FOCUS January 2020

1 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

FOCUS January 2020 Vol. 8 No: 1

Priesthood is a Gift from God, Lal Varghese, Esq., Dallas – Page 19

Cover Photo: Priesthood is a Gift from God (Cover Design by Lal Varghese, Esq., Dallas)

A Publication of Diaspora FOCUS From Aaronic to Melchizedekian Priesthood Prof. Plammoottil V. Cherian, M. Div., Ph. D. Chicago – Page 22

Editorial, The Christian Priesthood and Ministry in Crisis, Dr. Zac Varghese, London - Page 3 Glimpses of Christian Heritage In Ministry Revd Dr. M. J. Joseph, Kottayam – Page 25

The Eucharistic Experience in a Hospital Bed Fr. Thomas Punnapadam, SDB – Page 6 The Christian Priesthood in the 21st Century, Dr. Zac Varghese, London – Page 27

Is Priesthood a Divine Calling or a Just Another Profession? Revd Dr. Valson Thampu, Trivandrum– Page 9

How the Clergy Conquered Christianity V. Georgekutty, Karunagapally, Kerala – Page 15

The Holy Books: Part-4, Dr. Ian Fry, University of Divinity, Melbourne- Page 31

Ten Years of Metropolitan Alvares Julius Research Project, Ben Kunjacko – OCP - Page 35

2 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

EDITORIAL The Christian Priesthood and Ministry in Crisis May we wish you all a very happy and blessed New Year.

We also would like to thank all our authors and readers from across the world for supporting and encouraging us to publish this Journal over the last seven years. It is with humility and grateful hearts we are entering into the eight year of publication. ‘Priesthood and ministry’ was a theme that was selected in 2018 for the October issue of the FOCUS (Vol.6. No.4). However, we are revisiting this theme in this issue because of the continued crisis facing priesthood in Christian communities across the world.

This crisis has been with us for a long time, Terrance Card1 summarised his understanding of the crisis in 1988 in the book on ‘Priesthood and Ministry in Crisis’ in the following way. “It is no longer enough faithfully to celebrate the sacraments and preach the word, faithfully to pray and visit the sick, and to hope somehow to pay the bills. The crisis on all churches is far more fundamental, going to the very heart of all we do and believe we are to be, but at the same time opening up a new way.” We are still searching out for new ways and models to follow the path Jesus set out for priesthood and ministry.

The articles published in this issue highlight how priesthood and ministry primarily evolved to establish the kingdom values and solve problems through the unconditional love of God is in itself in a crisis. The crisis is heading towards large numbers of people leaving churches for varied reasons. Clericalism, celibacy, power mongering and divisions are discouraging people seeking ordination too. The articles in this issue highlight this crisis, which needs urgent attention. These articles are not written as a final devastating judgement, but with pain in their hearts in highlighting the state of affairs, which need immediate intervention and correction. These articles are sincere attempts to address some of these issues. Some of the corrective measures suggested will not be acceptable to everyone, but the issues raised must require everyone’s immediate attention and prayers. We are further encouraged by the attention given to these issues by Pope Francis and his statement that “being a priest is not a job, of fulfilling a job contract, but it is a gift from God.” Before entering into short discussions on various articles on ‘Priesthood and Ministry’, I have great joy and peace in strongly recommending the article by Fr. Thomas Punnapadam OSB, on how he came to celebrate and experience a Eucharist in a hospital bed. In his testimony, we see the life of a humble priest through his lived out 1 Terrance Card, ‘Priesthood and Ministry in Crisis’, SCM

Press, 1988.

experience under the most trying of circumstances. Fr. Punnapadam writes: “Is not this the noble vocation of and profound challenge for every priest, not just ritually celebrating the Eucharist but of actually living it to the full as Jesus did?

If, as we believe, the words of consecration give birth to the whole mystical body of Christ, then every time the priest pronounces them he should first and foremost offer every atom, of his being to be consecrated, divinized, and transformed into the body and blood of Christ! Even to a veteran of three decades of Eucharistic celebrations celebrating Holy Mass, for the first time in a hospital bed helplessly, is a deeply enriching experience. “This is my body… this is my blood”.

The grace and power of the words of consecration penetrate every atom of the universe, beginning with one’s own body. Every time the words of consecration are pronounced, it is another step in the mysterious process of the full incorporation into Christ of all existence. This is indeed deep, authentic prayer, letting go in total self-awareness, becoming more grateful, aware of ultimate perspectives. Such an experience of the Eucharistic celebration reminds us most powerfully that the Eucharist is no mere routine ritual.

Every celebration puts us in touch with wider existence, and entire life becomes unceasing prayer. The Eucharist becomes a living sacrifice, the earnest appeal of St. Paul “to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship (Rom 12/1), is best understood from this perspective.”

Fr. Punnapadam’s concluding words are a very meaningful summary on priesthood and ministry.

“Experiences like these challenge the priest to conform evermore fully to what he celebrates. Then his words, his life, his very person, rather than his words and actions, will be nourishing food for his people. Through him Christ will nourish the faith and love of those whom the priest serves. Priesthood is essentially a transformation in one’s nature. If one is always and everywhere a priest, he is no less so in a hospital bed. The people he ministers to by divine commission are always in his heart, though geographically far away, physically invisible. We believe with the Psalmist that “Every one of my days was decreed before one of them came into being” (Ps 139/16). Hence the days in bed were no less integral to priestly ministry than the healthy days filled with exhausting activity. It is beyond all doubt that even life-threatening, unexpected, unprepared for illness can carry us deeper into the mystery of the Eucharist. One could not agree more with George Bernanos “All is grace”.

The warning that Revd Dr. Vaslon Thampu expressed as an introduction to his article is equally applicable to all the authors. “It is taken for granted that there will be, in every system and institution, individuals who buck the trend and endeavour to be sincere and faithful to his calling.

They are to be valued and respected all the more in a period of general decay; for they are our life support

3 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

systems, so to speak. What I write below is to be read strictly under this caveat.”

The ministry has become a ministry of power and posturing for recognition and fame. An overriding theme of the history of the world is how power structures of the world rise and fall. Some lasts longer than others, but each is thirsting for power; this leads to self-destruction.

We see this in our churches locally and globally, and sometimes we wonder just how long it will be before God does something about it! And that brings other questions: Why does God allow it to happen? Why is there so much suffering in our churches? How is it affecting the wider community and society? Why are we going through this?

No matter how dark or difficult our life’s circumstances are right now in our churches, many faithful followers make it their regular habit to celebrate and acknowledge God’s sovereignty in their affairs. Let us accept God’s timing and His will for us, which may be beyond our understanding. When power-struck people threaten our faith, be confident that God always will be with us. He is our Immanuel.

Although Valson Thampu’s article is critical of the present state of the Christian priesthood, he admits: “Yet I believe that priesthood is a practical necessity; just as teachers and doctors are . . . A sincere, God-fearing priest is a great blessing. He helps to concretise what, otherwise, remains abstract . . . So, if spiritual beauty is embodied in the person of a priest, it is greatly to be cherished. But there is a problem here; and that problem is basic to our wellbeing and the authenticity of the Way of Jesus Christ.” He further states: “There is compelling all-round evidence today that priesthood, as understood and practised, runs counter to the culture of the Kingdom of God. . . .What needs to be done is to reckon its aberrations and the calling refined and restored to its pristine purity.” We are publishing these articles entirely with this purpose in mind. Valson Thampu’s article is not all about the diagnosis of a malady, but he also provides us with prescriptions for corrections and for attaining spiritual maturity. “The question we are addressing in this piece – Is priesthood a divine gift, or is it just another profession? – is indeed of immense significance for all of us. I hope very earnestly that our quest for a truthful answer to it will not prove a flash in the pan. We need to sustain an earnest, prolonged debate in which those concerned can participate with open and fearless minds, so that the truth is discerned and affirmed without fear or favour. This is a sacred duty we owe to ourselves, our descendants and to Jesus himself. Ignorance and indifference do not help. If Jesus is the truth, and we his disciples, we cannot flinch from looking truth in the face.”

Georgekutty, a new author to the FOCUS journal, in his article on ‘How Clergy Conquered Christianity’ painstakingly traces the historical development of ecclesial structures from the apostolic times to the present day and comes to the following conclusion. “It is true that there are well-meaning and honest leaders in the various factions of today’s church. But, historically, there has been a tendency for the church leadership to claim unquestionable authority over the congregation. This is witnessed in one form or the other even today. This does not seem to be based on any scriptural authority. It is doubtful whether the New Testament really envisages a professional clergy with authority to rule over the congregation.”

Lal Varghese, Esq., in his article develops the idea that priesthood is a gift from God and it is a God-centred vocation. He concludes: “While being a steward in the Church of Christ, priest has the special responsibility to shepherd the flock in this world, to participate ardently in the work of the Kingdom of God through the ministry of the Word and administration of sacraments, to be a witness in the Church, which is the body of Christ and in the name of Christ, involve in the temporal & spiritual growth of the Kingdom of God. He has the responsibility to shepherd the flock of God, to render sacrificial service to the community according to the will of God, to be

4 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

fervent in the proclamation of the Gospel, to be consistent in the ministry of teaching, and to manifest the dignity of the Christian ministry in the congregation and society.”

Dr. P. V. Cherian, in a scholarly and a very detailed article traces the development of the priesthood in the OT and The NT traditions. He develops Aaronic, Levitical, Melchizedekian and the high priestly role of Jesus Christ.

Finally, in Christ we see the fulfilment of prophecies for the high priestly role of redeeming mankind from their sins once for all. Jesus said, “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me” (Hebrews 10:5). Then I said, Behold, I have come, in the scrolls of the book, it is written of me, to do your will O, God” (Hebrews 10:7, cf. Psalm 40:7).

Revd Dr. M. J. Joseph, with many years of experience as a theological educator and ministerial trainer, in his article on ‘Glimpses of Christian Heritage in Ministry’ states that “Mission in Christ’s way is the need of the hour as humankind is facing spiritual and moral problems. There is thus a huge responsibility before theological educators and ministers.” Therefore, what is required is a combination of pastoral and prophetic vision in ministry.

He points out three fundamental ingredients of the ministry: “commitment to God, compassion for people and passion for justice are required for a transformative leadership”. He concludes: “Our concern is to deliver God’s concerns in Christ as the action plans of Christian ministry. What we are is more important than what we have. What St. Paul said to the elders of Ephesus in his farewell speech is to be remembered in pastoral ministry: “You yourselves know how I lived among you. . . I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God. . .

I coveted no one’s silver or gold or apparel. . . .”

(Acts.20:17-38).

Dr. Zac Varghese also traces the development of priesthood and ministry during the Old Testament, the New Testament and the present time. He is sympathetic to the pressures of the present day priests. He says: “Preservation of physical and emotional health, rest and efficient time management are important for a parish priest. A priest’s life is not always administering sacraments and other official duties; he has to recharge his batteries through silent meditation, prayer, recreation and fellowship. Lay people should appreciate this and provide support as active members of a team ministry.

Bishops also get isolated; they also need help to become effective overseers of ministers and ministries.” He also develops the story that we should not get satisfied by living in the comfortable zones of life in homogenous communities; opportunities for mission are always is on the other side, as we learn from the life of Abraham and the stories of the Samaritan woman and the good Samaritan. Therefore, it is necessary to look for opportunities where people are. We need to become

more imaginative in reaching out to people and to interact with their needs. In order to provide a safety net for those found marginalized by society. It may be necessary to discover new forms and fresh expressions of worship and ministries to cater for people on the other side of the boundary walls. He then stresses the importance of lay priesthood and the need to develop joint ministries with ordained priests for addressing the needs of the local parishes and communities.

The problems and challenges presented in these articles cut right to the heart of Christianity as they are practiced through the managerial, administrative and pastoral arms of the world-wide institutionalised Church. We are all in it together and we need to address these issues calmly and collectively. The Christian priesthood and ministry are based on a call and vocation for a radical transformation of our whole being, amounting to a new birth, born of the Spirit. Christ’s mission was not to make us nominal Christians, but to give us an indwelling ‘in Christ’ experiential living. Jesus’ response to James and John (Mk. 10: 35- 45), wanting to sit at Jesus’ left and right in his kingdom is to get rid of their love of power and replace it with the power of sacrificial love. Therefore, in order for us to realize the inner Christ, the Christ within us, we must gain freedom not for ourselves but from ourselves. Only those who are able to practice the discipline taught by Christ can be regarded as his disciples and ministers.

Dr. Zac Varghese, London For FOCUS Editorial Board http://www.issuu.com/diasporafocus http://www.scribd.com/diasporafocus Disclaimer: Diaspora FOCUS is a non-profit organization registered in United States, originally formed in late Nineties in London for the Diaspora Marthomites. Now it is an independent lay-movement of the Diaspora laity of the Syrian Christians; and as such FOCUS is not an official publication of any denominations. It is an ecumenical journal to focus attention more sharply on issues to help churches and other faith communities to examine their own commitment to loving their neighbors and God, justice, and peace. Opinions expressed in any article or statements are of the individuals and are not to be deemed as an endorsement of the view expressed therein by Diaspora FOCUS. Thanks.

Web Site: www.facebook.com/groups/mtfocus E-Mail: mtfousgroup@gmail.com

FOCUS EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS: Dr. Zac Varghese, London Dr. Titus Mathews, Calgary Revd Dr. M. J. Joseph, Kottayam Lal Varghese, Esq., Dallas Dr. Jesudas M. Athyal, Thiruvalla Revd Dr. Valson Thampu, Trivandrum

5 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

Jesus – Mary – Joseph (JMJ)

THE EUCHARISTIC EXPERIENCE IN A HOSPITAL BED Fr. Thomas Punnapadam, SDB [This paper was previously published in the Vidyajyoti Journal, VJTR,75 (Oct 2011)10,725-731] Illness is as integral to life as good health and equally mysterious. The most health- conscious are not always the ones who enjoy the best of health. Many who are apparently careless about their food habits and lifestyle seem to enjoy enviable well-being in body and mind. So everyone needs to have the right attitude to the Godgiven gift of one’s health as also the grace of the illnesses to which one could succumb. Beyond the chronology of an illness, how one internally responds to it and the ensuing long-term consequences, depend entirely on one’s attitude to illness in general and to the particular suffering one goes through. On the one hand illness is a dark night of faith, yet it can be a blessed night, a gracefilled night of a re-energizing encounter with a healing God. Illness can be an enriching and purifying experience, verily a grace. The more unexpected and serious the illness, the more bounteous the avenues through which grace flows. The hospital bed can indeed be the place where the Lord “will tell you great and hidden things that you have not known” (Jer. 33/3). To the extent one is open to the experience, despite external turmoil, one arrives at a place of peace and serenity, even without an awareness of the grace-filled journey.

The more unexpected and sudden the onslaught of illness, the greater is the pain and the bewilderment. And yet received as a grace, the time spent helplessly in a hospital bed can become a channel of transformation and deeper intimacy with God. The well-known ‘Footprints on the sand’ quote reminds us that in the darkest moments of our life, God is carrying us, albeit one is often unaware.

Illness like other heart-rending experiences of life bring home to us wisdom of the deepest truth of existence: we are not in control of our lives, God is. Though being bedridden is a rather solitary experience, paradoxically one discovers that people are caring far beyond one’s expectations. Taoism defines life as ‘love-received’. It is during an illness that one is best enlightened to this profound truth.

An emergency coronary bypass surgery was the most unexpected, yet God-given experience I was blessed with.

It is a ‘routine procedure’ for the medical profession, but a life and death experience for most patients and their dear ones. The priest enjoys many unwritten privileges and receives extraordinary care and concern even from total strangers. The surgeon was extremely magnanimous in anticipating the surgery and rewriting his schedules for the sake of his priest-patient.

So the agony of waiting for surgery was mercifully nonexistent.

After my surgery I opened my eyes for the first time, and saw the clock clicking away, it was 6.30 in the evening, exactly twelve hours since I had been wheeled into the operation theatre. My last memories were of blinding lights and masked nurses and the irresistible drowsiness overpowering my whole being, thanks to the anesthetic that had been injected into my veins. As consciousness returned to me, the overwhelming, eerie silence of the ICU was far from friendly. The buzz in the ward, the doctors in constant rush, everyone busy, responding to ever-new emergencies, with lives to be prolonged, if not saved, were all intimidating to say the least. With hardly any strength to raise one’s voice, one had to resort to frantic gestures to communicate. I was dying of thirst and my silent voiceless pleas for a sip of water fell on deaf ears. Those whose attention I received seemed more concerned with the machines hooked on to my weak body or the liquids draining out of the tubes inserted into the incisions on my chest and ribs.

In moments like these, almost unconsciously one’s attention is drawn to one’s own body in an incredibly helpless state. The body with which you identify yourself so very closely seems to have let you down miserably. It could be the body was rebelling for not having given it sufficient and appropriate attention and care. The words of Genesis seem to come home ever more powerfully: “you are dust and to dust you shall return” (Gen. 3/19b).

The weakness, the emptiness, the unutterable void seems unbearable. Every movement in bed seems to call for super-human effort. The bed sheets seem like heavy metal sheets smothering you down; the scanty clothes covering you are a constant irritant rubbing against your wounds; every tiny gesture to communicate takes its disproportionate toll of fast-depleting energy from your feeble body; at every bout of cough your lungs seem to be falling out; a sneeze leaves you wondering if a bomb has burst in your entrails.

