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.  

Disconnect of the tongue

Like every other species on the earth, we humans too love to communicate... especially, by way of talking. So much so, for most of us prolonged silence is almost practically impossible. 

While that is the case of most of the population, there is a small portion of humanity which prefers to speak less.  Among this minority, there are few who barely speak at all. With people of such ability, conversation becomes very difficult. Then there are those whose silence cuts us off from even gauging what's going on in their mind.  

There are those rare few who speak very little but when they do speak they make utmost sense. Hence it is a joy to listen to them.  

A few people have a tongue that has a mind of its own.  Sooner than later, other realise how fickle such people can be.  

Then there are those whose tongue is totally disconnected from their mind; a total rapture of the nerve linking the tongue and the brain. I know of a handful of such and I stay away from them!  Worse still, if link to the heart is also missing!  Such people are toxic.  

Strangers or friends?

 Of late I'm reading up interesting inspiring or odd stories in the news.  I never liked politics - never do! So I gladly skip the political section.  But the odd bits that occasionally pop up in mainstream media about unusual or heartwarming stories, I gladly read.  

One such was this one on BBC: The wedding crasher mystery solved after four years

It is a story of a young couple, reviewing the photos of their wedding, come across a stranger in attendance. Being a close knit event with family and friends only invited for the occasion, they couldn't identify the man.  The bride particularly felt she needed to uncover his identity and after four years did manage to discover that the man attending their wedding was a total stranger; but accidentally at their wedding, instead of another wedding happening at a nearby venue.  This man was given the wrong address and realised that he was at the wrong venue, only on seeing the bride - the only person whom he knew in the intended wedding he wished to be present!  

As I read this story, I couldn't but laugh.  In Scotland - as it would be in most of Europe, I guess - weddings and such events are attended only by invitation, that too very selected few. To find a stranger would mean they are wedding crashers!  And just like in this story, easy to identify, as 'not invited' - though may be difficult to identify them in real life.  But in India, if one were to even try to identify all those who attend a wedding, a lifetime would be totally inadequate even to mark someone as a wedding crasher!  Not to mention anything about actual wedding crashers. 

First of all our families and friends circle are so big and wide, any new face could very well be a first cousin or the better half of my best friend! So when one invites someone close to oneself for an event, that invited person inviting another one or two or more is not taken offence at or unexpected.  The more the merrier is the mantra!  In such a scenario, total strangers are also welcome!  That's the other aspect of celebrations in India - everyone is welcome!  Very rarely is a guest thrown out, merely because he or she is a stranger or he or she hasn't been invited. On the contrary, strangers becoming friends at such events is not uncommon!! Such is the adventurous life in India! 

Ronald Menezes SDB

 Today is the death anniversary of Fr Ronald Menezes, a Salesian Priest from Mumbai.  I was in the same community as he in the year 2003 at Matunga.  I was a student then, studying outside the community or the Salesian educational institutions.  

I remember him for his gentle ways of keeping all of us in the community together.  He was a hard worker and expected everyone also to contribute their mite in keeping the works going on smoothly. One of his most striking features was his enthusiasm. He was always optimistic and enthused about life.  That was really contagious.  Be it among the confreres, the school teachers, people who came to the Shrine, or even the boys in the campus. 

He was always present in his rectors office which was in the school building.  Every school day morning, he would be at the entrance of the primary section greeting children and parents - always in his cassock.  He was such a familiar figure among the tiny tots that one day one of them walked up to him and said, 'Your mummy is at the gate!' Ronnie was shocked.  (His parents were long deceased). Looking at his face the boy realised that he didn't believe him. So the little one took Ronnie's hand and dragged him to the entrance.  And whom does Ronnie see there?  A nun, in a habit!  The little one had linked the 'matching clothes' and figured out that the one in the habit would be the mother of the one in a cassock!

