Focus October 2016

1 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

FOCUS October 2016 Vol. 4 No: 4

Post Modern World Scenario – A Christian Response, Rev. Dr. M. J. Joseph, Kottayam- Page 15 Cover Photo: Post Modernity and its Challenges to Christianity – Modern Painting of Jesus Christ

A Publication of Diaspora FOCUS

An Intimate Realization of God, Dr. Zac Varghese, London - Page 18

Editorial, Post Modernity and its Challenges to Christianity - Page 3

Post Modernism and its Challenges to Christianity, Lal Varghese, Esq., Dallas – Page 20

Post Modernism and Christianity, Rev. Dr. Valson Thampu, Trivandrum - Page 6

Preserving the Timeless While Adapting to the Times - Revd.

Dr. Lord Griffiths, Page 22

Random Theological Insights – Post Modern Context, Rev. Dr. K. V. Mathew, Kottayam, Page 9

Post Modernism, Rev. Shiby Varghese, Kottayam - Page 11

Mar Chrysostom’s Life Story, A Review,

by Dr. Zac Varghese, London - Page 25

2 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

Editorial Postmodernity and its Challenges to Christianity Although we live in everyday realities of a postmodern world, what is postmodernity or postmodernism is a question for which no one seems to give a clear crisp answer. Without knowing what this trend or movement means, how can we consider its challenges to Christianity? With this in mind, we invited various authors to give their takings on this important theme.

How did we arrive at this point in our postmodern existence?

It was not a ‘Bing Bang’ moment, which brought us to postmodernism or postmodernity. It was a slow process of moving from the pre-modern times through modernity to a postmodern world. It was a gradual process, a continuum.

Religious ideas determined the entire life of the people in the pre-modern times. God is considered as the be all and end all of everything. We read in the prologue to St. John’s Gospel, ‘In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God…… but the darkness has not understood it” (Jn 1: 1-5). Everything in life from birth to death was centred on religious thoughts and rituals. Representatives of religious institutions occupied highest rank in the society. Thus priestly classes (Brahmins), gurus, bishops, priests, medicine, men and witch doctors belonged to the highest rank in communities. It is important to remember that the ideas of pre-modernity are still prevalent in the present day in certain cultures and traditions; we still respect and honour priestly order and hierarchies. We still see all sorts of people making the sign of the cross and other gestures before entering a football match or an Olympic event.

without the hegemony of religion. In pre-modernity, the overarching story was God, whereas in the modernity, the overarching narratives were the results of rational debates, scientific investigations and logical conclusions. Modernists stressed the importance of the individual and the power of their mind to reach out to truths relating to many mysteries of the nature to extract energy and other resources for the benefit of humanity. People begin to learn to depend on their own innate abilities to solve problems of the natural world to make life more comfortable. Many begin to believe that human needs are not beyond human help and ingenuity.

Secularisation became a competing force and displaced religion from the public square.

The supreme confidence of the modernity to solve human problems begun to collapse with two world wars, economic down turns of nineteen thirties and later times, collapse of the market economy, population explosion and man’s in ability to feed, clothe and provide shelter for everyone, breakdown of political systems, decolonisation, environmental crisis and a whole host of health-related issues. For all these issues modernity do not provide an adequate solution. Hence there is a realisation that human needs have become beyond human help. It is in this loss of confidence that we begin to see the emergence of postmodernism or postmodernity.

The modern period begins from 15 century with the rise of scientific ideas, and experimentation. Reason and logic ruled the minds of ‘enlightened’ people. Renaissance created new momentum in every field of human activity. Thus modernity is identified as the ‘Age of Reason’ in the European culture.

Martin Luther, Calvin and other reformers challenged the power of the Catholic Church through reasoned arguments about theological concepts and church dogmas, rituals, and sacraments. The Bible has handed down to the ordinary people in the pews to read and study and hence there was a wealth of different understanding about scripture. People begin to reach out to God from their personal perspectives.

When Rene Descartes pronounced his famous dictum, ‘I think therefore I am,’ he was trying to figure out of a way of understanding God and related life issues through reason and logic. Immanuel Kant, David Hume, Schleiermacher and such philosophers believed that rationalism must be used to dissect out ideas, and particularly Christian theology, and this period is known as the Enlightenment era. It was considered to be the golden period of the western culture. th

The advance of science and technology gave an amazing confidence to people to liberate themselves from the clutches of religion and its power dynamics; people genuinely came to believe that they could manage things

Postmodernism sounds like a philosophical or political ideology or a system with a defined structure as we find in Socialism, Communism or Capitalism, but a clear definition

3 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

is difficult to find for postmodernism. It can be considered as a trend or movement that influenced arts, architecture, literature, religion and in other fields over the last sixty years or so. The universal emergence of these changes can be considered as postmodernity; it probably refers to an identifiable period. Some people are not comfortable with the adage of ‘ism’ to the word postmodern. The distinction between postmodernism and postmodernity is for the experts to debate, but here we consider it as one great shift in the attitudes that happened to a whole number of human activities such as liberation and counter cultural movements in arts, architecture, religion, postcolonial politics, globalisation, music, pop culture, fashion industry, communication, literature, and even the use of language in texting and the social media. Postmodernism probably indicates a challenge against high modernist culture. AntiVietnam war movement, Black power struggles and liberation, gay and lesbian culture, anti-elitist culturedattitudes, psychedelic experiments, ecological awareness, liberation and Dalit theology are all parts of these postmodern polychromic changes with certain shades of anarchy. It is very difficult to find a comprehensive definition to accommodate all the things that are happening around us in our current globalised postmodern situation. Therefore, postmodernity is possibly an umbrella term, which covers many changes that happened or happening in the society since the Second World War. Although it is difficult to pin down or define postmodernity we can identify few characteristics of this movement and then consider how it has become a challenge to Christianity.

The following are some of its characteristics: 1. Postmodern space is occupied by multiple voices claiming its rights to present reconstructed truths or realities; according to them truth is not found, but created. Therefore, it is not easy to receive competing voices without losing a single important authoritative voice. This is a problem for a theocentric person. There was a loss of authority.

2. It has no respect for metanarratives. One of the reasons for this rejection is that metanarratives are often considered to be the cause of religious violence and ethnic cleansing.

Postmodernists strongly reject any kind of all-encompassing universal explanation through stories. There is no single unifying worldview for them. However, the ‘people of the Book’ rely on metanarratives for their spiritual journey, for Christians the Bible is their guide and the voice of the Almighty God. Postmodernists challenge foundational concepts. They reject the idea that among many beliefs there is a single irrefutable foundation.

3. There are no moral absolutes. They have no foundational values that are objective and universal. Representation is a form of domination of suppressing the other, and the less privileged people. There is a need to respect differences and everything must have a space for its way of life. In the postmodern mind there can be no universal moral or ethical laws. Individuals shape their lives by their own spiritual impulses. They build for themselves their own spiritual environment. It is a love of God and not love of religions.

John Caputo suggested that there are many different ways

to love God, but without laying special claim to an exclusive possession of ‘The Truth.’ They see love of God as love of truth, goodness and beauty. Experience of love is a condition of human existence.

4. Ideas are cultural creation and culturally sensitive.

Knowledge is a human construct. The world we live is the result of sociological and political conveniences that prefer certain facts that suit our intentions and immediate needs.

5. There is no such thing as objectivity. Universal values are objectives, whereas the way people make choices is subjective.

6. Texts have no intrinsic meaning; it can find meaning through the readers and their contexts and in this interpretative-reading the author is dead. Post modernists are deeply suspicious of ideas and propositions because these have been used to oppress people. Religious scholars, pulpit preachers, religious gurus and missionaries have used and continue to use convenient scriptural interpretations to win hearts and minds of people to subjugate them, and wipe out many traditional tribal communities. For these reasons, for postmodernists, there are no foundations or fundamental truths.

It is indeed a protest against conviction and certainties of modernity. Karl Barth suggested that that there can be no ‘ground’ or ‘givenness’ to theological reflection.

Based on the above characteristics, it is now possible to see how postmodernity challenge Christianity. It challenges Christianity both positively and negatively. Some Christian theologians think that it is a godless relativism and it is a ‘cancer against the gospel.’ The postmodern economic ideas are producing consumerist philosophy everywhere, and this is particularly significant in our churches; it is out there to meet spiritual consumer demands. The body of the God’s mission (missio dei) is cut to fit the needs of the church-administrators to attract people to churches to create wealth for pet projects. Instead of cutting the coat to fit the body, we are asked to cut the body, the church. There are many examples of this happening in churches such as viewing the Eucharist on the box, virtual fellowship on the cyber space, gay/lesbian marriages, spiritual supermarkets and selling Christianity through televangelism, etc.

Metanarratives are important to Christians, Post modernity wants to reconstruct these and make it into to a collection of snippets, which are only relevant in its historical contexts of time and space. But these stories are there for us to internalise and see its relevance in our own lives. The story of Ruth in the Old Testament is lived out every day in the refugee crisis of today. We need to learn to internalise these stories to make them our own. This aspect is often missing in our apologetics for faith formation. They have inbuilt timeless truths in healing a fractured-world. There has been tendency in many Christian denominational churches to interpret biblical texts to suit their own particular needs, and our problem has been asking others to see our self-styled interpretation as universal truths. Maybe postmodernity is challenging Christians in a positive way to live out the gospel as it was intended.

4 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

Therefore, it is up to us take the positive benefits emerging from postmodern thinking. It is good to question the modernist’s know-it-all attitude. Modernity sought to attain rational certainty according to single centre Knowledge with a capital K and worldview. We should have the humility to appreciate the mystical aspects of the experience of God and His continuing revelations fitting to the needs of our present conditions. Karl Barth emphasised the importance of mystery in his writings. It is good to realise that ‘God is not a noun, but a verb.’ The work of God is the essence of God. It is in the activity of God with humanity that we discern the truth and this would allow us to polish and revaluate the truth from our constant relationship with the Holy Spirit.

Postmodernity is reminding us that we have been legitimizing our own interpretation of the scriptures for too long. Our evidence for justifying our so-called puritanical behaviour and creating exclusivism is often based on selected biblical verses and our interpretations of them.

Postmodernity is certainly challenging this behaviour. Karl Barth left us a question for reflection: “How can the mystery of God be captured through the formulae of any humanly conceived master plan?”

Therefore, postmodernity wants to kill religious institutions and all their power structures and games they play; in its place, it wants to revive spiritual experiences. They see religion as an experience, which cannot be explained by propositions. It is about loving God in spirit and truth.

Religion should move from an ideology to praxis. It is not all about orthodoxy, but about orthopraxis. Post modernists also values margins of the society because it is in our dealing with margins, which decides the true morality of a community. Jesus Christ valued people on the margins: poor, widows and orphans. Christian life begins in faith, move towards love of God and the neighbour and configure it in here and now by hopeful openness to the ‘other’ with an ‘I-Thou’ attitude. God becoming human being in order to enable humanity to become reconciled with God is at the heart of the Christian faith; it is not about orthodoxy of the past, but an on-going response to divine mystery.

We recommend the articles by Revd. Dr. Valson Thampu, Revd. Shiby Varghese Revd. Dr. M. J. Joseph Revd. Dr. K. V. Mathew, and Lal Varghese, Esq. They deal with the subject in great depth. It is with an amazing insight that Revd. Dr. Valson Thampu opens his article by saying: “One of the ironies in modern history is that Christianity played a major role in creating postmodernity.” Karl Barth, for example, was ever intent on calling into question a self-satisfied and complacent, comfortable, bourgeois Christianity of the pews.