THE EUCHARIST As my consciousness became more sustained and less hazy, it dawned on me a priest of over thirty wonderfully happy years, that I had not celebrated the Eucharist that day. Canonically there is no obligation to celebrate Holy Mass daily. Yet most priests feel a void within engendered by its absence. On the one hand one would like to celebrate Mass even in a hospital bed. But how

6 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

does one do it in a Cardiac Intensive Care Unit, in a semiconscious state, with no altar or missal, liturgical vestments or sacred vessels and without Eucharistic bread and sacramental wine, in a non-Christian hospital?

Before a tinge of discouragement or disappointment could overpower me, it was indeed amazing grace that revived my memory of the words of the Jesuit mystic, Teilhard de Chardin, who many times on the road lacked the requirements for Mass. It inspired him to write in Mass on the world: “Since today Lord, I your priest, have neither bread nor wine nor altar, I will extend my hands over the whole universe and I will grasp this immensity as the matter of my sacrifice… Is not the infinite circle of things one final host that it is your will to transmute? The seething cauldron in which the activities of every living and cosmic substance are bubbling, is it not the painful chalice that you wish to sanctify?”

Since I too had neither bread, nor wine nor altar, I was graced and inspired to raise myself beyond all symbols, up to the pure majesty of the real itself. The words of consecration pronounced for the first time at the Last supper, seemed to spring form the depths of my being.

My weak, emaciated body, almost dead without medical support, seemed the best symbol of the body to be broken and the blood to be shed. Helplessly, half consciously repeating the words of consecration several times seemed a unique unprecedented way to celebrate the Eucharist. This is my body; this is my blood. God alone knows how many times I repeated the mysterious formula. The words were hardly audible yet the words were surging from the depths of being. As the formula moved deeper into consciousness, an ineffable peace and satisfaction overwhelmed me. As it were, God had graced me with the privilege of a unique Eucharistic celebration.

The Bread and wine were consecrated by Christ at the Last Supper. Could one say Jesus offered his body and blood symbolized by the bread and wine, in total submission and the Father consecrated them? The disciples could only think of Jesus’ body before their bodily eyes. As Jesus broke the bread, he could envision his body sweating blood in the Garden of Gethsemane that very night; he could anticipate the agony of the scourging and crowning with thorns; he could already feel the weight of his lacerated body on the cross tearing through his pierced hands; he could sense the soldier’s lance at his side and feel the last drops water and blood ooze out of his dying body. Aware of the ultimate surrender and supreme sacrifice he had to make, his dying words were already in his heart and on his lips “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit” (Lk 23/46).

The one and only Eucharistic offering made by Jesus was no less real in the upper room than on Mount Calvary.

The sacrifice on mount Calvary was offered with no bread and wine.

As the total self-offering of Jesus was accepted and consecrated by the Father, the priest is called not only to re-enact but re-live the first and only Eucharistic sacrifice of Jesus Christ. As Jesus broke the bread, he had offered thanks to the Father. They were no mere words; he had lived the reality from the moment of his incarnation. He had done the will of his Father every moment of his earthly life, as the true and only high priest: “Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body you have prepared for me” (Heb 10/5). Could one not say that when at the Last supper Jesus blessed the bread and had ‘given thanks’ (Lk. 22/17, 19) he was offering to the Father his body soon to be crucified and his blood soon to flow down Calvary on Good Friday? Was he not giving thanks to the Father for accepting his offering and consecrating it? Assured of acceptance and consecration by the Father, he could proclaim to the disciples, “This is my body which is given for you” (Lk. 22/19); “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk. 22/20).

Is not this the noble vocation of and profound challenge for every priest, not just ritually celebrating the Eucharist but of actually living it to the full as Jesus did? If, as we believe, the words of consecration give birth to the whole mystical body of Christ, then every time the priest pronounces them he should first and foremost offer every atom, of his being to be consecrated, divinised, and transformed into the body and blood of Christ!

Even to a veteran of three decades of Eucharistic celebrations, celebrating Holy Mass for first time in bed helplessly, is a deeply enriching experience. “This is my body… this is my blood”. The grace and power of the words of consecration penetrate every atom of the universe, beginning with one’s own body. Every time the words of consecration are pronounced, it is another step in the mysterious process of the full incorporation into Christ of all existence. This is indeed deep, authentic prayer, letting go in total self-awareness, becoming more grateful, aware of ultimate perspectives. Such an experience of the Eucharistic celebration reminds us most powerfully that the Eucharist is no mere routine ritual.

Every celebration puts us in touch with wider existence, and entire life becomes unceasing prayer. The Eucharist becomes a living sacrifice, the earnest appeal of St. Paul “to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship (Rom 12/1), is best understood from this perspective.

As days passed, the absolutely astounding resilience of the body became evident. Almost imperceptibly the body regains its strength and vitality, day after day. The medical professionals compassionately liberate your limbs from invasive tubes and supporting machines. Is it merely a sign of triumph of medicine and technology or a clear reflection of the resurrection to a glorious body?

7 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

While the body is still very weak, the so very familiar words of the Eucharistic prayer seem to tug at one’s heart strings, as if prayed for the first time. This brings home to us that not infrequently we may have been on autopilot and the inspiring prayers may have become just sounds, or as Jesus warns we have been heaping up empty phrases as the gentiles do (Mt 6/7). We may have given up allowing the words to go deeper into us. Due to the still feeble body, one is forced to say them slowly, deliberately. The forced deliberate articulation of every word of the Eucharistic prayer has miraculous effects.

Those of us, who have exhausted trying to harvest the mystery that lies within the words and ritual, will rediscover it.

Ever since my first ‘mystical celebration’ of the Eucharist the words of consecration have taken on a new meaning for me and the depth of my being seems to be stirred every time I pronounce them. Indeed every celebration of the Holy Eucharist can be a moment of deep Godexperience and the moment of consecration (despite changing theology) is a climax. “That we who are nourished by his body and blood may be filled with his Holy Spirit, and become one body, one spirit in Christ” this is indeed the supreme intention of every celebration.

With constraining, long pauses between the phrases, one is unconsciously united with innumerable people who have deeply touched one’s life during the illness – the loved ones, real good friends, the medical professionals.

One is constantly reminded about innumerable people one has ministered to and earnestly praying and fasting for your speedy and complete recovery Indeed there is no deeper union than the one symbolised, expressed and deepened by every Eucharistic celebration. While I can visibly see only a beloved sister of mine at my bedside, I know that many others “who take part in this offering” and “all who seek you with a sincere heart” are spiritually surrounding me.

Experiences like these challenge the priest to conform evermore fully to what he celebrates. Then his words, his life, his very person, rather than his words and actions, will be nourishing food for his people. Through him Christ will nourish the faith and love of those whom the priest serves. Priesthood is essentially a transformation in one’s nature. If one is always and everywhere a priest, he is no less so in a hospital bed. The people he ministers to by divine commission are always in his heart, though geographically far away, physically invisible. We believe with the Psalmist that “Every one of my days was decreed before one of them came into being” (Ps 139/16). Hence the days in bed were no less integral to priestly ministry than the healthy days filled with exhausting activity. It is beyond all doubt that even life-threatening, unexpected, unprepared for illness can carry us deeper into the mystery of the Eucharist. One could not agree more with George Bernanos “All is grace”.

Pearls of Wisdom Series: No.12 We must follow the Lord’s example in caring for his flock (A reading from the Sermons of St. Asterius of Amasea*) If, having created in the image of God, we now desire to resemble him, we must follow his example. The very name that we bear as Christians is proof of God’s loving kindness towards men. Let us, therefore, imitate the love of Christ. Consider and wonder at the riches of his goodness. For when he was about to show himself to men in in man’s own nature, he sent John ahead of him to preach repentance, and before John he sent the prophets to persuade men to change their way of life. Then he came himself, and with his own voice he cried out: come to me, all you who labour and are overburdened and I will give you rest. And how did he receive those who listened to his call and followed him? He readily forgave them their sins, in an instant relieving them of all their cause for sorrow. The Word sanctified them; the Spirit set seal on them. The old man was buries in the waters of baptism, the new man was born by grace. As a result, enemies of God became his friends, strangers to him became his sons, non-Christians became Christians, Idolaters learned to worship the true God. It is for us now to follow our Lord’s example in caring for his flock. We should read the gospels carefully, for they are like a mirror, showing us the pains he took and the kindness he showed, and they will teach us how to be like him. Obscurely, in the form of a parable, we see him there in the shepherd who had a hundred sheep. When one of them became separated from the flock and strayed, that shepherd did not remain with the sheep that were still grazing with the others, but set out to look for the lost one. He crossed many chasms and ravines, he climbed over high mountains, he was almost overcome with exhaustion in the wilderness, and then, at last, he found his sheep.

When he had found it, he did not beat it, nor roughly drive it back into the fold, but instead carefully carried it home on his own shoulders to restore it to the flock, and he was more delighted over this one sheep than over all the others.

Now there is a hidden meaning in this parable, which we must try to penetrate; for the sheep is not really an animal, nor is the shepherd a man that cares for senseless beasts. No; he is someone very different. In fact, the purpose of this story is to reveal a sacred mystery and its lesson for us in that we should not easily despair of men’s salvation, nor should we abandon them when they are in peril. When they go astray, we are bound to search them out and bring them back to the fold. Then, when they return, we should be delighted to receive them into the fellowship of all right-living people. [*Saint Asterius of Amasea (C. 350 – c. 410 AD) Asterius, having specialized in rhetoric and the practice of law, abandoned this profession to enter the ministry of clergy. He was the Metropolitan of Amasea between 380 and 390 AD. He was born in Cappadocia and probably died in Amasea in modern Turkey, then in Pontus. Significant portions of his lively sermons survive, this sermon is taken from a collection edited by Henry Ashworth O.S.B; ‘A Word in Season’, The Talbot Press, Dublin, 1974.

Collected by Dr. Zac Varghese]

8 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

Is Priesthood a Divine Calling or a Just Another Profession?

Revd Dr. Valson Thampu, Trivandrum I need to fix a caveat at the outset itself. When questions of general significance are discussed, what is kept in mind are emerging, or general, trends. It is taken for granted that there will be, in every system and institution, individuals who buck the trend and endeavour to be sincere and faithful to his calling. They are to be valued and respected all the more in a period of general decay; for they are our life support systems, so to speak. What I write below is to be read strictly under this caveat.

I have been a priest, most of my life. I don’t regret having been one. But I do regret what priests are coming to be.

This presents a problem: the problem pertaining to one’s awareness of a calling, which is fast becoming unlike what it was meant, or seemed, to be. The dilemma is this: either my idealistic view of priesthood four decades ago was naive; or the present dystopic picture of priesthood is an aberration. But how can something which is becoming nearly universal be wrong, and what once was, remain right in the vastly changed circumstances? This is important, because we don’t live wholly in the past. Life is a forward flow, not a regressive nostalgia.

This presents a painful dilemma. How can I continue to harbour my idealistic view of priesthood, where the ordained journey of my life began, without reckoning the present aberrations of priesthood? Do I not, by being indifferent to priestly degradations, which abound today, falsify my original idea of priesthood? Quite simply: could it be that my original idea of priesthood was quixotic? Did I embrace a pleasant piece of fiction then?

Here’s what I saw in a video clip just the other day. A priest of the Jacobite faction was seen addressing the faithful of his church. He was urging them to despise and spite their Orthodox brethren. “Have nothing to do with them,” he thundered. “Boycott their shops, their presence. Do not give your daughters in marriage to their sons and do not let your sons marry their daughters. Do not buy a piece of paper from a shop run by an Orthodox rascal. That’s how they deserve to be treated.”

At every word, he evoked applause from his flock.

Obviously, they believed he was discharging a core priestly function. The question is: where does the biblical faith, the teachings of Jesus Christ, come into this picture?

The very same priest would, come Sunday, put on a pious priestly role. He will exhort his congregation to forgive even their enemies (perhaps, other than Orthodox rascals). To walk the extra mile. To turn the other cheek.

Come Good Friday, he will lead tear-jerking meditations

on the meaning of the Cross. He will not be found wanting in fasting and praying as per his tradition.

Who instituted priesthood, if this is what it amounts to?

What for? One thing we know. Jesus did not institute priesthood. He called individuals to be disciples. Rather than ordain priests, he denounced the priests and their betters of his day. He called them whited sepulchres.

It is not my contention that we should not have priests, just because Jesus did not create this order. We do many a thing that Jesus did not specifically mandate: like establishing institutions, many of them for worldly profit and prestige; like building bigger and grandiose churches out of parochial vanity; like gathering treasures upon the earth, where they are vulnerable to thieves, moths and (if Arthur Schopenhauer is believed), priests.

My only contention is that whatever is instituted in the name of Jesus Christ, and for the sake of his sheep, must have, and serve, a purpose that harmonizes with his spiritual vision of life. We will feel troubled, for example, if an organization to spread communal poison is established in the name of Gandhiji.

So, I have difficulties in persuading myself to believe that priesthood is a divine gift, instituted by Jesus himself.

This is, factually, untrue. I have much less problem in accepting the view that priesthood meets a practical need. That’s why we find priesthood emerging in all religions at a certain stage in their historical evolution.

Now, here’s what I have come to understand about the logic for the evolution of priesthood.

Human beings have metaphysical, not less than, physical needs. A good illustration of this is Jesus’ saying: “Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.” To live by bread, or food, alone is to be no different from animals. We are more than animals. So, we have needs different from, and higher than, that of animals. Logically, by living like animals -on the physical plane alone- we become less, or worse, than animals.

The realm of the metaphysical, it is widely assumed, is a sphere of expertise and specialisation. (Jesus taught otherwise. The understanding withheld from the wise is accessible, Jesus said, to children and the suckling.)

Whatever is specialized, is beyond the reach of the common man. The domain of the most rarefied expertise is the world to come, about which the common folks know nothing. (They also don’t know that the so-called priestly experts too, truth be told, know nothing.) He

9 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

needs guidance. Guidance can be provided only by those who are specially trained and accredited, clothed and commissioned for the purpose. The main alibi for the existence of priesthood is the metaphysical illiteracy, and insecurity, of the common man and God’s alleged partiality to specialists. Or, the need to accredit a set of specialists ‘ordained’ to mediate divine mysteries. Of course, it is overlooked, in this process, that Incarnation is an existential protest against mystifying mysteries. If mystery were to remain an inaccessible category, it was a mistake for the Word to become flesh and, especially, to dwell in the midst of human beings!

It is another matter that the Word becoming flesh, is a deeper mystery; but it is mystery of a different order. (I have read none more profound than Soren Kierkegaard on this point.) That mystery results from God becoming God-man. The mystery on which priesthood has now come to stand and operate, stands that mystery on its head: it tries desperately hard to turn God-become-man into its opposite: man-become-God, which is no more than a secular freak.

This enables priests to pass off as experts on the other world, which is the safest and the most profitable thing to do. It is safe, because one can say anything about the world to come and remain safe from being questioned and contradicted. No one can prove anything for or against his averments. This is not to say that the world to come is a myth. It is that it can be –and it often is- turned into a matrix for locating magical, superstitious, irrational and hypocritical ideas meant for the consumption of the credulous. These ideas are such, not necessarily because they are false in themselves –how do we know, either way? - but because those who pontificate on them, and commend them earnestly to the believers, do not believe in them. Otherwise, how can it be that a priest who recommends the gains of the world to come to his people remains obsessed with gains only of this world for himself? Don’t believe this? Well, find out the extent to which priests go, or abase themselves, to get an overseas posting.

It is my experience, spread over four decades, that not more than a tiny fraction of priests and preachers believe in what they proclaim or profess. (This is true also of the laity. If a group of ardent believers, who are fasting and praying for the urgent second coming of Jesus Christ, were indeed to be accosted by the Risen Christ, they are sure to be shocked and startled.) Well, you don’t have to go to Dante’s Hell for evidence in this connection. Only pay heed to what priests do familiarly when denominational interests are at stake –that’s why I quoted the instance of the Jacobite priests a while ago- and you will be readily convinced. If there is a priest who dares to look beyond the interests of his employer –the denomination concerned- he is sure to be suspect in the eyes of his bishops and fellow priests.

Yet I believe that priesthood is a practical necessity; just as teachers and doctors are. In theory, everyone can attain knowledge without teachers, and people can mind their own health without doctors. But it helps to have them; especially in critical situations. It makes life a lot easier. But what are we to do when teachers promote ignorance and doctors prove a threat to health? A sincere, God-fearing priest is a great blessing. He helps to concretise what, otherwise, remains abstract. Most human beings, including me, are incapable of relating to abstractions. It is any day easier for us to relate to a beautiful human being than to the idea of beauty. So, if spiritual beauty is embodied in the person of a priest, it is greatly to be cherished. But there is a problem here; and that problem is basic to our wellbeing and the authenticity of the Way of Jesus Christ.

Spirituality is not a domain of spectacles or of heroworship. It is a domain of personal transformation. In the realm of culture, it is enough if we have assets external to us: say, a globally celebrated athlete, a great author, a beauty queen, and so on. But, in the realm of spirituality, only what we are, avails us. It matters little how great our denominational forefathers were, or how ancient our tradition is, or how prestigious our church, or how ascetic our priests are. Their asceticism does help; provided they don’t turn it into an ornament of religious vanity, as the priests in Jesus’ times did. Read the 6th chapter of St. Matthew, if you need illustrations of this.