I most appreciated his love and care of the boarders.  We then had nearly 60 boys with us in the Matunga boarding.  And he knew each of the boys, their family background and their strengths and weaknesses.  It was he who warmly exhorted us, three Brothers, to visit the homes of the boys during the holidays.  We went grudgingly.  But that one visit to the homes of the boys, made a big difference for our relationship with the boys.  When the boys returned to the boarding, most of them had a totally different outlook towards us.  They saw us Brothers as friends and relatives, who knew their families, their homes, their real living condition.  They didn't have to put on masks because we knew their real condition, and didn't treat them any different or less because of that.  

Ronnie was also very good in relating to people and roping them in to assist in the various works of the boarding or school.  He was keen that we three Brothers meet him every month.  And he was keen that we keep him abreast of our reading material and progress.  I think that was because he himself was an avid reader.  It was evident from his sermons and reflections.  

Anyway, I was blessed to have him as the Rector of the community when I was in Matunga.  And today, I thank God for him, in a special way.  

Sanctity and relationship

 Fr Thomas Santiagu began his sermon the other day, saying that to be a saint is to choose to be eternal.  For a saint is someone who has opted to be related to Jesus and that relationship is eternal.  For this relationship and the person himself or herself to be eternal, there is no shortcut.  And all that one has is this lifetime...long or short does not really matter. What counts is the intention and the intensity. 

Truly, just like prayer being a relationship, rather than a string of words or rituals, so is sanctity.  And to be holy, is to actually enter into a relationship with the Divine.  This is not a one day achievement, rather it is a life time work.  But one who genuinely has opted and worked for this relationship, he or she has become eternal.  The person continues to live on even after death.  The good that the person has done resonates in different ways in the lives and works of those still alive.  

On the other hand, there are some who wish to have a quick shot at fame or name.  Perhaps they should join the film industry.  Perhaps some of us religious too are in the wrong field of life!!! 

Salesian priorities

 I came across this beautiful description of the shift in our Salesian approach towards young people, in the last General Chapter GC 28, p. 38 (AGC 433): 

We do not doubt this truth of the young people themselves, a truth we recognised at the same time in the Chapter hall: “They ask us for time and we give them space; they ask us for relationships and we provide them with services; they ask us for fraternal life and we offer them structures; they ask us for friendship and we provide activities for them. All this commits us to rediscovering the riches and potential of the ‘family spirit’”.[CG28, Priority of the Salesian mission among today’s young people. First nucleus, no.5]

I think this para exactly sums up what we should be focusing on (spending time, building relationships, developing friendships...), rather than what we are presently engaged in (creating spaces where we Salesians are missing, offering services, structures, and activities). 

Then came a Pharaoh...

In our religious houses, among the numerous issues plaguing our transition procedures, is the break of rapport between the one laying down office has with the various people with regard to our apostolate and the one replacing the outgoing confrere.  The phrase 'there came a pharaoh who knew not Joseph' aptly describes this issue. 

In my three years in office, I've come across several lay people who feel greatly disturbed, and some even feel humiliated, after a new set of confreres replace others in a place with a long history.  The new set of confreres treat this particular individual or persons with utter disregard or total shun any contact with him or them.  At times confreres may not be doing this consciously.  It is sometime out of pure ignorance or because his predecessor has not introduced or even mentioned about these individuals to the incoming confreres. But for the lay persons involved it is very awkward.  It is just that some of them have long been associated with our works and our mission.  And after being so closely associated and worked so much, suddenly to find themselves being treated as strangers, by actual strangers (new Salesians!) is embarrassing.

I also know of instances where some Salesians have pampered some lay persons to the extent that rather than become people who would positively influence the apostolate, they become parasites or looters.  The fresh team distancing themselves and the apostolate from such persons is actually needed and is healthy for all involved. 

At other times, our attitude of being omniscient, certainly does not help!  Even though, we have no idea of the new apostolate, or have never even bothered to glance through its history, we act as if we were born into that responsibility.  In such a scenario, there came a Pharoah, who not only knew not Joseph, but thought of himself as Yahweh!! 

