A Call Towards A Theology of Littleness: Hearing Luke 12:32

“To be faithful in little things is a big thing”

Big-ness & Big-Talks :

Have you ever heard of a Church named as 'little flock'? On googling I did find some churches named after 'little flock' but their mission statements forces us to probe whether they have ever lived as 'little flock?' Have you seen Christians of 21^st century calling themselves 'little flock?' The demography of global Christianity today is unevenly characterised on the one hand by the expansive nature of Christianity with numbers rapidly growing in some parts of the world, and on the other hand witnessing the shrinking numbers of Christians in other parts of the world. One of the visible markers of the expansive character of global Christianity is the growing culture of 'mega churches' where the founders and the followers of such churches take pride in the capacity capability of their Churches and boast of tens and thousands of people attending their worship services. Such mega culture of the churches speaks the language of capitalism, where the mega rich leaders of such churches proclaim that he or she is in the business of Jesus Christ, whose corporation is an 'Unlimited' enterprise. These churches encourage people attending their churches on becoming rich as being 'blessed' and preach on 'prosperity' as a blessing that follows those who believe in their teachings. The language and practices of these growing dominant mega churches are part of a colonial project where they colonize simple Christians by exploiting their vulnerability of faith all in the name of riches, wealth, blessing and treasures. This has a huge influence on the kind of God-talk and theology that these mega churches project and articulate. Out of this grand mega culture emerged the ideas of God as all powerful, God as almighty, God as King of Kings, Lord of Lords etc. for it is the rich who associate God conveniently to be rich, powerful and strong like them, and therefore talked of God in those expansive and expensive terms.

In the background of this context, we now read Luke 12:32 -40, where the gospel comes afresh 'Do not be afraid little flock for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.' (v32) , which comes as a call towards a theology of littleness, for church exists as 'little flocks' and God is located in 'littleness,' in contrast to the churches as 'mega churches' and God and God-talk in the vocabulary of 'bigness.' From the parable of the rich fool in Luke 12:13-21, we acknowledged that Jesus' teaching as 'life is not in the abundance of riches or possessions' and 'life is not me, my and mine alone.' Luke presents in this chapter about Jesus' exhortations on wealth and earthly treasures, and intersperses it in the context of fear, anxiety and worry. In this particular text, we see Jesus calling the listeners as 'little flock,' and then explains about what it means to be little by way of selling the possessions and then linking it to slaves, who are the little ones of his times for they have been waiting for the Son of Man's coming. This text therefore helps us to unravel a theology of littleness, for it is a gospel imperative for our times.

Little Flock and Theology of Littleness:

Who according to Jesus are the 'Little flock?' For that would define the character of littleness. We need to see this question in three different perspectives. Firstly in the historical perspective, it were the disciples who were listening to Jesus as he was preaching to them. Therefore in the context of the multitudes following Jesus, this little flock of twelve disciples could have been the 'little flock' to whom Jesus mentions not to be afraid. In the context where Roman armies were counted in tens and thousands, Jesus' dozen disciples represents the 'little flock.'

Secondly, in the theological perspective, Jesus introduced himself as 'good shepherd' and mind you not as 'big shepherd,' by which he was always trying to locate himself in the 'little flocks' and affirm in their identity as being little. If he believed in mega flocks, he should have identified as mega shepherd, but he was a good shepherd, who had come to give life in all its fullness. 'Little flocks' represented the minority people in contrast to majority, for Jesus said elsewhere that, 'wherever two or three are gathered there he is present' for God in Christ locates among the littleness. Littleness theologically is further understood that Jesus became a human and took on the form of a slave, the powerless, for the sake of slaves to pitch his tent among them so that he is willing to struggle along with such communities ensuring liberation and freedom. Littleness of little flocks is further understood by his engagements with the outcastes, women and poor of his times. God in Jesus is born as a little baby in the little town of Bethlehem, God in Jesus has became a child refugee as he fled into Egypt and God in Jesus resided, identified and was crucified in all his vulnerability. Jesus therefore had to categorically say that unless a person becomes a little child, he or she is not eligible to enter the Kingdom of God. When his disciples were arguing among themselves who is the greatest, Jesus picked up a little child as a greatest, for he acknowledged that in the littleness exits God and god like-ness. 

 Pope Benedict therefore affirmed in the theology of littleness as he said, “The theology of littleness is a basic category of Christianity. After all, the tenor of our faith is that God's distinctive greatness is revealed precisely in powerlessness. That in the long run, the strength of history is precisely in those who love, which is to say, in a strength that, properly speaking, cannot be measured according to categories of power. So in order to show who he is, God consciously revealed himself in the powerlessness of Nazareth and Golgotha. Thus, it is not the one who can destroy the most who is the most powerful...but, on the contrary, the least power of love is already greater than the greatest power of destruction.”¹

Thirdly, in the eschatological perspective, no doubt all those who follow the values of the gospel that Jesus taught which include hard facts like selling of possessions, sharing of resources etc. will certainly be a small group, for in Jesus movement many left grieving on hearing such altar calls to go sell their possessions, to give up their riches etc. and therefore they will be little flock and little group any way, and as such Jesus was calling them 'little flock.' Probably that was the reason in Luke's second volume, which is Acts of Apostles, he mentions that the early Church gathered in houses and had everything in common, where they shared their resources among them. They were 'little flocks.' Jesus says, “It is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.”32 verse says, not to be afraid of Rome, of any circumstance for Father out of his good pleasure gives you Kingdom. In other words, Kingdom belongs to the little flocks and little ones. Jesus else where picks a little child and says that kingdom of God is like them. Kingdom of God is of the little ones, for little ones by the God of little ones, for God in God's pleasure grants this Kingdom to the little ones.