So, the spiritual merit of a priest needs to be valued not as an end in itself, but as a catalyst for the spiritual growth towards maturity of the body of believers. In the end, therefore, there is a necessary, indeed inevitable, norm of judgment: the plight of the people. So, let us fix this clearly in our minds: a priest is a divine gift only to the extent that he is a fellow traveller with the people in their pilgrimage to spiritual maturity. Instead of this, if priests prove hindrances in the faith-life of believers –of which we have ever-increasing, instances- there is a need and a duty to recognize this as an atrocity on Jesus Christ and

10 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

be vehemently disapproving of it. It doesn’t help to be treating shepherds and hirelings on an equal footing, as Jesus himself said.

What I have stated above is central to the instruction Jesus gave to Peter: ‘feed my flock’. Due to excessive and overwhelming denominationalism, priests tend to be blind to the fact that believers are the flock of Jesus Christ. They are not denominational assets, like broiler chickens raised in private farms. What does it mean to ‘feed’ the flock of Jesus Christ? One thing is clear. It includes the duty to so nurture believers that they become more and more like Jesus. That is, without a doubt, the meaning of the expression, “my flock”. A congregation becomes the flock of Jesus Christ only when they, in their collective and individual lives, become witnesses to Jesus Christ by growing more and more into his essence and likeness.

As Jesus took pains to emphasize, our spiritual calling – such, presumably, priesthood is – is metaphysical or divine in its essence. That is why profit motive is wholly incompatible with it. Hence the instruction: “Freely you have received; freely give.” To understand this aright, recall instances from the flood-devastation of Kerala last year. The fishermen of Kerala were at the forefront of rescue operations. They sacrificed their livelihood in order to respond to the distress of fellow Keralites. There were innumerable instances of fishermen refusing to accept rewards from the individuals they helped to survive. Why? They realized that godly deeds are desecrated by profit motive. Imagine a hypothetical situation. You see a child (God forbid) drowning in a river. You jump in at personal risk and save her and take her home to her parents. You are offered Rs. 10000 for your efforts. Won’t you feel the ‘value’ of your gesture of compassion undermined?

Yet, how come that we associate every priestly service covering the space from birth to death- with monetary rewards? We cannot imagine anything godly without Mammon’s coins. How has this come about? Certainly, not from the example of Jesus Christ. Nor from his teachings.

I have tried, in a humble and inadequate way, to investigate this issue in a historical perspective. My findings are disconcerting. I find that all over the world, in every culture, in every religion, in every age, the priestly class has served as a fountainhead of worldly corruption in respect of their religions and religious communities.

This involves a vast historical panorama, and a mountain of material, and it is quite beyond the limited scope of the present essay to marshal the details. The readers may look through just one book to be duly informed on this issue: Our Oriental Heritage by Will Durant. If a sociological perspective is desired, the foundational text

by Max Weber titled The Sociology of Religion can be

consulted. All that is actually unnecessary, if only Christians would read the Gospels with an open mind.

The degradation of priests as a class is addressed adequately by Jesus himself.

You shall know, Jesus said, a tree by its fruits. Let us adopt the same standard in dealing with the present issue. What are the fruits of priest-craft currently on evidence? Are our congregations serving as places of growth for our people? Are they becoming more and more mature, spiritually? Or, are they becoming petty and shallow? What is the vision with which priesthood is practised?

This is a major issue and I cannot deal with it in sufficient detail in an essay of this kind. I limit myself, in what follows, to a simple-enough analysis of its operative logic.

I start with a secular illustration, so that we begin our journey from familiar grounds.

There are, we all know, two types of individuals. First, those who derive all their sense of personal worth from the opinions and dispositions of others. They die for a good word from anyone around; likewise, they could also die of a bad word from anyone else. They are habitually complaisant and always over-eager to please others.

The second category of people, evidently much smaller in number, have their equilibrium within themselves. They derive their worth from what they have in themselves.

They are unaffected by the uncharitable and calumniating things others say about them, even if they are not indifferent to people in general. They don’t go out of their way to create a favourable impression on others. Unlike the first category of people, individuals of this kind ‘are’ what they seem to be. If this is true, then the following- In our religious life, we could well resemble the first kind.

The difference is that in place of ‘others’ we place God. Instead of being men-pleasers, we are God-pleasers, as though God is waiting to be pleased and humoured by us. All our religious practices and strategies are aimed at keeping God on our side, favourably disposed towards rewarding us by way of worldly favours. So, we feel flattered when we are spoken of as godly! We are eager to be seen as zealous in our religiosity. We also fear priests and bishops, because their displeasure –as several of my fellow Christians have told me – could make God angry with us with dreadful consequences. We try to please God after the fashion of the world. The means and strategies we use are also worldly. We value flattery.

So, we assume that God also does, and we have developed sanctified expressions and formulae for the purpose. We crave for material benefits. So, we assume God too is similarly inclined and try to win his favours through material offerings. We have our cases, when we are not sure of our merit, recommended to the powers that be by those who have special statuses. Likewise, we

11 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

think God too needs to be nudged by ordained middlemen, to act mercifully towards us.

community – priests included – is dwindling. They are but the two sides of the same coin: the coin of institutionalized religious hypocrisy.

What is the problem in all of this?

That is why Jesus identified himself as the truth. Truth is the alternative to hypocrisy. If our personality is founded on truth, we will be in ourselves what we appear to be to others. We will be consistent. There will be no need to ‘whitewash’ sepulchral individual personalities. The fact that, instead of evolving and improving the spiritual and ethical mettle of our individual and communitarian lives, we are degenerating points necessarily to the reality that our religious life is structured on flattering and pleasing God through hypocritical appearances and pretensions rather than on worshipping God “in spirit and in truth”.

Those who live entirely on the favours and opinions of others become hollow within. Banking entirely on borrowed worth, they fail to develop inner, intrinsic worth.

They remain unaware that they can have intrinsic worth.

They remain preoccupied with ways and means for pleasing others. Dale Carnegie in his popular and misleading book How to Win Friends and Influence Them, counsel his readers that before they go to meet someone, they should ascertain the main interests of their hosts and read books relating to them, so as to be able to leave a good impression on them. What is wrong about this, you might ask? Well, nothing, so long as all you want is to be gilded specimens of humanity, thriving by pleasing all and sundry. This is seriously wrong if, on the other hand, if you are authentic human being with a well-defined personality core and want to be only as you are. In that case, your prime consideration is not whether or not you appeal to this person or that, but if you are being true to yourself in dealing with every human being. If you are, your aim will not be to impress but to enrich, which can be undertaken only in truth and humility without any playacting. Any amount of reading done with this end in view is indeed desirable and a mark of respect for others. In that case, we are doing our reading for the sake of those we meet, and not for our own sake.

Now let’s ask ourselves. Is not our religious life mostly about putting up an appealing face before God? Otherwise, why are we different on week days, as compared to Sundays? There is an issue even more important. Don’t we bear false witness to God when we assume that God can be easily deceived with our playacting? Can it be that God who sees us on Sundays does not see how we live the rest of the week?

To me there is an ironic link between the following contrary features. First, the influence and power of priests are increasing. Second, the ethical authenticity of our

The teachings of Jesus Christ are all about who we need to be. His core emphasis is on ethics. There is not text in religious literatures that can rival, as Gandhi realized, the Sermon on the Mount. But, under priestly influence, we have shifted the core of our religious life from spiritual ethics to religious ritualism, where priests are at home and in full control. But a gap has opened up between what is good for the people of God and what is profitable to priests. The authority of the disciples of Jesus Christ was not based on rites and rituals, but on making the way of Jesus prevail in the life of individuals and societies.

They incarnated and proclaimed the Good News. Priests today sustain religious practices in a mechanical and quasi-professional fashion, from which profit-motive is never afar.

Priest-craft, predicated on loyalty to denominational authorities and interests, rather than on accountability to the Lord Jesus Christ and fidelity to his teachings, is a hindrance to spiritual maturity. Priests of this kind bear false witness to God that he, like us, is swayed by shallow flattery and is blind to the truth of the live we live. You only have to take a biblically informed view of what priesthood has come to be in our times to know how crafty this craft has indeed become. The religiosity we have adopted – in which the coming generations will be nurtured – needs an urgent re-look. If a secular cadre of service produces effects contrary to what is envisaged to be achieved by it, it will be re-examined, rectified or dismantled. Of course, this is a thankless job. The cross is its reward. Not a welcome prospect, especially at a time when everyone wants resurrection without crucifixion. So, in the end, we get the priest-craft we deserve.

Nothing of what I have stated above is to be construed to mean that priesthood is in itself an aberration, or even that it has to be dispensed with. My argument is a limited one. There is compelling all-round evidence today that priesthood, as understood and practised, runs counter to the culture of the Kingdom of God. It is becoming,

12 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

increasingly, a domain of hirelings. But a calling is not to be judged by its aberrations manifested through the intruders into it. What needs to be done is to reckon its aberrations and the calling refined and restored to its pristine purity. Defending the indefensible may be the order of the day in politics, but it is reprehensible in spirituality.

The key to priestly reform does not rest with priests, but with the laity. As long as the laity wants priests to be glorified servants and convenient middlemen, serving as specialists in securing from God blessings and advantages they don’t merit, the downward trend is sure to continue. The day they want to be authentic disciples of Jesus – willing to deny themselves, to take up the cross and to follow him, unmindful of risks and rewardspriesthood too will change. But it is like the egg-orchicken-first situation. Which should come first? My experiences convince me that a new beginning will not come from the priestly class; for they have become habituated servants of the system. To them, denominational authority supersedes the authority of Jesus, despite all pretensions to the contrary. Every system serves the status quo as its de facto God. There is no instance in history of a new beginning having been initiated by a system or by the custodians of a system.

God initiates new beginnings through individuals who are outsiders to systems. Else, the daughter of the High Priest, not Virgin Mary, would have been the mother of Jesus.

So, let us ask. Is priesthood a gift from God? Well, yes. In the sense that parenthood is a gift. Caring for others is a gift. Preaching and teaching are gifts. Being a faithful friend is a gift. Being a sensitive doctor, or a just ruler is a gift. Is priesthood a special gift? Well… No. The moment we think it is, we envelop it with pride. Corruption begins to knock at the door. All my life as a priest I have lived with the tension that I am just like everyone else, but I am assumed to be different or special. I never was. I was as much vulnerable to the weaknesses that flesh and blood is heir to.

Christians go wrong in believing, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that priests are a special people. Ordination, and the license issued to a priest consequent to that, mean nothing unless the consecrated way of life is not sustained till the end. It is only in the final moments of a priest’s life that he can know for sure if his life was indeed ordained and if he led a consecrated life. It is necessary that we abandon our superstition in favour of the truth in this respect. Priests are ordinary human beings, called upon to perform extraordinary duties. They need to do so in fear and trembling, under the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ. A priest who abases himself before a bishop because the

latter could otherwise hurt or humiliate him, or deny him special privileges, is already in the payroll of Mammon.

The question we are addressing in this piece - Is priesthood a divine gift, or is it just another profession? is indeed of immense significance for all of us. I hope very earnestly that our quest for a truthful answer to it will not prove a flash in the pan. We need to sustain an earnest, prolonged debate in which those concerned can participate with open, and fearless minds, so that the truth is discerned and affirmed without fear or favour. This is a sacred duty we owe to ourselves, our descendants and to Jesus himself. Ignorance and indifference do not help. If Jesus is the truth, and we his disciples, we cannot flinch from looking truth in the face.

To judge justly and fairly, we need a relevant norm. What is the distinction between a spiritual calling and a worldly profession? Fortunately, it is quite simple. The spiritual calling brings two worlds together: heaven and earth, the domain of God and the world of man. A profession is strictly earth-bound, immune to any extra-terrestrial discipline. All professions are secular; spiritual callings are a hybrid of heaven and earth. That is the incarnational principle. This can be readily understood with reference to a major distinction. The spiritual realm, unlike the secular, depends heavily on symbols. There is a reason for it. Symbols hold two distinct, but complementary, realms together. The word ‘symbol’ literally means ‘thrown together’. Secular professions are univocal. They don’t depend on symbols, even when they bank on emblems. A priest, for example, wears a cassock. A soldier has his uniform. Is there, or is there not, a difference between the two? The answer to this could guide us to the answer to the question we are trying to settle.

A soldier’s uniform too, you may say, is a symbol: the symbol of state power. It is possible to see the vestments of a priest also as similar: they symbolize a denomination.

(I used to enjoy causing much confusion among my fellow Christians by wearing a black cassock. I was taken for an Orthodox priest.) But that was, clearly, not the original intent. Every item of priestly vestments symbolizes a spiritual discipline. The cassock, for example, is a symbol of purity. The girdle, a symbol of self-control. The stole, a symbol of the priest being under the yoke of Christ. And so on. But it is also possible to treat them together as constituting a priestly uniform in a worldly sense in which case it suggests only (a) a mark of priestly distinction from the laity and (b) a sign of the special privileges and entitlements -especially, respect and authority- that a priest is professionally entitled to. Understood symbolically, the vestments denote both: a functional identity and a spiritual discipline, the latter determining the former.

13 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

In a period of spiritual decline, priests could succumb to the temptation to have the best of both worlds. Ironically, in such a context, the distinction of priestly vestments increases. You are not a priest, if you are not thus arrayed. And you are an authentic priest, even if inwardly you are a ravening wolf, so long as your true nature is hidden behind the priestly plumage.

Let us hope that the Franco Mulakal case is entirely trumped up. But let us assume, for the sake of argument, that there is an element of truth in the allegation of rape and unnatural sex as stated in the charge sheet. In that case, what happens to the priestly calling in respect of him? What meaning do his vestments have, except that they constitute the official uniform of a privileged profession? Something that is expected function as a bulwark against censure by the laity and even by the public?

Medical ethics, for this reason, has been very robust and rigorous from the beginning. A physician has immense authority over his patients and they trust him limitlessly. The position of priests is comparable.

2. All professions combine privileges/rights with responsibilities within an ambit of accountability. There is none exempt from this. All professionals have a duty to their managements, their colleagues and co-workers as well as clients and the society at large.

3. Every profession demands competence and faithfulness at work. As Jesus said, a worker needs to be ‘good and faithful’.

Incompetent professionals are like barren trees. They are a liability and, if the system cares for accountability, it weeds out such pseudo-professionals.

4. When, in a profession, rights and responsibilities polarise, it ceases to be a profession and becomes a mere privilege. It was a privilege, say, to be a feudal lord; but it is not a privilege to be doctor or a teacher or a prime minister. Priesthood, in particular, degenerates utterly when it is seen in terms of privileges. Jesus said of himself, “The son of man has come to serve…” An annual ritual of feet-washing is no substitute for living a life of spiritual meekness as Jesus did.

A spiritual calling, like priesthood, by imitating professional patterns, and that too in their degradation becomes worse than a worldly profession. That is why Jesus denounced such priests as ‘hirelings’.

Furthermore, what are we to make of the bevvy of bishops who stand by the accused, as if by sheer herdinstinct? How different are they from trade unionists who are ever-ready to stand by any in their ranks who is held to account for his misdemeanour, irrespective of the merit of the allegation? Do they believe, and behave as though, priesthood is a divine calling, which entails accountability to the God of justice and truth?

What Christians as a whole need to realize, and insist on, is that truth is, in its very essence, consistent. You can’t be chameleons of shifting stances and claim to be shepherds of truth. There must be some meeting point between one’s identity as a Sunday priest and a weekday human being.

Every secular profession is bound by a few bottom-line, non-negotiable, requirements.

1. There is a code of conduct corresponding to each profession.

The ethical rigour of a profession increases in proportion to the authority of its professionals over the individuals they deal.

Given how things stand today in our community, Christian laity carry a heavy burden of responsibilities on their shoulders. They cannot afford to be indifferent or take refuge behind ignorance, saying, “Oh, I did not know”. As St. Paul wrote to the Romans, “Now you have no excuse.” We have a duty to keep our eyes and minds open. There are many -especially my fellow priests- who misinterpret Jesus’ teaching against judgmentalism, as though it proscribes Christians from making any judgment whatsoever! This is absurd and motivated. Jesus was only alerting us to the aberrations of making prejudicial judgments ‘with our eyes closed’, or keeping a beam in our eyes, which is in effect the same as being blind.

There are only two possibilities. Either priesthood is a divine calling or it is a perverse profession. It cannot ever be a normal profession; for the reason that the moment it embraces worldly goals and patterns, it gets overridden, as Jesus said, by hypocrisy. No profession becomes hypocritical by pursuing worldly goals, though professionals would be condemned for being bad, incompetent or selfish. I have never heard a professional being damned as hypocrite. Yet, the only charge that Jesus brought against the priests of his times is that of hypocrisy. There is nothing nearly as bad as anyone claiming the benefits of being ordained by God, but living by motives that mock the nature of God. Of all aberrations in the world, this is the most condemnable.

14 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

How the Clergy Conquered Christianity V. Georgekutty, Karunagapally, Kerala “Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.” (Denis Diderot, French philosopher, art critic, and writer) When the Apostle Paul started establishing the first churches, many people saw it as an opportunity to exploit it for personal aggrandizement. As the church evolved into a political and financially powerful establishment, this tendency to capture ecclesiastic power also increased. Paul, Peter and Jude all speak out against the activities of men in the early church, who were attempting to take over the control of the churches. It is true that there are well-meaning and honest leaders in the various factions of today’s church. But, historically, there has been a tendency for the church leadership to claim unquestionable authority over the congregation. This is witnessed in one form or another even today. This does not seem to be based on any scriptural authority. It is doubtful whether the New Testament really envisages a professional clergy with authority to rule over the congregation.