His voluminous writings points towards a postmodern theological leaning. Bonhoeffer also argued for a religionless Christianity. Revd. Shiby Varghese gives a detailed exposition on Postmodernism and introduces all the major players and thumb nail sketches of their contributions. On the other hand, Revd. Dr. M. J. Joseph gives us a pastoral understanding of the theme from the philosophical heights to the grassroots. He recommends a re-reading of religious texts and recommending a movement from crude religiosity to spirituality. He says, “The boundary of spirituality is not

between religions, but between love and hate, justice and injustice, truth and falsehood.” Lal Varghese, Esq. on the other hand highlights some of the negative aspects of postmodernism. Revd. Dr. K. V. Mathew gives us the Christian hope and assurance that ‘we need not be frantic about these passing clouds of the human psyche. The Church had an apologetic tradition that had sustained the faithful in similar context.’ K. V. Mathew Achen examines our faith in God, significance of Jesus the Christ, and the legitimacy of Christian Life. These articles are well crafted for us to a get a glimpse of the vast postmodern realities in which we live and move. The editorial board is greatly indebted to all our esteemed writers.

Professor Joe Arun , who has written extensively on postmodern challenges to Christianity, had the following to say about postmodern challenges: “It is hard to see any precision in the arguments of postmodernism, for it refuses to settle down to one single meaning by which one could characterise it. Ideas are to be kept dynamic, constantlyreimagining and reinventing themselves, always changing to historical circumstances. To this extent, postmodernism practises what it preaches. But it is idealistic or unrealistic to imagine a social life without certain foundations from religious faith and belief in an order that in some sense puts humanity at ease. Without fundamentals and foundations, life cannot be imagined; even it was the case that every foundation may have received its basis from some dominant and hegemonic ideology. However this supposition does not stand the test of empirical analysis. People need moral principles on which life can be structured and lived. But what we can learn from postmodernism is that one needs to look at every institution and ideology critically, as there is always a danger of their betraying the people they promise to represent.”

Therefore, Let us select what is good in postmodernity and apply them in our lives.

1

Reference: 1. Joe Arun, 2007. Death of representation a postmodern challenge; Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological reflection; 71: (4), 262-270.

The 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. It is an independent lay-movement of the Diaspora laity of the Mar Thoma Church; and as such Focus is not an official publication of the Mar Thoma Church. 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. www.facebook.com/groups/mtfocus

E-Mail: mtfocusgroup@gmail.com

5 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

Post – Modernism and Christianity Rev. Dr. Valson Thampu, Trivandrum One of the ironies in modern history is that Christianity played a major role in crafting Post-Modernity. It is not a direct or simple correlation, like a hen brooding over eggs.

It is, nonetheless, a fact of history that the Post-Modern worldview took shape in the so-called Christian West.

More than any other faith, Christianity has a historical genius. That is at once its strength and weakness.

Whatever is rooted in history -unlike what springs up from myths- has the strength of truth and its affinity to the human condition. At the same time, whatever emerges from within the matrix of history is also bounded by time.

Time is under the yoke of entropy. Whatever exists in time, as Soren Kierkegaard said a century and a half ago, is at risk of degenerating over time and turning, within itself, into its opposite.

authority. Modernity has come to define the human condition since the Enlightenment.

Modernity, said Nietzsche, is a period of unbelief. But this is not really true. Modernity is a period of re-located belief.

Man came to repose his faith in material resources, in unlimited progress, aided and abetted by science and technology. Modernity evolved for itself the dogma that man can understand and value only what he himself creates. Unlike the Psalmist who refuses to put his faith in horses and chariots, the modern man reposes faith only in horses and chariots and insists that man can live by bread alone. Of course, given that technology is the defining element of Modernity, horses were replaced by oil and chariots became Tomahawk cruise missiles. Bread increasingly acquired an electronic flavor. (There are many who can live without cereals but not without serials).

Preaching gave way to advertisement, fullness of life was sought through unlimited consumption and self-denial gave way to colonial subjugation of weaker races and the unconscionable exploitation of man by man.

Modernity and Christianity are two gigantic mountain ranges. It is not easy to map their correspondence. Yet, it is possible to determine if the two mountain ranges exist in the same continent. In that sense, we may sense their kinship.

Christianity, as distinguished from the biblical faith, is at best a quasi-human entity. Religious establishment is man-made, even if it is erected on the foundation of revealed scripture. If the relationship between the two were a safe and simple one, there would have been no place for Prophets in the Old Testament. Whatever is man-made has the genius to enslave human beings. What is God-created, in contrast, is a domain of human freedom. One of the sobering truths of history is that man becomes, invariably, a victim, sooner or later, of his own handiwork. This insight exists in an intuitive, inchoate fashion, in the story of the Tower of Babel (Gen. 11: 1ff).

Modernity is an epic story of human achievement. It is the grand narrative of man coming of age, which he has been doing at least since the Renaissance. The striking features of modernity are: (a) the autonomous, self-accentuating individual (b) a culture of Narcissism (c) a willful return to nature, in retreat from God (d) the rise of technology and the presumption of human self-sufficiency and (e) the rejection of Providence in favor of Progress (e) the ascendancy of individual freedom over traditional

Post Modernity is to Modernity what Ecclesiastes is to the Book of Psalms, so to speak. This is only analogically, and all analogies have their limitations. The dark, brooding Psalms notwithstanding, the collection as a whole are cheerful, affirmative and optimistic. When we move from Psalms to Ecclesiastes, it is like hitting a dark tunnel. Its refrain, “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity,” comes upon us like a brooding cloud cover.

I have been hearing the Word proclaimed and the message preached now for half a century. Not once have I heard anyone addressing this abrupt change in tone and texture.

Why does this strange book, Ecclesiastes, standing in the company of a host of others that underline faith- project such a dark and nihilistic shadow?

This is similar to what Post-Modernity does vis-à-vis Modernity. It casts an aura of suspicion on the Metanarrative of Modernity, indeed of all Metanarratives. It unfurls a cloud of skepticism over everything: over historical truth, over the possibility of purpose in life, over human nature, over the validity of inherited truths and dogmas. It plucks man from his habitat of certitudes and casts him in the clear and leaves him, without a tinge of mercy, to fend for himself under a barren sky.

6 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

That is not, T. S. Eliot, would say, such a bad thing. It is only when everything else fails him that man turns to God or thinks of his “eternity”.

Here I must allude to a problem. We use words, especially when we think through the medium of English, without due semantic sensitivities. Just as, in India, “wedding” and “marriage” are used -most regrettably- as synonyms, the words ‘eternity’ and ‘immortality’ also exist on the landscape of vagueness.

Christianity was preceded by Greek antiquity, which marks the dawn as well as ascendancy of philosophy. The relationship between scriptural wisdom and Greek philosophy is too vast a subject to be reckoned for our immediate purpose. Suffice it to say that the maximum reach of the philosophical goal was the attainment of ‘immortality’. The eternal was not the domain of philosophy. Human beings lived perforce in a passing and perishable world. Like the vision of Ecclesiastes, nothing that pertained to human efforts and achievements endured. In contrast, nature was endless, or immortal, because it was the domain of cyclical repetitions and renewals. Individual seasons died and departed, but, in the cyclical march of time, each season assuredly returned. This was not true of human life or predicament.

As Job says, a felled tree could be expected to sprout into life again from its stump; but a killed man could have no such hope. He disappeared forever.

Jesus’ words, “Come to me all you, who are weary and heavy laden . . .” (Mtt. 11: 28) could well be addressed to the Post-Modern human predicament. Today individuals are atomized, encased in impregnable aloneness. The scope for sharing meaning and purposes with others is all but vanished. Meaninglessness- according to Viktor Frankl (Man’s Search for Meaning), the worst of all modern afflictions- torments him continually. Add to that his incapacity for significant action under the canopy of a sky from which the metaphysical scope has disappeared.

Cynicism of the metaphysical, as Hannah Arendt points out in The Life of the Mind, empties the physical too of all significance. This leaves the human predicament vacuous and empty of substance. Not surprisingly, the plight of the Post-Modern man is punctuated by boredom and depression. Skepticism, as against faith, is a climate of existence, which necessarily dwarfs the human. Faith, in the biblical vision of things, is the principle of human growth and empowerment. “If you have faith as large as a mustard seed,” as Jesus truly said, “you will ask this mountain to move, and it will.” Faith, in non-metaphoric words, empowers. Empowerment, in the spiritual lexicon of the Bible, is healing.

Situated in such a predicament, human beings could not attain physical immortality. They could, however, aim at attaining undying, or immortal, significance. Each person would surely die; but his words and deeds could live on, if he so lived. [Is there an echo of this in Jn. 11: 26, or is the similarity merely accidental?] The craving for immortality, ironically, arises out of the awareness of being fleetingly temporal.

The problem with Post Modernism is that it does not spare even immortality from the ambit of its skepticism.

Historically, we are today where the humankind was in the wake of the fall of the Roman Empire. That earthshattering development, taking place, no doubt, over a period of time, precipitated an acute crisis and opened the Pandora’s box of skepticism. The words, “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity” could well have been on the lips of many in its wake.

This is the hallmark of the Post-Modern human predicament. It denies the validity of all truth claims, and doubts the basis for all certitudes. It harbors a disparaging attitude to the past, on the apology of the unreliability of its accounts. It robs the individual of all metaphysical props and puts the burden of existence, unmitigated, on his fragile shoulders. The consequences are there for all to see, and it can be quickly enumerated.

What, then, are the “challenges” that Post Modernism throws at Christianity?

The eye of faith, incidentally, sees the human predicament in terms of opportunities. That applies to challenges as well.

Every challenge is also a veiled missional opportunity. In this respect too, the empowering dynamic of faith is too obvious to require any explanation or illustration.

Jesus, says the writer of The Letter to the Hebrews, is the same yesterday, today and forever. What this means is that the context, spread on the axis of time, will continue to vary. But there is a fixed, unchanging point in this turning, changing world: Jesus, “the author and perfecter”

7 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

of our faith, is that enduring, unchanging point: the handgrab of eternity amidst the temporal flux. Even as the historical context varies, we have a firm foundation on which to build the mansion of our life, as the parable of the two builders (Mtt. 7: 24-28) testifies.

It is not Christianity, therefore, that has to face and negotiate Post-Modernist challenges: it is church. Put more accurately, the question is if church today is (a) aware of these challenges and (b) prepared to, or preparing itself to, face them.

This warrants an aside. There is a problem inherent in religiosity. The conservative character of every religion makes it, unless spiritually renewed from time to time, a regressive, backward-looking force. This is aggravated, further, by the attitude of protection and preservation.

Jesus was aware of this. So he has proposed a different approach. The essential spiritual duty is neither to preserve nor to abolish. It is to “fulfill” (Mtt. 5: 17). A defensive mindset makes us stay anchored in the past, making us deaf and blind to the challenges and opportunities of the present. An abolitionist animus makes us bulls in the China shop of religion.

While the matrix of human existence continues to change, the core human needs do not. Jesus tell us upfront what that need is. Every human being needs to attain and live life in all its fullness. Every Post-Modernist feature of the human predicament robs him of this irreducible human right. Life being a dynamic and integrated thing, it cannot but become a burden if it loses its fullness or wholeness. A motorcar, with just one of its tires punctured, offers us a ready illustration. Everything else is perfect. But the entity is incomplete. Never mind that it is incomplete only to the extent of a puncture. Incompleteness is the thing, not its extent. If a million parts comprise an aircraft, and one of them is missing, it shall stay grounded. Life is a million times more complex than an aircraft. Completeness, or wholeness, or fullness, is the bottom line. It is nonnegotiable.

The challenge, if you like, is to re-orient human nature and predicament from its willful preference for ‘part-ness’, to life in all its fullness. This is the paradigmatic task. This is something that church, drawing neither from its tradition nor from material resources, nor human genius can even attempt to do. That is because church, in and by itself, is incomplete. Jesus is the head of the church.

The primary challenge before the church is, hence, not that of going out and winning human beings lost in the jungle of Post-Modernity. It is to be truly the bride or body of Christ. Vis-à-vis Christ, church faces this challenge.

Vis-à-vis the world, church is poised for exciting opportunities. To the extent that church faces the

‘challenge’ of being Christ-centered, it will see opportunities. To the extent that it does not, it will see only problems and dangers and prefer to stay behind closed doors.