Little Flock and Spirituality of Littleness

The calling to these little flocks is to sell their possessions and give alms, which is the first characteristic of littleness. God in Jesus is a God of littleness who calls not to build barns to store the possessions, but to sell their possessions and give them as alms. By selling the possessions one joins Jesus movement, who along with Jesus identifies with the homeless poor communities, who do not have a place to lay down their heads. By accumulating the possessions one distances from Jesus movement, for one cannot serve Christ and Mammon. Giving alms is not to a mere act of charity, but is a responsibility which is linked with selling of possessions. With possessions, one is big, strong and powerful, but by selling of possessions and giving alms one becomes little, weak, and powerless.

It was said of St. Theresa of Alva that she always displayed the spirituality of littleness. “When we think of Thérèse we think of a specific kind of spirituality - her Little Way. It is a way of trust and absolute surrender to God's intimate presence. Scripture is her source and inspiration. Three texts in particular bring into focus the heart of Thérèse's doctrine: "Whoever is a little one, let them come to me." Proverbs, 9:4 "For to the one that is little, mercy will be shown." Wisdom 6:7 "As one whom a mother caresses, so will I comfort you; you shall be carried at the breasts, and upon the knees they shall fondle you." Isaiah 66:12-13

In a prayer to Christ, Thérèse sums up her spirituality for us:

"O Jesus! Why can't I tell all little souls how unspeakable is Your condescension? I feel that if You found a soul weaker and littler than mine, You would be pleased to grant it still greater favors, provided it abandoned itself with total confidence to Your infinite Mercy. I beg You to cast Your Divine Glance upon a great number of little souls. I beg You to choose a legion of little Victims worthy of Your LOVE!" ²

Little Relevance:

• It is only the vulnerable, the powerless and the little who can speak of a God who exits among littleness, and therefore such an exposition has emerged out of that subaltern voices and communities who speak of a God like them. For it is the good pleasure of Father to give them the Kingdom of God. Mind you, Kingdom of God comes in such littleness, like in a mustard seed and not in the colonial expansive terms.
• Unless our churches become Sunday schools, kingdom of God may be a distant reality. By which, I mean unless we become like little children congregating and exploring God in our vulnerability, and in our marginality, our ecclesiology has less relevance.
• Let us stop building huge Church structures, towers and buildings with lavish comforts, for the church is called to identify with the homeless, poor, refugee and crucified communities, for only among them, among the little flocks and amidst littleness church happens.
• Are our churches willing to become like little flocks? Living out the characters of littleness, inculcating the spirituality of littleness.
• Theology of littleness – challenges us to sing not 'let the poor say I am rich', but other way 'let the rich say I am poor and let the strong say I am weak.'

Rajbharat Patta

1http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/30344-the-theology-of-littleness-is-a-basic-category-of-christianity

2http://showcase.netins.net/web/solitude/vilma5.html

Pics Courtesy: 

http://www.jarofquotes.com/img/quotes/886b055f06b12fde88842fc7b45adc35.jpg

http://blog.littleflower.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/TheGreatestOfAll.jpg

Re-understanding Lord's Prayer

http://www.romanroadimchurch.org.uk/uploads/news/id310/24th%20July%20-%20Luke%2011%20vv1-13.mp3

Screening Theology: Engaging Faith & Film

Postcolonial Reading of Indian Jesus' Film Karunamayudu

On the day of Ramadan, when our kids were at home enjoying a holiday due to teachers' training day at school in Manchester, we as a family watched the revised version of the film Karunamayudu on our Xbox at home. Both me and my wife remembered watching this film as children in our childhood in local cinema theatre in our town in its longer version, and also watched it when the film was screened on a 16mm screen on the streets of our locality in India. The film had made an indelible impact on us as children, for visualization of the gospel narratives came alive for us from this film.

Now watching this film after a long time helped me to review this film from the perspectives of postcolonial theological positioning. The film becomes an important theological resource for those engaging in postcolonial enterprise, for the plot of the film, the characters of the film, the content of the film and the ethos of the film all depict a new flavour and genre to the gospel narratives in the Bible. The film was produced and released 38 years ago in 1978, the year I was born and has had a wide reception ever since then for it was dubbed in to several Indian languages and was screened on several village and remote streets of India over the years. The film is popular in Hindi as Dayasagar, in Tamil as Karunamoorthy and has been used for evangelistic purpose, though the intention of the film makers was commercial in character. The film locates Jesus story in a culturally contextual setting to India with Indian professional film cast performing the roles. The film brings out several postcolonial pointers, of which I will mention just two for our discussion here. Allow me to mention that film is a 'public text' that calls the audience to engage publicly in reviewing and interpreting it without limiting it with any conditions. The film is reviewed subversively and subjectively to screen theology. A profound theology is screened in this film, for this film becomes an important factor in the construction of faith.