Reworking our transition procedures keeping in mind such scenarios is one possible way forward. But ultimately, blessed is he who does not feel as a Pharaoh at all!

Source of significance

In the episode of Don Bosco and Bartholomew Garelli, in the sacristy of the church, which marked the beginning of Don Bosco's work for the poor and abandoned youth, there is a very clear distinction between the way Don Bosco approached the boy and the sacristan. 

For the sacristan the boy was 'useless' unless he was able to serve Mass.  A very utilitarian outlook.  From this perspective the meaning of life is defined only in terms of what I do.  The significance is derived from my achievements.  Hence the emphasis on responsibility, role, position, status, success... 

For Don Bosco, the boy was relevant just for himself.  His significance was his mere existence and presence.  Who I am.  Hence the emphasis on relationship, spirituality, care, concern (for self and others). In this sense, a dimension that I need to grow in, when it comes to viewing others and myself is this: How deeply is this sense of identity rooted in God?   

God as a living person

 In the book Mister God, this is Anna, there is an interesting episode - among the many - where Fynn tucks little Anna into bed and ...

"Ain't you gonna say your prayers?" she asked. "Well, yes," I replied, "when I get to bed." "I want say mine now with you," she said. So we both god down on our knees and she talked while I listened. 

I've been to church many times, and heard many prayers, but none like this. I can't remember much about her prayer except that it started off with, "Dear Mister God, this is Anna talking," and she went on in such a familiar way of talking to Mister God that I had the creepy feeling that if I dared look behind me he would be standing there.

It is that familiarity and closeness with which Anna 'speaks' to God that caught my attention.  God, for her, was not a distant reality or a supernatural being to be adored.  For her, God was alive and present, in person, for real and therefore addressed and spoken to as if present here and now. 

I wonder how many of us will ever reach this stage of life, this personal experience of God.  

Journey or the destination?

 There's often the debate whether the journey is more important than the destination; or the other way around.  I'm more prone to agree with the former.  Nonetheless, I think there's another dimension to this debate as well.  It is about relationship; or company during the whole process.  What makes the journey really pleasant and enriching, among the many other things, is the company we have all along.  The same can be said about reaching the destination. Achieving a milestone is relevant and thrilling when there is someone with whom I can share that experience.  That experience is going to differ depending on whether I have with me those dear to me or  some total strangers or none at all.  

Vine and the branches

One interesting thing about the branches of a vine is that they can never of their own accord get detached from the stem.  Neither is it in their nature to seek independence.  They always stay connected to the main stem and draw energy from it.  

The mistake is to treat the branches and the stem as individuated parts.  As if they were different part put together to form the vine.  It is we who call the different aspects of the plant as stem, branches, fruits and leaves.  For the plant itself it is one life.  

So it would be good to ask ourselves this Sunday, as we reflect on the gospel of the vine and the branches if we are looking at our relationship with God as outsiders or as from within that relationship.  If the latter then we are one; if we view our relationship as an outsider then we are different beings brought together and assembled into one.  And if assembled, then we can as well be un-assembled.  

Listening

 Today's inspiration... 

I guess that is what distinguishes a wise person from a teacher or a learned person... the ability to listen.  Not just hear, but listen with an open mind and a generous heart.  

Of late I've realised my nephew tends to speak longer to me over the phone.  Earlier he barely spoke to me.  But since the time I appreciated and showed some interest in his activities and learning skills he has begun to compete with my niece for 'his time' with me!!  And my niece, not to be outdone, at least for the time spent, goes on and on about stuff I barely can make sense of.  The temptation is to cut her off and end the conversation.  But I know if I do that she is going to interpret it as my disinterestedness in her 'achievements'.  So I listen.  And am happy with that time spent with them, because I know that time is not wasted but invested in a relationship.  Worthy every bit!  

