Prayer

This morning we began the annual leaders meeting.  There were several aspects going through my heart and mind and I was aware that I was disturbed.  There were a couple of presentations, that I was mostly coordinating, and was anxious not knowing what actually the presenters will finally come up with or how they would put across the core ideas. Besides, I myself was handling a delicate topic and was anticipating trouble from some lousy participants ... and was itching to wring someone's neck!  But sense prevailed... or let me be honest in acknowledging God's help in understanding my own situation.  So I said this silent prayer and even wrote it down, right in the hall, in the midst of the preliminaries: 

Lord, let me say and do what builds and paves for growth or transformation, rather than assuage my hurt feelings or boost my own ego! 

At the end of the day, as I re-read the same prayer from my scribble pad, I sincerely THANK GOD for hearing my prayer! 

Death of John the Baptist

 Listening again to the episode of the beheading of John the Baptist, as part of the Gospel reading today, a couple of points that struck me: 

That Herod could find his promise more demanding and compelling than the life of a person is strange.  Is the worth of life lessor than a mere word, that too given to someone for a dance performance?! But it didn't take me long to realise that it was never about honour.  Herod was not honouring his word; he was merely giving in to his fear.  He had already decided to kill John the Baptist; he just didn't have 'sufficient reason' to justify his plan.  The promise was a mere excuse, to actually carry out what he had already made up his mind about! 

On a totally different note, the concluding lines of the Gospel speak about the disciples of John the Baptist, burying him and then informing Jesus about it.  What suddenly hit me was Jesus' response.  Of course, there certainly would have been an emotional response; but the text says nothing. Whereas when Lazarus dies, Jesus weeps.  Here the death was of his own cousin; someone he had known all his life. Surely, this would have been a very sad moment for Jesus. If Lazarus' death could move him to tears, I'm sure John's death would have been no less a tragic moment.  

Or did the Biblical authors perhaps skipped recording that emotional response, lest they show him 'human'.  Or maybe they did not want to show his affinity to family more than his mission?  Too many may be's!! 

Beheading of John the Baptist (by Caravaggio)

Self-discovery vs Self-awareness

Today I realised there a difference between self-discovery and self-awareness.  Not that I really thought much about self-discovery in comparison to the latter, but I presumed that one is more or less the same.  

As a matter of fact, both self-discovery and self-awareness are related; although not the same. Self-discovery is more as of now, today, here and now; while self-awareness is forward looking, in as much as it is future oriented, not stuck with today. 

Self-discovery has much to do with facts and affects (feelings, emotions, moods); whereas, self-awareness helps one influence choices, relationship and a whole lot of stuff, when one moves beyond the facts and affects.  The latter leads to changes and is transformative; while the former is intellectual.  

Self-discovery answers the question: Why am I who I am? 

Self-awareness responds to: What am I now/later meant to be? 

Passions and spirituality

The word 'passion' is often seen suspiciously in ecclesial circles.  The only time it is looked up with some respect - in fact, with utmost reverence - is when it is spoken in the context of the last moments of Jesus: the passion of Christ. 

The Russian author Merezhkovsky writes,

It is very strange that the Church, considers the 'passions' as something bad and their absence as a sign of holiness, has had the courage to call her greatest mystery a 'passion'.

But honestly speaking, without our passions, we are not really human.  Our emotions and feelings are very much part of our being human.  Not just emotions but even anything mundane cannot be excluded from our spirituality.

Soren Kierkegaard has a very significant point when he states 

It is a greater loss for one to lose his passion than to lose himself in his passion. 

The emotional and rational dimensions of faith

The gospel reading of Easter Tuesday is one of the most emotional and powerful instance in the Gospel where Mary Magdalene encounters the risen Lord at the tomb.  Her response and perception of the whole incident is highly emotional.  She sees the angels but is not in any sense surprised or amazed - as if they were creatures one encounters day in and day out in the market place!  Her whole concern and worry at that point is the missing body!  Nothing matters more to her than the one whose body she came to anoint. 

Contrast that highly emotional perspective with that of the rational dimension of Peter's ministry with the Jews in the same post-resurrection scenario.  The Jews listen to the 'arguments' of Peter, and are 'convinced' of what he says and get baptised. 