1. A Subversive Postcolonial Hermeneutics:

The film's script provides a directive for subversive postcolonial hermeneutics, for the plot of the film was positioned in a colonial setting of Rome, where Palestine was subjugated to Roman oppression with Barabbas and Judas fighting for liberation through revolution. It was into that setting that Jesus sets his mission through love, justice and peace in order to establish an alternative kingdom called Kingdom of God in opposition to the Kingdom of Rome. Unlike most Jesus films in the West, which tries to film Jesus story from the written gospels with less or no relation to his own context, Karunamayudu brings in the message of the gospel more powerfully, for Jesus' story was located into his own context and was reinterpreted into the world views of the audiences in India. The film makers were bold to read between the lines and behind the lines of the gospel narratives and have used hermeneutics of imagination, hermeneutics of translation and hermeneutics of indigenization. “Where in the Bible did Jesus, Judas and Barabbas ever met?” asked my son as we were watching the film, and I thought that was the strength of the film for it courageously knitted the plot of Jesus story with subversive imagination. The film no doubt became a 'visual gospel' for many people, it became a 'visual Bible' for many people of different faiths who did have the luxury of reading Bible, appropriated the content of this film as 'scripture'. The film did play a role in the formation of faith in Jesus Christ. Cynics contested that the film did not hold the accuracy of the gospel texts and even questioned the authority of the extra canonical narrative plot of the film. On the whole the film employed a subversive postcolonial hermeneutics of interpreting the texts of the scriptures, particularly Jesus story, with a visual difference, helping the audience to revisit the Eurocentric notions of 'scriptures', and also calling the audience to enjoy the freedom of liberative hermeneutics embedded into the context and content of the film. Indian music, song and dance as projected in the film all bring Jesus' story nearer to the Indian audience. This Jesus' film in a way contests the authority of 'print tradition of texts' and helps to recover the tradition of 'oral texts' of the Scriptures which were forgotten and even erased.

Another important character in the film, my younger son's favourite character was Malachi, who was blind man but with profound theological perspectives, for a song has been filmed with him where he questions 'if God ever existed let him come down now to meet to the needs of the people.' He was eventually healed by Jesus and gets back his vision, and recognizes and acknowledges the political messiah in Jesus. There is a deep subaltern epistemology that was expressed through his character, for his non-conformist theological positioning reflects the goals and aspirations of the subalterns of Jesus times. This Indian Jesus' film provides new vistas in screening theology, which takes form and shape beyond written-ness of theology.

2. A Subjective Postcolonial Christology:

Unlike the titles of many Jesus films in the West, which carry the triumphalist titles like 'King of Kings' or popular titles like 'Passion of Christ', this 1978 Telugu film was titled as Karunamayudu which means 'Compassionate Man', projects a subjective postcolonial Christological title to the film. No where in the Bible is this title used for Jesus like the Son of God, Son of Man, Son of David, Lord, Master etc. though he was understood as a man full of compassion, and to entitle the plot about the life of Jesus in such a way, projects the subjectivity of the Indian understanding of Jesus. In a colonial context, where the whole Palestinians were longing for freedom, the longing for a political messiah was well projected in the film, for Jesus comes as Karunamayudu, whose politics are counter-cultural to the Roman empire and also to Barabbas-Judas duos violent strategy. Such a counter-cultural Christology suits to the Indian context, for there has been a yearning for such a political messiah who is an embodiment of compassion, who comes from among the community in addressing the unjust situations of our times. Jesus' portrayal as a carpenters son is to communicate that he is a boy living next door to the audience. Jesus' mother Mary teaches to read scriptures to him as boy, and when Jesus meets her he bows down to touch her feet, his meek outfit and body build up, all project the subjective Indian Jesus. Such a portrayal contests all forms of the macho- Jesus, who is all mighty and all powerful.

Dwight H. Friesen in his PhD dissertation on “An Analysis of the Production, Content, Distribution, and Reception of Karunamayudu (1978), an Indian Jesus Film”¹ expounds 'hybrid Jesus' in the film and argues that the cinematic Indian Jesus was so visualised to suit and meet the expectations of the audience of multiple religious traditions of India. He further expresses that this Indian portrayal of Jesus story is to 'diffuse his reputation of foreign God.' However the subjectivity has been of the Indianness, but which Indianness? According to Dwight's analysis the film reflects a resonance to the Hindu mythological portrayals, for example the ascension episode was projected with Jesus becomes bigger and bigger, dwarfing the human community. A Dalit assertion of Jesus would have been even more appealing to the audiences to express Indian subjectivity in the context of postcolonial theological enterprise. One has to be aware that the film has been produced and filmed by a commercial film company who were predominantly Hindu in 1978 to attract popular Indian audiences. Dwight's analysis of Jesus in the film as 'Indian guru' meets to the theological expectations of the inter-faith theological genre in India, but such a portrayal excludes the indigenous communities spiritualities and their aspirations for liberation.

The passion narrative of the film was also dealt with so much care, though there has been an element of over-romantisization of his suffering. Jesus was brought as a criminal to Pilate, where the religious leaders accuse him of religious crimes for which they demand crucifixion, and ultimately the release of Barabbas instead of Jesus, suggests the political naivety of the plot.

On the whole, the Indian film Karunamayudu provides a new terrain for postcolonial theological engagement, for it opens up a new conversation on texts, hermeneutics, epistemology and theology and encourages to construct theologies beyond mere written-ness or words. The hard questions that comes to the fore are, if such Jesus' films are projected as 'visual scriptures' how will people with visual disabilities receive and understand it? Does other films not carry and communicate the values of the gospel? There are some conservative Christians in India who deem watching films as something 'sinful' needs to understand that films are texts that have loads of meaning embedded in them and there is nothing unchristian about watching films.

