Jim Lovell: The Apollo 13 astronaut

 I read the sad news of the death of Jim Lovell, the famous astronaut of Apollo 13, who mouthed the iconic words: Houston, we've had a problem. 

As I read about his death, I came across the following news article on BBC: Jim Lovell, Apollo 13 astronaut, dies aged 97 

Very inspiring story of the man Jim Lovell was, right since his childhood.  How he pursued his dream right from the early age of 5.  How he made sensible choices in order to fulfil his dream.  

Jim Lovell, the captain of Apollo 13

It was interesting to note that even though he never managed to land on the moon, he lived contented that he did his best.  He got to live his dream: that of being an astronaut.  

I liked one of the lines in the news article, describing the Apollo 13 space mission: The mission was Nasa's greatest failure and, without question, its finest hour. 

The crew of the ill-fated Apollo 13: Jack Swigert, Jim Lovell and Fred Haise

Goes without saying, the movie Apollo 13, starring Tom Hanks continues to be one of my favourite movies! Of the many good and great aspects of that movie, is that the movie shows the whole rescue attempt of Apollo 13 as a team work. While the three crew members did best what they could, their whole back up team here on earth, spared no effort.  The movie does not miss out that effort of the back up team either.  

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.   

Salesian Collaborators

As years go by there is a greater understanding and appreciation of the involvement and collaboration with the non-professed secular members of the civil society, when it comes to the Salesian apostolate.  

I purposely did not use the word 'lay people' because the usual meaning of the word 'lay' refers to someone who is not competent in a field of knowledge or learning.  But in the Salesian dictionary it refers to all those other than the professed Salesians.  Nonetheless, in our recent discussion it was proposed that the english word that comes closest to the true intended meaning would be 'collaborators'.  

In a sense, clericalism still is a major challenge that prevents us from truly embracing the collaborators and opening our hearts and minds to see the richness and efficiency they have to offer us with regard to our apostolate.  As Fr Koshy stated, clericalism was a block that prevented us from accepting the Salesian Brothers as real brothers then, and now is still a stumbling block when it comes to understanding and working with the collaborators. 

Nonetheless, one thing that struck me was the notion that, unlike yesteryear, there is a rather general consensus that collaboration is a must.  But what still is being debated is the methodology of collaboration; rather than collaboration itself.  I see the point that some make, perhaps more as an excuse than an honest reason: collaboration is with people who are like-minded; with those who have imbibed the charism and spirit of Don Bosco.  That's the best form of collaborators.  Not merely having highly qualified skilled employees!  

Of course, we can always split hairs to say that how would someone know and love Don Bosco unless we start associating with them, even if it is as employees.  But the point is that being like Don Bosco, passionate about the wellbeing of the young, is enough reason for us to join hands and hearts!  

Perfect combination than perfect individuals

The time of the year is coming round when transfers come into effect. Usually my prayers in the month of April are for the Provincial, who will have to have this headache of finalising the community confreres. 

Nonetheless, I'm more and more beginning to get to the point of believing that one individual does not really matter in the community.  What one needs to look at is the whole composition, the complete team.  Not that individuals are not worth or play no role in building the community. But that looking for a 'good rector', a 'strong administrator', a 'devout parish priest' for every community is absolutely impossible.  

Perhaps we need to be focusing on making sure that as a team the community is perfect; best possible. I suppose it is also the same tactic used by efficient sports team managers and coaches. 

Youth group

How do I offer the young a cause to work for? 

But, do I actually have to? Because they are more attuned to the reality of the world than I. 

Perhaps it is more of learning from them. More of accompanying them. Standing by their side. At the most, offering them guidance (based on my experience and age), some direction, at times perhaps boost their morale, helping them stay focused... 

The first question stems from our insistence in the province, on forming youth groups... which I feel, in itself is good, but useless. The formation of the group is useless if not accompanied or preceded by the question: Why form the group? What for? And if it is a group activity, all the members of the group will naturally vibe with that ‘why’, unless imposed by someone outside.

