Among these would already be someone who has been or is a migrant or with a criminal record.  A politician, maybe (if not for any good reason, at least to replicate Judas!).  

Am sure that his choice would startle and shock quite a few Christians of today.  Even if he did choose any christians, he'd have to bear listening to them as to whom he should choose and why!  Given our fickle and narrow minds, Jesus' choice rather than open our minds to His Word and mindset, would lead us to question the authenticity and 'christian values' of Jesus himself!  

Wonder if he'd need the same number (12)?  Given the fact that women can bear witness more convincingly than men, and that there is the presence and use of social media... these would certainly cut down the work force needed.  But one never knows.  

All said and done, I don't think what one does and is capable of is of little value to Jesus here.  What matters is one's openness to the Kingdom.  

Jesus the migrant

One thought that has recurred in my mind this advent is the fact that the one whose birthday we celebrate, the feast which practically means so much for most of the western world, Christmas which means so much to so many in so many different ways is actually the celebration of a migrant birth!!  

That Jesus was born outside his own home, his own parent's house, that too in a stable, a lowly place considered fit only for domestic animals, is so often repeated in our sermons and reflections, but we can sum it all into one word: being a migrant, a refugee, a stranger in a lowly and lonely place.  Amazingly we celebrate this birth with such great festivities, yet choose not to be disturbed by the way we treat the stranger and the lonely, the 'other'.  

Not just the child Jesus, but practically every other Biblical character was a refugee, a migrant at some crucial point of his or her life, if not the entire life itself: Abraham was on the move, after he thought he had set his roots,  Moses had to flee from his brother, Joseph was sold into slavery and imprisoned in Egypt... why, even Adam was evicted from his first home, by none other than God himself!! 

While there are numerous generous and noble people today (as in times before) who open their hands and hearts to the migrants and refugees, it is alarming to see the modern world speckled with countless refugee camps and agonising immigration processes that dehumanise persons - most often, in the name of securing the dignity of other human beings.  

So I ask myself, how justified am I everytime I claim something as 'mine'... my land, my home, my property, my inheritance, my rights... what is the cost of making something 'mine'?  Can there be a 'mine' wherein the other is not denied 'his'?  How do I happily make the journey from 'mine' to 'ours'?