According to the New Testament, the people who acted as leaders in the local churches were ‘presbuteros’, a Greek term translated as ‘elders’. It meant ambassadors or guides. We have no information on what process was used to select the elders or what duties and responsibilities were assigned to them. But, what is quite clear is that the elders were not called upon to build their own little empires or wield any unquestionable authority over the faithful. They were only assigned the task of serving their fellow believers in the capacity of spiritual guides or mentors.

Paul instructs the elders, “Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood”, (Acts 20:28). We might roughly rewrite this verse to obtain the spirit of the advice of Paul as, "So, continue to watch over your own lives, as well as the lives of the others in the church; remember, the Holy Spirit has chosen you to watch over them, and in so doing, guide the Lord’s church, which He bought with His own blood."

In about 64 CE, Paul was apparently released from house arrest in Rome. He then writes his First Epistle to Timothy, who was assisting the church at Ephesus at the time. Therein, he uses the Greek term episkope, (1 Timothy 3:1). In the King James Version (KJV), this word is translated as "office of a bishop". However, this word is used to denote "someone who has been appointed to watch over" (an elder). So, in many later translations, the word is translated as ‘overseer’.

But, there is a verse the church leadership often cites as proof of its authority to keep people under perpetual subjugation. It comes from the Epistle to the Hebrews, probably written by Paul. It says, "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves…” (Hebrews 13:17, KJV). The word translated here as "Obey”, is the Greek verb ‘peitho’, meaning, "to persuade, to gain confidence or trust". And “them that have rule over you” comes from the Greek word hegeomai, meaning, "to lead on or forward". A more fitting and expanded translation of the verse might read as, "Have confidence in those who are leading you forward in the faith by their good example. Follow them without reservation, because they are sincerely watching out for your soul’s wellbeing…."

We find nothing in the New Testament suggesting that the earliest elders/overseers went through any sort of ordination or consecration. We also do not find any mention that they wore special garments, crosses, or wielded any significant power over the rest of the congregation. Nevertheless, the early Church soon changed its presbyters into priests, borrowing much of the styling from Roman paganism in which priests were holy men who enjoyed a special relationship with God and made sacrifices to the divine being. At some stage, the leading elders/overseers of the New Testament seem to have monopolised the title of bishop, and acquired pre-eminence over their fellows. Initially they were merely first among equals, and for centuries to come, they would address other presbyters as "fellow presbyters". But in due course, they became masters of the rest of the presbyters and the congregation.

The transformation of the authority of the clergy in the second century was influenced by Ignatius of Antioch (35108 CE), the bishop of Syrian Antioch. In the first part of the second century, he wrote several letters while being escorted under armed guard to Rome where he was to be martyred. In his letters, we encounter for the first time an ecclesiology, which exalts one "bishop" over the rest of the "presbytery." He wrote to the Trallians, "It is necessary therefore that you should act, as indeed you do, in nothing without the bishop. But be subject also to the presbytery, as unto the Apostles of Jesus Christ our Hope". "Your bishop presides in the place of God," he wrote to the Magnesians.

In short, after the death of its last Apostle, the church saw the initial emergence of an ecclesiological system, which was to have devastating consequences. The creation of a

15 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

new caste of Christians was not far behind. The theoretical link to the apostles allowed bishops to claim apostolic authority. Imperceptibly, there has been a change from a theme of service and humility to one of authority and command. Bishops were soon pointing out that disobedience to them amounted to disobedience to God. To fail to obey a priest or a judge was deserving of death, and bishops were both priests and judges. And they freely pronounced death to those who challenged their views or authority. By the fifth century, bishops became important people, who expected others to kiss their hand, maybe, even fall on their knees. Abject obedience is still expected, particularly in the Catholic Church.

The followers of Jesus thus came to be divided broadly into two sects – the clergy and the laity. The New Testament never uses the term ‘laos’ (laity). Only once do we find it used in all the Christian literature prior to the third century. In the fortieth chapter of his letter to the Corinthians, Clement of Rome (writing towards the end of the first century), illustrates the need for church order by appealing to the Old Covenant protocol. God's "peculiar services," he writes, "are assigned to the high priest, and their own proper place is prescribed to the priests, and their own special ministrations devolve on the Levites.

The ‘layman’ is bound by the laws that pertain to laymen", (1 Clemet 40:5). Here Clement uses the term ‘layman’ to describe the Old Covenant system of Judaism. Even he did not use it in reference to Christians.

Obviously, the concept of a Christian "laity" was unknown to Clement I. It was also unknown throughout the second century.

The term kleros (clergy) was not frequently used during the second century. We find it used mainly in reference to martyrs of the first half of the century. According to Alexadre Faivre, ‘We have to wait until the beginning of the third century before encountering the term kleros being used to describe a limited group within the Christian community. It was only then that certain

Christian ministers became clergy. It was also at that time that the term "layman" came to be employed again. This was not purely by chance. By analogy with the Old Testament layman, the Christian layman could only be defined negatively’.1 The word, bishop is derived from the Greek word episkopos, which can be translated literally as overseer or supervisor. But their functions and status bore little similarity to those of modern bishops. During the second century, it came to be accepted that there should be only one bishop in each city. The arrangement was meant to avoid conflicts of authority. As time went by, bishops laid claim to more and more authority. Around the end of the first century, St Clement of Rome had adopted the idea of apostolic succession. It was developed into the proposition that the first bishops were the apostles (or at least were appointed by the apostles), and that all subsequent bishops were authorised by the ones already appointed. Thus, it should be possible to trace back a succession of bishops from any modern bishop to at least one of the apostles. Bishops became the spiritual heirs of their predecessors. So, bishops alone could consecrate new bishops. By AD 250s, apostles and bishops were being equated, and the chain of succession was being used as an explicit argument for arrogating authority and demanding abject servility from the laity.

In the third century, we find that the Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons together made up the "Clerical Order" as distinguished from "the laity". Clement of Alexandria referred to "bishops, presbyters, deacons" as "grades here in the Church", the episcopate being the highest.

Women were not considered part of even "the laity". The Church establishment was simply modelled on the first century pagan Roman Empire. Ancient Rome did not regard women as equal to men under its law. They had no voting rights. They received only a basic education, if any at all, and were subject to the authority of a man.

Women were valued mainly as wives and mothers. The Church happily copied the system.

The monarchical bishop rapidly assumed near-divine status. The exalted role that Ignatius had ascribed to the bishop was further emphasized by the ‘Constitutions of the Holy Apostles’, which lays down, ‘The bishop is the minister of the word, the keeper of knowledge, the mediator between God and you in the several parts of your divine worship. He is the teacher of piety; and, next after God, he is your father, who has begotten you again to the adoption of sons by water and the Spirit. He is your ruler and governor; he is your king and potentate; he is, next after God, your earthly god, who has a right to be honoured by you.... let the bishop preside over you as one honoured with the authority of God, which he is to exercise over the clergy, and by which he is to govern all the people’.2

16 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

As Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire in the fourth century, a number of unhealthy practices entered it. One of it was the increased involvement of the church in Roman politics. Extensive legal privileges (including complete tax exemption) turned the priesthood into a lucrative and rewarding career.

Bishops drifted even further from the congregations they "served," often leaving smaller churches for churches that are more prestigious and profitable. As "the clergy" continued to develop, so did the concept of "the laity," which at this time was defined more broadly to include all non-clerics - including women.

The cult of Martyrdom developed in the face of persecutions against Christians in the early centuries. The faithful sought to die for Christ since they believed that the most desirable thing was to die and join Christ in heaven as quickly as possible. So, many Christians went to the Roman authorities and demanded that they be put to death. The Romans often had to refuse and turn them back. When Christianity was legalized in the Roman Empire in 313 (The Edict of Milan) and became state religion in 381 (Edict of Thessalonica), the door to martyrdom was suddenly shut before the faithful. But fervent believers did not wish to live in a corrupt and sinful world. Suicide was considered sin. So, they just withdrew into the deserts and mountains and started living a life of suffering, learning and meditation. Thus, Christian monasteries developed and became the fortresses of what they considered true faith in a world filled with evil. Then the Church started recruiting monks as priests. Shortly, monk-priests began to fill the ranks of "the clergy," touting their ascetism, and questioning family values. Celibacy came to be celebrated. As "the clergy" continued to drift apart from "the laity," the hierarchy of the Church continued to evolve.

Early Christianity was ‘Orthodox’ in the sense that they supposedly followed ‘correct teachings’.

The Mediterranean Sea had divided the Roman Empire into two regions viz. the Eastern Empire and the Western Empire. The common language of the learned was Greek in the East and Latin in the West. Thus, two ‘Orthodox’ Christian segments emerged – ‘Greek Orthodox’, which came to have its centre in Constantinople (modern Istanbul) and ‘Latin Orthodox’ centred in Rome. Those Christians, who differed with the ‘correct teachings’ of Orthodox Christianity, became heterodox Christians.

Their views were branded heresies. Heretical Christians and their writings were mostly burned by the powerful Orthodox Church. The Western Orthodox Christianity soon became the Roman Catholic Church. It was but a short step to the recognition that the monarchical bishops of some churches were above the rest. The exaltation of the monarchical bishop by the middle of the second century soon led to the recognition of the special honour due to the monarchical bishop of the church in Rome.

Most denominations tend to model their organization on the popular government at the time of their formation. So, the Roman Catholic Church organization came to be modelled on the lines of Imperial Rome. The emperor had the title of ‘Chief Priest’ (Pontifex Maximus). He was the high priest of the College of Pontiffs (Collegium Pontificum) in ancient pagan Rome. The title of "Pontifex Maximus" was applied within the Catholic Church to the Pope. (The ‘College of Pontiffs’ apparently became the ‘College of Cardinals’ in due course). Anglicans use a parliamentary system. Denominations that are more modern use a representative democracy style. Some have adopted a corporate governance model with a board of directors, such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses or the Mormons. But what remains common is that the clergy is separated from the plain believers and that ultimate control rests beyond the local congregation in the hands of a few people occupying glorified positions.

They pulled all the strings. The role of the laity came to be marginalized to that of people coughing the moolah to sustain this enormous apparatus of a pompous ecclesiastic system.

But the bishops refused to be contented. They sought positions still more exalted. The bishop of the metropolis of each imperial province came to be styled ‘Metropolitan’. These metropolitan bishops came to dominate their fellow bishops as the bishops had dominated their fellow presbyters. By the canons of the First Ecumenical Council summoned by Emperor Constantine in Nicaea in 325 CE, the Metropolitan Bishops were given certain powers of veto.3 the bishop of the primary see in each state came to be styled Primate ("first" or "principal"). Outside the Empire, the title Primate was used much as the title Metropolitan was used within it. In the fourth and fifth centuries, the bishops of important sees such as Alexandria and Antioch came to be considered super-bishops and started being styled Archbishops.

In early times the title ‘Pope’ was widely used by leading figures in the Church. It is a variation of the Latin word ‘Papa’ and Greek ‘Pappas’. Bishops and Patriarchs were accorded the title ‘Pope’ by those who stood in a filial relationship to them. Thus, for example the African bishops addressed their own Primate in Carthage as Pope, but called the Bishop of Rome merely ‘Bishop’ (and not Pope). There is no record of a bishop of Rome being accorded the title ‘Pope’ before the late fourth century, and it was not until the time of Leo the Great (Pope 440461 CE) that the title started to be used by the Western Church specifically of the Bishop of Rome. In fact, it was not claimed exclusively by the Bishop of Rome until 1073, and the (Greek) Orthodox Church never accepted this claim.

17 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

The first centre of Christianity was Jerusalem and remained the natural centre until the Ebonites were expelled along with other Jews after the Second Jewish Revolt in 135 CE.4 When Jerusalem ceased to be the single focus of the faith, Christians from Egypt and Libya looked to Alexandria, those in Asia Minor (modern Turkey) to Antioch, and those in southern Italy to Rome. In the fourth century, the heads of the churches in Rome, Alexandria and Antioch were all being accorded the honorific title of ‘Patriarch’, and the Bishop of Constantinople soon joined them. In the fifth century, Christian communities had again grown up around Jerusalem, and the Bishop of Jerusalem too was accorded the title.5 In the East, the Patriarch of Constantinople became first among equals. Constantinople had become the seat of the Roman Emperor after Constantine moved the capital of the Roman Empire to the city of Byzantium in 330 CE, and renamed it Constantinople. As the bishop of the capital city of the Roman Empire, the bishop of Constantinople was accorded the rank of Ecumenical Patriarch. The bishops of Rome (the former capital of the empire), keen to establish themselves as superior to their brother patriarchs, awarded themselves the title of Ecumenical Patriarch, and later appointed their own patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem (in the Eastern Roman Empire).

This new ecclesiastical hierarchy led to new forms of abuse. Powerful men continued to aspire for positions that are ever more powerful. Some of the most famous Christian leaders were rich laymen, whose offices were not gained by piety, merit, election, or hard work, but by influence and bribery. Rich families routinely bought Church offices. For instance, St Ambrose was consecrated as a bishop of Milan eight days after his baptism.

Let me say in conclusion that the long and short of the story is that the leadership of early Christianity simply arrogated to themselves monarchical powers as their divine right. Ordinary believers, who had no access to the Holy Scripture until quite late in history, believed the untruths and half-truths told to them by their leaders about their right to enslave the faithful. The faithful had no means of knowing whether priesthood was truly authorised by the Bible. The New Testament canon was finalized in the fourth century. By this time, the ecclesiastic hierarchy was already securely established into their lofty thrones. And for approximately thousand years, the New Testament was available only in Greek and Latin - the language of the learned. Obviously, the faithful believed that the priests were divinely ordained.

By the time they woke up to the fraud, it was too late.

And when they found that even the political rulers lived in

fear of the rulers of church, they knew that the game was over for them.

In many ways, the twenty-first-century church is more like the third and fourth century church. The church has monarchical bishops who rule over the congregations.

The bishop is the Omni-competent administrator, teacher, evangelist, theologian, and counsellor, the paternalistic authority figure in the church. Nowhere in the gospels, in the writings of the apostles, or in the early Church Fathers is there a hint of the need for Metropolitans, Primates, Archbishops, Cardinals, Patriarchs or Popes. In the earliest times, there were not even bishops or priests, but merely people who acted as community elders or overseers. The whole edifice of ecclesiastical ranks and grandiloquent titles is a later development. It did not develop out of any scriptural authority or spiritual exigency. It was developed and thrust down the throats of the faithful by clergy who were turning increasingly powerful, worldly, and luxury loving.

Foot Notes: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Alexadre Faivre, ‘The Emergence of the Laity in the Early Church’, trans. by David Smith, 1990.)

The Sacred Writings of Apostolic Teaching and Constitutions’, II: XXVI. A Church Council (Synod) is an assembly of bishops that is considered a rule making super-body of the church. The term Ecumenical means ‘of universal scope or application’. Therefore, the representatives from various church denominations were invited to the Ecumenical Synods and its decisions are deemed to have worldwide effect. The First Ecumenical Council was summoned by Emperor Constantine to meet at Nicaea. Constantine had presided over it. The most important task assigned to the council was the drafting of the Nicene Creed.

Ebionites were Jews who had accepted Jesus as the Messiah and the Gospel of Matthew, but rejected the Pauline Epistles. The group had continued to live observing Jewish customs.

Patriarch is a title adopted from the Old Testament and was universally accepted as the highest honorific available.

Mr. Georgekutty is a former Central government officer and academician.

He is a gold medallist of the Institute of Cost Accounts of India (ICA) and its Fellow Member (FCMA). He holds postgraduate degrees in Business Management, Computer Application, Commerce, Journalism, English, History, Philosophy, Politics, Public Administration, Sociology and Gandhian Thoughts. He is passionate in studying Philosophy and Religions. After quiting his post retirment job as director of a business school, he has been devoting his entire time on reading, writing and some public speaking. He has also written a number of books.

18 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

Priesthood is a Gift from God Lal Varghese, Esq., Dallas At some point in life, almost everyone needs a priest.

Even today, in an evermore-secular world where people live as though God does not exist or believe that God does not play any significant part in the way they live their lives, people find there are times when they want a priest.

No matter how much church ministry changes, some elements remain the same. For many years, priests have performed baptisms, dedications, confirmations, weddings, funerals, and holy sacraments. Today, that role remains constant, but today’s context should force priests to continually re-examine their roles in the lives of parishioners they serve to make their ministry more meaningful and a blessing to others.

Bishop Erik Varden of Mount St. Bernard, Leicestershire, Great Britain in the Scandinavian Bishops’ Conference, stated that “in a world, in a time that is increasingly affected by indifference and cynicism, by desperation and division, our job is to do something different: to show the light that no darkness can extinguish, to stoke good will, to let ourselves be reconciled, to help a community built on trust, to show that death has lost its power and life is meaningful, beautiful, inviolable.”

Christ empowered the Samaritan woman at the Jacob’s well to go and tell the Good News to her villagers (John 4). In partnership with the power of God, she shared her story and many people came to believe in Jesus as a result. Partnership centered in love for God and his beloved is the most powerful, life transforming, and lasting ministry model priests have to offer. Priests are all called through the beautiful invitation of Matthew 28—to “go and make disciples of all nations”—and they are equipped with a powerful promise of Emmanuel, “I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” A priest is a pastor and a teacher; someone set aside to proclaim the Good News and to care for the souls of those who believe in Christ. But priestly ministry isn’t just the domain of ordained pastors. Christians of all types participate in

“the priesthood of all believers,” by proclaiming the gospel and caring for those who name Jesus as Lord.