Going solo

 We often have this tendency of going solo.  We prefer to do things by ourselves. The way 'I' want it. Even amidst a team or a group, it is preferably 'I'.  

In our lives as priests and religious too this tendency is very much to be seen.  However, the extreme of this procedure is when we even exclude God from our purview.  God does not feature in our plans, our projects, our endeavours.  Naturally when God does not find a place, people too do not find a place.  Adversely, if we are willing and happy to make place for God in our plans, and endeavours, involving people - ALL people - will not be too much of a hassle.  It will only be natural and joyful!

Peter and Paul

Peter and Paul, the two great stalwarts of the early Church were not the best of men around those times.  They certainly were not the most capable and celebrated individuals in Israel of those days.  Evaluating others among the apostles, there was John who was of an impeccable character.  Someone who was also loved greatly by the Lord himself.  Or there was Mathew or Luke the educated ones.  But it was Peter, the illiterate, the fisherman, the mild, who was appointed as head of the apostles and ultimately given the keys of the Kingdom. 

Paul was no saint. He was a scholar, yes, but if his history were to be examined, he would have been the last one to be approached for standing for Christ.  Yet, he is the one who goes out to the non-Jews.  Together with Peter, he plants the seed of Christian faith in the heart of Roman empire.

None of them were given the mission because of their worthiness or talents.   They were entrusted with the mission and grace followed.  A good reminder for each one of us that it is God who has blessed us with all our talents and gifts, we only exercise them to the best of our capabilities.  

Secondly, there was no single hero doing all the work.  Something we see in Bollywood movies - all down to one man to do all the good!  The Church was a living example of work-in-communion.  Everyone, including God, did one's bit. Nothing greater or better.  Just what one could with the given-grace.  

Two rules

Words of a wise man to someone who really is busy with his or her work:
Just two rules:

1. Do not do today what you can do tomorrow. 
2. Do not work alone; that what can be shared with others, or something others are willing and happy to do with you, share. 

Fierce independence

The notion of 'independence' is very much ingrained in the English psyche.  Fierce independence!  The notion that one needs to manage one's own business and that every one can, is something of an innate idea among the English population.  This is reflected very vividly from individual undertaking to national politics.  Take Brexit.  A typical attitude that Europe is actually obstructing Britain's growth.  That on our own we are better off.  This insulation of self, is also reflected in individual attitudes.  I wonder how many residents of this country can proudly claim to know and actually be friends with their neighbours.  Most of whom I know, do not even know their neighbours.  Leave alone interact with them regularly or be friends with them.  I don't think I would be too off the mark to state that this feature is also among Salesians and is a one of our characteristic working style! 

I also see that this sort of "individualistic" attitude does have its advantages and benefits.  It results in a thoroughbred professionalism.  A great experience in focus and system building.  But the downside of it is that it goes again the very social nature of humankind.  I achieve success alone.  I struggle also alone!  We know the other, but not more than at a very very peripheral level.  And we think that that knowledge is more than sufficient.  Anything more is an intrusion of privacy.  We work, but as isolated individuals.  In case I fail, the system will pitch in - not another concerned friend or neighbour.  Nor will I ask someone to help me! 

When I'm weak, then I'm strong

One of the many Biblical paradoxes: when I am weak, then I am strong. A very good meditation on humility and openness.  The weakness experience here is not oppressive, even though it is meant to be.  The weakness does not prevent one from buckling, even though that is exactly what weakness is all about.  Rather, in those moments of struggle and giving in, we feel strong enough to carry on.  Rather than give in, feel the urge to keep going. 