After 1978, there are several other Indian Jesus' films that were produced and several English films were dubbed into Indian languages, however hardly any of them carried this postcolonial tenor of Jesus' ministry into their plot and contents. Bible ki Kahaniya (Stories of Bible) was an Indian television programme that was televised during 1993 to 1995 in Hindi language with huge Bollywood cast based on Bible. This programme received a huge response from Indian audience for it was televised on the national TV channel Doordarshan. However, it was stopped abruptly for several reasons and did not carry this postcolonial context into its plot.

This review is merely invitational for a more engaged conversation on film and faith. Faith and film should not be seen as opponents but be viewed as complimentary to each other, for there creative convergences between them that evolves and emerges. Faith certainly comes from hearing, and film provides that hearing aid with audio-visual effects. This Indian Jesus' film Karunamayudu opens up new horizons to construct Jesus' story and his gospel relevant to our Indian context, specially from Dalit and Tribal perspectives, for a post colonial lens of reading and re-reading of film, theology and religion from subaltern standpoints becomes immanent and necessary.

Rajbharat Patta

11^th July 2016

Full Length Film can be viewed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEhJxsAulx4

1https://www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1842/5805/Friesen2010.pdf?sequence=1

The Politics of Good Friday

When thinking of ‘good Friday’, I always thought, for the person on the Cross to whom Jesus said that ‘today you will be with me in paradise’, it was a ‘good Friday’, and to the other person who mocked Jesus it was a ‘bad Friday.’ What is ‘good’ in ‘good Friday’ has always been a perennial question that people of faith communities across the histories and contexts keep interrogating with.  How can the brutal killing of Jesus on the Cross be called ‘good Friday?’ What is the politics of ‘good Friday?’

There have been theories on the etymology of the ‘good Friday’ for some have referred it to ‘God’s Friday’ for it synchronizes with the root meanings of ‘goodbye’ which means ‘God be with you.’ The day has always been referred to as ‘holy Friday’ like that of the rest of the week days in the ‘Holy week.’ In my local Church tradition, ‘good Friday’ is translated as ‘Maha Sukravaram’ (‘great Friday’ in Telugu language), where the emphasis of Jesus’ act on the Cross has been considered as great sacrifice for the salvation of the entire humanity.

On the one hand, we are aware of Plato’s theory of ‘Form of Good’ which is understood as the ‘ultimate principle’, for the ultimate ‘good’ illuminates all other forms, both in the empirical world and in the world outside of time and space. On the other hand, there are philosophies that profess that there is no such a thing as good and evil, and they are only as people desire, where ‘good’ is recognized as a ‘subjective value.’ All of these thinking direct us in our grappling with ‘good’ in ‘good Friday.’

‘Good Friday’ is not about ‘romanticizing Jesus suffering and his death,’ rather a call to locate God among the crucified.  There was a political bargain from the courts of Pilate, whom to crucify and whom to leave scot-free, and we know that the community chose ‘Barabbas’ (Bar Abbas in Hebrew means ‘Son of God’), which lead Jesus to his crucifixion.  Good Friday, the day on which Jesus was killed is highly political, for Jesus died a political martyrdom. Therefore, one cannot unthread the political aspect of Jesus’s death on Cross from his holistic act of salvation. ‘Good Friday’ also calls us to unpack it from the colonial enfleshments that it carries, for this ‘good Friday’ is also understood in contrast to ‘black Fridays’ (very colonial term) where consumerism is celebrated to its core. Here is a subversive reading of ‘good Friday,’ which serves as one perspectives among many, that helps us in problematizing the same for our times today.

1.      ‘Good Friday’ is about exposing the unjust political systems of the state that represses and criminalises Jesus for believing and professing in an alternative value system which is the Kingdom of God, for he was nailed on the Cross with an inscription ‘King of Jews.’ Jesus’ disapproval of a military state led him to be branded as a ‘political insurgent’ and eventually led him to be killed on the Cross. 

2.      ‘Good Friday’ is a day where an innocent Jesus was falsely implicated and was taken to be crucified on a Cross, along with two other bandits of his times, at a public criminal execution place, which was ‘outside of the camp.’ It was a place where the soldiers gambled on Jesus’ clothes, spit on him, and rebuked him with all possible insults. Jesus died as a political martyr.

3.      When Jesus cried ‘my God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’ many around his Cross mocked him saying that he was calling on Elijah for help and rescue. To that question, we see that there was silence from God’s side. We run a risk of translating God’s silence as God’s absence. The politic of this saying needs to consider that God joins in the suffering of people, where God grieves along with those that are suffering to lead them into the resurrection experience.

4.      The politics of ‘good Friday’ is always related to the ‘best Sunday’ to come, the ‘Easter day’, where God raised him from the death. It displays a politics of hope, for death and regimes of oppression are defeated and chained in the empty tomb of Jesus Christ. Resurrection of Jesus from death was a huge blow to the empire that believed that there is no opposition to their force, for on that day death died and was buried.

‘Good Friday’ therefore challenges us humanity to locate crucified Jesus’ among us, among our histories, among our contexts, who are opposing the repressive regimes of our times, and stand along with them in their struggles for justice, the highest good. ‘Good Friday’ finds its fuller meaning not in religious sanctuaries, not in our cosy comfortable zones, not in our parochial colonies but on the public streets where people are time and again crucified by the unjust systems of violence. ‘Good Friday’ comes alive and becomes meaningful ‘outside the camps’ of our times, in the veli vada (untouchable ghettos), in the refugee camps, in the excluded zones, in the prisons, etc. ‘Good Friday’ becomes relevant by disavowing hegemonic powers and principalities that suppress and marginalize people and communities and by standing for justice and peace of our times. The calling of our spirituality is to become politically sensitive to our contexts and attempt in relating our faith to the times of our times.

