Property woes

One of our staff members returned this morning from his native village after attending the funeral of a relative.  I saw him down since his arrival and just before lunch asked if all was well.  He then started narrating his pain about retaining a small bit of land - all that he really owns, in his village - that too from the greedy hands of his own uncle.  What pained him most was this betrayal and backstabbing by his own kith and kin.  Those who should have been standing by him, are the ones usurping his share of the property.  Not only do they want the land bit but to grab it the tactics they are adopting are cruel: they forced this man and his family out of the rented house at midnight.  He, along with his wife, two small kids, aged mother were on the road just before midnight!  He couldn't bear it anymore and broke down narrating it.  This is the first time I have seen him weep.  The pain and humiliation of a son, a father, a husband ... was vivid. All this, around and about a one and half cent bit of land!  

He is still to recover from that shock and pain. Adding to it is the awareness of his helplessness.  No one wishes to get involved citing it to be a family matter.  Walking away from that land is like giving up the only thing he feels connected with back with his roots, especially his deceased father's legacy. 

 As religious, we own much land.  Keeping track of every bit of it and ensuring maximum utility is not something that we do or feel pressurized to do.  But I also know of the agony involved in securing these properties and ensuring that no one creates false documents and lays claim for any of these bits.  Although it is a big headache, it is not always a matter of life and death for us.  Worse comes to worse, we forgo the land and move on. We do not feel the pinch of it. 

On the other hand, most lay people, especially farmers in rural areas who have inherited land from their ancestors or simple city folk who have 'earned' miniscule plots after years of toil, face an uphill task to keep these land bits secure.  And by chance, if some greedy souls lay eyes on it, then they either spend their whole earning on it or have to give it up, due to sheer pressure of the big sharks.  The desperation and helplessness when faced with such challenges is deep and acute! 

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! 

Owning up... being the Church

The revelations about the abuse of minors by priests and religious has driven a knife into the heart of the Church.  There is no going back on this.  What has been done cannot be undone.  The church will have to live through this.  It cannot deny or escape this guilt. 

The direct consequence of this uncovering has significantly contributed to the departure of many a faithful from the church.  People no more feel safe in the church and prefer to stay away.  Vocations to priesthood and religious life had drastically fallen.  Many even prefer to be categorized as 'irreligious', if not atheists. 

Yet, it is interesting to note that the priests and religious are not the only sex-offenders to be exposed.  Football coaches, Hollywood bigwigs, famous politicians, too have been charged, and found guilty.  Yet parents have not stopped enrolling their sons for football training camps;  young women still try their hand at modelling and in the movie industry;  youngsters still aim and strive for a political career... there hasn't been a reduction of these (at least not significantly or recorded).  Why then is the whole church singled out for this treatment, unlike football, or movies or politics?

The basic difference is a matter of trust.  The Church was considered the moral conscience of the society and priests and religious the models of virtue.  This was something the Church leaders aimed for, took pride in and the lay faithful joyfully and sincerely endorsed.  However some took advantage of this trust and let their human tendencies prey on innocent believers.  Others instead of confronting it, covered it up.

So it is not the media coverage and the ensuing outrage that has wounded the church but the very act itself.  The church is betrayed by the ones most trusted.  Again, not the whole church but individuals. Yet the church will have to take the blame, if it still wishes to be true to its name.  The victim and the abuser, both are the church! 

Joseph called Barsabbas

In the selection process for the replacement of Judas, Joseph and Matthias are the finalists.  Unable to decide upon which one, the apostles pray and cast lots (initially reminded me of the soldiers at the foot of the cross casting lots for the robe of Jesus).  The lot falls for Matthias and he is announced as one of the apostles. 

What became of Joseph called Barsabbas?  Simple: He carried on his life and ministry!  That's how I would like to remember him.  If among all the people they had to choose from, the apostles zeroed in on these two men, they surely must have been men of faith, men dedicated to the ministry and truly in love with Jesus.  So I don't think being granted the title of an 'apostle' would have made any big difference to their personal character.  All that happened was that one got an additional role and responsibilities, the other didn't get that role... but the ministry and life of faith continued.

How often in life, have we seen people give up everything for a particular goal or post?  And once they do get the post, life is totally different.   It happens all the time in politics and with politicians.  It happens also with priests, religious and bishops..., especially those whose aim is the post (religious politicians?).  I wish Luke the author of the Acts had enumerated the qualities of Joseph and Matthias and a bit more of the selection criteria.  But honestly speaking all that was needed is clearly mentioned:

...it is necessary that one of the men who accompanied us the whole time the Lord Jesus came and went among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day on which he was taken up from us, become with us a witness to his resurrection.

...been with Jesus and his people and a genuine witness of all that Jesus stood for... we get the role for being this, with the confidence that we would do better.  If those basic qualities for which we were granted the role and related responsibilities are compromised with, then one has no right to continue in that role or claim anything related to it.  That would be the story of Judas, not Joseph Barsabbas!

Judas, the non-anonymous

Reflection for April 12, 2017

Judas, often exemplified, as the devil incarnate or the evil one is just a mortal human being like you and me. That he was chosen as an apostle indicates that Jesus found something special in him. He certainly wasn't a criminal or a good for nothing guy.