However for me to really experience that I need to be doing what God wants me to do;  furthermore, not my work, but His work. So it is not me doing His work, it is me sharing in His endeavours.  Therefore the task is not mine alone nor am I totally indifferent about the work ("not my responsibility").  I have the strength because I'm not alone; because he who has entrusted me with a task, is taking the major responsibility and I have only to accompany; because the achievement of result is not my goal, making the best of efforts is. 

The challenge is for me to be humble and open enough to see that I'm not in this alone.  There are others, there are well-wishers, friends, guides, confreres, loved ones... there is God.

Playing the second fiddle

The saint of the day, St Barnabas, is said to have stood as a witness and presented Saul, after his conversion, to the apostles as a genuine Christian.  They do undertake some missionary journeys and do much good.  However, history remembers Paul more than Barnabas.  While both carried out their missionary activity, initially together, it is Paul who almost overshadows Barnabas with his eloquence, wisdom and reach.  Perhaps this was also the cause of their parting ways - could be! 

What strikes me is that Barnabas was - at least initially - willing to play the second fiddle, if one might use such a hierarchical language in ministry.  In cricketing terms, Barnabas let Paul do the real scoring and only lend his support by rotating the strike.  Barnabas, was one of the apostles, a chosen one of Christ. Paul, on the other hand, a newcomer, one who had never seen Jesus during his lifetime here on earth.  Yet Barnabas let Paul take the lead. 

This was possible only and as long as both of them understood that the mission at hand was greater than their individual egos.  A good lesson for us priests and religious when engaging in ministry: letting the Spirit work rather than insisting on it working (only) through me, or worse, emphasizing my work.  

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. 

'Limited' Cooperation

Came across a weird article trying to explain the process of increasing cooperation and decreasing non-cooperation (leading to destruction), using mathematical language.  Well, know not about the mathematical implications, given the author's acknowledgement that some facts look great on paper but prove an utter failure in practice.  However, the main point of the article does make some sense.  The author seems to suggest that cooperation when reciprocal between like-minded individuals is more influential than cooperation across everyone in the society.

Cooperation flourishes best when each individual has strong, reciprocated connections to a small number of others. In this case, cooperation spreads locally, along these connections, leading to clusters of cooperators who share benefits with each other. In contrast, if all individuals are equally connected to all others, the benefits of cooperation become diluted in the sea of non-cooperators, and the behaviour cannot spread. Thus, for cooperation to thrive, a few strong ties are better than a myriad weak ones.

Read the full article on Aeon.

C standing for cooperation and N for non-cooperation

McFarland, USA

Last night I watched the movie McFarland, USA.  Am surprised I never heard of it before (given the fact that I have seen more movies in the past three years than I've seen my whole life).  The fact that it is based on a true story is what makes it really inspirational.

The movie is about a group of young boys and their coach in the neglected state of McFarland who train and go on to become the best in cross country race.  What touched me was the ease with which these youngsters could take pressure, especially of work.  Not only did they work, they studied and they trained (which is equally grueling)... all at the same time.  And they did it all with a sense of determination and joy.  Liked the movie for it portrays the value of family, of a team, of belonging, of unity, hard work, of enjoying the little things of life, prejudices and values we hold dear...

There is a truth in the quality of life lived by those who do strenuous manual labour.  I do believe that hard manual labour, especially directly in touch with nature, is a great learning experience.  The following clip is a neat summary of my sentiments too (about all those who slog it out, day in and day out, )

Loved also the amusing clips wherein this coach, used to a posh and comfortable lifestyle and setting, finds the ways of his boys used to the hard life of labour strange.  There is one particular scene wherein after being invited to join the family meal of his team, he wishes to thank the father.  Assuming that he does not know English, he asks one of his sons to tell him that he felt honoured to being invited to his house.  The son repeats the same in English!  And the father tells the son, "Tell him, that he is welcome!" ... in English!

God so loved the world...

Having been involved in meetings and organising some, I know the pain of getting everyone on board.  It is far easier to work with individuals directly than get a group going!  Today found a theological (or Biblical?) proof for this idea!

