God's inadequacies

 Watching the movie, Karuppu, reiterated even God's inadequacies in the face of human free will.  In a fantasy world, God can play the 'God mode' and 'set right' all things! But in reality, even God is limited! The movie attempts to 'liberate' God and assist him work 'outside the God-mode'. It even throws an open challenge to God to work in and as the human mould.  So far so good! 

However, the rest of the movie takes recourse to a fantasy, without making any serious effort at addressing an evil plaguing our Indian judicial system. The closest the movie comes to making a possible response or proposing a way forward, through the maze of the judiciary is citing fear.  Fear among the people, especially those directly involved in judicial matters: lawyers, judges, court staff... Fear primarily of the Divine.  But, that is a very lame attempt.  

For if those involved in the court process were God-fearing, the whole system would have never got corrupted in the first place.  And if everyone was so obedient to God, the courts would be redundant! 

In comparison to this movie, the other recent movie of Surya titled Jai Bhim is a much more powerful and sensible one. 

Nonetheless, the movie is a rather good trigger for discussion in a Theodicy class.  God is omnipotent, and almighty, all powerful; but before the human free will, God makes himself and is 'limited'. 

Travesty of Justice

To take my mind off the hundred and one things that were literally eating my brain, I watched the Tamil movie Karuppu, yesterday. Wrong choice!! It only added fuel and angst to my already preoccupied mind.

The movie is centred around the Indian judiciary system, or rather the inbuilt corruption and red tape that cripples the system so badly that while apparently everything is as per the process, the results are totally skewed and wrong.  The process itself, is so prolonged that even when justice is served, the intermediary costs are exorbitant.  The movie clearly indicates that even if God himself were to follow the legal procedure, he/she would be unable to do anything differently!  

Having to undergo the same judicial trials of matters concerning various issues of the communities, in the last four years, I could very much vibe with the sentiments of the victims, as I watched the movie.  The only difference being, the dozen cases that I'm involved in aren't anything serious or life-altering for me personally or for the community that I'm representing.  But that is not the case for most people approaching the courts for justice.  Their needs and demands are far, far, far more pressing, basic and absolutely human.  A decision - if at all, one arrives at it - is enough to break a family, shatter dreams, plans and even alter the lives of individuals and families irrevocably. Besides the corruption underlying the whole system, the duration these court cases take is perhaps the most agonising and traumatic aspect. 

During my 5 year tenure so far, there is only one case that has seen us walk out of the court for good. Only one.  That too after 17 long years! Presently there are 11 ongoing issues, with 9 of them being initiated within the last 5 years!  

Zaccheus and the rich young man

Kevin offered an interesting insight into the reading of this day.  The passage is that of Zaccheus.  He said, he was wondering what new or different could he share about his passage from the Gospel that we have heard so many times. 

He then said that he noticed something in the structure of the Gospel itself.  The story of Zaccheus follows that of the rich young man and the poor blind man.  The curing of the blind beggar is so to say, sandwiched in between the stories of the two rich men. 

The young man and Zaccheus were both rich in wealth.  Both of them were keen to meet Jesus.  The young man had some idea of how to become better, but that he had already mastered.  He knew not what next.  Zaccheus, on the other hand, knew exactly what he had to do.  He was aware of his corrupt dealings and what needed to be done to shun that burden of guilt.  Once Jesus arrives on the scene, all that Jesus does is give that final push!  The young man, asks for further instructions.  However, on knowing what that entails, he is hesitant to go down that road.  Zaccheus, does not need further instructions.  All that he has is a self-invitation of Jesus to dine with him.  He then rattles off his next mode of living! 

At what stage of life am I?  Am I aware of what the Lord wants of me? If aware, am I willing to undertake that what He wants of me?  Am I conscious of what I need to give up, if I am to follow the Lord?  Am I ready for that? 

I suppose, the same questions arise in the intermediary context of poor blind man.  Another lesson, we can draw from these three stories together is that no matter what our financial situation is, we are always in need!  

I will seek other shores...