Wishing you all a meaningful observance of Good Friday.

Rajbharat Patta

Pic courtesy: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/b6/fc/22/b6fc2293a751e215dc7f8c25af6441ba.jpg

‘Hosanna’ as against ‘Roman Mata Ki Jai’: Palm Sunday Challenge

The occasion of Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem before facing Cross and crucifixion, which is observed by Christians as ‘Palm Sunday’ is an important event in the life and mission of Jesus Christ. It is important to know how the passage containing this palm Sunday story in Bible is named, particularly the passage from Matthew 21: 1-11 is titled as ‘Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem’ (NRSV), ‘Jesus comes to Jerusalem as King’ (NIV), ‘Jesus triumphant entry’ (NLT). All the titling is basically ‘interpretation’ of the people who have compiled the texts as different versions of the Bible, and therefore seeks verification. When I read this text from Matthew, I understand this text as Jesus’ contestation of triumphalism, and if I have to title this passage, I would like to title it as ‘Jesus’ anti-empire procession’ or ‘Jesus’ contestation of triumphalism’ or ‘Jesus counter-hegemonic ride’ or ‘Citizens shouts ‘Save us’ from oppressive regime’ or ‘Turmoil in the city’.

1.      Jesus’ Counter-Hegemonic Procession into the City:

Jesus lived at a time when Roman oppressive regime was ruling them, for Jesus’s community were under occupation, and have been subjective to exploitation by rulers, governors, priests and other religious authorities. It was a usual practice of the Roman army to conduct a military parade with horses on the streets of Jerusalem prior to the festival of Passover as a sign of their authoritarian power and rule, for their arms and weapons were at public display to frighten and threaten people who are subjective to them. Year after year, the occupied people have witnessed these military parades of the army in the streets and have been frustrated with this kind of rule. Therefore, Jesus’s procession into the city is a march of counter-hegemony, contesting against the oppressive regimes, parading on a donkey with people holding palm branches, which was their yearning for the coming of an alternative kingdom as against the kingdom of Rome.

2.      Jesus’ Anti-Empire Procession into the City:

Jesus’ procession into the city was a pre-planned one, for he ordered the disciples to go and fetch the donkey and the colt and prepare for this ride. Jesus’ ride on the donkey is an expression of his anti-empire ride, displaying an alternative kingship, as against the pomp and royalty of the Roman emperors and the empire. This was a public march against the empire of his times. This was a march of the colonized against the colonizer. That is the reason there was ‘turmoil’ at the end of the procession as recorded in 10v. ‘When he entered Jerusalem, the whole city was in turmoil.’ This was a march that stirred the city, that was ended in a turmoil, which exhibits, the angst of the colonized against the oppressive empire. Towards the end, the identity of Jesus was revealed, which wasn’t in any way kingly, but it is recorded in verse 11, ‘the crowds were saying, ‘This is the prophet Jesus from Nazareth in Galilee.’ Here is the Jesus movement, which is run by an ordinary man from a village called Nazareth in Galilee who was running an anti-empire procession in the capital city of Jerusalem, in which act, the crowds have seen ‘a prophet’ in Jesus.

3.      Citizens Shouting ‘Save us Save us’ over against ‘Roman Mata Ki Jai’:

Jesus’ political march in the streets of Jerusalem was well supported by the people, the citizens of that nation who were shouting ‘Hosanna to the son of David, Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest heaven.’ These shouts are of prominence, for the citizens of Roman empire were compelled to shout ‘hail Caesar’ for rulers who were called ‘Caesars’ claimed themselves to be sons of God, who were sent by God to rule the empire. The other popular slogan during their times was ‘there is no other name under the heaven by which men can be saved than that of Caesar.’ In contrast to this empire slogans, the co-citizens of Jesus were shouting ‘Hosanna son of David.’ This was the genuine yearning of the citizenry as they were looking for ‘freedom’ from these oppressive political regimes. I guess the gospel writers censored the other bit of these shouts like save us from what? Or save us from whom? The shouts could have been ‘Save us from Rome’ Save us from Caesars’.  The empire in a way was forcing its citizens to understand it in today’s terms to shout, ‘Roman Mata ki Jai’ (Mother Roma be hailed), but citizens’ shouts ‘Hosanna’, ‘save us’, which depicts the peoples’ anti-empire cries and aspirations to save them from the rule of oppression. These may look as slogans or shouts, but they convey deep ideologies and belief systems. The crowds could have been booked under ‘sedition’ laws and would have branded ‘anti-nationals’ for shouting something radically different from their dominant rhetoric.  It was in such a context, the citizens of a small territory in Judea were subverting the whole understanding of empire and were shouting ‘Hosanna to the son of David’ and ‘Hosanna in the highest’.

In light of this reflection, the call for us this Palm Sunday is to commit our faith communities to join with Jesus on his anti-empire, counter-hegemonic processions, shouting ‘Hosannas’ ‘God save us from these oppressive regimes of our times.’ Jesus’ alternative kingship and his alternative to the ‘roman empire,’ which he inaugurated in ‘kingdom of God’ should be our public faith belief, narrative, aspiration and paradigm.