According to Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor, the perennial challenge before the world is to combine bread with freedom. Man does not live by bread alone. Freedom is as basic to us as bread is. But, our progress through history has driven a wedge between bread and freedom; so much so, one has to choose between the two. Secular dispensations will always offer bread at the expense of freedom. This contrived incompatibility between bread and freedom stems from founding human existence on the partial. That was why Jesus had to come to set the captives free (Lk. 4: 18). We cannot claim the benefits of wholeness, while remaining obstinately on the foundation of the partial. So, Zacchaeus is asked to come down from the sycamore tree. He has to abide in Jesus.

The Post-Modernist world is peopled with the likes of Zacchaeus. We have everything to live with. But we are sick unto death. The words uttered to the church at Ephesus reverberates in the corridors of the human predicament: “One thing you lack” Just one thing! That takes the joy out of everything.

So we are back with Ezekiel. “Son of man, will these bones live?” Church has to heed and answer that question.

But, hark! The mighty wind is gathering itself in the distance from all corners. It will blow over the people like a whisper of hope. Like the still, small voice that the Prophet heard. The voice that, soaked in tears, spoke in defiance of human logic at the tomb of Lazarus: “Lazarus, come out!” “Hear, Oh, Israel…………………..”

Editor’s Note: Revd. Dr. Valson Thampu is an ordained Minister of Church of North India; he is an educator, theologian, who was the former Principal of St Stephen's College, University of Delhi, from 2008 to February 2016. He is a prolific writer and has authored many books. He is also a translator of books from Malayalam to English, and has received prestigious awards. He was also a member of the National Minorities Commission and currently, he is a patron of the Abundant Life. This is an exclusive article written for FOCUS.

8 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

Random Theological Insights – Post Modern Context Rev. Dr. K. V. Mathew, Kottayam Before we reflect on theological insights let us have a quick glance through the nature of post modernism. It is a passing thought-wind that created some disturbances in the erudite mind of the West. However, its vibrations make not a few repercussions in the world all over. Post modernism questions all sources of authority, absolute claims including faith affirmation. That may be the reason why FOCUS wants to identify challenges to Christian Faith in this context.

living spirit in us. We believe that we are created in the image and likeness of God [Gen.1:26] by which we experience the Divine. It does not mean that we become God. In other words we only share the divine qualities of ‘creativity’, ‘care’, ‘concern’ and ‘love for the other’ in order to preserve the integrity of creation.

We need not be frantic about these passing clouds of the human psyche. The Church had an apologetic tradition that had sustained the faithful in similar context. Let us examine our faith in God, significance of Jesus the Christ, and the legitimacy of Christian Life.

FAITH IN GOD: By faith we affirm God as the very foundation of existence. This affirmation is nurtured by the Church and its authority is the Bible. Remember, that the Bible is the faith testimony of a people who lived at a particular period [circa 2000 BCE to the early century CE], and that too in a corner of the earth. Biblical writers had their own worldview and they had their limitations.

Today we have to approach the Bible from our own worldview and exegete its word accordingly. New insights and paradigms govern our mode of thought and that should be our guide while interpreting the biblical word.

How do we now affirm and understand God today?

He [She, It] is not like an individual sitting above the clouds. God is a generic term, not a personal noun and God has no name at all except those which the human attribute. It is through our consciousness that we become aware of God. God is to be acknowledged as cosmic mind and we are endowed with similar mindconsciousness with which we do realize the divine reality.

Can we see our face without a reflector or a selfie; how do we know about our own DNA; have we knowledge about the intricacies of ‘quark and lepton’ except through a science media? These questions affirm that knowledge of any kind is transmitted through and confirmed by our mind-consciousness realized as ‘Subject-I-Thou-Object’ interaction.

Divine knowledge is worked out through a process of ‘image-in-ining’ between cosmic consciousness and self-consciousness; to borrow an Indian term we may say ‘paramatma and jeevatma’ – supreme spirit and the

God the Creator may be understood today as a verbal noun. Creation is its visible evidence – the verbal act of God. This is a faith affirmation confirmed by our ‘IThou’ relation with the cosmic consciousness.

Energy is the creative power of the cosmic mind. ‘Bios’ [Life], ‘Theos’ [Divine Mind], Cosmos – the quintessence of creation is activated by this energy. It energizes, keeps it alive, maintains and preserves ‘life in cosmos’.

The living human also is energized by the divine energy.

The cosmic mind-consciousness when it becomes active in human, such human we call the ‘children of God’, ‘servants of God’ et al – those who share the life in the divine.

In short the Christian faith is built on a communion with the supreme self and the human self. Both share the same divine energy that sustains the universe. We

9 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

testify to this knowledge that the world may be guided and steered to its divine destiny.

The Significance of Jesus the Christ: According to Christian faith Jesus of Nazareth is acknowledged as a great divine paradigm for the world [Cosmos]. Many in the Church and outside recognize him a model for the divine truth. His disciples witnessed in Jesus the interaction of ‘I-Thou’ constants, meaningfully becoming active especially in the crisis of the cross experience in life.

‘Good News’ was the message of Jesus, which was the announcement of God’s rule over cosmos. Its possibility is freely available to those who ‘image-in’ the divine in their own consciousness, provided they humbly discover the inbuilt source along the ‘Jesus Way’. He invited people irrespective of caste, creed and culture to follow His way so that justice, peace, love and joy may prevail in the world of ours.

Legitimacy of Life God the invisible is not a tangible reality. It can only be expounded in terms of analogical language. ‘Pneuma’ [Gk.], ‘Ruah’ [Heb.], the two biblical terms mean ‘Spirit’ the source of life. Concretely speaking it stands for air, breath, wind etc. though invisible but experiential. The sacred unpronounceable four letters in Hebrew [YHWH] means an eternal dynamic presence of the divine spirit with us. Our faith in this dynamic spirit legitimizes our faith stance.

The spirit of God was in Jesus. The same legitimate spirit was promised, nay granted, to the disciples, a constant companion and guide to those who followed the Way of Jesus. It is this Spirit that provides continuous energy and power to us who struggle to live the life of Christ. Jesus who overcame the power of darkness and the forces of death promised to be with us. As we live now, we live by the power of the living spirit of Christ. In a sense we follow Jesus, the first born of new humanity as a ‘proleptic sign’ [an experience prior to the actual] of a coming ‘parousia’– the presence of the divine with the new creation. Let this be the vision and beacon as we encounter challenges in future to Christian faith.

Editor’s Note: Rev. Dr. K. V. Mathew, is a renowned theologian and former principal of Mar Thoma Theological Seminary, Kottayam, Kerala.

A Note on Orthodoxy Cognate PAGE Society “The United Orthodox Christian Witness” George Alexander

The Orthodoxy Cognate PAGE Society (OCP) is a Pan-Orthodox society for the promotion of Orthodox Christian unity and faith established in the year 2007. It is registered under the TravancoreCochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955. The major objective of OCP Society is to promote Pan-Orthodox Conciliarity and engage in different activities that promote Orthodox Christian unity with ecumenical respect.

The Society provides equal importance to Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches and firmly believes that both the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Oriental Orthodox Churches are the true heirs to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ, which were the Church of the apostles and the Holy Fathers. The Society's motto is “Seeking United Orthodox Christian Witness”.

The OCP Society has made several achievements since it’s founding in 2007. It operates OCP Media Network, the world’s largest Pan-Orthodox Christian News Portal with a monthly outreach of more than two million people worldwide along with Orthodox news services, journalism. It also engages in various Pan-Orthodox research projects, Pan-Orthodox networking, publications and charity activities. The OCP delegations have been fortunate enough to meet several eminent Orthodox Christian leaders as well as represent the Society at several international Pan-Orthodox Conferences. The Society has also been involved in a number of social welfare activities since 2007.

Public Relations & Information Services Department Orthodoxy Cognate PAGE Society Established under the Travancore Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955. Registration No: A.455/2010 Website: www.theorthodoxchurch.info Twitter: https://twitter.com/ocptweets Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthodoxy_Cognate_P AGE_Society

10 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

Postmodernism Revd. Shiby Varghese Introduction Postmodernism is a social and cultural event.

Postmodernism is philosophy, lifestyle, architecture, politics, feminism, science, art, cinema, literature, music and spirituality. Postmodernism is a vast term, which employs the current historical, social and cultural epoch.

The discontent towards modernism led to the emergence of postmodernism. The experience to postmodernism is related to cultural and linguistic contexts. The prefix ‘post’ to the ‘modern’ is one of critical thinking, leading either to a continuation or a rejection. Often, it is a critique of all that is associated with modernism. This paper is an attempt to explore the philosophical and theological premises of the turn from modernism to postmodernism.

Postmodernism The phenomena of postmodernism cannot be understood apart from modernism. Postmodernism doesn’t have a single definition; rather it cannot be defined. Postmodernism is the intentional upsetting of the epistemologies of modernism. It resisted the harsh logical propositions of rationality and revolted against the universal human experience. Postmodernism is neither harsh nor static; is dynamic and flexible.

Postmodernism is a living condition with certain assertions.

Postmodernism brought an epistemological turn with modernity and filled the ‘gaps’ constructed by modernity. It is ‘a reconstruction,’ ‘a reinterpretation,’ and ‘an attempt to give meaning.’ Postmodernism opens up the discourses of constructions and deconstructions of space, language, texts, archaeology of knowledge, archives, arts, aesthetics, identity politics, bio-politics, body politics, media-politics, bare-life, institutions, practices, rituals, music, rhythm etc.

According to Stanley J. Grenz, rejection of modernity begins from the consistent identification of postmodern thought with deconstructive relativism. Linda Hutcheon asserts that post modern’s initial concern is to de-naturalize some of the dominant features of our life; to point out to those entities that we unthinkingly experience as ‘natural’(capitalism, patriarchy, liberal humanism) are in fact ‘cultural’; made by us, not given to us.

Enlightenment-The Modernity

Epistemological

Context

of

Enlightenment was an intellectual, social and political movement has its origin in rationalism and empiricism.

Enlightenment overturned the method of perceiving ‘knowledge’ and ‘understanding.’ Enlightenment was the creation of a new framework of ideas about human society

and nature, which challenged existing conceptions rooted in a traditional world-view, dominated by Christianity.

Enlightenment placed human reason at the center of history and elevated humankind by means of optimistic anthropology. There were two fundamental widespread conceptions of reason namely reason as a faculty of criticism and reason as power of explanation. Enlightenment constructed a scientific worldview, which began to dominate through the social institutions and social practices.

Enlightenment rationality or Modernity elevated humankind to the center of reality.

Michel Foucault envisages modernity as an “attitude” rather than a period in history. Modernity is often characterized in terms of consciousness of the discontinuity of time: a break with tradition, a feeling of novelty, of vertigo in the face of the passing moment. By “attitude” he means a mode of relating to contemporary reality; a voluntary choice made by certain people; in the end a way of thinking and feeling; a way, too, of acting and behaving that at one and the same time marks a relation of belonging and presents itself as a task.

Modernity declared rational self as the site of understanding and rejected the irrational self’s. Knowledge is achieved through rational disciplines such as science, philosophy, and mathematics. Modernity assaulted all narrative knowledge’s.

Science with its objective truths and legitimate claims captured the place of local narratives. Every human phenomenon was explained meta-narratively from the perspective of the European white male-biased outlines.

Modernity was about conquest: the imperial regulation of land, the discipline of soul, and the creation of truth.

Modernity-Modern Science The genesis of the Enlightenment lies in the early seventeenth century, perhaps socio-politically in the Peace of Westphalia (1648) that ended the ‘Thirty Years War’, and intellectually with the scientific works of Francis Bacon, Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, and Newton.

Francis Bacon used the method of experimentation not only to understand the universe but also to rule the nature.

Bacon’s vision of humans exercising power over nature by means of the discovery of nature’s secrets was the new perception of modern age.