As the Lord’s messenger a priest is expected to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ. Seeking the lost, announcing God’s justice, warning and correcting those in error are some of the responsibilities of the Christian priesthood.

Priests have to encourage and build up the body of Christ, preaching the Word of God, leading God’s people in prayer, declaring God’s forgiveness and blessing. That is the substance of the priestly service of the gospel. Paul reminded Timothy, “I call to remembrance the genuine faith that is in you, which dwelt first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice, and I am persuaded now lives in you also” (2 Timothy 1: 5). Lois and Eunice were ordinary women who lived in ordinary circumstances, who were faithful in a rather ordinary way. Their teaching was an instrument God used to work genuine faith in Timothy. Ultimately, Timothy was not the only person to benefit from the godly influence of his mother, his grand mother, and his spiritual father, but the entire church in Ephesus reaped the benefits of their godly influence.

The sling and stones were what David was used as his armor, and God used them to bring joy to the ranks of Israel that day. Whenever someone felt unsure of one’s ability of being a priest and thinking if I just had what someone else has, my ministry would be different consider the gifts or experiences God has given specifically to each one of us and trust the God-given armor. When Jesus cured the leper, the blind, lame, devilpossessed man, forsake of the sins of the prostitute, rebuked the winds and waves, we do not see an ordinary Jew, but a Christ in action filled with faith in His father, the God in heaven.

Events in a priest’s life can be alarming or discouraging, but he is sustained by God’s guidance, protection and reassuring presence (Zech. 10: 1-8). Israelites were given more bricks and less straw, but God assured them that ‘I will rescue you; I will redeem you with an outstretched arm.” (Exodus 6:6). God asked them to seek peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you from exile and assured that I have plans for you. This is the same assurance given to us also that He will be with us and He will send the Holy Spirit to guide and lead us to fulfill His mission. In Isaiah 17: 7-11, we read “because you have forgotten the God of your salvation . . . the harvest will be a heap of ruins.” Yes, if a priest forgets the Lord and the ministry entrusted to him it will be a ruin for him and also the people entrusted to that priest.

Pure and undefiled religion before God and Father is this: to visit the orphans and widows in their trouble. (James

19 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

1:27) Let the roads you tread is rough and dreary and its end is far out of sight, foot it bravely, stronger and trust in God. In the days of the American civil war, one of the President Lincoln’s advisors said he was grateful that God was on the side of the Union. Lincoln replied, “Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on the God’s side, for God is always right.” Psalm 139:23-24 says: “Search me, O God and know my heart . . . And see if there is any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way of everlasting.” Priests need to be on the God’s side and never try to carry God on their side.

Pope John Paul II's book ‘Gift and Mystery’ was written on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of his ordination as a priest. He received what he called the “gift and mystery of the priesthood.” He said that every priest should be humbled to represent Christ—because through the priesthood, the world can “catch a glimpse of the Lord.” Truly, the priestly vocation of Karol Wojtyła, who would become Pope John Paul II, was heroic, generous, and holy. Indeed, every priest is called to a heroic, generous, and holy life of ministry, and service.

Priesthood is a gift and mystery—a source of profound grace and wonder—for us all. Every priest is called to the adventure—the “gift and mystery”—of a life configured to Christ: to his mercy, to his truth, to his love. The priesthood is an extraordinary gift for each man on whom it is conferred, an extraordinary gift for the entire Church.

Through the priesthood comes the love, grace, and truth of God in the sacramental mystery of the Eucharist, and the healing mercy of confession.”

In this book ‘Gift and Mystery” and also in his annual Holy Thursday letters to priests Pope John Paul II emphasized the influence of the joyful priestly witness on the lives of men considering their own vocations. Support from priests is important, but what is even more influential is the witness of a priest visibly fulfilling his vocations in his ministry. The late Pontiff wrote, "Vocations will certainly not be lacking if our manner of life is truly priestly, if we become more holy, more joyful, more impassioned in the exercise of our ministry. A priest 'won' by Christ more easily 'wins' others, so that they too decide to set out on the same adventure" (cf. John Paul II, Letter to Priests, Holy Thursday 2005) God continually invites men to serve His Church as priests. Are those being invited listening to His call, and responding with a generous heart? In a culture in which every voice is competing for a person's attention, in which commitment is to be avoided and self-gratification is to be encouraged, and in which silence is hard to come by, it is truly more difficult to be attentive to God's call and to respond with openness and generosity.

The origin of the Christian priesthood has its source in the Blessed Trinity, like every Christian identity. When the

Bishop lays hands upon a person during the Rite of Ordination the priest is consecrated. He is sent forth by the Father through the mediatorship of the Jesus Christ in order to live and work by the power of the Holy Spirit in the service of the church for the salvation of the world. The Church is the Body of Christ in time and in space. Christ is the Head of the Church as St Paul tells us and we are His Body. Therefore, it is just this relationship between Christ and the Church that we see present and tangible in the person of the consecrated priest. Since both Christ and Church are holy, a priest also should be holy.

There is only the one priesthood; that is the High priesthood of Jesus Christ. The ordained priesthood links him to Christ's own priesthood. The man who is a priest allows Christ the crucified and risen Lord to exercise His own priesthood for us. This means that in every age and in every place where there is a man ordained by Christ exercises His priesthood for us and for our eternal salvation. We understand this by the Latin phrase which describes a priest as in persona Christi i.e. in the Person of Christ or as an alter Christus. He stands in relation to the Church in the way that our Lord does to us. Jesus is Head of the Church, which is His Body. He is Bridegroom of the Church, which is His Bride, and He is Shepherd to the Church who is His Sheep. The priest stands in relation to his people in just the same way that Christ does.

Priest, as a delegate of the Bishop, has a role of authority in the Church at a local level. This authority is to guide and govern the community. The Church is not simply a democratic entity that operates by the vote of the majority. Priest has entrusted to him the task of leading the people to holiness and seeing that their spiritual needs are met. In this way he mediates the kingship of Christ, because it is Christ who governs us. This does not exclude the valid and valuable involvement of the laity.

There are many things that the laity can and must do which the priest cannot and shouldn't do. But the work of the laity is principally to be in the world as bearers of

20 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

Christ where they live and work and come into contact with the world. The Church, whether we like it or not, is hierarchically structured. That means that it is governed by priests. That may not be very popular or fashionable but that is the mode of the Church given by Christ. Christ proclaimed himself a king and shares that with his Church. Peter is placed at the head of the apostles not because he was better or more competent, but to be the voice of Christ among his people to articulate what the mystery of faith holds for us.

The Alter is the heart of the priest's life and identity. The priest stands in the person of Christ offering the holy sacrifice on the altars, the same that was offered on Calvary. In doing that the whole Church joins its own sacrifices and lives to that of Jesus through the sacrifice of the priest. That is why the priest invites us in these words. "Pray brethren that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God the almighty Father." The priesthood is a gift of Christ to the Church in which Jesus Christ our redeemer is present and working his saving works in us.

Priest is a visible sacrament of the Person of our Lord Jesus Christ––priest, prophet and king––living in intercession and sacrifice, teaching the truth and enlightening our minds and hearts and guiding us as a true shepherd to holiness and life eternal.

The central task of a priest is “to bring God to men and women,” Pope Benedict XVI once told priests in Rome.

Priests are tremendous gifts from Christ to his Church and its people. Faithful priests are a blessing from God for his people. There is an element of mystery in the call to the priesthood. St. John Paul II noted this in his book “Gift and Mystery,” which was born out of his thoughts on 50 years of priestly ministry. “At its deepest level,” he said, “every vocation to the priesthood is a great mystery; it is a gift which infinitely transcends the individual. Every priest experiences this clearly throughout the course of his life. Faced with the greatness of the gift, we sense our own inadequacy. A vocation is a mystery of divine election: ‘You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, fruit that will last . . . .”

Pope Francis, reminded priests that the Gospel they proclaim and serve can be described as “Good news. A single word – Gospel – that, even as it is spoken, becomes truth, brimming with joy and mercy.” The Holy Father also counseled his fellow priests, “We should never attempt to separate these three graces of the Gospel: its truth, which is non-negotiable; its mercy, which is unconditional and offered to all sinners; and its joy, which is personal and open to everyone. Truth, mercy and joy: these three go together.” In serving the faithful, priests are entrusted with bringing the “truth, mercy and joy” of Jesus Christ to them. The enemies of the Church would like to see priesthood fit in with the surrounding culture as it becomes more secular, and their tactics have

not changed over the centuries. If the Church is to be faithful to her mission, then the laity and priests alike must renew their commitment to holiness and to supporting one another. We must return to our first love as Pope Francis said to a gathering of priests during the Year of Mercy. “I renew my first love: the memory of that time when the Lord touched my soul and called me to follow him, the memory of the joy of having cast the nets of our life upon the sea of his word.” I urge you to pray that the hearts of all priests may be filled with the joy of the Gospel and set aflame with the love of Jesus Christ so that they may be shepherds after the heart of Jesus.

In the words of Pope John Paul II on the vocation of the priesthood: “Called, consecrated and sent. The triple dimension explains and determines your conduct and your lifestyle. You are ‘set apart’, segregated, but not separated. What would separate you, would be to forget or to overlook the meaning of the consecration that characterizes your priesthood. To be but one more in your profession, in your lifestyle, in your way of living, in your political obligations, would not help you to fully carry out your mission. Your would betray your own faithful who want you to be priests through and through.”

(Valencia, Spain, November 8, 1982) Jesus being the high priest through the Holy Spirit has called priests for a sacrificial service and not for a profession or vocation, but to submit to Him and to the leaders of the Church in fulfilling their priestly duties.

There may be orders, which may not be acceptable to some priests handed down from the leadership of the Church, but like Jesus Christ did, they need to submit to the authorities in serving the Lord and His people. No one should be allowed to separate or segregate a priest from his calling to serve the Lord.

At a wedding, Jesus rejoiced; at a friend’s graveside, Jesus wept. At both occasions, Jesus worked miracles.

Jesus sensed these moments as dramas that held people’s rapt attention. Through Jesus’ ministry at these occasions, God became the leading actor. That remains our Priests’ call also by involving both in the temporal and ecclesiastical matters of the parishioners in this multicultural society. While being a steward in the Church of Christ, priest has the special responsibility to shepherd the flock in this world, to participate ardently in the work of the Kingdom of God through the ministry of the Word and administration of sacraments, to be a witness in the Church, which is the body of Christ and in the name of Christ, involve in the temporal & spiritual growth of the Kingdom of God. He has the responsibility to shepherd the flock of God, to render sacrificial service to the community according to the will of God, to be fervent in the proclamation of the Gospel, to be consistent in the ministry of teaching, and to manifest the dignity of the Christian ministry in the congregation and society.

21 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

From Aaronic to Melchizedekian Priesthood Prof. Plammoottil V. Cherian, M. Div., Ph. D., Chicago Priesthood is a doctrine of the Old Testament as well of the New Testament. However, priesthood developed from the Levitical Laws of Aaronic order and transformed to the priesthood of all believers with the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is a New Testament doctrine that every individual has direct access to God and each individual shares the responsibility of assuring his/her salvation through personal relationship with the Redeemer Saviour, and ministering to the others of the community of believers. The term Levitical applies to the Israelite Tribe of Levi, third son of patriarch Jacob, the tribe to which Moses and Aaron belong. Aaronic male descendants were set apart for the priestly duties (Exod.

28:1-4), the rest of the Levities were designated Aaron’s assistants to help him in the work of the tabernacle and to take care of its furnishings (Num. 3:5–10). [1]

While many people consider Aaron as the first priest of the Old Testament, remarkably the Bible teaches that Abraham, the Father of faith was met and blessed by an unknown High Priest of the Most high God, just after a righteous action performed by Abraham as described in Genesis chapter 14 as well as in Hebrews (7:1-3). Thus, contrary to the understanding of most theologians about the lineage of priesthood, a mysterious Melchizedek is the earliest priesthood mentioned in the Bible who is considered the High Priest of God, forever. The true identity of this Melchizedek is described with ample evidence in the recent book “Promised Land: Whose Land, Whose Promise, Who shall inherit.”[2] While we analyze the progression of priesthood of all believers, however, we shall begin with Aaron in the biological lineage of earthly priesthood.

Levitical Priesthood Inaugurated with Aaron.

Three months after Lord led the children of Israel out of Egypt, he brought them to Mt. Sinai (Ex.19:1), where Moses received the Laws and Ten Commandments for humanity. Moses anointed and consecrated Aaron and his sons to the priesthood and arrayed them in the robes of office (Lev. 8; cf. Ex. 28-29). He also related to them God's detailed instructions for performing their duties while the rest of the Israelites listened (Lev. 1-7, 11-27).

Priests were also commissioned to bless the people (Num. 6:22-27). After Aaron completed the altar offerings for the first time with Moses, they came out and “blessed the people: and the glory of the LORD appeared to all the people (Lev.9:23). Some of the prominent names of Bible such as Eli, Ezra, Zechariah, father of John the Baptist were Levites.

Historically, there is a truth to be learned of the Levite Tribe which is the blessing given to Levi by Jacob from his deathbed in Egypt. When Jacob blessed his sons Simeon, and Levi, his words were, “Simeon and Levi “are brother, instruments of cruelty are in their dwelling place.

Let not my soul enter their council, let not my honor be united their assembly; for in their angry they slew a man, and in their self-will, they hamstrung an ox. Cursed be their anger, for it is fierce, and their wrath, for it is cruel. I will divide them in Jacob and scatter them in Israel” (Genesis 49:5-7). Jacob’s prophecy of blessing on his son Levi is a curse because of their unrighteous anger and wrath, but God changed it into a blessing. The tribes of Levi were not allotted a portion of the land after the conquest of Canaan, but God sanctified them to be the priest of Israel. Levi’s inheritance was far superior to the land inherited by the other tribes, and their inheritance was God himself (Num.18:8-14). Thus, they had enormous privilege of serving God, and they were given from the abundance of the other tribes, through their tithes (Num.18:8-14).

The work of the Levitical priests included the morning and evening sacrifices offered on behalf of the community of Israel (Ex. 29:38–44), tending the vessels of the Holy Place (lampstand, altar of incense and bread of the Presence, Ex. 27:20–21, 30:7,8; Lev. 24:5–9), teaching the Law and administering justice under the Law (Deut. 17:8).

The most holy sacrifice was to be performed only once a year on what is known in Hebrew as Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, the tenth day of the seventh month of Tishri (September–October, Lev. 23:26–32). It was to atone for all the sins of the entire Israelite community (humanity, Lev. 16:34). One of the priests was specially designated as the high priest, just as the present-day

22 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

presiding bishop of the Western churches or the Metropolitan of churches in the Eastern tradition.

Aaronic Priesthood Vs Melchizedekian Priesthood The Levitical priesthood was an inseparable part of the Mosaic Law and the priesthood is inseparable from the laws as priests were appointed to perform the sacrifices and the administration of the Law. Nonetheless, the Levitical priesthood was never intended to be permanent.

Animal sacrifice was a common practice in the Ancient Near East, but its meaning within the Old Testament is very different from the volatile, angry gods of Israel’s neighbors. But it was a custom as we see that first animal sacrifice was offered by Abel (Genesis 4:3, 4), and later Noah sacrificed animals after the flood (Genesis 8:20, 21), which were centuries before the Sinai Laws. God instituted animal sacrifices, a custom that they were familiar with to teach humanity that by cutting an animal, watching its blood (that is, its life) gushing out was a visceral symbol of the devastating consequence of sins.

Annual sacrifices were only a reminder of sins, because it is not possible for the blood of bulls and goats to remove sins. Nevertheless, sin must be atoned, for which God descended and became man as prophesied by Isaiah.

Therefore, when Christ came into this world, he said, “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me” (Hebrews 10:5). Then I said, Behold, I have come, in the scrolls of the book, it is written of me, to do your will O God” (Hebrews 10:7, cf. Psalm 40:7).

ever appoint idol gods or a Canaanite idol worshipper as his substitute? Is there any historical record of a Canaanite king named Melchizedek ever ruled the city Salem? Jewish records and Canaanite history do not indicate such a king in history. Why did he greet Abraham on his return after defeating the aggressors when the city of Salem and Melchizedek were not attacked or even involved in the incident? Why did he choose to offer bread and wine instead of bread and milk or honey or cakes made of fig and raisins? Why did Abraham give a tenth to an unknown Melchizedek only, when there were

Christ, Our High Priest Revealed in Melchizedek.

When Abraham returned from the arduous fight in Canaan described in Genesis 14, Melchizedek, an unknown King abruptly received and offered “bread and wine” to refresh his body and soul. From the description we understand that: (1) Melchizedek was the priest of the most high God as well as the King of Salem, who blessed Abraham. (2) He was not mentioned in any of the nine Canaanite kings engaged in war. In Jewish theology, the most high God is El-Elyon above any other gods. (3) Melchizedek appeared as the high priest of God and blessed Abram.

Melchizedek attests that Abraham is favored by God (Abram of God most high). (4) He reveals God is the possessor of heaven and earth and that Abraham belongs to God. (5) He blessed (gave thanks to) God. (6) He acknowledges the fact that the living God is the one who delivered the enemies to Abraham. (7) Abraham voluntarily offered a tenth of all what he recovered to Melchizedek, the act of tithing to the Lord for the first time in the Scriptures (Gen. 14:17–20).

Who is Melchizedek?