Join with Jesus, this Palm Sunday in creating a turmoil in the context of empires, manifested as caste, class, patriarchy, race, religious nationalism, etc.  Join with Jesus this Palm Sunday in the mission of liberation that he has embarked against Caesars and their policies and join with Jesus and his co-citizens who boldly and courageously shouted against the dominant ideologies and stood undeterred even to the extent of being blamed as ‘anti-nationals’. Join with Jesus in a procession against the ‘honour killings’ that keep happening unabated in the name of caste. Join with Jesus this Palm Sunday to publicly express our solidarity in action with ‘exiled citizens’, ‘refugees’, ‘migrants’, ‘undocumented asylum seekers’, ‘homeless’, ‘excluded’, ‘marginalized’ and join with them in their struggles for justice.

Wishing you a Meaningful Palm Sunday.

Rajbharat Patta,

18^th March 2016 

Picture courtesy: http://blog.youversion.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/jesus-welcomed-into-jerusalem-1024x461.jpg

Mother Mary had a Song for her Son, What Song do you have for your Children? : Mothering Sunday 2016

(A picture of Mother Mary and Jesus from African tradition as found in the Church of Annunciation at Nazareth) 

Mary’s song, the Magnificat, (Luke 1: 46-55) is a description of Mary's aspirations for her son Jesus and reveals her role as a mother. When most mothers sing lullaby to their children, Mary has a very revolutionary song that she had to sing when she was pregnant with Jesus. There should have been several songs available for Mary in Nazareth those days, for she could have either chosen a hymn from Psalmody or from their regular hymnal, but she chose to compose a contemporary song of justice, her own yearning for her society, and sang it for her son Jesus. Her situation and context of oppression and discrimination, demanded mother Mary to sing this radical song of justice. This song reveals her mothering quality, her dream for her son, and raised Jesus with those values and ethos and Jesus eventually lived up for all those that her mother aspired and raised him with. This song could have been the song that Jesus heard her sing daily, and learnt it as an anthem of justice for his mission in his life. 

Mothering Sunday is an opportunity for parents to compose and sing songs for their children, penning their dreams and aspirations for their children. This Sunday then calls us as parents to commit ourselves to raise our children in fulfilling our aspirations for a just society. May we like mother Mary get inspired to sing songs of justice for our children. I specially remember mothers like Radhika Vemula mother of Dalit martyr Rohit Vemula, Meena Devi mother of Kanhaiya Kumar, President JNUSU and several other mothers whose names have been undocumented, forgotten and erased by the dominant patriarchal society, for they as mothers sang songs of justice and liberation for their children, and their children lived out their dreams for a just world. Thanking God for the gift of motherhood, and remembering all our mothers for their love, care, sacrifice and dreams for their children. Mother Mary had a song for her son, what song do you have for your sons and daughters? Here  is her song... what is your song? 

Luke 1:46-55

⁴⁶ And Mary said,

“My soul magnifies the Lord,
⁴⁷     and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
⁴⁸ for he has looked with favor on the lowliness of his servant.
    Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed;
⁴⁹ for the Mighty One has done great things for me,
    and holy is his name.
⁵⁰ His mercy is for those who fear him
    from generation to generation.
⁵¹ He has shown strength with his arm;
    he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts.
⁵² He has brought down the powerful from their thrones,
    and lifted up the lowly;
⁵³ he has filled the hungry with good things,
    and sent the rich away empty.
⁵⁴ He has helped his servant Israel,
    in remembrance of his mercy,
⁵⁵ according to the promise he made to our ancestors,
    to Abraham and to his descendants forever.”

Raj Bharath Patta,

camp: Bogota, Colombia 

4th March 2016 

Fasting as an Act of Public Theological Witness: A Lenten Imperative

Public Reading of Jonah 3: 1-10

 

With the advent of the season of Lent, Christians globally have been busy preparing for the season. Fasting has been the buzz word this season of forty days, for people have been seeking various reasons to justify their fasting. Fasting has become trendy these days, for some give up a meal during the day, some give up eating meat, some give up drinking alcohol, some have proclaimed fasting on social media, some have given up Facebook, some have given up whatsapp and the list goes on. These trendy fasting, people say are part of a spiritual discipline, for at least, they can work out on de-addictions on their addicted habits. Whatever be the reasons, Fasting in the season of Lent has been a key element, which has been practiced from times immemorial continues to find an important place in the lives of the faithful.

 

Unfortunately, fasting remains to be a self-centric element in the lives of Christians, and has not permeated towards the cause of transforming the society. Fasting is not merely an act of self-piety rather has a public theological relevance, for it is intended to bring justice in the society. ‘Fast unto Justice’ is a rendering in that line which has had its deep Biblical and theological moorings. Duetero- Isaiah is very succinct on such an understanding of fasting, for in Isaiah 58: 1-12, he reminds the people the kind of fasting that is acceptable in the sight of God. This season of Lent, let us resonate with Isaiah and imbibe ‘fast unto justice’ as an act of our spiritual calling and strive towards justice through our fasting.