Galileo by his mathematical enterprise and Isaac Newton with his law of motion gave new theories to understand the physical world. Modernization brings with its industrialization and urbanization gave way to capitalism and individualism, the erosion of meaning, the endless conflict of polytheistic values, and the threat of iron cage of modernity.

11 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

Modernity- Modern Philosophy Rationalism-Cartesian Doubts Enlightenment was the product of philosophical revolution inaugurated by French thinker Rene Descartes, the father of modern philosophy. He writes, “The basis of knowledge is reason and mathematics is the ideal form of knowledge.”

The French philosopher introduced “doubt” as the first principle of reasoning. According to Descartes the three basic ontological realities are mind, extension, and God. Rejecting the sense experience as the foundation of knowledge, Descartes makes it clear that the only certainty is one’s own self and hence he formulated “I think, therefore I am” (Cogito ergo sum).

For Descartes one’s own thought and experience becomes absolute and authoritative in the “Self” or “Subjectivity.” He concludes that ‘Self’ is reason embedded which is distinct from body but they are logically inseparable. Descartes’ self is a powerful form of individualism and a defense of individual authority and autonomy.

Empiricism John Locke, the founder of empiricism, opposed reason and capitalized knowledge on sense experience as the locus of understanding. He argued “Mind at birth is a clean slate or tabular rasa.” His method of understanding is psychological but it is not based on logical reasoning. According to Locke, text produces meaning, which is a psychological act. Mind establishes a relationship with text and text imparts meaning to the mind.

Beyond Rationalism and Empiricism: Kantian Revolution According to Immanuel Kant, empiricism and rationalism both had failed to explain knowledge because both of them were based on a common assumption concerning the status of objects. For both schools of thought, things as objects of knowledge exist external to the mind. The proper view according to Kant is “knowledge begins with experience, but doesn’t necessarily originate from it and ends in reason.”

Hence, the epistemological enquiry of Kant is transcendental, that calls knowledge independent of experience as “a priori”.

Kant’s notion of ‘Enlightenment’ opens the theoretical discourse of modernity. Kant wrote in his famous essay “What is Enlightenment?”(1784): Enlightenment is human leaving his/her self-caused immaturity.” Immaturity is the incapacity to use one’s own intelligence and is self-caused.

For Kant, “Enlightenment” is a gradual process through which not only individuals but even an entire public attains maturity and increases its ‘self-understanding’ through critical reflection and open communication.

Kantian Enlightenment places the situation of the individual subject at the center of moral, political and social thought.

Modernity celebrated the grand narratives such as universalism and liberalism. Social theorists A. Kroker and D. Cook argue that modernity is characterized as the search for

a “theory of representation.” All events and experiences of human life were subjected to extreme rationalization. This had great influence in the art of interpreting texts. Text was considered not only as literary work but also as scientific format, which demands critical study.

Modernism is characterized by variety of dualisms that are intrinsic to it’s understanding: universal-particular, natureculture, mind-body, reason-passion, subject-object and public-private (Graham Ward). Modern thought includes binaries and polarities. Modernity operates on totalities that embody truth.

Modern Theological Methods Modern theology accommodates Enlightenment project.

Modern theological method is a disastrous capitulation of the essentially secularizing tendencies of rationality of Enlightenment.

The systematic approach of Hegel and Schleiermacher is a meditation of religious thought to a secular world. Liberal Protestantism of Albert Ritschl, Adolf Harnack and Ernst Troeltsch and demythologization of Bultmanian schools leading to extreme anthropocentrism and finally Paul Tillich “method of correlation” is an equation of religious and secular wisdom.

Responses to Modern theology Liberation theologies or contextual theologies challenged the classical, dogmatic propositions of theology as it was metaphysical and essential in its principles and foundations.

Classical theism was seemed to be a derivative of Greek metaphysical, epistemological and ontological pursuits, which separated life realities into dual entities such as richpoor, white-black, men-women, male-female, Western European-non-European etc.

Liberation theologies emphasized the other-side of realities like black, women, poor, Latin American, Asian African, Dalit’s, Tribal’s and other subaltern groups.

Death of God movement-Traditional understanding of God, the classical theism, was challenged by “death of God” movement of Nietzsche, Mark C Taylor’s deconstructive theology, post liberal theology of Hans Frei and George Lindbeck, Radical orthodoxy movement of John Milbank etc.

From Modernism to Postmodernism: Epistemological, Ontological and Linguistic Shift Incredulity towards Metanarratives Jean-Francois Lyotard defined postmodernism as an ‘epistemological condition’ “incredulity towards metanarratives” or the decline of grand narratives. Lyotard designates them as “master narrative” or “metanarratives” because they are overarching, synthesizing stories that can give coherence and meaning to “local” stories and practices.

He found that modern world speaks in metanarratives.

12 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

In a postmodern world, Lyotard witnesses the celebration of “little narratives”: the most inventive way of disseminating, and creating knowledge, and that they help to break down the monopoly traditionally exercised by grand narratives.

mental process and is evident in both human language and social institutions.

Subjectivity and Otherness Epistemological issues centered on postmodernism reconstructs the notion of subjectivity, the ethical issues with the demise of metaphysical, foundational approaches to morality finding them inadequate to pluralism and sociopolitical issue related with question of “otherness.”

Stanley J. Grenz contents that postmodernity embraces the narratives of particular peoples and celebrates the diversity and plurality of the world without attempting to discover “grand scheme” into which all of the particular stories fit into.

Post modernity showed us that there is no one unified uniform universal system of knowledge to bind human beings. Postmodern world “delegitimizes” the absolute legitimized normative models and patterns of knowledge.

Emergence of New Social Movements New social movements such as feminist, ecological, decolonizing movements of Asians, Afro-Americans, Aboriginals, Dalits, Adivasis, started the process of making new social knowledge’s against the metanarratives and universal class identity of the proletariat. Postmodernity questioned the messianic faith and liberative hope of grand narratives.

Linguistic and Textual Discourses as StructuralismPost-structuralism Postmodern world bought a paradigm shift in the understanding of language. Language thought and taught to be the communicating medium of modernity. But for postmodern world language constructs thought and meaning. Frameworks of meaning are constructed within historical languages by the language using community.

Language constructs the world-view of human beings. The process of understanding is mediated into the self as linguistic event.

Structuralism Ferdinand de Saussure, the founder of modern structural linguistics separated the codes of language (la langue) from its usage by an individual who externalizes the underlying `system (la parole). Language is there in advance; we never speak through language, but language speaks through us.

Language has both signifier and signified; signifier is the abstract and signified is the reality.

Structuralists, therefore, argue that we do not order our language according to our semantic needs, but we are always already structured by the particular way in which our language as linguistic system works. Language constructs and constitutes the human consciousness, experiences, and practices in universal structures. Structuralism asserts that an objective, universal cultural system “structures” the

Post-structuralism Post-structuralism is a cultural revolution ignited in French history after the Student revolt in May1968. Aftermath of revolt questioned the legitimacy of institutions beyond state and capitalism to the social institutions that creates knowledge, shape identities, makes grand visions, and proclaims utopias. The existential philosophy and Marxian ideology, which prepared the ground for, a cultural environment that sustained structuralism started degenerating. A new mode of social life and experience was growing in the intellectual womb that gave birth to the movement called post-structuralism.

Post-structuralism is an extension of post-Marxian, postcommunist Left standpoint that emphasized rebellion and deconstruction rather than social reconstruction. Poststructuralism shares a linguistic position similar to structuralism. But it doesn’t share the scientific vision of structuralism. Post-structuralism is aware of the pitfalls of ‘brackets and binaries’ of structuralism and highlights the unstable patterns of linguistic subjective social order.

Structuralism engages in a constructive linguistic discourse whereas post-structuralism has a deconstructive method of doing social discourse. The chief exponents of poststructuralism are Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida.

Michael Foucault Knowledge as Discourses of Power Foucault understands knowledge as power. He attacked the foundations of morality-often classified as a cultural historian

13 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

but preferred to be an archaeologist of knowledge. Foucault is more Nietzschean than any other philosopher, influenced by the writings of Hegel-Marx-Nietzsche and Freud.

Instead of asking foundational questions like “What is human nature?” Foucault asks functional-historical questions like “How has the human nature functioned in the society?”

Foucault argues that there is no original or transcendental “signified”(Kantian)to which all “signifiers” can ultimately refer. Foucault’s works is based on the trinity of knowledge, power and truth.

Language discourses: Language as the world and discourse as the something representing the world-discursive formation-formation in institutional language practices of power.

Genealogy: New Epistemic discourse against hegemonic truth claims of reason-how reason is constructed-targets grand unifying theories of society, history and politics.

Discourses on Body Power is diffused through society and power is a productive network, which operates, in the social body. Foucault highlights the significance of the body by showing that body is the locus of control and discipline in modern civilization.

Modernity considered body as inferior to mind. In the ontological discourses body is the locus of experiences.

Foucault shows that body is located in social relations, controlled by power and knowledge. He further adds that history has made its imprint on body by its rules, laws, legal and medical practices.

Jacques Derrida Deconstruction of Texts Jacques Derrida (1930-2004) is the father of modern deconstruction. His philosophy of deconstruction is his strong opposition to authoritarianism whether epistemological, social or religious. In the place of old Enlightenment Jacques Derrida makes the advantage with new Enlightenment. He rejects the idea of things having a single basic meaning based on reason alone. Derrida’s deconstruction embraces fragmentation, conflict and discontinuity in matters of history, identity, and culture. To put it in a nutshell Derrida says deconstruction is the affirmation of the coming of the “other” constructed by the old Enlightenment.

Derrida is the most prominent theorist of textuality. The very meaning and mission of deconstruction is to show that things--texts, institutions, traditions, societies, beliefs, and practices of whatever size and sort you need--do not have definable meanings and determinable missions, that they are always more than that any mission would impose that they exceed boundaries they currently occupy.

into social thinkers Nietzsche and Marx. Kantian centeredself retained in existential vision was replaced by deconstructive self-nodded in relations.

Derrida deconstructed modern metaphysical worldview shaped by the scientific archives of logo centrism and phono centrism.

Deconstruction as a method of transcending the available forms of philosophizing is a type of intervention, destabilizing the structural priorities of each particular construction.

Deconstruction, to Derrida argues, is an ‘analysis’, the objective of which is ‘the sedimented structures which form the discursive element, the philosophical discursivity in which we think’.

Deconstruction is not an enclosure of nothingness but an opening to the “other.” Rosemarie Tong, a feminist social theorist, argues that deconstruction is antiessentialist not only in viewing the search for universal definitions as useless, but also in actively challenging the traditional boundaries between oppositions such as reason/emotion, beautiful/ugly, and self/other as well as between disciplines such as art, science, psychology, and biology.

Deconstruction is not an uncritical method.

Deconstruction takes a critical attitude toward everything, including particular ideas or social injustices as well as the structures upon which they are based, the language in which they are thought, and the systems in which they are safeguarded.

Conclusion In this an attempt was made to sketch the different theoretical, philosophical premises played in the emergence of s postmodern world. Postmodernism can be everything and anything but the explanations given to it matters.

Postmodernism challenges the traditional world, its arguments, explanations, or postmodernism explains the betwixt, the in between-gaps in human life.

Books Referred: Stanley J. Grenz A Primer on Postmodernism. Cambridge: William B Eerdsmans Company.1996.

Jean-Francois Lyotard The Postmodern Condition: A report on Knowledge, trans. Geoff Bennington ns Brian Massumi.

Miineapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984.

John D Caputo ed. Deconstruction in a Nutshell-A Conversation with Jacques Derrida. New York: Fordham Press, 1997.Paul Rainbow Foucault Reader .New York: Pantheon Books, 1984.

Editor’s Note: Rev. Shiby Varughese Pallathu is a member of the faculty of The Mar Thoma Theological Seminary Kottayam.