The questions we must answer are, which Canaanite king could have been known to Yahweh other than the pantheon of idol Canaanite gods? Would a living God

five other kings for whom he fought for? Why none of the kings he freed did not receive him or offer a word of thanks, except king of Sodom, who sardonically offered some of the spoils that belonged to him, which Abraham graciously rejected?

Melchizedek was neither a Canaanite king nor a human being can be proved from the following facts: (1) Abraham would not accept any gift from king of Sodom who epitomized wickedness (Gen. 14:22–23). (2) Melchizedek typifies Christ, and it is significant to note that he offered Abraham the elements of the memorial of Christ, bread and wine, who fought against injustice and immorality of a gang of cruel rulers with his righteous attitude. (3) The scriptural references to Christ, the ultimate Seed of Abraham as “according to the order Melchizedek,” suggest the royal, superior, and everlasting

23 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

authority of Christ’s high priesthood over the Aaronic human priesthood that was faulty, transitory, and mortal (Ps. 110:4; Heb. 5:5, 6). The fact that Melchizedek was a priest serving the most high God and a priest forever indicates God’s presence was accessible in Salem (Jerusalem, the City of Peace) before the Jewish nation was organized and the regular Aaronic priesthood began.

Why would the eternal everlasting righteous God seek a model and a pattern of an earthly Canaanite king when there is no righteous one among men? (Ps. 14:1–3, 53:1– 3; Rom. 3:10–12). No human being can be a model for the high priest of the most high God. Melchizedek, the king of Salem who received Abraham, was Christ in apparition, who is the high priest of God, far better than any priest in the Aaronic descent or of other lineage. The priest of the mosthigh God is Christ himself who appeared to Abraham as Melchizedek, the King of Righteousness.

Christ typifies God’s High Priest in the order of Melchizedek because: (1) Melchizedek appeared to Abraham as a human being (man) foretelling Abraham about his incarnation later in history. (2) He was not man ordained (Ps. 110:4; Heb. 7:4, 1 Tim. 2:5). (2) He was a king-priest (Gen. 14:18, Zech. 6:12–13); (3) Melchizedek’s name means “my king is righteous” and he appeared as king of Salem (Isa. 11:5–9). (4) Melchizedek had no recorded beginning of days or end of life (Jn. 1:1, Rom. 6:9, Heb. 7:23–25). Can a human being ever be designated without beginning or end? While there may be comparison between Christ and a human king, the greater contrast between the high priesthood of Melchizedek and Aaron is only as to person, in the order of appointment, and duration of kingship and priesthood.

Christ is King and Priest forever.

Christ, the High Priest and Kingdom of Priests.

and appoint themselves as pastors and bishops. They claim that priesthood was abolished forever, which is wrong theology and against New Testament teaching. It is Christ who appointed Apostles and gave some apostleship, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers (Eph.4:11). The book of Hebrews or the New Testament does not speak of abolition the priesthood, but gives preeminence to Jesus Himself, yet calls us to do good and to communicate,” sacrifices of good deeds (13:15,16). Paul calls the Romans to present their bodies “a living sacrifice” (Rom. 12:1) and Peter calls Christians “a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices” (1 Pet. 2:5). What is intended by such statements is that the Church by its corporate relationship to Christ, by its being “in Christ,” is “a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.” It does not mean priesthood is abolished forever. The individual member shares in Christ’s prerogative as high priest. There must be orderly priesthood for administration, to perform sacraments, and to give directives and guidance so that we become living sacrifices by word and deed, bringing others to the throne of grace.

Melchizedek was not a king of the Levitical Order and not of the genealogy and heredity of Aaron. Christ’s genes are of mixed pool from Rahab the Canaanite woman, Ruth a Moabite woman, and Judah who married a Canaanite woman, daughter of Shua from whom the Davidic line of lineage comes to Jesus (Genesis 38:2).

Christ’s multiethnic genes and the Holy Spirit by whom he was conceived by Virgin Mary indicate that the blood of Christ with the human genes is sanctified by the Holy Spirit, and thus unique for the atonement of all humanity.

Christ is the Mediator, Redeemer and Saviour, and he made believers heirs and coheirs in the kingdom of God. Christ fulfilled the promise God made to Israel as they were freed and brought to Sinai. “Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod.19:5,6). Thank God, we are priests in the kingdom of God through, Jesus Christ, our High Priest to whom we are brothers. Remember the claim of Christ, “I am the Alpha and the Omega; I am the first High Priest and the last High Priest of God forever.

Melchizedek, an apparition of Christ appeared to Abraham, to develop a faith community, the Church, the Bride of Christ, whom he shall present to GOD. [1]

Therefore, when the Bible speaks of the “Levitical priesthood,” it is referring to the narrower lineage of Aaron and his sons within the tribe of Levi, the rest of the Levities being designated as his assistants.

[2]

However, we should not misinterpret the priesthood of all believers as some fundamentalist denominations interpret

Cherian, Plammoottil V. (2019). Promised Land. Whose Land, Whose Promise and Who Shall Inherit. Pp.669. Covenant Books.

South Carolina, USA. Chapter 22 of the book pp. 297-311 describes who Melchizedek is and his priesthood.

24 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

GLIMPSES OF CHRISTIAN HERITAGE IN MINISTRY Revd Dr. M. J. Joseph, Kottayam Introduction In the pilgrimage of our life, we need to face problems. A problem always carries a possibility. “Difficulties in your life do not come to destroy you, but to help you realize your hidden potential and power. Let difficulties know that you too are difficult” (APJ Abdulkalam). A ship on the harbour is safe; but a ship is not meant to remain on the harbour. The quote above has brought to light the path we need to traverse in our pastoral and prophetic ministry. The immortal words of the Church Father Ignatius recorded in the annuals of history: “I am the wheat of God, and by the teeth of the beasts, I shall be ground that I may be found pure bread of God” have sent vibes of spiritual inspiration and courage to several down through the centuries towards transformative discipleship. This is also what St. Paul says in 2Cor.6:4-10: “Rather, as servants of God we commend ourselves in every way; in great endurance; in troubles, hardships and distress; . . . sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; poor, yet making many rich; having nothing, and yet possessing everything.”

1. As a pilgrim of the future Mission in Christ’s way is the need of the hour as humankind is facing spiritual and moral problems. There is thus a huge responsibility before theological educators and ministers.

Church as a called out community being “the special possession of God “(1Pet.1:9), Christian ministers have to act as a technician – revealing or unfolding whatever does not bring forth good by itself (see 1Cor.3:10). Thus mission is to be carried out by conscious effort using appropriate skills and methods (cf.1 Cor.9:19-21).To quote the former General Secretary of the WCC ,Samuel Kobia, “the 21 century will be a century where spirituality will take central stage in our lives. Spiritual accompaniment, therefore, should be what social solidarity was in the 20 century”.

When Sri Ravi Shankar, the founder of the ‘Art of Living Foundation’, was asked about the biggest challenge we face today, he replied: “Prejudice is the biggest challenge” – prejudice against culture, against religion, against gender etc. Prejudice takes different forms in society”. As Christian ministers we need to act as channels of grace and agents of change. In a borderless world, we need “ to risk Christ for Christ’s sake”( Dr. M. M. Thomas).The task before us is to re-read history and scriptures of all religions so as to act as “ letter from Christ” (2Cor.3:2) and “ the fragrance of Christ” (2Cor.2:15), making ourselves known as a happy blending of dignity and compassion. The recent Flood in Kerala and the Ockhi cyclone tragedy (2017, 2018) have raised umpteen spiritual questions before us. The 10 lessons the world community have realized from the Fukushima Nuclear mishap (Japan) are indeed gospel truths. The late Thomas Mar Athanasius used to remind the clergy that they should always remember the two poles of the gospel truth: God in Christ for man and man in Christ for God. Further, Thirumeni used to quote Max Warren’s book, ‘The Divine Imperative’ “Go and preach; go and preach; go and teach.” The real st

question posed by several teachers of faith is this: “Are we modelling us on Christ or modelling Christ on us? This is basically a theological and ethical question addressed to the ministerial leadership.

The well-known prayer of Dag Hammarskjold, the former General Secretary of UN, quoted below is to be recited and lived everyday by the Christian ministers: “Give me a pure heart that I may see Thee; a humble heart that I may hear Thee; a heart of love that I may serve Thee; a heart of faith that I may live Thee”.

2. Shades of Christian heritage Those who take the pastoral ministry of the Church seriously have the God-given responsibility to protect the weak and the marginalized from the onslaught of the thieves, robbers and wolves and to protest against exploitative, manipulative and competitive tactics of powerful people and institutions of the day. This is the legacy of the good shepherd (Jn.10).

Legacy of the yesteryears is for today’s wellness. There are quite a few bishops, clergy and lay people in the Church who lived and taught ahead of their times . . . A book under the title ‘Light to the Nations’ published on the occasion of ECC’s Golden Jubilee (2013) speaks of new vision to mission paradigms, focusing on the unity of the Church as well as the unity of humankind and the integrity of Creation.

“The need for re-imaging the Church’s mission in the world arises out of our recognition that very often mission has been done from a position of privilege, power and possession. But the mission in Christ’s way clearly indicates an attempt to articulate an understanding of the Christian heritage from the perspective of the least or the marginalized.

th

The word “Legacy”/”heritage” has assumed deeper implications than the one we usually think of allocating possessions to people according to a ’Will’. The posterity is expected to imitate such men and women of repute and to translate their radical concerns into programmes and projects for the future. ‘Heritage’ is often used synonymous with tradition. But it is not. Heritage/legacy speaks of our yester years. The Jews quite often took pride of Abraham as their forefather. Legacy is not a static monument. It is indeed a canvas for a better future. Speaking about the legacy of Reformation in the Malankara Church, Dr. M. M. Thomas speaks about the three-fold developments as the values of Reformation. They are: i) the democratization of the Church polity, ii) the movement of the Church from an exclusive ethnic group to a more open and socially inclusive culture and religion and (iii) introducing a radical concern for the dispossessed and weaker sections of the Kerala society.

This is what we call today the preferential option for the poor. In the Liberation Theology, this concern is taken seriously. We need to translate the legacy of Reformation into living traditions . . . It is not possible to hand down legacy to anyone as a right of paternal property. With

25 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

determination and constant effort we need to appropriate it in each generation. As members of the future generation we need to remember what others did for us. (cf. Sib.44:10-13.)

The task before us is to enlarge and re-interpret what we have received.

We have a pedagogical responsibility in our ministry to hand over the faith tradition to the posterity as we read in Ps.78:1-4: “. . . things that we have heard and known, that our fathers have told us “(v.3).The glory of Christian ministry is rooted in responsible stewardship. The basic question to be asked is whether we are faithful in our vocation. We need to remember Rom.12:11. ”Keep the spirit of service at the boiling point” (Barclay). For this, partnership in mission must be encouraged as both men and women are joint heirs of the divine treasures (1Pet.3:7) the poetic meditation of Rabindranath Tagore is worth recalling: “Give me the strength to make my love fruitful in service.” Service is the rent we pay for our room on earth as someone has rightly said. Christian ministerial responsibility assumes different shades in socio-political and cultural contexts as harbingers of costly grace.

3. A minister is not a manager, but a leader In Mk. 7: 37 we read “Jesus has done all things well.” The Greek word “Kalos” in the text is quite illustrative. Road to success is not straight, but there is a curve called failure.

“My last mistake is my best teacher” is a wisdom saying

by APJ Abdulkalam. We need to recall the oft-quoted African proverb: “If you are fast, go alone; if you go far, go together.”

In the pastoral ministry, the glory of working together is a pastoral norm for all ages. St. Paul worked with over 150 people in his ministerial travels. He is scarcely found without companions. (See the article by E. Earle Ellis “Paul and his co-workers” (NTS Vol. XV 11, 1970-71, p.437-452). In Pastoral ministry we need to know the difference between a leader and a manager: There are three classes of people: those who see; those who see when they are shown and those who do not see (Leonardo da Vinci). Whether one is great or not, he or she is judged by what he or she leaves behind. The age old biblical norm of leadership-advice given

by Mordecai to Esther is worth remembering: “If you keep silence, you and your family will perish” (Esther 4:13-14).

Silence is golden; but the conspiracy of silence is devilish.

“In an age of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act” (George Orwell). In the Human Rights Manual, the warning given by Martin Nimbler (1892-1984) is written in golden letters. To quote, In Germany, the Nazis, first they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.” Voltaire, the French Philosopher, is right when he said, “Every man is guilty of all the good he did not do”. In an article, under the title, “The Respect Paradigm”, Noemi Tasarra-Twigg gives us 5-guidelines for us to follow how to make people respect us in our pilgrimage of life. They are: i) be genuinely

interested in people and their concerns; ii) learn how to be humble; iii) don’t be a doormat; iv) be open to other ideas and v) deliver on your promises. Leadership is a combination of strategy and character. A good leadership is revealed through the management of 4 -Ms: men, material, money and machinery. There are several models of leadership in the Bible particularly of Moses, Nehemiah and above all Jesus.

What is required is a combination of pastoral and prophetic vision in ministry. The three ingredients of ministrycommitment to God, compassion for people and passion for justice- are required for a transformative leadership.

4. Character and strategy Following a Christian strategy is very important in our ministerial vocation. Let me refer to an anecdote told by Antony de Mello. A man began to give large doses of cod liver oil to his Doberman because he had been told that the stuff was good for dogs .Each day he would hold the head of the protesting dog between his knees force its jaws and pour the liquid down its throat. One day he dog broke loose and spilt the oil on the floor. Then, to the man’s great surprise, it returned to lick the spoon. That is when he discovered that what the dog had been fighting was not oil, but his method of administration”. The great temptation of the minister is to entertain false presentations and irrelevant strategies to preserve the timeless.

Let us now look at the leadership traits about which Gordon E Fadies rightly said, “If you don’t stand for something, you will fall for anything”. The difference between a leader and a manager must be remembered: (i) The leader innovates-the manager maintains. (ii) The leader develops-the manger relies on systems. (iii)The leader relies on his vision and delegates- the manger counts on controls. iv) The leader counts on trust-the manger on texts. (v) The leader does the right thing- the manager does things right vi) The leader does not waste his time to do – the manager believes in procrastination for reasons of his own. To which group do we belong to?

The work ethics of Azim Premji (Wipro) provide good directions in fulfilling our ministerial tasks: (i) Begin with our strength; ii) a rupee earned is far more valuable than five found; (iii) when you lose, don’t lose the lesson; iv) we need to live with humility recognizing the worth of others (cf.Phil.2:4) Strive for excellence; vi) never give up in the face of adversity; vii) be open to change; viii) and don’t compromise on values like honesty, integrity, consideration etc..

Conclusion Our concern is to deliver God’s concerns in Christ as the action plans of Christian ministry. What we are is more important than what we have. What St. Paul said to the Elders of Ephesus in his farewell speech is to be remembered in pastoral ministry: “You yourselves know how I lived among you. . . I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God. . . I coveted no one’s silver or gold or apparel . . . . “(Acts.20:17-38).

26 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

The Christian Priesthood in the 21st Century Dr. Zac Varghese, London I wonder whether I should pay attention to the common wisdom that Jean- Paul Sartre 2 expressed as an introduction to his famous discourse in Paris in 1945 on ‘Existentialism and Humanism’: “. . . that you must not oppose that powers-that-be; that you must not fight against superior forces; must not meddle in matters that are above your station. . . .”

Therefore, it is with a certain degree of diffidence I am venturing to write about priesthood. Recent events in churches of all denominational colours make me very sad because the noble word ‘priest’ has changed over the last hundred or so years, certainly after the second world war.

Therefore, it did not surprise me to read about the pronouncement of Pope Francis that ‘being a priest is not a job, of fulfilling a job contract, but it is a gift from God.’ He was preaching to a group of priests and bishops who were celebrating the Silver Jubilee of their consecration on 19 th September, 2019 at the chapel of the Pope’s residence at ‘Domus Sanctae Marthe’. He went on to say, “Those who turn ordained ministry into an occupation ‘lose the heart of the ministry, lose the gaze of Jesus who looked upon all of us and told us, ‘Follow me.’” The text of the sermon was based on 1 Tim. 4: 12-16. He told his audience that they should not lose the gift God has given them. When ordained ministry is not seen and treasured as a gift, he said, “deviations” emerge, starting with “the worst ones, which are terrible, to the more everyday ones that make us base our ministry on ourselves and not on the gratitude of gift and love for he who gave us this gift, the gift of ministry.” “Effort, intelligence and also a bit of shrewdness are needed to safeguard this gift properly”, he added. The Pope also stressed the importance of proclaiming the Gospel. He concluded by praying and saying that priests see their ministry first as a gift, then as a service and that they should never become “businessmen, fixers or adopt other attitudes that make them stray from the Lord.” We should prayerfully ponder why the Pope was forced to remind those priests with 25 years’ experience of ministry with these very basic facts.

How did the Christian priesthood evolve?

The Old Testament priesthood was established during the time of Exodus at Mount Sinai, when Moses was instructed to appoint the house of 1 Jean-Paul Sartre, ‘Existentialism and Humanism, Metuhen,

Aaron, and the house of Levi, to carry out sacrificial and ceremonial functions as prescribed in the Law (Ex. 28: 41). One from the Aaronic lineage was chosen and ordained as high priest for life (Lev. 21:10; Num. 20:26). The descendants of Levi served in the temple in subordinate roles (Num. 3-4; 1 Chron. 9:28-32; 23: 26-32). From then on, priests exercised considerable authority and power in Israel, as mediators and arbiters of every area and aspect of life. The Aaronic priesthood filled an important role in the divine plan for the people of God before the coming of Jesus Christ; this in a way prefigured and prepared the way for the high priestly royal priesthood of Jesus Christ as we read in the letter to the Hebrews (Heb. 10: 5-7). Christ’s entire life on earth was an act of his priesthood. He came to heal a fractured-world. Finally, as a priest and a victim, he offered himself totally at Calvary in obedience to the will of the Father for the salvation of mankind.