Perhaps the only difference one sees and is in a way important is that the 'rational' means adds numbers, is meant for the crowd; while the emotional is highly personal and intimate.  One needs both along ones' journey of faith and growth.   

Vulnerability and community building

People often say that trust is the bonding factor in a relationship.  In religious life too trust plays a very important role in building communities and lasting bonds.  However,  I also believe that prior to trust it is vulnerability that plays a crucial role.  Not just being vulnerable but recognising and having the courage to acknowledge that vulnerability to those whom I live with.  That indeed is risky and dangerous.  But there are no short cuts to forming real relationships.

Very often we as religious are reluctant to share our vulnerabilities.  No one feels great or is pleased to share one's own weaknesses.  All our achievements and strengths are broadcast but the weaknesses and failures we keep them private.  That is natural.  But in order to gain someone's trust the best way is to share with the person something personal, so that the person feels that the other is not just mouthing good things but sharing something of his or her own self.  What often keeps us from sharing our weaknesses from one another is the fear that the other may use them against me or make them public.  Genuine fears but mostly prejudiced. 

I've seen myself the strength of confreres working together once they have bonded well.  Individually they may not be exceptionally talented or gifted but once they learn to trust each other, we complement one another and the tasks at hand become adventures.  Communities that are willing to sit and share, talk, exchange not just plans and ideas but feelings, emotions and requests for help, have a greater degree of strength and effectiveness in apostolate.  The element of witness is truly inspirational. 

Rorty, sentiments and human rights

Richard Rorty, speaking of human rights, believed that reason was not an effective means of communication in a human rights discourse. Anti-foundationalist that he was he did not believe in human rights being founded on some moral or eternal principle, which everyone ought to recognize and admit.  He rather preferred to speak of a 'human rights culture' something that we socially have agreed to.  And the best means of building this culture? Through sentimental education, not rational argumentation.

I see a very valid point in what Rorty is trying to build.  The sentimental appeal is much stronger than any rational argument. We are affected more by our sentiments than our logic and rationale. The idea is to make people see that others are not "like us", but "us".  However, there seems to be a sort of drawback lurking just round the corner in this argument.  Am not really able to pinpoint it, but I can feel it.

• Is it that convincing someone of human rights using emotions is more of a blackmail than a real conviction? 
• Would I be using the suffering of others as a 'lesson' plan? If no suffering or pain with which I can appeal to the sentiment of others, do I not have a valid means of conveying the worth of human rights? 
• Seems more like claim-rights... only when 'we' agree to something.  What if 'we' agree to what is convenient for us?  Slavery and dowry was very convenient once upon a time.  Even to those who were burdened by it, because it was a 'socially accepted norm'. 
• What of those who 'understand' the language of reason?  Learned men and women who know what is being said and discussed?  
• Can international and national policies ride on the strength of emotions and feelings? 

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.

Introspection before accusation

Yesterday the gospel and the reading was about the woman accused of adultery.

If there is one of you who has not sinned, let him be the first to throw a stone at her (Jn 8: 7).

Psychologists speak of 'projection' as a defense mechanism that we human beings use to cover up our defects or hidden thoughts. If we really analyse those things that irritate or annoy us most, we would realise that the cause is actually within us and since we do not want to acknowledge our defects, we project them on to others, point fingers at them and thereby justify ourselves. This is easier done on those who cannot question or defend themselves. Jesus reverts our attention back to ourselves, calls for an introspection prior to an accusation.

We judge ourselves by what we are capable of but judge others by what they've already done (Henry Wadsworth Longfellow).

Depth

From my little experience of dealing with people of UK, I suspect there is an element of fear and anxiety underlying any attempt to touch upon deep personal matters. Not that elsewhere people go about shouting their inner feelings and emotions in the street.  But in comparison, there seems to be a sort of block, a sort of veil which everyone is comfortable with.

The few who do dare speak of their inner turmoils and share their feelings are often considered and treated as traditionalists or religious - someone to be kept away from!  Most consider it fashionable and modern to be 'trendy', to be superfluous.  Thus the avoidance of shared silence, deep intimate relationships, that extra effort to retain relationships, conversations involving feelings (rather than merely intellectual stuff or swearing), sharing of personal space and emotions... A note on silence: it is not that people appreciate silence. They do - that too fiercely. It is more as a tool to close up oneself, shutting out others, rather than shared silence.