Deconstruction traces its roots from the structuralism and post-structuralism, which extends from Kant to Saussure

14 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

Postmodern World Scenario: (A Christian Response) Rev. Dr. M. J. Joseph, Kottayam “Heavy rain reminds us of challenges in life. Never ask for a lighter rain but just get a better umbrella”. There is so much truth in the above statement. The topic chosen for the present issue of FOCUS Journal, “Christianity and Postmodern Challenges” enables us to search for the relevant avenues at the grassroots level for Christian obedience. We need to address the issues of life in the light of the Spirit of Truth has given to us.

In Christ, God has commissioned us to live as “experts in goodness, but simpleton in evil” (NEB-Rom.16:20)... The patterns of this world are quite appealing to the young and the old alike .The missiological task of the Church is to enable people “to discern the will of God in each generation and to know what is good, acceptable, and perfect”. “Dare to be different “is a faith slogan.

Have we taken a value-based decision for the common good? What are the theological options before us?

dialogue between legacy and tradition is not creatively addressed. One may notice a paradigm shift in all realms of knowledge, particularly in religious sphere. In Christian theology, one may notice radical shift from the traditional formulations of doctrines. In the postmodern era, the relation between doctrine and life is important for a relevant affirmation of life for all. One may notice a shift to learn more about other faith traditions and ideologies for an authentic grasp of what we believe. Let me quote Dr. K. C. Abraham, former director of SATHRI: “Concepts, doctrines, and symbols of other religions, particularly Hinduism, were used freely and critically by Indian Theologians to interpret Christian faith. There was a serious search for an Indian face of Christ for dismantling the foreignness of Christianity. Profound was their recognition that Christ reality was greater than formal Christianity and that Christ was present but unacknowledged by the religions and cultures of people in India”. This has led to the emergence of URI and other inter-religious movements, which uphold the values of plurality in faith affirmations. All the religious Scriptures are for mutual edification and spiritual upliftment. The concept of “One Holy Word and Many Versions” has come to stay with us- a norm for the postmodern religious thinking. To quote Dr. Abraham Karickam, the director secretary of Asia-URI region, “Methodologically, the Intertextual study of the Holy Book is the most contemporary form of the study of Holy Scriptures…Different Holy Scriptures are components in a continuum with close links…” There will be voice of dissent in the Christian circles about such a view. Plurality is being widely accepted as integral to Reality. The theme of the WCC10th Assembly, ‘God of life, lead us to justice and peace” is indeed a theological understanding of faith experience. One may notice a paradigm shift from an Christological to Theological understanding of Christian mission in the contemporary world.

Swami Agnivesh, delivering the 14th M. A. Thomas Memorial Lecture at ECC, Bangalore (2007), said, “What we need is not a uniform, and regimented world, but a united world, a global community that is spiritually strong enough to admit and transcend differences and turn them into means of enrichment rather than items of offence and mutual alienation”. Religious pluralism has come to stay with us in the modern theological thinking. What the religious pluralism asks is to approach other religions with deep respect in understanding the mysterious way God guides his people all over the world (Fr. V. F. Vineeth). In the postmodern religious world, we need to speak about the spirituality of religion, which speaks of relationship among the people. The theological task is to interpret Christ in relation to others for a holistic understanding of mission, which has three pillars: Communion with God, compassion for people and passion for justice. All these concerns are important for us to respond to the postmodern challenges.

Called to cross the borders:

Re-reading of the religious texts:

It is quite imperative that our outlook should be beyond our own borders. Isaiah, the prophet, has warned us long ago to do what is right: “Enlarge the limits of your home, spread wide the curtains of your tent…” (Is.54:2). In the postmodern world scenario, there are several unanswered questions about faith and its practices. The authority of the Bible and the traditions, which we have inherited, are being questioned. A meaningful

A movement from religiosity to spirituality is the need of the hour. The boundary of spirituality is not between religions, but between love and hate, justice and injustice, truth and falsehood. When Christians address God as “our Father”, there is no grain of truth to say that God is only the God of a particular community or religion. The postmodern secular challenges have taught the Church to remain vigilant in dealing

Paradox of our time: Let me quote a few lines from the ‘Paradox of our Time’ (authoranonymous) to illustrate the paradox of our time.

We have taller buildings, but shorter tempers; Wider freeways, but narrow viewpoints; We spend more, but have less; We buy more, but enjoy it less.

We have more degrees, but less sense; More knowledge, but less judgment; More medicine, but less wellness;

h

We have learned how to make a living, but not a life; We have added years to life, but not life to years; We have spilt the atom, but not our prejudices; We have higher income, but lower morals; These are days of two incomes, but more divorces; A time when technology can bring an electronic letter to you The question before us is this:

15 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

with the totality of human affairs. It is quite legitimate for a rereading of all the religious Scriptures and traditions. If Jesus Christ is the New Adam, all people on earth have to affirm their common humanity for the establishment of God’s Kingdom (divine will) on earth. The concept of One God and One Creation should be affirmed for common good. The ecological problems of today are basically a question about life. All the resources of the religions in the world have to be pooled together for common good and a better tomorrow. One religion or one ideology alone will not solve the problem of environmental crisis today. The encyclical of Pope Francis under the title, Laudathe Si- 2013 (I praise Thee) is an ecological and ecumenical document for the whole humanity. The message of St. Paul in Rom.15: 7 require the churches to remain in frankness and openness. “Accept one another as God accepted us in Christ” (Rom.15:7).The Rig Vedic slogan, “Let noble thoughts come to us from all quarters” has much in common with the vision of Is.19: 23 and Rev.21:19-27.The call is to transcend the boundaries of caste and creed for a better tomorrow.

Rabindranath Tagore may call it, the crossing of “narrow domestic walls” within each of us. A few lines from a Philippine song composed by Sawa Tome will illustrate it clearly:

The song compels us to say without a ray of doubt that we become dust on the day when we cease to be illumined by the radiance of forgiveness and reconciliation. The postmodern challenges of Christian faith enable us to search for radical Christian obedience. For this, a bold initiative in costly discipleship is required. “Risking Christ for Christ’s sake” (Dr. M. M. Thomas) should be the mandate for Christian involvements in a plural world.

Global is not universal:

“Where’s the line between love and hate, Where’s the line between the North and the South Where’s the line between man and woman, Where is the line between you and me…?

The line is me, the line is you………..”, The ‘I’ culture of today has to be become ‘we culture’ as we find it in the Lord’s Prayer. We lack mutual appreciation and adoration. The Pauline exhortation, “counting others better than yourselves and looking to each other’s interest” must become the code of ethics. In spirituality, self-hood is good; but not selfishness. The postmodern questions urge us to affirm that “every one of us is part of a continent, a part of the mainland; none of us is an island.”

Secular spirituality is to be considered as an expression of New Humanity in Christ. The New Humanity in Christ is not the gift of Christians to the world, but God’s gift to the whole world. There should not have any hijacking of God or Christ by the Christian faith traditions. In the post-modern society, secular spirituality assumes religious overtones. After the Nuclear Holocaust in 1945, a school was built in Nagasaki. At the time of its inauguration the children of the school sang a song affirming their commitment to the basic pillars of religious faith for the survival of the future humanity. Excerpts (transl.) are quoted below: “Let us build the northern side with love to block the wind of Fate Let us build the southern side with patience to destroy hatred Let us build the eastern side with daily rising of the ray of faith Let us build the western side with the beautiful enchanting hope Let its roof be eternity and its floor be humility.”

The concept of a global villager may appeal too many and make sense in a techno-savvy world. But the word “global” may not comprehend the universal (Dr. Ninan Koshy). It is only a geographical pocket where something wonderful and attractive is happening. The concept of globalization may create many myths around us. It is to be remembered that globalization is only an economic process. It is incapable of uniting the rich and the poor, the strong and the weak. There is no compassion in the globalization process as marginalization takes place at all levels. The unskilled has no place. “Remember the poor” is not the slogan of the players. Globalization may speak of “some part of the world” where a few significant changes have taken place. The Information Technology particularly the Social and the Print Media have revolutionized the postmodern worldview today. The result is the uncritical welcome accorded to the very concept of economic globalization as the panacea for all the illness of the world. We must be concerned with the whole of human life and of the whole world. In a globalized world, we must have a dream to make all the nations of the world prosperous and happy. We need to promote GDH as well as GDP in the whole world. The words of Dr. C. T. Kurien, the noted Indian Economist, are worth recalling with regard to India and other developing nations. To quote: “India is an island of prosperity in a sea of poverty “ If anyone walks around the neighborhood of ITPL in Whitefield (Bangalore), he/she will get the impression that India has come of age and it could be compared with New York City or Singapore. The global scenario is quite impressive and it tempts us to forget the grass roots realities. Will the Church think of the prevailing social realties as its theological challenge for a meaningful response?

16 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

The imitative culture of the people particularly the Youth without a critical review or judgment is a noted phenomenon, and it has become the fashion of the day. The information technology takes us nearer to a world culture. The social media like Face Book, Twitter, etc. have played their significant role for social get together for a common cause in different parts of the world.

The Wall Street Movement in the US was indeed a protest Movement (2011) that is considered to be the seedbed for the emergence of several social movements at the local level. But the net result is to be critically evaluated. The ardent search for a space in social change is a lesson for the Church too. The search for a virtual space for everyone is really a gospel mandate for the empowerment of the least, the last and the lost.

The commodification of everything including water and air has also come to stay with us. It is important that we need to ask the basic core question whether all that we learn from the IT and the social media contribute to a healthy communication process in our societal living. IT is only a tool to make greater communication among people all over the world. The very idea of one’s physical presence in the field makes a difference. When God took his decision to save the world, he took a human flesh in Jesus Christ. It implies that God’s concern is best communicated by active involvement in the social contexts. The Electronic Churches in the West and Tele medical care are only effective tools for greater grasp of the reality, but can never replace the human face. In a globalized world we should aim at corporate survival by creating just structures and value systems.

In a post –modern society, a critical participation of the Church in social movements is necessary.

Living in the midst of a consumer culture: In a cyber culture, the transfer of culture takes place along with the transfer of technology. The three pillars of Cyber culture with its intellectual legacy are rooted in FOOD, MUSIC AND MOVIE. The youth and the adult of today embrace a consumer culture uncritically and they create their own islands or ghettos. There is no point in despising it out rightly. What is required today is to obtain the capacity to judge our value systems. We should critically appreciate and participate in the Economic philosophy of Privatization, Liberalization and Marketization for social transformation in the world around.

Modern man is easily led to the hidden traps of a consumer culture and his needs are very often made into wants. The great temptation is to appreciate the package rather than the product. Having has superseded the question of existence spoken in terms of being. Appearance has eluded the mind.

There should be a conscious effort to break the deadlock of ‘Tina Syndrome’ in all the spheres of social life (Tina is a Geek word for expressing the idea that no other alternative is possible . There is place for asking legitimate questions as a means for social empowerment. One should know that “huge is not great.

Great is that which is nearer to truth” (by Tagore- displayed in the London YMCA wall). This is the religious truth for today.

In summing up: The identity crisis experienced by the Youth in work places cannot easily be ignored. The opportunities provided by the Multinational Companies very often make the youth vulnerable.

In a mobile culture, the life styles of young men and women have undergone radical changes. The given name of a person

has undergone changes. For example, John will be known as Johnson and Eli will be called Elizabeth! How do we restore the self-hood of the future generation? The imposition of one cultural identity on another individual is to be encountered. What matters in life is not money. The writer of the letter to the Hebrews has rightly warned us with a message: “Keep your lives free from the love of money, and be content with what you have” (Heb.13:5) .It is to be remembered that contentment is the state of the heart rather than the statement of accounts. To run after “easy loans” and” “plastic money” often lead people to bankruptcy and depression. “All that glitters is not gold! The human face of science and technology has to be discovered in our search for the highest. This is indeed a challenge before us.

The words of wisdom uttered by St, Paul years ago still hold good: ‘Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things”. (Phil.4:8). In the post –modern scenario of the world, the age-old morals and values have to be taught and affirmed.