Giving up for giving

It is one thing to fast when one has plenty to eat and choose from and totally another when one has nothing to eat in the first place!  I think if we are to build up the triadic relationship with God, the other and myself, we need to graduate from merely 'giving up' to 'giving' - with a spiritual intent.  In that way, all three are involved: we are doing it for God, benefitting the neighbour or the needy and helping oneself too in this whole process. 

While 'giving up' has its merits, it is lesser than 'giving' because it ends up with me alone!  Or at the most God and me!  There could be a laissez faire effect wherein the needy benefit but when I decide to share with the other what I've denied myself, then the good reaches the other directly and instantly.  

Faith is personal; not private

 Faith is personal, but not private.  It is the intimate relationship that we have with God but not something exclusive.  That relationship includes the other as well.  If it does not then it is private!! 

The gospel of the day, from St Matthew (6: 1-6, 16-18) wherein Jesus tells his disciples about praying and fasting in secret, rather than making a big show of it, tells us precisely of this triadic relationship we Christians are called to live. 

This passage can be interpreted as a private relationship with the Father... 

But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.

But God does not want us to be so exclusively bound to him that we do not care or bother about those around us. We pray in secret, but not for ourselves!! My relationship with the Father flows out through me into the world.  It does not end begin and end with God and myself!! 

Belonging to God - a grace, not a reward

 I found the 'Collect' of this morning's commemorative Mass of St Bakitha very disturbing and in fact quite wrong!  The opening lines of the prayer read: 

O God, who led Saint Josephine Bakhita from abject slavery to the dignity of being your daughter and a bride of Christ, grant we pray, that by her example, we may.... 

It sounds as if she had to get out of slavery to become a child of God!!  That's atrocious!  No state of our life or circumstances in our living, and most certainly not of our own making, can prevent us from being a child of God.  At times our own choices and decisions strain our relationship with God but never does one have to become something in life in order to then become a child of God.  Being a child of God is not a reward, it is a grace - freely given and part of our nature.  

Resurrection and relationship

The question we hear in the Gospel of the day, "After resurrection, whose wife will she be?" is quite a human question.  We can judge it to be a very rude or arrogant question or one intended to put the listener into a catch-22 situation.  But if reviewed from a simple and ordinary perspective, it can be said to be a very common question. 

We human being are relational beings.  We tend to work our way through life, by the relations we make or break.  So for one to ask what would be her relation to the 7 husbands whom she married here on earth, is a very concrete and living question.  It makes the situation all more volatile when I hear this passage being used to describe God as the God of the living and not of the dead.  That interpretation of God actually puts God in contrast to the human life!!  The very fact that she had 7 husbands it because the previous one died!  So she did not have 7 husbands all at once.  She only had one husband all along!!  And now if we bring in the 'God of living' interpretation, all 7 are alive.  And then to ask is she married to all 7 is a bit ridiculous! 

The most sensible way I see this Gospel unfold for us the mystery of the resurrection is to challenge our understanding of relationship.  I believe relationship is a commitment.  Granted that every commitment includes boundaries and limitations; but if those boundaries and limitations over-ride commitment and the well being of those involved in the relationship, the connection is actually a strangulation, and all that exists is bondage!  In resurrection, we live our commitment to one another to its fullest - even to God.  Not as bonded labourers, who have no other go than to, but as free individuals who choose to.  

I am...

An interesting observation ... (found on Aeon):

The Western focus on internal change makes anthropological sense: people in the West fixate on the internal. Psychologists have demonstrated this with a simple experiment. When researchers at Lewis and Clark College and the University of Nevada in Portland, Oregon, asked people to finish the sentence ‘I am ______’, people from the Western world responded with phrases such as ‘happy’, ‘a fun person’, or ‘a health-nut’. Meanwhile, rural Kenyans or Pacific Islanders said things such as ‘a mother’ or ‘a member of the Makea family’. Whereas most people define themselves by their relationships, people in the West emphasise their interests and personalities.