I'm not judging, neither the people nor the situation, but merely trying to understand.  Certainly, it is not the case that every person or situation is in this state - but a sort of general ambiance.  Surely there must be several reasons for such an ambiance to be created.  Wonder what could be the predominant ones that led to this state of affairs.  Or I may be reading the signs differently.  Possible.

Fear of Mercy

This year the Church commemorates the year of mercy.  However, one strange feeling crept over me today as I listened to someone helping another person with her troubles in life.  Perhaps there is also a psychological dimension to it.  The fact is that mercy is feared!

Just like love can cut through any hard heartened person and transform him or her into another person altogether, experience of mercy really touches the core of a person.

Moreover it is an expression of strength without being showy about it.  Though it apparently seems like cowardice and inability, mercy is not possible for the weak.  Most people however, would like to 'appear' strong rather than truly 'be' strong.  Gentleness and meekness are not considered by the general public as virtues. Hence a facade of 'strong' feelings and expressions.  

Sharing... from the heart

While our sharing based on our reflections on the Salesian Constitutions was good, it brought back to my mind some of the earlier sharings I was involved in, with members of my community wherever I was during my earlier years.

There was a time when I was 'all head' and would feel odd about people sharing their feelings and sentiments.  I considered them as not strong people or those incapable of 'delving deep' into something profound.  However over the years my perception has changed and today I hold quite the contradictory position.  To share something of one's own feelings and emotions in all honesty require a great amount of courage and maturity.  Only those who have a genuinely large heart for the group and are at home with the group and themselves can do so.

To expose one's vulnerabilities before others, one's own family members, does not make one more feeble or guilty; it actually strengthens one from within.  Done in an ambiance of sincerity and openness, it gives one the courage to face difficulties, no more as individuals but as persons who enjoy the support and cooperation of a 'family'.

Once we taste this sort of sharing when in a small close knit group of persons, a very sound theological or doctrinal exposition of a concept does not touch anyone as much as a downcast look or a brief pause after narration of a very personal experience.

Defining sin/love

While at Karunapuram, Puma one day approached me asked, "Does God get offended by our sins?" I immediately replied, "That's up to Him. If He wants to, He will. If not, He won't."  His next question was ready. "Then why confess?" As I reflected, an analogy came to my mind, especially in the context of that day's reading where Jesus meets and praises the woman at Peter's home.

One day I scold and say bad words to ...

1. a drunkard on the road
2. my good friend.
3. my own mother. 

Am I then comfortable or does my conscience prick?  If the latter then in which instance haunts me?  It all depends on my relationship with that person. Naturally, I'll feel more guilty and ashamed of raising my voice against my mother, than in the other two instances.  The more I love, the more I feel... It is also because somewhere deep within us we prefer to love than harbor guilt, shame, fear, hatred or envy.  I therefore ask forgiveness from God because I love him and wish to savour that love better.

"Her many sins are forgiven, because she has loved much!"

Feel, Do, Be ... Good

Often our whole formation structure and all our activities are geared towards, perhaps unconsciously, making one 'feel good'.  Whether it is prayer, work, study, relationship, apostolate... The same is repeated when the students complete their basic formation and are involved in full-time apostolate, not just in their early years but all through life.  Make people 'feel good'.  So we have 'good' sermons, 'radical' documents, 'smiling' relationships, 'high-scoring' students, ...

Some of these boys go on to also 'do good'. That certainly is one step ahead of merely 'feeling good'.  So, some charitable works once in a way.  Some heroic deeds in some place... the rest of time is spent on riding high on the good feeling that is earned from such deeds!

However, very few - very very very few - graduate to 'being good'.  Now that's a different ball game!  'Feeling good' is a form of escapism (from growing in depth, from being men of substance).  'Doing good' is a form of lethargy (can, but do not will).  'Being good' on the other hand, demands a sustained endeavour, a collective effort, radical choices and lifestyle in congruence with those choices, a steady and joyful commitment... there is no play acting here, no breaks/holidays (from being good).  