The immortal words of Rabindranath Tagore be remembered: “Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high; Where knowledge is free; Where the world has not broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls; Where words come out of from the depth of truth; Where the tireless striving stretches its arms toward perfection; Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit; Where the mind is led forward by Thee into ever-widening thought and action; Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake”. In this prayer, there is a search for the Unseen. The vistas of the skyline alone will create a sober mind.

The concept of a borderless world is the only hope of the world.

The spirituality of the cave of the heart makes the humans ecofriendly and make the markets people friendly. The seeds of hope have to be sown in the barren lands of relationships across the digital divide. The vision of a horizon must take us to the joy of discovery. There are more things to be discovered than the ones already known. What we have traversed is only the beginning of a pilgrimage. It is through ones’ commitment to the eternal truth- satyam, sivam and sundaram- uttered by the sages of the past make life holistic. This is the challenge before us.

Editor’s Notre: Rev. Dr. M.J. Joseph, M.Th., D. Th, is the former Director of the Ecumenical Christian Centre, Bangalore. He has also served as Professor and Principal, Mar Thoma Theological Seminary, Kottayam, India. As a former member, Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches, he is widely known for his ecumenical and ecological contributions. He has served as Secretary Board of Theological Education, Senate of Serampore College (University). He currently serves as Convener, Ecological Commission, of the Mar Thoma Church. Dr. Joseph has also authored several articles, poems and books available both in English and Malayalam languages. E-Mail: drmjjoseph_65@yahoo.co.in

17 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

An Intimate Realization of God Dr. Zac Varghese, London In ‘God, where are you?’ by Fr. Gerard W. Hughes SJ, I came across a familiar caricature of God; God as ‘good old Uncle George.’ Uncle George’s relatives used to take their little children to meet him every Sunday. This narrative has the following framework: “Uncle George is the family favourite, enormously wealthy, highly influential and is loved by all. He has a white beard, gruff voice, and lives in a large mansion. At the end of their Sunday visits he turns to the children and says, ‘I want to see you here every Sunday dears, and if you fail to come, let me tell you what will happen to you.’ He then leads them to the hidden underground cellars of his beautiful big mansion. The heat becomes intense, the smell of burning flesh noxious, and the children hear hideous screams. Uncle George opens a steel door revealing blazing furnace into which little demons are hurling men, women and children.

The children are frightened; they have never ever imagined anything like this can be hidden in such a beautiful mansion; they have never seen any such horrible things even in their worst nightmares.

He tells the children with a devilish delight in his eyes that the furnace is the ultimate destination if they do not visit him regularly and obey his instructions. And then he leads the children back to their parents. The children, filled with fear, are taken back to their own homes in the evening. On the way, one of the mothers leans over and asks,’ don’t you love Uncle George with all your heart and soul, mind and strength.’ Remembering the furnace the children answer, ‘Yes, we do.’ They are conditioned to obey Uncle George’s orders, but in their hearts they consider him a monster, but dare not admit this to themselves, their parents or to anyone else.” Fr. Hughes goes on to say in this beautiful book: “We become what we worship. If we worship a God who is primarily a God of judgement, whose main interest lies in our failings and inflicting suitable punishment, we become that to ourselves and to others. We become people of the law, hardliners, intolerant, self-righteous, condemnatory, practising a Christ-less Christianity and calling it orthodoxy.”

Different version of the above picture of God is familiar to all of us. This is the kind of deliberate distorted images of God that we often pass over to our children and then we blame children of having a problem in reciting, ‘God is love.’ Many such deformed images of God can dominate our lives. Some of the Old Testament stories and narratives have a tendency to create an ever-lasting fear in our mind. Postmodernist are challenging such uses of these stories. Abraham taking Isaac to slaughter is a difficult image to come to terms with; seeing Christ crucified is not also an easy image. When I was nine years of age, one Good Friday itinerary preacher in our village church made me believe that I shouted for the release of Barabbas; I ran all the way home crying my heart out at the unbearable shame and guilt on my part for being in the part of the crowd which crucified Christ. The scene was so real to me; it haunted me for several days, I still can remember the agony of it after all these years. It will take a

very long time to move from childhood acceptance of what have been taught to real experiential understanding of a God of love and mercy through the life and mission of Jesus Christ. Although faith is the basis of a religious life, for many it is the fear instilled in them, which is the motivating force; fear of judgement and damnation; fear of fire and brimstones. For me, it took nearly seventy years to have the courage to write the following simple, uncomplicated, image of the Lord that I came to know and love gradually. This time, the encouragement came for writing this reflection from reading an email that I received on the New Year’s Eve from a gentle, God-loving, friend of mine who expressed a caring and deep felt concern for his seven grandchildren growing up in the United States. Knowing him, I thought that he had no reason whatsoever for such a concern because his blessed grandchildren are living in the everyday realities of God’s loving care through their interaction with their parents and grandparents.

I was able to think so because I had the following image of God for the last few years, as I started to have a meditative life through the grace of God, as a great and loving grandfather sitting in his magnificent chair looking out into the world and beyond, and I as a little mischievous boy pulling his magnificent flowing rob and making a nuisance.

Although he has many things in his mind, he always has time to look behind the chair for me and to give me an encouraging nod. This hide and seek game has been a wonderful experience, I do wrong things and then hide, then God misses me, but he comes after me and finds me in my fallen and sorrowful state; I cannot look up, I am looking down with the burden of guilt on my back as a naughty school boy before his headmaster. God restores the relationship, things are normal again for a while. Then again it is my turn to go and hide from him because I am busy with my own things and I am comfortable in my new situation for a while and particularly boasting about my meditations and private prayers, I have other companions and things to engage me in the place of my God; then something happens, an internal alarm bell rings, it is my turn again to go to him and disturb him when I need something from him very badly because I cannot hide from him any longer. I hide, but

18 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

he always seeks and finds me. On reflection, life has always been like that for me. The biblical story can be summed up as a story of going away and coming back or exile and return. The story of the prodigal Son demonstrates this so vividly.

Jesus himself played a hide and seek game with his earthly parents when they took him to the Temple; his parents lose contact with him for three days, while he was doing ‘his heavenly Father’s business’ in the Temple. Here was a young boy breaking away from parents, but his parents were willing to accept this as part of his growing up. After an initial dressing down from his parents for his escapade Jesus went down to Nazareth with his parents and became obedient; and he advanced in wisdom and age. Then again after his baptism at river Jordan he disappeared to wilderness for forty days and emerged after dealing with Satan and his temptations for his great ministry. In all this he was constantly in touch with his Father and understanding his Father’s will to declare the manifesto for building the kingdom of God through ‘the sermon on the mount.’ It was through ordinary everyday events in Nazareth and Galilee that Jesus showed us God’s extraordinary love and involvement with human condition. It is only when God is presented to us in human affairs and conditions that we begin to long for God. I find great comfort in this image of God as lovable Father, instead of fearsome judge and executioner, an image developed from my childhood experience of living in a Godfearing family with a wonderful maternal grandfather. It took almost a lifetime to recognise God in ordinary things of life and to realise that God is not a ‘caged bird’ living within the unbreakable codes of theological formulations of words and phrases. I now see things as God’s grace and favour, for me it is simply a ‘grace and favour existence’ to see God as the God of everyday experience. This image has given me a freedom to go and pull on his flowing, seamless, robe when I need his attention. In this image I do not have to worry about intermediaries, it's me and my God. I am sure, this is all what God needs from us, to be like children; in this state of mind we will have the freedom to play hide and seek or any other happy games with him. This innocence of faith is possible for all of us now because of the revelations in Jesus Christ of a loving and dependable God. Therefore, we can be totally sure that he will find us through his unconditional love and abundant grace. The blessings and happiness of this abiding, indwelling experience of God is a gift far and above any other gifts that one can wish for. This gift is available to us regardless of the circumstances that we find ourselves; this is the source of our God-given freedom and happiness even in the midst of discord. But I also realise that this freedom comes with a built in responsibility for the common good of others around us. A longing for God is our first step in our blissful spiritual journey. In Psalm 42 we see the expression of such a longing: “As the deer pants for the water brooks, so pants my soul for you, O God. My soul thirsts for God, the living God.” I recently read an interesting story from the autobiographical sketches of Chrysostom Valiya Metropolitan, who, God willing,

would be celebrating his 100 birthday in April 2017. In 1939 after passing his degree examination from the UC College, Alwaye, before his ordination as a priest, he decided to appear for an interview for becoming a missionary with the Ankola Mission. But he developed very high temperature on the day before the interview; worried about this his father informed the interview panel that his son would not be able to attend the interview on that day. Then Thirumeni remembered the newspaper report of how Subash Chandra Bose addressed a Congress rally with very high fever, against the advice of his doctors. This incident prompted Thirumeni to attend the interview against the advice of his father. One of the panellists questioned the accuracy of his illness and claimed that by attending the interview on that day, he made his father a liar and hence he is not eligible for the job; the logic was sound, but Thirumeni then described that he was encouraged to attend the interview by the example of Chandra Bose. This prompted one of the panellists to ask Thirumeni a very penetrating question: ‘Who is your guide and who do you follow, Chandra Bose or Jesus?’ At this point, as thing were getting hot, Rev V. P. Mammen who was the chairman of the panel intervened and said, ‘When we see ‘God of the Church’, this young man sees God in everyday situations and human interactions.’ Thirumeni has been doing it all his life. ‘God of the Church’ is the problem, all religions own God as their own and no others. The expressions like God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are problematic. ‘God is not a caged bird, but a bird in flight.’ Karl Barth wrote, “God would not be God, if there was a single point where God was absent or inactive.” Intellectuals try to see God as cosmic intelligence or cosmic conscience and so forth. But ordinary simple human beings see God in their day-to-day experiences. Without God’s action, humanity is unable to be what it ought to be. How can the mystery of God be captured through the formulae of any single humanly conceived master plan? Silesius wrote: Christ could be born a thousand times in Bethlehem, but all in vain until He is born in me. This is indeed the experience of St. Paul of ‘living in Christ,’ and living with Christ and living for Christ. th

We read in the Ramayana how Lord Rama removed evil from the world through his epic battle with Ravana. He of course destroyed all the evil in his path, the sin and the sinner at one stroke. Apart from, supposedly, cursing a fruitless fig tree, Jesus did not curse any one. Instead he brought love, healing and blessings. He hates sin, but not the sinner; sin is the separation from God; sin is a thing that we do for which we cannot thank God for. From the Old Testament to the New Testament we see this change in emphasis. As we evolve and grow under his abundant grace, God is giving us a more refined means to have a relationship with him through images and modalities available to us from everyday life in our families and work places.

Perhaps, my grandfather image of God is just a beginning of such a rudimentary infantile understanding. I appreciate and honour others who understand God at another level or at a much more mature level. Maybe postmodernists are challenging us to come out of our comfort zones. We are all in this journey together; let us give a helping hand to those who need a little help in this pilgrimage. The desire for the divine is a necessary step for us to go forward in living together in harmony with peoples of other faiths and other understandings. To think about God therefore, is to remain open to new thoughts and new ways of being in the world. St. Paul reminds us that ‘we are in the world and not of the world.’

19 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

Postmodernism and its Challenges to Christianity Lal Varghese, Esq., Dallas Culture, society and civilization are intermingled and cultural influences are unavoidable for religions to survive in this world. Human beings are born in a specific culture and everyone proudly treasures his or her cultural heritage. Culture is the totality of the shared values, beliefs and basic assumptions, as well as collective behavioral patterns emerging from them. “Christianity as a social phenomenon,” wrote theologian Lesslie Newbigin “has always and necessarily been conditioned as to its outward form by other social facts.” In a multicultural society, some people are anxious about shifting cultural beliefs, civil rights, and religious liberty. Postmodernism poses several challenges to the basic principles of Christianity in the realms like sexuality, same-sex marriage, transgender rights, and religion in the public square, and the authority of the Bible, and the creation of world.