I'm not sure how the notion of 'interests and personalities' is internal and relationship is not.  Interests and personalities are actually outward tending - only in their expression is their realisation.  I fail to see how relationship is different.  Only in its exercise is a relationship alive.  One way of viewing relationships is restrictive.  They bind us to individuals.  On the other hand, is the fact that being in a relationship does not 'limit' us.  Rather than see as restrictive, relationships can be seen as linking, bridging. 

Anyway, that's a digression!

Am still amused by...

most people (rural, non-educated, tribal...) define themselves by their relationships, people in the West (educated, urban...) emphasise their interests and personalities.

Strength in/of weakness

This is getting more and more intriguing.  Another quote this morning from the Scriptures to make the point I've been trying to get my head around this week.  This time from the scripture reading during morning prayer. A quote from 2 Corinthians 12: 9-10. 

I am most happy then, to be proud of my weaknesses, in order to feel the protection of Christ's power over me. I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and difficulties for Christ's sake. 

And then the bombshell... 

For when I am weak, then I am strong. 

Again the same story: for a Christian this passage, especially the last line wouldn't really be odd or strange.  For one who has spent months, and years listening, reading and meditating on this passage, there is no contradiction there. Rather a very consoling reassurance.  

But for someone reading it as 'just another regular text', without the background of Christian life and living, the logical conclusion would be, it has to be either weakness or strength.  Both of them cannot be said to be true at the same time.  It is either-or. They are not compatible in the same breath (same line/same thought).  

Cultures and traditions which have a rich history of viewing the inter-relatedness of everything stand at a real advantage here when it comes to language and meaning.  When everything is connected to everything else, there is nothing that is explicitly or exclusively true or false.  One is more prone to see the underlying network rather than the contradiction and incompatibilities. For instance, the Buddhist notion of Pratityasamutpada. 

Religion: Private or personal?

Is practice of religion, something private or personal?  I've not really studied the dictionary and the etymological meaning of the two words but feel that there can be a distinction drawn for clarity.  Most often, the developed world tends to keep religion to the private.  That's something not to be paraded about in the open.  Unfortunately I feel this should be the attitude of theistic countries!  Countries and places where the unholy mix of religion and politics breeds nothing but vice! 

I would rather look at religion as something personal.  This way, principles and convictions one lives by are something totally of the individual and not something enforced by him or her or enforced upon one - in the name of religion.  These are matters which guide and direct one in ones life.  Keeping religion private would mean something hidden and secretive.  That festers fermentation and is bound to explode sooner or later.  Treating religion as personal does not mean that it is hidden or totally out of bounds for anyone - it remains open to challenges, by the individual himself/herself, by the society, by anyone.  The concerned individual need not respond to all the challenges thrown at him or her.  But that the individual is open enough to review those challenges.  That openness is obliterated if religion is treated as purely private. 

The acid test for this is to ask if one's experience of God (one of the integral aspects of religion) is personal or private.  In both the cases, it is a one-to-one relationship.  However if the former, it shades and affects everything else the individual does.  If the latter, the affects of that experience will be buried deep within the individual and nothing of that experience will ever flow into (or from) the rest of one's living - a clear watertight inner experience!  

Entering advent

We begin Advent today.  For me it only meant preparing an Advent wreath... for now.

However, looking back at my own relationship with Jesus over the past two Christmas' that I've spent here on English soil, I wouldn't say that I've remained the same.  Far from being 'scandalised' or shaken by the lack of external practices of piety, I find myself far more consolidated in my real connection with the person of Jesus.  He certainly has not become more divine; he's become more human.  And thereby I begin to appreciate Him and His role better.

The most significant change that I've begun to notice is the way the Biblical texts, especially the Gospels, sound different.  Not extraordinary in themselves but personal - though, not always.