A few days ago heard this particular hymn, and was immediately struck by the chorus:

O Lord with your eyes set upon me gently smiling, 
You have spoken my name. 

All I longed for I have found by the water 

at your side, I will seek other shores. 

A hymn with a strong vocational dimension.  The call.  The invitation and the response!

Lord you have come to the seashore,
Neither searching for the rich nor the wise
desiring only that I should follow.

The tension Paul expresses in his letter to the Corinthians, read yesterday for the second reading, wherein he speaks of being 'compelled' to proclaim the Gospel, is not something everyone can grasp.  How can one be free when one feels compelled?  How can one feel happy and thrilled when cannot but obey?  In a way, only one who has gone through such an experience can understand it.  The mental logic cannot really set to rest the tension such a compelling call creates. 

The Lord hardened Pharoah's heart...

The first reading of the day begins with this statement:

"The Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart..." (Ex. 11: 10)

Honestly if only Yahweh did not do this, there'd be no Passover, no slaughter of the Egyptians at the Red sea and no hurried exit from Egypt.  Just that one act of making Pharaoh obstinate resulted in all this following confusion.  So why did he do that?

Some would prefer to believe that he did that in order to fulfill his promises to the Israelites; or to show them his greatness.  These could be 'good reasons' but not 'valid or real reasons'.

The fact is that he didn't!  Yahweh, the almighty could inspire Moses and Aaron and lead them to guide the Israelites out the Egypt, but he could not and would not change the heart of Pharaoh.  That was something beyond his own nature... to meddle with the decisions of human beings.

So then, is the Scripture wrong in making that statement.  Well, can consider it one of the many anthropological modes of expressing an experience of God.  

The truth will set you free

Reflection for April 5, 2017: If God were your father...

Freedom is a tricky issue. Most of us are convinced that if I am able to do anything, then I'm free. If not, then I'm not free. True freedom is not about doing anything. It is about doing what one ought to do. That what we claim we are, we choose to do accordingly – freedom lies in that choice to strive and be fully who we are. Jesus proves this clearly when he says, “If you claim to be descendants of Abraham, you will act accordingly… If God were your Father, you would love Him...” The trio of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego knew exactly what they believed in. They did not need Yahweh to save them in order for their belief to be confirmed. “Our God… may he save us. But even if not, know O king, that we will not worship your god or anything else.” Nothing ever binds such freedom.

The Father's commandment

Reflection for April 4, 2017: I say and do only what the Father has told me to

All of us seek name and fame, in our own subtle ways. That is human tendency. There is nothing evil about it. However, as humans we really do not need all of it! We often forget that we are not called to be the sun, giving out light to the world. We are rather called to be reflectors of the sun spreading light to the dark corners of the world and peoples lives. Jesus Himself shows us the way when he openly admits that He is merely following the Father's commandment. All His words and actions that drew attention to Himself, He used it all to build the Kingdom. In this Kingdom, the light already exists; one is merely called to be reflectors of that light or atleast transparent enough for that light to shine through us.

Addiction and spirituality

While preparing a paper on 'Addiction and desires', I was suggested this particular book by one priest.  I read quite a few academic and psychological articles and then read this book, written by a psychologist but with a heavy spiritual bent. Reading this book was a real 'confusion'!  It turned all what I read earlier, on its head. I redid my paper. However, (unfortunately) could not include the spiritual element and that was a real struggle.  The concept is basically based on spirituality.  The name of the book is Addiction and Grace by Gerald May.

The basic premise of the book is that each of us has an inborn desire for God.  Irrespective of whether we are conscious or not, name it so or otherwise, seek it through religion or other ways, this yearning is inescapable.  May calls addiction, the "most powerful psychic enemy of humanity's desire for God" (p. 3).

Addiction then is what distracts us from this desire for God or seek comfortable ways of escaping from His haunting (but not enslaving) love.

Psychologically, addiction uses up desire. It is like a psychic malignancy, sucking our life energy into specific obsessions and compulsions, leaving less and less energy available for other people and other pursuits (p. 13).