 

Liturgy as a Public Act:

Ronald Theimann’s important contribution to public theology is linking liturgy as public responsibility, which has a great relevance in public theological enterprise. In his book, ‘Constructing a Public Theology: The Church in a Pluralistic Culture’, he explains that, “the etymology of the word liturgy, which is leitourgia, is a Greek noun meaning, “the discharge of public office.” In the context of Greek polis, leitourgia involved engaging in public office at one’s own expense, thereby offering service to the state and so contribute to the well-being of the community or koinonia. The language adopted by the early Christian community for its own worship life was clearly and explicitly public or political language…The righteousness of faith must result in transformative justice within the public realm. Thus Christian worship is essentially political, and the leitourgia of the Church extends naturally and directly into political action.”[1]

 

Liturgy has been mostly limited to the worship done in the Church, and has not really taken political meaning out of it. By making public theology liturgical, public theology’s political characteristic is revealed and calls on the Christian communities to relocate their worship practices beyond their worshipping structures into the public sphere. A public political act of spirituality is envisaged by the Church, for only then her public witness is felt and impacted.

Therefore, the need and relevance of fasting becoming a public act aimed towards bringing justice and transformation to our society is imperative and instructive for our spirituality. One should also realise that there is no command for Christians in New Testament to fast, however Jesus did comment on fasting, where he emphasised not on any “show-off” or for boasting on self-pride and on self-righteousness, but said that it should be an act between an individual and God (Mathew 6: 16-18). That relationship between God and an individual should be reflected in acts of justice in our contexts.

 

In light of the discussion that Fasting as an act of public theological witness, the experience of prophet Jonah and his community’s fasting is of great relevance for us today, specially during this season of Lent. Allow me to present to you a public reading on Jonah, a prophet from the margins, and try to capture fasting from his community.

 

Jonah: Prophet from the Margins

Prophet Jonah is a minor prophet in the prophetic literature, and the story of Jonah has been one of the most favorite stories of all children for the involvement of fish in the story resonating with the modern fictional stories. Jonah as a book in the canon is independent of the historical settings of the Israel, and has therefore been related to several contexts. The book of Jonah begins with the title, ‘Jonah’s disobedience’ for he flees to Tarshish, when he was called to go to Nineveh. He has been branded by those in the centers as the disobedient person. No one has ever asked what could have been the reasons why he had to flee away to Tarshish? Probably, he wasn’t yet ready to proclaim the judgment about the wickedness of the city, when there has been lots of wickedness within his own contexts. He wasn’t willing to be a missionary in a foreign land, allowing a prophet to arise out of the Ninevehian context, however conditions demanded that he had to at the end, land up as a migrant missionary in Nineveh. He was called as ‘reluctant one,’ ‘a lazy sleeping guy’ when there was a greater storm, he was a ‘run away missionary’, the ‘main culprit for the raging storm’ and therefore had to be thrown away into the sea. The only human being in the history of human kind, who had to live in the belly of a fish for three days, spending time in prayer and confession, and most times he is viewed as a superman who spent three days to be alive.

 

Jonah is a Prophet from margins, marginalized by the writers of the canon for not weaving his experience into the very fabric of the life and witness of the people of the OT. He is further pushed into margins, for his disobedient attitude to the word of God, for fleeing to a different destiny, for falling asleep when there is a raging storm, and for allowing a vicarious throwing into the sea. When there would have been total disappointment and hostility from ‘God’, from the co-passengers for trespassing, for sleeping without a concern, for being the sole reason of the raging storm etc. Jonah would have been totally looked down by the corridors of canonical writers, by the co-passengers and even by the people of Nineveh, who would have seen him as an alien after being vomited by the fish on their shores. What can you expect from such a person like Jonah? Out of his margins, God chose Jonah to deliver God’s people by speaking God’s justice at difficult moments of history.  Jonah, emerges as a political missionary who proclaims the gospel of repentance, as a mission from the margins to those in the centers.

 

It was a day of fasting at the city of Nineveh. After the miraculous save of Jonah through the belly of a fish, Jonah finally arrived in the city of his destination, Nineveh to proclaim the prophecy of God. At prophet Jonah’s call, the entire city from the king to the citizens to the animals joined the fast and put on sackcloth seeking repentance from God for their wicked deeds. The cry of Jonah, as recorded in Jonah 3, “Forty days more, and Nineveh shall be overthrown” put the city to test and gathered the political attention, for His Highness the King of Nineveh took the lead and made it a public policy in calling for a fast with his royal proclamation. The call for the fast included turning away from the evil ways and from the violence that is in their hands, besides putting on the sackcloth and ashes. The call for fast on that day put God in a fix to change God’s plan for the sake of the life for that city. From the clashes of conflicts, the city went into fasting and ashes, and out of ashes, the city came out into a splash of liberation and life.

 

1. Fasting Challenged the Polis (5 V)

As Jonah proclaimed the prophecy of God, the people of Nineveh believed God, and sought God’s help through a very democratic, political and spiritual way of fasting. This idea of fasting emerged from among the people of the city. The fast they proclaimed was communitarian and for the need of their city. Their fast was not for a selfish need or for an individuals need or for an exhibition of their piety. Their fast was a political necessity, for it challenged the whole of the city. As the fast was proclaimed, everyone in the city without any objections or reservations or concessions observed their fast by putting on their sackcloth and ashes. Great and small in the city, man and women in the city, child and adult in the city, the sinning and the sinned-against in the city, powerful and powerless in the city, irrespective of their lines of divisions and identities, the city came out to the open for a fast in support of their city. When the whole city got together to fast, both the sinned and the sinned against joining the fast meant repentance with regard to the sinned and an indication from the sinned-against that time is ripe for reconciliation. This fasting, which included everyone and in which no one was excluded, displayed the true spirit of fasting. It was this fast that challenged the city.