The following verses in Hebrew give a picture of Jesus Christ’s continuous mediation on behalf of us as our high priest. “But because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them. Such a high priest truly meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once and for all when he offered himself. For the law appoints as high priests men in all their weakness; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever” (Hebrew 10: 24-28).

The Christian Priesthood: The Church’s model of ministry and priesthood is based on the ministry of Jesus Christ. After the Pentecost and the formation of house and Synagogue fellowships, we begin to see the appointment of ‘elders’ as the leaders of these groups. From these early informal beginnings we begin to see the development of ministries through apostles, prophets, evangelists, deacons, pastors and bishops. Women were also involved in some of these ministries during apostolic times. However, the nature of the ministry is not one of status and power, but a servant ministry. It is about having a called out experience of vocation as a set apart member of the faith community, the local church. This is to exercise a particular service, according to one’s God-given gift, for the good of the whole community. Anyone who has read the first edition of Archbishop Michael Ramsey’s book, ‘The Christian

Publishing Ltd., 1973, page 25.

27 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

Priest Today’3,4 would realise the importance that he has given to priest as a watchman, interpreter and weaver. In 2004, another Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams5, made a memorable speech on the same theme at the occasion of the 150th anniversary of Rippon theological college at Cuddesdon. These men of faith have described the ordained priest as “a man of theology, a man of reconciliation, a man of prayer, and a man of the Eucharist; displaying, enabling and involving the life of the Church.” Therefore, priesthood is the composite of all these and much more under the divine guidance and discipleship. A priest is also like a conductor of a philharmonic orchestra. When we enter a concert hall, find our seats, and listen with anticipation as the members of the orchestra tune their instruments - the sound is discordant, not melodic. But the tuning is simply a prelude to the symphony. Doubts and unbelief are areas, which need fine tuning. A good conductor would help us to fine tune our lives to reach the harmony needed for living in a melodic faith community, where everyone has a significant contribution to make; he or she would help us to enjoy the heavenly symphonic orchestra in our parishes and communities.

remember five characteristics and responsibilities of this priesthood as described in Malachi 2: 5-7:

Priesthood of Laity

Kerygma (preaching), diakonia (service) and koinonia fellowship) are the essence of priestly ministry. If we as lay people are bold in claiming our royal priesthood, are we serious about our God-given responsibilities associated with the priesthood? Do we see God as one who understands our needs and is ready to help us? His voice is ‘still and small;’ we often drown that voice with our discontent, rebellion and even laziness. Therefore, we need to learn to be quiet before God. Cardinal Manning said that the problem of Judas was his over-familiarity with the holiness of Jesus; this can indeed be a problem in the mere ritualization of our worship.

When we consider the importance of the priesthood of ordained ministry, we should not forget the responsibility and involvement of the priesthood of laity. St. Peter, in his first epistle, referred to laity as a chosen race and royal priesthood. “But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare praises of him who called you out of the darkness into his wonderful light” (1Peter 2: 9). This is indeed the ordination certificate and legitimacy of lay people to be responsible and committed members of a ministerial team of the local parish. Where do lay people fit into the ministry of an ordained priest?

Thus, all Christians have the right to go directly to God through Jesus Christ, our High Priest (Heb. 4:14-16).

When one obeys the gospel of Christ, he is added to the body of Christ and is thereby part of God's holy priesthood. Heb. 10:19-22 says, "Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from an evil conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water." It is good to

2 Michael Ramsey, ‘The Christian Priest Today’, SPCK, 1972 3 Zac Varghese, FOCUS, October, 2018, Vol.6 (4), page 9.

4http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/sermons_speeche

s/040528.html

1. Every priest should remember that he or she is an agent and herald of God. It is a covenant of life and peace.

2. He or she should understand the will of God and make it known to others under his/her care.

3. S/he should quietly and honestly walk with God. This is a sole purpose of creation. Therefore, they should be ever diligent not only to speak about God but also to maintain continuous communion with him.

4. Most importantly, they should guard against overfamiliarity with God, which results in a weakening of devotion. In everything the giving of glory to God should the priest’s primary concern and preoccupation.

5. The aim and purpose of a priest’s life is turn people to God and show them the right path. S/he should never be content with statutory worships and preaching.

Canonically ordained priests of our churches tend to be mostly conservative in their outlook and approach, trying to limit the vision of God within the bounds of the codes, rituals, traditions, and constitutions of institutionalised churches. These priests hold on to rigid understanding and revelations of the past, while priests with prophetic vision trust in an infinite God and worship Him who holds the future of humanity in His hands. Prophets seek to understand God by reading the signs of the time and express the will of God in all sorts of ways. We need to develop organic partnership with ordained and lay priesthood for God’s mission. Let God’s glory be our supreme concern in everything that we do. Prayer is at the centre of this ministry.

If the ministry is to be a team ministry, how do we define the membership of the team? Is this limited to just administrators, elected committee members, members of the Parish Church Council, Church Wardens, vice president, secretary, trustees, and Lay Readers? The

28 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

local church always needs a strong lay-centred ministerial team for the continuity of its mission, particularly in the contexts of short three year terms of ordained ministers in some churches like that of the Mar Thoma Church and five year terms in the Methodist tradition. The ministry here means service to the community. This membership is not a status symbol; it is a response to a call and an enrolment for servant ministry. What is important in parish ministry is that each member actively contributes to the good of the whole community through responsible participation and exercise of their God-given talents. A biblical church is a ‘church of the people and not church for the people’ with a decentralised ministry.

Since priesthood seems to have attracted a lot of bad press in recent years, it is important for laity to appreciate their responsibility in God’s mission and for providing pastoral care for various communities. We all have the experience of dedicated parish priests and bishops who are passionate about their calling and vocation that become exhausted by all sorts of demands people put on them. Any ordained priest who is passionate about ministry and who makes himself or herself available to everyone at all times, may become a sort of blotting paper by absorbing the worries and needs of others may get burned out due to compassion fatigue. Preservation of physical and emotional health, rest and efficient time management are important for a parish priest. A priest’s life is not always administering sacraments and other official duties; he has to recharge his batteries through silent meditation, prayer, recreation and fellowship. Lay people should appreciate this and provide support as active members of a team ministry. Bishops also get isolated; they also need help to become effective overseers of ministers and ministries.

The Mission of God: It is important to equip ourselves for facing difficulties and challenges in the ministry and not get satisfied by living in comfortable zones of life. God’s mission (Missio Dei) as opposed to the comfortable ‘mission of the church’ is all about going to the other side, which is risky and challenging. This is what we learn from the story of ‘Abram’ and his calling. Abram is asked to abandon the

familiar, comfortable and the habitual, and to go to a land he had never seen before. It is a faith pilgrimage into the unknown, which is akin to the dynamic of history. Abram had the choice, at that point, of turning his face away from the unfamiliar terrain of history, hiding in the undergrowth of familiar customs, ways, and possibilities, and ‘safe in the arms’ of the given. But after the transformation and having had the new identity as Abraham, he decided to go to the other unknown side and as a result he became a ‘blessing for many’.

This is beautifully illustrated in the story of ‘calming the storm’ in Luke’s gospel (Lk.8: 22-25; Mt. 14: 22-24).

When Jesus asked his disciples, “let us go to the other side of the lake”, and when faced with a storm – a whirl wind, while sailing; they thought they were going to drown. They forgot that their redeemer was with them; they thought he was sleeping, but our redeemer never sleeps. “. . . Indeed, he who watches over Israel will neither slumber nor sleep” (Ps. 124:4). And when they reached Gerasenes, which was on the other side of the lake, they met a demon-possessed man and Jesus cured him; this man wanted to stay with Jesus, but Jesus sent this man away; he went and told everyone how much Jesus had done for him. Following this many others came to Jesus for healing. The opportunity was on the other side. We see this again in the story of the Good Samaritan and the Samaritan woman. The other side is the place of mission; the other side is where new opportunities exist. Therefore, people involved in the mission of God should not stay put, but should go to the other side and experience miracles of life. The diasporic experience and opportunities opened to immigrant Christians are fertile fields for mission.

As people are more and more disinterested in participating in traditional worship on Sundays and other parish-based activities, the church membership is declining. Therefore, it is necessary to look for opportunities where people are. We need to become more imaginative in reaching out to people and interacting with their needs. In order to provide a safety net for those who themselves find marginalized by society. Revd Rodney Marsh founded the ‘Romero Project’ in Wakefield Diocese of the Church of England.

He commented, “I am a priest, not a social worker. My job is to care for the souls, but what is the use of saying to folk whose lives are in a mess, ‘God loves you, get on with it?’,” Commenting on the ministry of Fr. Marsh, Archbishop John Sentamu6 wrote: “We would do well to remember that the Church is not the building in which we worship, it is the people who put God’s love into action.

He calls us not to serve those inside the congregation, but those outside and on the periphery of society.” In his role as the Archbishop of York, he spends a lot of time 5 John Sentamu, ‘Faith Stories’, DLG, 2013, page 79.

29 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

meeting people and becomes involved with all sorts of issues affecting them, In 2015, he got to know his Archdiocese intimately during his ‘Diocesan Pilgrimage of Prayer’, witnessing and blessing where he spent weeks walking 1,578 miles covering every corner of the Diocese.

He was indeed meeting people and seeing the problems of people who are on the other side, ‘on the periphery of society’. It is indeed the same sentiment that an earlier Archbishop of Canterbury, William Temple, expressed during the Second World War: “The Church is the only society that exists for the benefit of those who are not its members.”

This problem is slowly being addressed in the Church of England through other new initiatives such as ‘Emerging Churches’ and ‘Fresh Expression of Church’. ‘Messy Church’ and ‘Taize-style worship’. These are ways of going over to the other side for supporting people beyond one’s own close knit homogenous groups. Let us learn to submit ourselves to be guided by the Holy Spirit. Priests themselves need to be liberated from the demands of their job descriptions in order to be all comprehensive, ultra-efficient, multi-talented, good communicators and super-human performers. And lay people need to wake up from their illusion that it is enough to pay the membership fee and occasionally attend church on Sunday mornings for the Eucharist. We must have a longing for justice, love and relationship. We must be taking on such tasks as working with people on margins of society, the poor, and the voiceless and creating peace where there is conflict.

Yes, indeed, as Pope Francis emphasised: ‘being a priest is not a job, of fulfilling a job contract, but it is a gift from God.’ When we appreciate and thank Pope Francis for his ministry, it is worth remembering the words of prophet Malachi in and around 450 B.C. “. . . For the lips of a priest ought to preserve knowledge, because he is the messenger of the LORD Almighty and people seek instruction from his mouth. But you have turned from the way and by your teaching have caused many to stumble; you have violated the covenant with Levi,” says the LORD Almighty. “So I have caused you to be despised and humiliated before all the people, because you have not followed my ways but have shown partiality in matters of the law” (Mal. 2: 1-9).

Have we learnt anything about priesthood and ministry over the last 2500 years? Is the time running out for us too? Therefore, let us remain faithful to the truth delivered to us in Christ; let us have God-given courage to face challenges of the 21st century, particularly those facing ordained ministry in some churches and be content in prayer to leave the future to our Lord and our saviour, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. It is important to build a partnership ministry incorporating both ordained and lay priesthood to cultivate God’s kingdom values.

BORN IN A CAVE (A Reflection of the Christmas Saga) Revd Dr. M. J. Joseph, Kottayam

BABY JESUS, You were born in a cave.

You were laid in a manger Your parents had no option, but to do what they could.

They knocked at the DOOR OF HOPE at an Inn And heard the voice of the inner keeper: “Sorry, Sorry, . .”

“No space in the inn for a pregnant woman”.

I know, you, Jesus, breathed the polluted air in the cave I know you had no mask to protect yourself.

I know noise pollution was harming your eardrums.

I know Mary could not quench your thirst with a few drops of pure water.

I know your first cry was a nuisance to the innkeeper and to the animals in the stable.

I know there were none to see the smile of your mother, Mary, on your birth.

You might have heard the squeaks of rats, brays of donkeys and neighs of horses.

The flora and the fauna around you did not know who you are!

But you communicated with them by the words of silence.

I know silence is also the voice of dissent.

The unexpected turn of events happen even to the righteous, But the God of Grace will give them strength to bear it with fortitude.

You were wrapped in swaddling clothes.

Your kenosis is the ABC of human pilgrimage towards eternity.

Why did the Destiny lead you to be born in a cave?

It is in the cave of human heart the power of sin rules; The power of Death resides.

I want to cleanse the pollution in human hearts; I was born in a cave for the cave dwellers and its owners; For the sons of the soil, And for the ones on the margin.

I want you to stand for the just order (mishpat) and to sing for peace on earth I want you to shout for the right and the generous deeds (sadaqah) I want you to live and to manifest the power of love (agape) as the Shepherds did And be known as the Aroma of the Divine in the oikoumene.

30 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

THE HOLY BOOKS - Part 4 Dr. Ian Fry, Honorary Postdoctoral Associate, University of Divinity, Melbourne [This article is written for the 8th Holy Book Conference held at Kuala Lumpur in April 2019 under the auspices of the United Religious Initiative (URI). Part-2 of this paper appeared in the July issue of the FOCUS, 2019, Vol. 7 (3), page 26-28. Part-3 of this paper appeared in the October issue of the FOCUS, Oct. 2019, Vol.7 (4) page 30-32.]

On the Roman Road For more than three centuries after Pope Stephen II’s successful bid to increase his power base by means of the fake Donation, the church struggled on in a bid to offset the territorial gains of Islam and the tendency for Europe’s kings and princes to accommodate the foreign religion in the interests of trade and security. Successive popes were angry about Jerusalem remaining in Muslim hands, and various proselytizing ploys were used to try to reverse it. Eventually Pope Gregory VII devised a plan to force Christian kings and princes to support him in a crusade to recover control of the sacred city after 400 years of complex interaction between the three Abrahamic faiths.

The final trigger for his plan was the invasion by Seljuk Turks who swept through the Byzantine Empire, halved its area, captured Jerusalem, attacked the Christians and forced large numbers of Jews to flee. However, intrigue to determine who would control the church in Russia had simmered between Rome and Byzantium ever since the Caliph allowed the Khazar Khan to determine the religious and political allegiance of his semi-nomadic Turkicspeaking peoples – Islam, Christianity or Judaism. He chose Judaism and independence Rome was infuriated.

Rome and Constantinople were competing for control of Scandinavia-Black Sea trade while Rome pursued barbaric Christianization of the Russian principality that encouraged the prince to favour Islam and resulted in direct attacks on the Khazar Khanate and its destruction.7 To resolve his diplomatic crisis the prince married a sister of the Byzantine emperor and invited the patriarch to send missionaries throughout Russia. It was the caliph’s turn to be infuriated and confrontation across the Bosphorus became more bitter. How can anyone say ‘religion doesn’t cause wars?’

7

The circumstances of the destruction of the Khaza Khanate, and its significance are widely debated. Sources consulted include: Richard Pipes, Russia under the Old Regime (Harmondsworth: Penguin/Peregrine, 1977). pp. 35-6,157.Alfred M. Lilienthal, What Price Israel? (Chicago: Henry Regnery Company, 1953). pp. 220-22.

Martin Gilbert, Jewish History Atlas (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1976). p.26. Roth, History of the Jews. pp. 158-62.

In the meantime, bishops in Jerusalem had stepped up proselytizing using “miraculous” descending fire liturgies at Easter at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. They refused to stop so the caliph put an end it by destroying the Church in 1009. When an infuriated Pope Sergius failed to gain support from ‘his’ princes for a ‘Battle of the Lord’ he signed a peace treaty, and rebuilding began in 1048. Sergius’ successor, Pope Gregory VII, dissatisfied with the princes, demanded a doctrinal justification for a Holy War that would strengthen his personal authority by playing on their moral subservience to him and their ‘sacred duty’ to secure the city that was central to the beliefs of all three faiths. His twenty-seven-point ‘Dictatus Papae’ was promulgated in 1075 to promote Crusades to recover Jerusalem and Spain, and to ensure that the Roman papacy would remain dominant and the basis of Catholic self-understanding thereafter.8 Thus, Dictatus Papae set the pattern for much that was to follow. Its key clauses are that only the Roman pontiff can be called universal; it is lawful for only him to make new laws according to the needs of the time and to assemble new congregations; all princes shall kiss only his feet; only his name shall be spoken in the churches and is the only name in the world; he may be permitted to depose emperors; no chapter and no book shall be canonical without his authority; he may be judged by no one, and no one shall dare to condemn anyone who appeals to the apostolic chair; if he has been canonically ordained he is undoubtedly made a saint by the merits of St. Peter, and he may absolve subjects from their fealty to wicked men.

According to Berman,9 by Gregory VII’s reign Christendom had become a beleaguered citadel, which survived mainly because its greatest enemy, Islam, had reached the end of its lines of communication. The church-state partnership had been dramatically abused but the church still had a stabilizing influence after each imperial conquest that was imposed by fear and the 8

Pope Gregory VII, "Dictatus Papae, 1075 " in The Internet Medieval Sourcebook, ed. Paul Halsall (New York: Fordham University / Online Reference Book for Medieval Studies, 1075).