Here's what I liked most...

Detachment is the word used in spiritual traditions to describe freedom of desire. Not freedom from desire, but freedom of desire.... detachment has come to be associated with coldness, austerity, and lack of passion. This is simply not true (p. 14).

God's will

The Gospel of the day is about the father and his two sons (Mt 21: 28-32). The eldest son is requested to go to the fields and he refuses. But later changes his mind and does go. The younger son who is approached next by the father agrees to go, but does not actually do so.  So who does the will of the father?

Well, it struck me today that this is a great lesson in understanding better the whole concept of 'God's will'.  There is often the clash between doing God's will and following our own free will.  How does one really reconcile both these?

The father, in the parable, merely asks his elder son to go to the fields.  He does not tell him which route to take, by what vehicle to reach the place, what exactly is to be done there, whom to meet, what to do and what not to do. The father trusts his son to know what is to be done and how best to do it. That part of it he leaves it to his discretion.  Moreover, when the son initially declines to go, the father does not impose his will on him.  Furthermore, once the son decides to go to the fields, there is only so much to be done, as is to be in a field!  He certainly will not be able to run a discotheque there!  Nor will he be betting on horse-racing.

Similarly when God invites us to a certain task, He does not specify each and every bit of it. That He trusts us to figure out, using the qualities of the head and heart we have developed.  He did not create us as robots with each and every step completely programmed.  He made us with His own breath to be creative, different, special - even commit faults and run into error. 

God's will

Speaking of the Gospel of the day, Mt. 12: 46 ff... Benny and I were having a small discussion during breakfast.  He casually asked me why I became a Brother.  When there was no straight forward answer coming he said, so you became a Brother because God wanted to become a Brother?  I immediately said, "Don't put that burden on God!" And we both laughed.

He said during his Mass in the Convent this morning he asked the Sisters what was God's will?  He asked them if they becoming Sisters was God's will for them. When they all affirmed, he thrashed it out saying, "Becoming a Sister was your choice!"  God only wills that we love one another... that's what the Gospel of the day clearly indicates.

By loving one another just as God loves us, we fulfill His will... the rest of what we do and say and be is purely an outcome of that primary task.  If only we are able to savour His love and respond and spread it out, the rest will all fall in place.

Free but must!

Quite a few of the Brothers find the recitation of the Breviary very routine and boring.  At every opportunity they get to skip it, they'd gladly replace it with something as fickle as an extempore bhajan service - every week!  This bhajan service at times is so extempore that nobody knows who is going to do what!  Very many of the same Brothers do not feel bored of the game they choose to play everyday.  Given an opportunity they'd play football every day... the same game, the same court, the same rules, the same position... but this is not boring or tiring.

What then distinguishes something as boring and irrelevant  from something else that is interesting and meaningful?

Baruch Spinoza while speaking of God states that he must necessarily emanate while still holding that God is free.  He explains that God's choice to emanate is not decided by someone else.  There is no compulsion from anyone external to him to emanate. Yet, he does emanate. It is his choice to do so.

Explaining this in class, I presented the following analogy:  A young boy is very fond of prayer and he does pray every day especially early in the morning. He perseveres in this choice and is happy about it.  He later decides to join a seminary.  At the seminary there is every morning a bell to rise and later for meditation and morning prayers.  Now in this present situation he 'must' pray!  Is he free now to pray?  Most of the students got the point.  Bell and the timetable does not in any way hinder this young man from praying.  If at all, they serve as an 'additional' help.  But even without them, he will continue to pray - primarily because it is his choice.  The rest of the crowd, who drag themselves to the church to pray, have to make sense of what we are doing once there!  It is often the bell that prays and not me!  

So is the bell and schedule really helpful?  To a certain extent, yes! For those who have not had the facility to fall in love with prayer, these offer an ambiance.  But very often they are seen more as deterrents than aids.