In between you have to manage!

Rabbi, my friend, send me this quote sometime ago.

You are loved when you were born. You will be loved when you die. In between you have to manage!

I always tell my Brothers, that love, more than an emotion, is a decision. It is a basically a commitment. It is a choice I have to deliberately make very consciously and carefully.  It is not something that just merely happens!  That 'happening by looks or chance' is only some wishful thinking or at the most the introduction to the introduction.  Not love itself.  

Using available force than battling it...

There is always a huge outcry whenever there is a depiction of a religious founder or leader in a sort of caricature mode or in a "derogatory" manner.  There was always somewhere someone depicting Jesus with a smoking pipe or a bottle of whiskey or puffing a cigar;  not to mention someone, drawing a caricature of Prophet Muhammad (not too often though!); or some celebrity dancing around trees in a movie draped with some shawl with imprints of gods and goddesses.  Immediately there are protests and letters and agitations...

Well, understandably sentiments are delicate and thereby one easily gets hurt.  To voice a corrective note is obviously a sensible thing to do. However, things often are taken overboard and an unnecessary ruckus created.  More than stage protests and create a scene, the same occasion could very well be used to instruct, perhaps using the very same "derogatory" text/movie/picture.  Take the wind off the sails! Or use the wind to steer in your direction...

I suppose that demands much prudence, wisdom and knack.  

Heart and Mind

The mind prefers to live in the past and is often lost in a maze of the bygone. On the contrary, the heart wants to live in the present.  It is in the here and now that the heart seeks to know who and what we are.  This collective tussle between the heart and the mind determines who and what we are.  Neither can we live only in the past - then we'd be as good as dead - nor can we live only in the present, then every moment we would be living afresh, with no anchor or foothold.

In simple terms, I suppose I'm reminding myself of the balance between feelings and ideas, something of what I learnt in the last week while in Mumbai. 

Handling feelings

Towards the end of the morning session, Ramesh asked an interesting question to the animator.  The theme was negative feelings like anger, revenge, hatred, sadness... He asked, "Do these issues which seem to plague us religious, also trouble the lay people?" He had a point in asking this question, namely that the lay people do not seem to be very much troubled by these aspects; whereas for us religious these really make or break our lives!

Reflecting on that question I would say that the issues we face are all the same - religious or not - for after all, we are human beings.  However, why is it a married couple somehow has the grace to live their  trouble marital life in a rather decent manner, while we make such a mess for everyone - including ourselves - in religious life?  Perhaps because we have the best of everything and hence the inability to see God's hand in what we go through.  Lay people are willing to see that because they believe and trust in God more than we do!  

Negative Feelings or helpful feelings?

During the morning session, among the many things the animator of our course spoke, something that caught my attention was this:  We always wish to get rid of all our negative feelings, those things that indicate the deeper pain and hurt.  And the best part is that these negative aspects of our emotions shield us from real danger.  Aspects like anger, fear, sadness, pain ... are all aspects which are there to 'protect the psyche'.

The animator was saying that this is the curse of our 'drug culture', wherein we would like to do away with anything painful or hurting.  We really do not bother to go to the deeper issues which cause these feelings.  We are quite happy to clean up these feelings rather than address the causes that give rise to these feelings.  Worse is when we rationalise or spiritualize these aspects and shove them off the radar (or so we think!).  

Identifying feelings

We began the five-day animation programme for the Brothers of the three provinces of Mumbai, Panjim and Hyderabad today at Matunga.  The first day was very packed... more intense than the retreat I attended last week.  Anyway, let me see what I can draw out of it. While I'm here I also need to sort out the issues regarding the next Brothers' Congress and related stuff which I've been asked to oversee.

Today's sessions were basically a call to focus on our feelings, and not hide or take shelter in our ideas and thoughts.  Using the Esop's fable of the fox and the grapes, the animator was trying to help us delve into our inner beings, to spell our feelings rather than quote our theories and thoughts. As part of it, we were asked to trace the source(s) of any one of our physical illnesses.  I really was struggling!

One thing is sure, I'm no 'feeling-person'; I certainly do feel safe in the world of thoughts and ideas!