God so loved the world that he did not send a committee. 

Lenten joy

Every year when we come round to this time of the year when we have to plan for the community Lenten penance, and discussion is most often around giving up food, I invariably remember my second year at Kondadaba as Dean and administrator.  That was the year when we did not receive the annual subsidy from Rome.  We were in a tight fix.  We were scraping on the savings of the previous years.  Not that we were desperate, but we really had to tighten our belts.

Now for a group of 70 young men, who were used to having good food and quite a bit of luxury to suddenly feel the pinch of it was not easy.  However, during one house assembly I presented them the financial difficulty we were going through and asked the Brothers to bear up.  Honestly I did expect some repercussions.  However, I was surprised at the way the Brothers rose up to the occasion.  Not only did they not complain or grudge but came forward with suggestions and actually carried out most of them, even without telling me, as to how to cut expenses.  What really touched me was the joy with which they bore up with the inconveniences.  It was not tolerated. They were happy to be part of a community.

So towards the end of the year, when we had the community meeting to decide on the Lenten penance, there was again suggestions of what to give up and abstain and all.  After some time I got up and sincerely acknowledged the sacrifices made by the community all through the year, that too joyfully.  And hence, I said, you need not do more than what we have already been doing.  Let's just continue with greater joy!  There was a huge round of applause.

In all my years of handling money/administration, that was the happiest year - not just for me but for the whole community!

Most of those in that academic year...

Novena to Don Bosco: Detachment

Novena to Don Bosco

(Remembering DON BOSCO and the significant people who shaped his life and works)

Day 4: Fr Borel
(First Helper of Don Bosco)

DETACHMENT 

Fr Borel, the first one to help Don Bosco at the Oratory, when the latter began to work solely for his poor boys. He was a good, short, simple and popular Diocesan Priest. He was affectionately called the 'little priest' because of his short stature. However, he inspired Don Bosco through his selfless and tireless hardwork. 

If you really love your boys, you must be ready to make this sacrifice too. 

Words of encouragement given by Fr Borel to Don Bosco, in 1844, when the oratory was in its infancy and Don Bosco had to go around begging for money. 

He appeared to be a little priest not counting for much, but ten good priests could hardly have done the good that this great servant of God has done. 

Words uttered by a weeping Don Bosco while Fr Borel was on his deathbed on September 9, 1873. 

Fr Borel was so generous and detached that on his deathbed he had nothing in his possession, not even enough money for his own funeral.  

(Click here to download the pdf file for display)

Hidden Agenda?

I liked two statements that Palli made during the discussions.

Any hidden agenda is not good agenda! 

He interjected with this statement when a confrere started speaking of our task of evangelization (preaching and proclaiming Christ) especially in a context that does not endorse it.

The other is from the cartoon, Dennis the menace...

You can win any game, if you make the rules of the game. 

This is how the government and corporates play. The others are bound to lose because the rules are always set against them.  For an onlooker, the game was played out perfectly and as per the norms and therefore the win of the government or corporate is legitimate.  But when the rules themselves are skewed and the poor have no say whatsoever in the rules nor an alternative to joining the 'game', then it is injustice! 

As stopgaps

Very many confreres take offence or feel insulted when shuttled around to fill gaps, plug in vacancies, either for a short time or for a long term.  This has much to do with perhaps, 'earning a name' 'doing something solid' and what not.  It also has something to do with the area of 'specialisation' of the individual.  One is 'specialised' and therefore one is to be sent only to those areas where his specialization is needed.

For me Salesian obedience (transfer) is a simple, Go!  You go because you are sent.  I consider this shuffling as per need (real need), a compliment.  It is a great Salesian virtue. That one is found capable of fitting into any context, any situation and trusted with a responsibility, even if not specialised in that area, is indeed a privilege.  Furthermore what kind of a skill has one acquired if one cannot translate the specialization into the context in which one finds oneself.