Judas is neither a master of evil nor the figure of a demoniacal power of darkness but rather a sycophant who bows down before the anonymous power of changing moods and current fashion. But it is precisely this anonymous power that crucified Jesus, for it was anonymous voices that cried, 'Away with him! Crucify him!' [Pope Benedict XVI]

Thus Judas was not the only reason why Jesus was caught. He only happens to be the only one with a name among the crowd of the anonymous. While anonymous charity can be read as humility, anonymous plotting of evil is cowardice. Where do we wish to stand: among the anonymous crowd or as one with a voice and a face, willing to take responsibility?

Persons beyond actions

Reflection for April 11, 2017: To see the person beyond the action

Jesus' attitude towards Judas is noteworthy. Here is the man who has already betrayed Him, yet Jesus does not throw any tantrum or make a scene out of Judas' pretense. He does not chastise him or humiliate him for his choices. He does not grumble about Judas to the other apostles when he is gone from the room. Jesus is also aware of Peter's betrayal by denial. Yet He still treats them both with dignity and respect.

We may say, it is because Jesus was God, He could be so gracious. But it is the same Jesus who cried out in agony in the garden of Gethsemane asking that if possible, he be spared the suffering. To feel such agony and at the same time not hold it against someone or anyone requires great vision and openness of the heart. It does not come all at once. One needs constantly to make such decisions in small matters of life, to achieve such equanimity at moments of great intensity.

Responding immediately to betrayal or hurt feelings by being angry is natural. Yet Jesus shows through his words and deeds that there are other ways of responding too, when others hurt us deeply… to see the person beyond his or her actions.

Field of blood

One simple thought that struck me when listening to the Passion narrative of this morning.  With the thirty pieces of silver thrown away by Judas, the chief priests and elders bought a plot of land and called it the 'Field of blood', because it was bought with blood-money.  And what was the plot for? Burial ground for strangers!

Well, interesting, even in His betrayal Jesus seems to be reaching out to those on the periphery.

I remember distinctly the vehemence and deep conviction with which Prof. Manti spoke about Jesus' choices during one of the PAR seminars.  He had initially asked us participants if God is partial? All of us very solemnly stated that God is not god if he is partial.  When all of us gave our own reasons for this, he thundered and explained how IS partial! How He always stood on the side of the poor, the marginalised and the disadvantaged!  

Betray Jesus??

This morning during Mass, Fr Maliekal asked a valid question: When does betrayal happen? Or rather, between whom does betrayal happen? He went on to say that it is only between friends that betrayal is possible.  Thus he was right in questioning Judas' "betrayal" of Jesus.  If Judas was never truly a friend of Jesus, how could he betrayal Him?

I look at it this way:  Betrayal is possible only when there is trust between two people.  So when that trust is broken, and abused then it is betrayal.  So in this sense, if I never really trusted Jesus, as a person, as someone close to my heart, someone whom I have willingly and joyfully given my heart to, then I don't think, I'm eligible for betrayal!  Indifference, yes; but not betrayal.  (Which of the two is worse?... I'll save that for later!)

On the other hand, looking from Jesus' perspective, whether we trust Him or not, He trusts us! He places His confidence in us and is willing to take the risk - He did it then, He does it even now! Knowing well, that the possibility of being indifferent to, being betrayed by us, is much higher than being a friend to Him, He risks being our friend.

The question now is: Do I betray Jesus?  Or am I worthy at all to even do an act of betrayal?? 

Judas' sin

It did not strike me before but today during the Mass in the morning, it struck me that Judas' did repent for his crime of handing over Jesus to the Jews.  Frankly speaking, being the political clout that the Jewish religious leaders wielded they could have just barged their way into Jesus' company and arrested him.  That they needed someone to 'sell' Jesus to them was merely a sham.

Anyway, coming to the point, I realized that Judas was indeed sad for what he did and wished to undo it.  He therefore goes back to the elders and even offers them the money he received for 'betraying' Jesus. I suppose if he had more money, he'd have willingly given that too just to get things back to as it were before his 'handing' Jesus over.  But then why is it that Judas always is portrayed in the negative.  For that matter, Peter also betrayed Jesus when he denounced him not once but thrice!  Going by that count, there are more heinous ways that we have 'betrayed' the Lord than Judas did!

His sin, I guess, is to believe that God would not forgive him!  Neither did he forgive himself!  These two facts coupled together saw him hang himself.  Certainly the society then - and now - would always have blacklisted Judas, had he lived on.  But he would have lived with that scar and through his life transformed it into a blessing for himself and others.  However, he was too miserly in his outlook of God... he never brought himself to believe that his crime would be forgiven - not by God and not even by himself!  

What if Judas did not betray Jesus?

I thought Thankachan was only fooling when he said today was 'Spy Wednesday'... anyway...! I do not know who is the spy, Thankachan or Judas? However, looks like poor Judas is made to carry the whole blame! Even Jesus speaks very crudely about him. Of course, to 'breed' a traitor is always painful but I would (only in retrospect) ask this question: What if Judas did not betray Jesus? Would Jesus have still been crucified? I fear the answer is 'Yes'! It only happened to be that Judas was the one who politically betrayed him. Given the socio-political situation of the existing period, those baying for the blood of Jesus would have somehow got rid of him - by hook or by crook.