Eusebius, the greatest Christian theologian of the 1st century in his book “The History of the Church from Christ to Constantine” noted that there were different types of Christianity like Jewish Christianity, Greek Christianity, Syrian Christianity and Roman Christianity.

Therefore, Christianity was culturally sensitive from its very inception. Christianity was formed as a religion after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ in Jerusalem and obtained its name at Antioch, but came into its fullorganized existence after the 1st century only after undergoing persecution. All the Apostles except one were martyred, the fist 13 Bishops of the church in Jerusalem also martyred. It survived the great persecution of the early century, which was the greatest challenge a religion could ever face in this world. In 4th century when Constantine recognized Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire, it embraced the political and also the social culture of the earlier Roman period. From there it spread to all over the world and established itself by embracing the socio-political culture of each community in which it is established.

the gay community for treating them differently. In other words, as Christians we have to embrace the postmodernism without sacrificing the culture of the Christian religion.

“Openness” and “tolerance” that rejects all moral absolutes are the mandates of postmodern ideology.

Moreover, postmodernism is gaining a clear and growing consensus in multicultural societies of the West.

Consequently, Christians of the modern day face unique challenges as we seek to communicate the gospel in a compelling way. In order to speak to others with a conviction that “it’s true for me because I believe it”; Christian communicators must understand and critique the foundations of postmodern relativism.

At the heart of the issue is whether or not objective truth exists. Objective truth means truth that is independent of individual or cultural belief. When something is objectively true, like the existence of moon or sun, it’s true for everyone regardless of whether they acknowledge it or not. Objectivity assumes that we all live in one reality, even though we may experience it differently or have different beliefs about it. Those of us who believe in objective truth think that we have a common base from which to discuss what is true and what isn’t, because we all live in the same real world.

Postmodernism is an ambiguous term to define and it should be distinguished from postmodernity, while the later refers to the result of objective factors of our contemporary culture of the age like the buildings, the communication system, the entertainment media etc.

Postmodernity the term in itself describes the current condition of the culture of the society of the day, while postmodernism refers to the value systems and theories that evolved along the cultural factors to support them. It will be difficult to tackle postmodernism, as value systems, which do not have the concrete reality like a building or communication or entertainment. Pope Francis recently said: The Church needs to apologize to

20 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

Postmodernists deny this shared objective reality.

Instead, they claim that different cultural groups live in different realities. To them, a people’s reality is their perception or interpretation of the external world, and is not the world itself. Postmodernists claim we are really creating truth as we interpret. We are not discovering truth, but creating it. According to postmodernists, a thing is true because they believe it; they do not believe it because it is not true.

As Christians, we accept the reality of both subjective and objective truth, and we believe that we can discover both through a combination of our own reason and revelation. The Bible teaches we can come to know a love that transcends knowledge (Eph. 3:19), and that relationship with God goes beyond mere statements of facts about God. This is subjective or experiential truth.

But the reality of subjective or experiential truth in no way rules out the reality of objective truth. Postmodernists, on the other hand, think all truth is subjective. The Bible’s emphasis on historical revelation (1 Cor. 15:13-15), doctrinal propositions (Rom. 10:9), and natural revelation (1:18-20) presume that objective truth exists. This places Christians in direct opposition to postmodern thinking.

Postmodernists hold that when modernists or religionists advance objective truth, they do violence by excluding other voices; that is, they regard other worldviews to be invalid. Thus the ideas of truth and reason marginalize the vulnerable by “scripting them out of the story.” Truth claims, we are told, are merely tools to legitimize power.

Michel Foucault writes, “We cannot exercise power except through the production of truth.” For postmodernists, truth claims are really mere propaganda intended to dismiss other views by calling them superstition or nonsense. That’s why, in postmodern culture, the person to be feared is the one who believes he or she knows ultimate truth. The dogmatist, the totalizer, the absolutist is both naive and dangerous, not to mention arrogant.

Postmodernists call Christianity to accept all beliefs as equally valid, thus introduced the idea of pluralism in the religious world. They propagate the ideas that instead of one truth, we have many truths. Pope Francis’s recent call to the Church to apologize to gay people, some Christian denomination’s initiative in appointing women as clergy and bishops, gays and lesbians as clergy are examples of this embracing nature of mentality. But conservatives do not accept this embracing nature of the Church and they split themselves from the main line churches like happened in the Episcopal Church in the USA. The time has to prove whether Christianity will adhere to this embracing nature.

Openness without the restraint of reason along with tolerance without moral appraisal is the new postmodern

mandates for Christianity to follow. Only In the postmodern climate of openness and tolerance, beliefs become barriers against genuine dialogue about spiritual and moral truth.

Postmodern subjectivism also inhibits a deep commitment to one’s own beliefs. Since faith is rooted in the practical matters of personal taste and experience, people tend to adopt and abandon beliefs according to the demands of the moment. After all, when truth is a human creation rather than something independent of ourselves, we may casually move on to some new “truth” whenever it suits us. Postmodernists use this tricky area to change several faithful believers in to their fold.

To sum up the characteristics of postmodernism are pessimism, which results in loss of enthusiasm, loss of confidence, multiple voices, which results in a plurality of thoughts vying for the right to reality, and finally denial of objective truth by saying that any objective truth can be discovered or experienced. The Christian faith is grounded in the books of the Old Testament, and the New Testament, which describes in detail the life, the death of Jesus Christ on the cross and the resurrection on the third day and our faith and hope of returning of Jesus Christ in the fullness of time.

Christianity must also learn to survive like the earlier Christians survived the persecution and emerged as a religion. Christ also had His own challenges from the society in which He lived, preached and ministered. He has to give up His own life for the cause He stood for, after all it is the purpose of the God in Heaven that Christ should die for the people to redeem them from their sins.

As society grows, culture shifts with the introduction of modern thoughts, communication system, technology, Christians must learn how to survive in the postmodern world without sacrificing their faith and belief. It may be embracing the idea of postmodernism or accepting what is good in it or rejecting the whole idea in itself, but we do not know which will be the best options for the Christianity to survive in this postmodern world.

Editor’s Note: Lal Varghese, Esq., is mainly practicing in U. S Immigration law for more than 25 years in Dallas. He is the legal counsel and member of the Legal Affairs Committee of the Diocese of North America & Europe of the Mar Thoma Church. He can be reached at E-Mail: attylal@aol.com, Telephone: (972) 788-0777 (O), (972) 788-1555 (Direct)

21 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

Preserving the Timeless while Adapting to the Times: Revd. Dr. Lord Leslie Griffiths [The following is a sincere effort in putting together my understanding and appreciation of some of the important aspects of Lord Griffiths’ three talks at the 34 Mar Thoma Family conference. This is not exact transcript of his talks, but this is what I thought that I heard. Lord Griffiths should not be blamed in any way for any unintentional inaccuracies occurred in my reporting of his talks. I very much hope that this would be of some help to reignite the memories of those who were at the conference and also of help to those could not attend. Lord Griffiths’ ministry over the last fifty years, in the postmodern era, shows how to face the postmodern challenges; he adapted his ministry to fit the needs of different cultural contexts and times.

His ministry is also an example of keeping the church and the affairs of the state in the right balance and not separating them into watertight compartments. The theme of the Conference is of special interest to the FOCUS Movement because it was the theme of the first FOCUS seminar at Santhigiri, in 1999, under the leadership of all the Bishops of the Mar Thoma Church. I offer this transcript in memory of Rt. Revd. Dr. Zacharias Mar Theophilus Suffragan Metropolitan. Dr. Zac Varghese, London.] th

Lord Griffiths opened his talk on the above theme on the morning of 27 August by describing how he met one of our young people, Ray Koshy, at the breakfast that morning.

Ray was a member of the Boy’s Brigade, Lord Griffiths is its president, and as such they have an oblique connection. Ray gave Lord Griffiths a copy of a daily Bible study that his grandfather had owned. Lord Griffiths referred to the meditation assigned for 27 August in that spiritual guide, which said, “What meanest thou, O sleeper? Wake up.”

With that he asked the audience to wake up and listen, which they did quite attentively. He then described how he came across a few members of the Mar Thoma Church at an ecumenical gathering, for Lent talks, at Harrow in 2014 and another member at a meeting at Chesham. th

th

From that he went on to describe the young reception committee that he had met at the conference when he arrived, and about the young man who guided him to his bedroom at the center. This was none other than our brilliant Tarun Alexander, who was walking in front of them with their luggage and talking continuously; therefore, Lord Griffiths and Lady Margaret could not see Taurn’s face but noticed the three words on his Tee-shirt, ‘Faith, Hope and Love.’

This amazing speaker organized his discourse around these three words and opened up the theme: ‘Preserving the timeless while adapting to the times.’

He spoke about the Wesley’s Chapel, built by John Wesley, where he works as a minister and the congregation, which is made up people from 55 national backgrounds with 24 languages. His work at the Chapel demonstrates that multiculturalism is possible, and there is an abundant opportunity to share the cultural-spiritual-capital available there. It is also a place of pilgrimage for 70 million Methodists worldwide.

He talked about his early life in a Welsh village in a single parent family with his mother and younger brother. His mother was not a chapelgoer, but she sent her two children to Sunday school. His mother said, ‘she is not going to be the reason for the preacher to preach.’ She was the best mother and the best person in the world for Leslie and his younger brother. She cared for an Irish lady, Mrs. Readie, who was a widow and poorer than her, and invited her for Sunday tea every week; in that hospitable gesture she used up the entire butter ration available for the week; Mrs. Readie was treated like a princess. He recited William Blake’s poem on ‘Garden of love’ to show how churches have done well in controlling people, it also depicted the chapel life in which he grew up.

“I went to the Garden of Love, And saw what I never had seen: A Chapel was built in the midst, Where I used to play on the green.

And the gates of this Chapel were shut, And Thou shalt not, writ over the door; So I turned to the Garden of Love, That so many sweet flowers bore.

And I saw it was filled with graves, And tombstones where flowers should be: And Priests in black gowns, were walking their rounds, And binding with briars, my joys & desires.”

Blake’s protest to the repression of desires as operated by conventional Christianity meant that chapel doors are shut to their real needs, and people are not free to act. The images of graves and priests wearing black dress patrolling the chapel yard provided an image of prison and the lack of freedom. It is now time to wake up from this oppression.

When Leslie passed his Eleven Plus exam, not a mean task, thirty poor working class mothers of the chapel community decided to put away one penny a week each to support the young Leslie for his Grammar school education. From there he went to Cambridge and to Haiti, ‘a wretched nation on the earth’, as a Methodist missionary, then a Methodist minister and became its president and then a member of the House of Lords. He mentioned so many fascinating stories during this journey, which had a bearing on the theme. Faith, hope and love sustained him from the beginning.

Faith: He spoke of the meaning, qualities, and necessities of faith hope and love in a bewildering world of no faith; we live in a world of no faith. We live in a secular and materialistic world. Materialism is like a drug. Flight from faith is quite considerable. As faith is declining, it is important to reclaim faith. This is a moment of challenge for the faith community to show what it means to have faith. Faith is the risk that

22 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

you take in your life. He gratefully remembered how his wife helped him in his faith journey.

Hope: What is hope in a world, which is despairing? What is hope in a world of despair? How can we watch this? Is there any hope for human existence? The killings in the city of Aleppo and other Syrian cities and Iraq are horrible. The resultant refugee crisis in Italy and other Mediterranean countries are difficult to sustain. He then talked about a Greek word used in the New Testament, which describes hope in terms of pity, empathy or compassion, which is used 12 times in the New Testament; we see this in connection with the story of the Good Samaritan and the Prodigal Son. Jesus had this compassion. We use the expression: ‘you are bowels of mercy’ when you feel someone’s pain. You feel that you are kicked on your stomach; it is a physical pain that you feel when you see someone in distress. We should feel in our guts the pain of others and have compassion. Let there be no compassion fatigue. The doctrine of hope is this compassion.