 

2. Fasting Challenged the Polity (6-9 Vs)

With the impending peril at hand, when a fast was proclaimed by the city, the royal power at the city, who represents the polity, furthered the fast. The fast for the city was a mandate that emerged from the people and for the people, and therefore His Royal Highness was challenged to endorse it and made it a public policy for the good of the city. The king with all his power consciousness could have easily downplayed and rejected the idea of fasting, for as kings they only know to feast and they cared least if the city would go into a doom. The king was challenged by this fasting, and therefore at the peoples call for fast, he had to rise from his royal throne, had to remove his royal robes and had to cover him with sackcloth and had to sit in ashes. The spirituality of this fast was such, that it demanded the powerful to give up their power costumes, attires, attitudes and masks, and calls for a wholesome solidarity with the powerless and weak symbolized through ashes, the waste product that comes after the consumption of energy. The fast for the city challenged the king to issue a public decree calling everyone in the city to restrain from food and feed and be in solidarity for the cause by putting on the sackcloth and ashes. The royal public decree calls everyone in the city to turn their evil practices, practices of discrimination and oppression and to turn away from violence that was in their hands. The king also felt, such a fasting that comes from the community may also challenge God.

 

3. Fasting Challenged the Prophecy (10V)

The king, who was challenged by the communitarian fasting, felt that even the prophecy from God could be challenged of such fasting by people attempted for a change in the city, and may change God’s plans for the sake of promoting life. As was foreseen, the fasting challenged the polity and eventually challenged the prophecy of God according to the writer of this book. The prophecy from prophet Jonah that ‘forty days from now, Nineveh shall be overthrown’ was challenged because the fasting was for the sake of community and not for an individual need. The prophecy was challenged for the barriers of power, for the powerful gave up their power and joined the common, and the community encouraged each other along with the creation to save their city. The prophecy was challenged that the residue ashes became the common binding and bonding symbol in the city, which reveals their deepest concern for righteousness. The prophecy was challenged for both the oppressors in the city and the oppressed in the city joined together to fast, where the oppressor sought repentance from God and the oppressed and oppressed could see justice being enforced in the land. This fasting challenged the prophecy of God, for it was political in nature, for the fast focused on ‘save the city’. This fasting was for the common good of the people and the community in the city, and it has shown the city’s belief in God and in their spiritual quest for God’s intervention. On all these counts, this fasting by the city of Nineveh challenged the prophecy of God and challenged God, for according to the understanding of the writer of the book of Jonah, the city did not perish as was willed by God earlier.

 

Jonah’s Mission from Margins in the book of Jonah is the recognition of the fact that

• God is concerned about unrighteousness as disastrous for creation.


• God’s concern of impending danger as proclaimed by the prophet can bring people and powers together for common good, which directs the mission as lobbying.


• The righteous could feel excluded in this process of reconciliation like Jonah, and such people need to include themselves in God’s act of reconciling all.

 

As churches, we are called to prophecy, reconcile and heal our situations of wickedness and bring in transformation to our localities and societies. The polis, the polity and the prophecy were thoroughly challenged by the fasting of the people in Nineveh, which brought in a change within and around them. Out of clashes they went into ashes, and out of ashes they came out splashing life and change.

 

During this season of Lent, when many people want to fast, as a spiritual discipline for forty days, there are several challenges for us from this text.

 

• Fasting is not for an individual piety, but has to be corporal and for the transformation of our society. This season is an opportunity to give up our self-righteous attitudes and publicity displays on our acts of fasting.
• Don’t take fasting during this season in vain, for many think this season can be an opportunity to cut down their calories and use it as a period to slim down their bodies. Fasting is not a cosmetic exercise.
• The account of fasting in Jonah resonates with Duetro-Isaisah’s understanding of fasting, which is recorded in Isaiah 58: 1-12, to fast unto justice. Fasting is a spiritual exercise for justice. ‘Fast unto justice’ is the need, meaning, purpose and direction of our fasting today. The call for us it to proclaim a fast unto justice against the injustices of our times and strive to establish a just society.

• In the context of the Campaign for climate justice, should not our fasting in this season sensitize our congregations and communities to be akin with the flora and fauna, address acts of greed and save our splendid earth?


• In the context of the growing violence, oppression and discrimination done in the name of caste, gender, sexuality, religion and region, should not our fasting in this season conscientize our communities to become peacemakers and bring in justice and liberation?

 

Lent is a season to ‘spring forth’ for justice, and let the experience of Jesus’ Cross inspire and challenge us to partake in doing actions for justice. Jesus was nailed to Cross for he stood and strived for justice of his times, for he proclaimed an alternative vision to the reign of Roman empire in the vision of Kingdom of God, for he sided with those on the margins and for willing to be branded as ‘criminal’ for the sake of the values he preached and practiced. God’s resurrection strength did not leave Jesus, for he rose again on the third day defeating the forces of death, and springing up in new life.  Wishing you all a meaningful season of Lent, and let our fasting turn into actions of justice and help us to join along with experiences of Cross in our times today and make resurrection a reality for our times.

 

Raj Bharath Patta,

Lent 2016

 

 

---

[1] Ronald F. Thiemann, Constructing a Public Theology, The Church in a Pluralistic Culture (Kentucky: Westminister/ John Knox Press, 1991) P.113-114

Picture courtesy: http://www.orthodoxherald.com/wp-content/uploads/fast-lent.jpg