The date of promulgation of Dictatus Papae is disputed. Some authorities say 1075, others 1090. See Paul Halsall, ed. Internet History Sourcebooks Project, Online Reference Book for Medieval Studies (New York, Fordham University: Fordham Center for Medieval Studies, 2006). , Harold J. Berman, Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983). p.96. and Tierney, Crisis of Church and State, pp. 59 - 60.

9 Harold

J. Berman. Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition. (Cambridge. Harvard University Press. 1983) p. 110. Berman cites Southern, Western Society, p. 27, saying that "both the Greek and the Islamic systems were immensely richer, more powerful, and intellectually more sophisticated than that of Western Europe. The West was the poor relation of Byzantium."

31 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

sword in the Low Countries, Central and Northern Europe, but the relationship soured when Gregory VII sought to adapt it further by equating his personal ecclesiastical power to that of universal dictator and demanded the protection of the Vatican by all states of the Holy Roman Empire. Dictatus Papae did not bring the immediate response the pope wanted but twenty years later, when Emperor Alexius appealed for his help to secure Byzantium against the Seljuks the new pope, Urban II, saw an opportunity to try for Jerusalem again.

Claiming that it was “imperative” for “the servants of God” to “make a stand against the enemy” in response to “the voice of Christ which commands your obedience,” and as an incentive for princes and paupers alike to join a campaign he announced that “by right of the gift of God’s power to me,” an indulgence with remission of all penances would be granted to those who “took the cross” and lost their lives as martyrs, and whatever lands or properties of the infidels the Crusaders managed to locate (discover) or seize (possess) would belong, as spoil, to the Christians who first seized it.10

By the time the Reconquista to recover Spain was launched in 1212 the country’s ‘Golden Age’ of Jewish, Christian and Muslim scholarship had already been crushed by Yusuf bin Tashfin who replaced the religiontolerant Muslim king and expelled all Jews and Christians in 1148. Among the exiles was Maimonides, the Sephardic rabbi-philosopher-physician-astronomerlawyer (see part three), who, with a contemporary, the Muslim philosopher Ibn Rushd, was among key figures of the Golden Age. Ibn Rushd, Western Europe’s ‘spiritual father,’ taught that there is no conflict between religion and philosophy, and they are different ways of reaching the same truth. This was a challenge to both Islam, which was pursuing extreme Shari’ah law, and the church, which claimed to be the sole arbiter in matters of factual truth and that there could be no debate after it had made a pronouncement on the basis of faith. Ibn Rushd also proposed that “the human soul is a separate substance ontologically identical with the active intellect; and when this active intellect is embodied in an individual human it is the material intellect…”13

With that incitement the first of the series of nine crusades over two hundred years following Dictatus Papae – a rambling, drunken disorganized affair – was declared a success in 1099 in spite of depravity and the destruction of Jerusalem in much the manner of Ashurnasirpal II’s 9th century BCE victory.11 The pope’s subordination of the state to religious authority, his absolute denial of any wrongdoing by him personally or by the institution of the church, his deliberate provocation of slaughter and theft, and his claims to exalted personal status free of any judgement did not reflect the relationships envisaged by Jesus for the community of the New Covenant, nor the Qur’anic statement of Muhammad’s authority as the ‘Seal of the Prophets.’12

Two of Maimonides’ classic works relate to covenantal understanding: the Code of Jewish Law, the Mishneh Torah, and the Guide of the Perplexed. Fourteen volumes of the Mishneh Torah, The Laws of Kings and Their Wars14 cover Talmudic teaching, the appointment of kings, their responsibility in war; resettlement of Eretz Yisrael; relations between Jews and gentiles; the Jews’ obligation to teach gentiles the seven key commandments; re-establishment of the monarchy, and the future Messianic Age. He wrote that at some time in the future the Messianic King will arise, renew the dynasty of King David, return it to its initial sovereignty, build the Temple and gather the dispersed of Israel. He said that anyone who does not believe in him or does not wait for his coming denies not only the statements of other prophets but also the Torah and Moses. He began very deliberately with Deuteronomy 30:3–5 which is to the effect that “your God will bring you into the land that your ancestors possessed, and you will possess it; he will make you more prosperous and numerous than your ancestors.15

10

Régine Pernoud, The Crusaders: The Struggle for the Holy Land Urban II: The Pope of the First Crusade (Ft. Collins, CO: Ignatius Press, 1959) 11 Frederick Turner, Beyond geography: the western spirit against the wilderness (New York: Viking Press, 1980). p.80. The Archbishop of Tyre described the destruction of Jerusalem and the massacre of its population thus: The rest of the (Christian) soldiers roved through the city in search of wretched survivors who might be hiding in the narrow portals and byways to escape death. These were dragged out into public view and slain like sheep. Some formed into bands and broke into houses where they laid violent hands on the heads of families, on their wives, children and their entire households. These victims were either put to the sword or dashed headlong to the ground from some elevated place so that they perished miserably. Each marauder claimed as his own in perpetuity the particular house which he had entered, together with all it contained.

12 Qur’an 33:41. (Al Islam on line.) Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but he is the Messenger of Allah and the Seal of the Prophets; and Allah has full knowledge of all things.

Maimonides supported the view of both Jesus and Muhammad that neither the Abrahamic nor Mosaic Covenants had been abrogated but he embittered both the church and Islam by proposing that there can be no greater stumbling block than Christianity, that Jesus of Nazareth who aspired to be the Messiah and was 13

H. Chad Hillier, "Ibn Rushd (Averroes) (1126 - 1198 CE)," in Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy., ed. James Fieser .

14 Moses Maimonides, Mishneh Torah: The Laws of Kings and Their Wars, ed. Eliyahu Touger, trans. Eliyahu Touger, First of new translation with commentaries ed., 14 vols., vol. 14 (New York: Moznaim Publishing Corp, 1987).

15 New Revised Standard Version English translation, Deut. 30:4–5.

Emphasis added.

32 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

executed by the court had been alluded to in Daniel’s prophecy as one of “the vulgar among your people [who] exalt themselves in an attempt to fulfil the vision, but they shall stumble,” (Daniel 11:14), and that “all the deeds of Jesus of Nazareth and that Ishmaelite who arose after him will only serve to prepare the way for the Messiah’s coming and the improvement of the whole world, [motivating the nations] to serve God together.”16 One down: Dictatus Papae. Three to go In 1442, more than three centuries after Dictatus Papae, Pope Eugenius IV promulgated the Bull of Union with the Copts. It was based on the teaching that holy sacrifices and sacraments, because they were instituted by Judaism to signify something in the future, and although they were adequate for the divine cult of that age, once Jesus was signified by them as the Lord and had come they were no longer relevant and the sacraments of the New Testament had their beginning. Therefore whoever, after the Passion, placed his hope in the legal prescriptions and submits himself to them as necessary for salvation and as if faith in Christ without them could not save, sins mortally.17 Rome denounced Christians who continued to observe the practices of circumcision, the Jewish Sabbath and other legal prescriptions that were practiced by the Copts as strangers to the faith of Christ in an attempt to reunite them with other Christian groups. The exercise failed miserably, driving a wedge between Christian communities, as well as between Christians and Jews, by substituting one law for another and, in particular, banning circumcision.

Within ten years the Balkans and several states in Eastern Central Europe were either under Ottoman rule or, being threatened by it, were accommodating its interests. The remnants of the Byzantine Empire were isolated and directly threatened, and the rapid expansion of the Ottoman Empire and growing Muslim influence in Europe posed a real threat to Rome’s role and papal ambitions.

The bull Dum Diversas was devised to encourage Portugal to project Christendom southward into Africa to offset the church’s loss of influence in Europe and Islam’s growing influence in sub-Saharan Africa. Citing Apostolic Authority Eugenius IV granted the kings of Spain and Portugal full and free permission to invade, search out, capture, and subjugate any “Saracens and pagans and any other unbelievers” to perpetual slavery.18 It thus legitimized and facilitated the Portuguese West African slave trade, and ushered in the Age of Discovery.

16

Maimonides. Mishneh Torah. P.236.

17 Norman P. Tanner (ed.). Decrees of the ecumenical councils. 2 volumes (in Greek and Latin). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press 2008.

18 Pope Nicholas V, "Dum Diversas. Bull," in Select Historical Documents of the Middle Ages, ed. Paul Halsall (London: George Bell 1910).

Dum Diversas was shocking and marks the last act of the Third Epoch.

Three down. One to go The world didn’t have to wait very long. In May 1453, the church and its associated powers had to contend with the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople and the end of Byzantium. Rome lost access to the Black Sea states and much of its trade and influence over the churches in states that had relations with the Ottomans or found an accommodation with them necessary, and there was no will among the princes for an attempt to recover Constantinople. The Roman Catholic Church said the future of Christianity was at risk,19 but in reality, it was only the influence of the papacy.

Soon after the fall of Constantinople, Pope Nicholas promulgated Romanus Pontifex in a bid to minimize risks by giving basically the same authority to all Catholic kings and prices as Spain and Portugal already enjoyed. His aims were the prior occupation of all new countries, a final overwhelming crusade against the heart of Islam from the rear, and raising funds to finance that crusade.

The theological justification for the bull was the statement attributed to Jesus that: All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. (Mt. 28:18-20)310 However, Jesus said nothing about subjugating, enslaving, exploiting and instructing them in canon law, church creeds or doctrine, and the Qur’an anticipates and insistently teaches that the return of Jesus will precede the Hour of Judgment and involve him in a preparatory or participatory role in the process of judgement. The church therefore has no basis to teach that Muslims are enemies of Jesus and must be destroyed. The two critical ayat are complemented by about 70 hadith entries in the Sahîh AlBukhâri, including the one here.

And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them. (S.4:157159) And (Jesus) shall be a Sign (for the coming of) the Hour (of Judgment): therefore have no doubt about the (Hour), but follow ye Me: this is a Straight Way. (S.43 A61-64) "By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, son of Mary (Jesus) will shortly descend amongst you people (Muslims) as a just ruler and will break the cross and kill the pig and

19

James Lees-Milne, Saint Peter's - the story of Saint Peter's Basilica in Rome (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1967).

33 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

abolish the Jizya.311 (Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 3. Hadith no.

425) Many of Europe’s crowned heads preferred to make peace with the Ottoman Empire. They were not interested in more papal wars, but neither would they allow Portugal and Spain to take exclusive control of whatever world was “out there” to be discovered and exploited. They acted independently and the pope’s bid to gain total control of world affairs by sponsoring subordinate monarchies and principalities had far-reaching consequences that he had not anticipated.

For a long time Romanus Pontifex was the critical factor in determining the pattern of world events and relationships between communities of faith and, in particular, relationships between Christianity, Judaism and Islam. The decision to promulgate that bull, and every consequence of it, involve neglect or abuse of obligations under covenant. Its immediate effect was to legitimize the expansion of slavery, encourage exploitation and the ageold practice of military colonization. None of Judaism, Christianity or Islam have unblemished records, but attacks on Jews and Muslims for involvement in slavery are essentially defensive exercises by Christians.20 The legitimizing of slavery and imperial domination demonstrated absolute rejection of the church’s basic obligation under the New Covenant, and make its primary responsibility under the covenant unattainable without a comprehensive reassessment of its self-understanding.

Romanus Pontifex was an absolute travesty of the Gospels and the concept of covenant. It provided confirmation that the pope and the church hierarchy had totally rejected the concept of Universal Covenant and the guidelines for conduct towards one’s neighbours. It extended the benefits of papal authority to additional Christian kingdoms while concurrently protecting Portugal’s rights by forbidding other countries from encroaching on the territory reserved for it. It eliminated any need for the explorer/invaders to exercise care and responsibility because they had papal assurance of divine blessing for their ventures and virtually unconditional forgiveness for foul play. Indeed the bull Romanus Pontifex ushered in both the European Colonial Era and the Fourth Epoch. It was a time of change and often brutal confrontation.

REASON FOR THE SEASON Lal Varghese, Esq., Dallas Jesus was chosen to be born as a carpenter’s son in a manger and to be buried in borrowed tomb. The one who created the whole world chose to be born in a manger.

The one who has our destiny in His hands chose to submit to His father’s will to die on the cross. We celebrate Christmas without knowing the reason for the season. We often forget the child born in the manger when we celebrate His birth. This child’s life and His death on the cross should be able to change our life and the life of others around through us, and our parish life.

He became poor so that we may become rich because of His grace. When we live in a market culture we often forget about the Christ. Christmas should be an experience of emptying ourselves. Birth of Jesus Christ was a painful experience for Joseph and Mary. But they listened and obeyed God so that their agony became our joy. Unless and until we experience the pain and agony of others we cannot celebrate the joy of Christmas in its true meaning.

Christmas must be an embodiment of the sacrifice and obedience to God. Our celebrations should reflect the pain and sufferings of others, then only it would become real celebration. God is the master carpenter who created the whole world. Are we still searching the Christ in the manger or the crucified Christ on the cross? His birth and death should challenge the way we live and should enable us to transform ourselves, and the life of others around us. The resurrected Christ’s presence in our lives should enable us to face the challenges of the world.

20

See Thomas Wiedemann, Greek and Roman Slavery, First; ed.

(London: Croom Helm Ltd, 1981; reprint, Croom Helm 1983; Routledge1988, 1992, 1994). Catherine Hezser, Jewish Slavery in Antiquity (Oxford: Oxford University Press., 2005). Syed Ameer Ali, The Spirit of Islam: A History of the Evolution of Ideas of Islam with a Life of the Prophet (London: Christophers, 1922). Ehud R. Toledano, Slavery and Abolition in the Ottoman Middle East (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1998

34 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

Ten Years of Metropolitan Alvares Julius Research Project (2009-2019) Ben Kunjacko – OCP About MARP The year 2019 marks the tenth year of Metropolitan Alvares Julius Research Project (MARP). Launched in 2009 (with the historic visit to Brahmavar Western Rite Community), MARP is an exclusive research project on Western Rite Orthodox communities of Oriental Orthodox Churches with special reference to SyriacMalankara Orthodox Churches. The research focuses on the known and unknown aspects of the missionary works of Saintly Metropolitan Alvares Julius, Archbishop Rene Vilatte and their companions.

These missionary champions and their Independent Catholic movements (Western Rite Orthodox) were not limited to religious sphere; rather they played an important role in social transformation. Over the years MARP became instrumental in publishing several documents that had not previously been available.

Under the leadership of Dr. Ajesh T. Philip the research Board was able to rediscover many former Independent Catholic mission fields, communities and Church buildings.

The project boasts two research publications, several historical rediscoveries and findings. Please visit this link for more informationhttp://theorthodoxchurch.info/alvares/our-journey-inpictures/ Structure and Ownership of MARP MARP is a Western Rite Orthodox research under the Center for Orthodox Studies (COS), an autonomous center under the Orthodoxy Cognate PAGE Society. Dr. Ajesh T. Philip is the Head and Chief Research Officer of MARP. He also serves as the Chief Overseer of COS. MARP has inspired a large number of individuals and institutions to take up research studies on Western Rite Orthodox communities. Please visit this link for more information on the MARP Research Board http://theorthodoxchurch.info/blog/ocrc/about/cosboard/marp-research-board/

independent association with Rohit Gupta, the author of the book 'Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church: Everything about Indian Orthodox Church'.

Achievements MARP is the first Western Rite Orthodox research project with special reference to Syriac and Malankara Orthodox Churches. It is the longest and most expensive Western Rite Orthodox research project in the Indian Sub-Continent. One of our biggest blessing and achievement was in the year 2018 when Patriarch Abba Seraphim published the book 'As Far As East Is From The West' in response to 'Western Rites of Syriac-Malankara Orthodox Churches'.

Please visit this link for more information on MARP achievements http://theorthodoxchurch.info/alvares/projectcoordinators/achievements/ Finances and Accountability Eighty percent of the research is financed by the internal funds of Orthodoxy Cognate PAGE, whereas, the rest twenty percentages is donated by benefactors.

The expenses include printing and publication, travel, purchase of research materials, and office management. The total expense of the project as of August 2019 is eight thousand five hundred dollars. As a part of the accountability, regular briefing on the progress of the research project is made to the Ecumenical Relations Dept. of the Malankara Church.

Briefing on the progress of the project is also communicated to the Syriac Orthodox Church as well.

Fr. Abraham Thomas acts as the point of contact between MARP Board and the Ecumenical Relations department.

The Future As of August 2019, MARP has successfully completed two research phases. The Executive Council of the OCP Society and the COS Board is expected to decide on the future activities of MARP.

Partnership and Associations

Gratitude

MARP and Center for Orthodox Studies have been associating with a number of Churches, institutions, and individuals. Chief partnership with the Ecumenical Relations Department of the Malankara Church was formally established in 2018. Intense research associations are in progress with the British Orthodox Patriarchate and the Christian Catholic Church Canada.

MARP continue to receive immense support and guidance from Patriarch Abba Seraphim and Bishop Serge ThĂŠriault. In 2019 COS and MARP began an

MARP Board is indebted to a large number of persons and institutions for their support. We wholeheartedly thank all our benefactors and supporters for their kind encouragement throughout our research journey.

Please visit this link for more information on MARP benefactors http://theorthodoxchurch.info/alvares/projectcoordinators/benefactors-of-ocp-marp/ Source: OCP-COS-MARP

35 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1