Love: ‘Love is like a penny if you spent it, you end of having more.’ Today, love has become a romantic fantasy; it is self-gratification, people meet in the Internet and immediately develop sexual relationship without really knowing the other person. Real love is rooted in the interest of the beloved. Prioritizing the interest of the beloved is at the heart of a loving relationship. Love that comes your way when you love others is amazing. This is the program of what it is to be a Christian. God did not love one particular group of people, but he loved the whole world. Gospel imperative is love and that is the faith all about.

Hans Kung’s book ‘On Being a Christian; was one of the books that he read when he returned from Haiti. This led him to speak about his experience of Haiti. The 2010 earthquake in Haiti killed 274,000 people; it is one of the poorest countries of the western hemisphere. Although it got independence in 1804, other countries rejected them and it never developed; yes, the People of Haiti were poor, but not poor in Spirit. They had humor, resilience and courage.

Roman Catholics in Haiti had a version of the Liberation theology. It was not the polished theology sent from Rome.

Liberation theology starts with the Bible, people and priests; it is the theology of the people and not of the church. It empowers people in theological understanding: it is a ‘bottom up theology.’ Cambridge theology that he learnt was different; it was about methodology, original texts, interpretations, and philosophy. The Liberation theology is about giving people tools to sort out their day to day problems. It is doing the gospel and not theorizing. Hans Kung in ‘On Being Christian’ is talking about the theology for educated people. Educated people go out on an intellectual search for building truth foundations and formulae. We should not be treated like children, but grown up, not to impose beliefs and punishments. Theology is about doing things and doing the things the right way and with right kind of tools. People should behave as grown up and have a grown up faith. Faith is doing the best from the information that you have. Faith is the risk you take in your life. Faith is an empowering agent.

The Second Talk: He started his second talks by stating the circumstances of his appointment as a lecturer at Lampeter, a new college under, University of Wales, in Medieval English. Inadvertently, he became a mentor to students and a sort of unofficial university chaplain for their spiritual needs, which led him later to Methodist ministry. But he was not an ordinary domestic chaplain; he spent of 50% of his time for conventional roles of a parish priest and the other 50% for representing people as their spokesperson in the outside world for highlighting and representing them to achieve social justice.

At this time, he became a colleague of Revd. Dr. Donald Soper who used to speak regularly at the Speaker’s corner at Hyde Park. His advice was, ‘when you are out there make it look like that you are enjoying it, otherwise the English people will have the decency to make you suffer.’

Lord Soper also told him that that the job of a preacher is to keep the Bible in one hand and the daily newspaper on the other, and relate what is in the newspaper to the Bible and what is in the Bible to the newspaper.

Then he talked about his outward facing ministry, political involvements and how he got to sit on the labor benches in the House of Lords. Politics is too important to leave to the politicians. He talked about the importance of the voluntary work in the UK, but governments should not take advantage of them.

He facilitates people to understand how democracy works by inviting people to meet him at the Lords. Politics and religion are not separate entities. He explained how he engages people through radio through religious programs. It allows him to offer a spiritual view through Radio 4 and Radio2. He presented the ‘Thought for the Day’ for seventeen years, ‘Daily Service,’ and such programs. Brian Redhead of the ‘Today Program’ fame once told him that he is reaching out to more people in one broadcast than John Wesley did throughout his life. You need different voices to reach out to people because the audiences and their tastes are different.

Education: He spoke about his role as the chairman of Central Foundation School for boys and girls in Islington and Tower Hamlet; Islington had a very poor record for GCSE examination results, but pass rates continued to increase over the last three years; in 2016 it was almost equal to Eaton and Harrow, but it is a local state school. In the Tower Hamlet schools for girls he has taken steps to avoid, Islamic radicalization.

Haiti experience: He and his wife, Margaret, went to Haiti in August 1970. They worked initially in Hong Kong for few months. Then the call came for them to work in Haiti, he thought his French might help him, but later found out that the peasants in villages did not speak French. He had to learn their lingo. The experience he gained over ten years in higher education in England did not help him much. He had talents and abilities, but the job in Haiti disempowered him, but this disempowerment was the secret of his success in subsequent life; it helped him to build a new way of relating to people. Initially, he was clever and arrogant, but was not able to do anything. The poor people in Haiti taught him

23 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

humour, their culture and their way of doing things. They put him together and made him whole again. He said in utter humility that Haitian peasants showed him the way; they reunited him with the poor boy that he had been in the beginning of his life in that Welsh village. He continues to help people of Haiti in many ways because of his position in the House of Lords, re-establishing diplomatic relations and so forth.

Youth Work: He also helps young people because the post war generation have done away with many opportunities for the young people, and disinherited them, particularly with the Brexit success. Brexit was a kick in the stomach of the young people. He became the voice of the marginalized people; his words are heard in places where others cannot reach. For representing his people in the outside world, he spent 50% of his time, the other he spent for the routine parish work as expected of a priest. We are not listening to the young people. There is a wedge between socio-political and religious world, we must get in there and engage them.

Wesley’s Chapel: He ended the talk by describing the stories of Joseph from Sierra Leon and Christine from Rwanda. These two young people were caught up in tribal wars and genocide. Christine lost all her family including her infant son. They became peace workers for the United Nations and they met in London became members of the Wesley’s chapel. They decided to get married; then they visited Christina’s hometown in Rwanda and by a miracle she was able to get united with her ten-year-old son, whom she thought had died. He was brought to London and baptized in the Wesley’s Chapel. The whole world is indeed his parish at Wesley’s Chapel; these rich and varied experiences demonstrate how a personal faith helped him to help a little bit in making this world a better place.

The Third Talk: Our young people also joined for his 3 talk on Sunday and he told many more stories. In January 2013 he went to Haiti for the 40 anniversary of his ordination. He spoke about his ordination on 21 January 1973. His experiences brought to our attention those things that you believe in matters. He talked about the events of his ordination in Haiti. Many people blessed him by ‘laying-onof- hands’ from many countries and many rites. It was the week of prayer for Christian Unity. Secretary to Papal Nuncios was there too. He jokingly established that his ordination is valid and possibly more valid than many others, including the Mar Thoma Church. The two leading clerics who re-commissioned him were his students, it gave him great pleasure.

Then he explained his joy in meeting Colbair; he was a little boy that he picked up from the street, when the boy’s mother died, was blind with congenital cataract. He arranged surgery and then he gained eyesight.

This boy lived with Griffiths’ family for a while. He is now a successful businessman with a family and he came to pay his respect and gratitude for what they gave him, a new life. rd

th

st

The talk ended with another memorable story about inner city black boys from East London.

He talked about educational programs and scholarships for inner city boys,

who always exchanged expletives because of limitations in language skills, to go to posh public school. He talked about philanthropists who are truly men of God whose right hand does not know what the left hand is doing. He described the educational problems of black inner city kids. Then he talked about Loui, who had witnessed murders and gang fights.

One night Loui and his friend were attacked; Loui escaped, but his friend, Esai, died. Loui had to identify the perpetrators of this crime to the police and also in the court, he was frightened. Lord Griffiths visited Loui the next day.

Lord Griffiths was about to leave after exchanging few comforting pastoral words, then the telephone rang. Loui said to his friend on the other end of the phone, “ye man, call me later. I got my reverend with me now; he is the man I need now.” That was an amazing moment; sometimes, it is the young person who teaches an older person manner. Loui said, “You are going to say prayers with me aren’t you?” After three weeks Loui came back to the chapel, marching down, with 30 young people singing the gospel songs all the way. He read Psalm 121: “Lift up my eyes to hills–where does my help come from? The Lord will watch over your coming and going both now and for ever more.” There were tears all around when he finished, but through the tears they could see the rainbow.

How can we see the Lord when we cannot see our neighbor?

Lord Griffith’s talks and stories have timelessness and it will stay with us forever. It was a joy to share his fellowship, kindness and humility. The Mar Thoma community is grateful to Lord Griffiths and Lady Margaret for all they have done for us. May God empower them more and more for their very special kind of ministry.

Editor’s Note: Lord Leslie Griffiths, Baron Griffiths of Burry Port, (born 15 February 1942) is a Methodist minister and life peer in the House of Lords, where he sits with the Labor Party. Griffiths became a local preacher in the Methodist Church of Great Britain in 1963. He completed a Master of Arts in Theology at Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge in 1969, while training for the ministry at Wesley House. He spent most of the 1970s serving the Methodist Church of Haiti, where he was ordained, before returning to Britain to serve in ministries in Essex and Golders Green. In 1987 Griffiths completed a PhD from the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. He served as President of the Methodist Conference from 1994 to 1995. Since 1996 he has been Superintendent Minister at Wesley’s Chapel, London.

24 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6

Mar Chrysostom’s Life Story – A Review Dr. Zac Varghese, London, UK On 16 July 2016, I had an amazing opportunity to visit Emeritus Metropolitan Mar Chrysostom at his retirement residence at Maramon, overlooking the fast flowing and very beautiful Pampa River. I am very grateful Revd. Saju Papachen who arranged this meeting. There were three other people, one lady from Houston and two others from Bangalore. Thirumeni recollected the time he spent at Canterbury in 1954 for studies immediately after his consecration. He also reminded of the need for a Mar Thoma Centre in London for greater exposure of our Church in Europe. th

Once amazing reflection on Mar Chrysostom by Revd. VP Mammen summarised the life of this great bishop for me.

Revd. Mammen was interviewing him for the missionary work in Karnataka in 1939 (Page 95). He was not very well on the day of the interview; therefore, his father informed the interview panel that he is not physically fit to attend the interview. Then he was challenged by an experience of Subash Chandra Bose, who attended a crucial meeting against doctors’ advice. Mar Chrysostom’s thinking simply was that if Subash Bose could do it then young Philip Ommmen (his given name before becoming a bishop) also could face the interview panel. During the interview Revd. V. P. Mammen made the following comment on him, “When we see God of the Church, Philip Oommen sees God through ordinary people and their day to day existence.”

This is the man who became a bishop of the Mar Thoma Church in 1953 with the name Mar Chrysostom. This is the measure of the man who has been an ordained as a priest on 3 June 1944 and a bishop of the Mar Thoma Church on 23 May 1953. By the grace of God Thirumeni is continuing his priestly ministry actively in his 99 year. This is indeed an amazing life and I once wrote an article on him entitled ‘People’s Bishop.’ He experiences God in everyday interactions with people from all walks of life: intellectuals, illiterates, theologians, politicians, porters, field workers, social workers and reformers, priests and missionaries, rich and poor people. He is not the bishop of an institutionalised Church and transcended all those restrictions and he is an amazing free spirit. It is this free spirit that we meet in this book. rd

rd

th

At the end of this meeting Thirumeni very kindly gave me a copy of his book on his life story, ‘Athmakatha.’ The following is my immediate, inadequate, short reflection on this book. I finished reading this book at one stretch in one day, often with tears in my eyes. My immediate reaction was that the book should be translated and made available to a wider readership because it is not like any other autobiography. In this book Thirumeni is giving us a guided tour of his spiritual journey so far. He describes amazing people that he met thus far and how through various incidents he was able to experience the presence of God in his interactions with people and nature.

On seeing a photo of Gandhiji with CF Andrew, he told a friend in Karnataka that CF Andrew loved people first and then preached the Gospel. Thirumeni is very critical of our mission strategies of preaching the Gospel and then trying to love those people after their conversion. Thirumeni throws many such challenges. He sees humour in many situations in life and he has the amazing ability to express them with deep reaching theological insights. People often get carried away with his jokes, but here is a very serious man behind those jokes who studied human nature and it vulnerabilities. There is an urgent need to translate this book into English and I very much hope that Thirumeni would take necessary steps to do so.

Dr. Zac Varghese, London, U.K., was the director of Renal & Transplantation Immunology Research of Royal Free Hospital and Medical School in London. He is an Emeritus Professor and supervisor for doctoral studies. He is also a prolific writer on religious and ecumenical issues; he continues to work relentlessly for the ‘common good’ of the worldwide Mar Thoma Diaspora communities.

25 | P a g e F O C U S O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6