Obedience and free will

2 Sm 6: 12b-15. 17-19/ Ps 24: 7. 8. 9. 10/ Mk 3: 31-35

Anyone who does the will of God, that person is my brother and sister and mother (Mk 3: 35)

Jesus, by stating thus, is not in any way insulting His mother, Mary. In fact, if there is anyone who perfectly fits that statement it would be Mother Mary. We see here the silent communication between Jesus and Mary. They understand each other perfectly well in all circumstances, from Jesus getting lost in the temple to the journey up the Calvary hill. That's possible only when both are tuned in to the same frequency, God's will.

I delight to do your will, O God (Ps 40: 8)

Lot and his set of choices

Fr Michael, the Salesian Provincial of New Delhi, shared an very insightful message during his homily this morning, during Mass. The first reading was about Lot fleeing from Sodom.

Lot, in comparison to his uncle Abraham, was always given preference by Abraham.  When asked, Lot choose for himself, the better looking part of the place for himself and his livestock, leaving Abraham with the 'not-so-appealing' scenery.  He could have very well let his uncle, Abraham make the preferential choice.

When asked by the Lord to flee from the impending danger to the mountains (symbolically representing, the presence of God), Lot bargains for the little town of Zor.

Lot consistently made choices to be away from God, totally on his own and always from his own and selfish perspective.  Abraham on the other hand, mostly discerned what was good for everyone concerned, including God.  Perhaps that's the reason, Abraham is remembered with much great reverence and respect than Lot. 

God empowers

We, as human beings, always wish God to treat us as babies when in difficulty and as youngsters for the rest of the time.  While the truth is that God treats us neither as helpless babies nor as carefree youngsters. He walks along with us, mature adults, grown up persons well endowed with grace and growth.  So while we wish that He carries us in His bosom, He gives us strength and points out the direction to tread on our own 'God-given' feet.  We expect Him to wash away our sins and make us 'as white as snow' but He gives us opportunities to have our sins forgiven.  God does not do things for us or instead of us, for in doing so He would be insulting Himself.  After all it is He who created us in 'his own image and likeness'. Why should He belittle Himself when He has already blessed us with all things necessary to fight and win the battle.  All that He joyfully does is accompany us, empower us.... not spoon-feed or babysit us!

Christ the King

As I prepared myself for Mass this morning, I read the readings and was reflecting on the Kingship of Christ.  I found it quite difficult and irritating.  To look upon Jesus as a King and someone in 'power' was not very soothing or anywhere near inspiring.  The one thought that kept ringing in my mind was 'what about Christ the Prophet?' That never gets mentioned anywhere, any day!  The last Sunday of the liturgical year is dedicated to Christ the King; Maundy Thursday commemorates Christ the Priest.  What happened and where is Christ, the Prophet?

The only thought connected with Christ the King that made sense to me was that of surrendering one's will to Him (or better still, aligning one's own will to that of my Lord).  Apart from this surrender, the Kingship was a real distraction. 

Jesus' freedom

Having read the passage from the book of Richard Rohr, I spent my adoration time this evening trying to figure out what was the freedom Jesus' enjoyed during this lifetime here on earth.  He constantly referred to God as the one whose commands and wishes he was fulfilling.  He never once claimed to be doing things on his own accord, much less in conflict with the Father.  Was he then a mere puppet in the hands of the Father?

Certainly not!  He would have been a puppet if he did everything he did merely because the Father wanted it.  He truly and fully exercised his freedom in choosing to do the will of the Father. For him that was the best way he could utilise and live his freedom.  He choose to do what his father wanted him to do.  And that made all the difference.

Apparently seems paradoxical, that surrender should be the greatest means of living out one's freedom but sitting before the Blessed Sacrament, I couldn't but believe it.

Being chosen; being consecrated

I know not if there is a big difference - theologically or not - between being chosen and being consecrated. I really haven't read about these two concepts from that frame of mind, ever ... so I really do not know the difference. But listening to the explanation of the gospel of the other day, the preacher having strayed from the main theme - as usual - made me reflect on these two words. Is it that those chosen by God are 'automatically' consecrated? Or is it that there is only a 'special' group within those called, to whom consecration is 'gifted'?

The Israelites from time immemorial claimed to be the chosen race. Yet, going by the Bible (especially the New Testament), when the time came, they did not believe nor recognise. Now we Christians claim to be the chosen ones of God - whatever that may mean! What guarantee that we we now recognise the Lord? ... that we would believe in that what is right?

In the same lines, does consecration of a person or race, mean that all that he or they do is sanctified? If not, how does consecration work or what does it mean?

The more I reflect on these ideas, the more I feel that it is the person concerned, that ultimately makes the choice. The final decision is in the hands of the person. This may make God a secondary entity. Well, apparently this line of thought does put me over God. But a little more careful observation of this fact will reveal that even in this situation wherein the person is given the right to make the final decision, God's supremacy is intact for He is the one who is offering us this choice. That's a very costly gift... and a heavy responsibility too.

Master of my choices: myself!

All the three readings of the day, I believe are the source of the following quotation of St Augustine:

God who created you without you, will not save you without you.

I really do not know in what context Augustine uses this statement but for me, it is a living testament of what God wants of me: my whole hearted cooperation and not just subservience or in other words, God lets me choose Him (with the inbuilt option of even rejecting Him).

The first reading begins thus:

You seduced me, O Lord, and I let myself be seduced.

Most often we get stuck to the first part of the quote. We say, "God you do what you want to do." It is never a willing conscious acceptance to work with God. It is a passive resignation to His will. It may do good, because God in His greatness can bring about wonders. But if only we add our two pence to it. If only we consciously make a choice and say, "God you do what you want to do with me because that is what I wish, that is what I'm happy to do." Then we see miracles being performed at every breath.

He floods me with a million options every moment of my life and in no way compels me to pick one of His choice - He only offers me advice and indicators. The choice is totally mine and mine alone. And the greatness of my God: He keeps offering me these choices no matter what. Even when I consciously do not opt for His suggestions, He is with me. That's why I love Him, adore Him and pray nothing but this: That I discern His will rightly and have the courage to follow it through, no matter what.

Understanding 'creation'

Discussing with my third year students I am realising the different meanings of the word 'creation'. It was always a firm belief of mine that Evolution and Creation concepts (with regard to the world) are never at loggerheads with each other. They in fact complement each other. But now this new concept of creation that I'm grappling with throws fresh light on this 'taken-for-granted' idea.

Creation is seen more as a real dependence on God (in Philosophical terms, a total ontological dependence on God). This is seen not as a product of human hands which may or may not need its 'creator' to be around for its continued existence. It is more like the light that proceeds from a candle. The light illumines and does great things by itself, but is dependent on the candle for its existence. Besides this, the candle does not interfere with the good or bad that the light does. Creation too is like our human dependence on God. Without Him, we are in a sense, incomplete. But this does not imply that we are mere puppets in His hands. He does not interfere with our freedom.

Listening to God's message

This morning as I sat for Mass, remembering that it was the feast of the Holy Innocents, I wondered if God could have very well alerted this carnage, especially since it was of really the little and innocent ones. Could not God have altered or distracted the mind of Herod? Could He not have alerted all the parents of the babies ahead of time, just as He informed Joseph about it? Could not the wise men, done something to trick Herod, rather than save their skin and walk away with it? I know I do not have the answers, for I am neither God nor have I any message from Him. But I guess this:

Just like Joseph was 'informed' about the impending danger, God would certainly have tried His unique ways of getting Herod to try something less heinous. Or at the most, distracted Herod from carrying out his evil plans of the massacre. Then, what happened? The difference lay in the fact that Joseph 'listened' to God's message; Herod did not! Joseph could have very well brushed aside God's message as some fancy thinking or dream; but he chose otherwise. Herod could have 'listened' to God's message but he didn't... and that made all the difference in the lives (or death) of the little ones.

Moral of the story (not a logical one or a sensitive one, but all the same a reasonable one): Each one's got to do what one ought to do; lest someone pays the price, at times a heavy one at that!