Condemnation and grace

"For God sent his Son into the world
not to condemn the world,
but so that through him the world might be saved."
But what a joy for us to preach condemnation than salvation.
Did God ask us to do that?
What is the standard behind our understanding on holiness, salvation or escaping condemnation?
How much portions of our retreats and seminars take about salvation and grace, or are they more about right and wrong, often judging the 'sinful they'?

Jesus did condemned sins, but they were not destructive to any one. Instead, they ensured love and life. If the risen Christ is the first fruit of the new creation, the similar fruition must be present in us also. But do our life, especially our judgments say that we are here as a sign of God's love, saving and liberating, and not as agents of condemnation.

false safety at the risk of the gospel

 Whether gospel is safe in our hands is more important question than whether Christians feel safe. In the name of false securities do we sacrifice the gospel itself? The difference between defining Christians to be a number of people believing in certain customs and traditions, and those following certain values based on the Gospel of Jesus is very significant and decisive. Identifying paths for new safety and security seems to be escaping from what the gospel is asking us. I have been noticing some arguments which represented a strange social fabric of the ecclesial vision. Accordingly, Indian Christians are only those who were baptized by St Thomas and their descendants. They must preserve and continue their traditions and customs, but not adding anyone to their group. Those joined the Christian fold during the time of the missionaries must return to their original beliefs, because their motivation was not right. Thus go the arguments. These were not the opinions of any Hindu ideology, but of many powerful social media groups of traditional St Thomas Christians. Here, ‘who are Christians?’ itself develop new definitions. But I also observed some strange views with regard to preserving family by girls marrying early, increasing number of children, even neglecting the need for education of girls. I am not sure whether our women must agree to it or whether this is what the Christian dignity would envision for girls. It is certainly possible that we may be able to manipulate the scripture and customs and make a tradition for them. But minimum education and remaining family-women contradicts the cry of the same community against social domination of other communities. Ultimately it is all about reducing the Christian community into an isolated and polarized number in society which the so called leaders can use for their bargain.

Evangelization happens by sharing one’s experience of the living presence of Jesus, and by the experience of others seeing something significantly sustaining one’s life. The initial mission has not been of intolerant domination. Faith became a definition to be believed when the emperor’s religion had to be the religion of the empire. Colonisers had it in their cultural-political interests. though some functioned as their agents, it is always notable that the missionaries stood against any form of injustice by the colonisers themselves. Those who understood the gospel of Jesus learned the good things in the lived values of people whom they met, and objected to what was against justice, truth and humanity. An arrogant proselytization would never be the mode of Jesus’ preaching of the Gospel also.

Pope Francis often spoke against proselytization, and he repeatedly says that true evangelization is by example or witness. There may be cases of imprudent cases where people are manipulated in the name of healing, economic benefit etc. But that accusation just for the sake of tarnishing Christian community is not right. Imprudent approaches may be provoking other communities, on the other side an intolerant approach is also on the growth among the fringe groups. Catholic Social approach is not being in isolation, a separate group. Some specific ideologies may be promoting such tendencies. But generally that is not the case. Genuine Christian approach cannot be pro-Hindu, pro-Jain, pro-Muslim etc. Nor it can be anti-Hindu, anti-Jain, anti-Muslim etc also. Similarly it cannot be pro-BJP, pro-Congress, Pro-AAP etc nor anti-BJP, anti-Congress, anti-AAP etc also. Basic dictum for our sociopolitical stand is to be valuing of the equal human dignity, because we are all the children of God. Any inhuman treatment irrespective of culture, religion, tribe, or cast, must pain a true Christian conscience. That is as s response from the beatitudes that Jesus offered.

I thirst

Jesus entered his last moments facing the pain of hell. they were the moments when God was absolutely absent for him. That emptiness is an indescribable brokenness and crisis. Yet, 'why have you abandoned me' still holds a hope in such a a presence. we find the voice of hope of life even in the emptiness in the words, "into your hands, Lord, I commend my Spirit." It may have been the most painful and conflicting moments than any temptations. It is the thirst for the communion in love that cannot be broken, but now absent, that extends his heart towards the Father. The cry in "I thirst" is a continuation of "why have you abandoned me?"

 
The same communion of love is the true motivation for our relationship with Christ. The sentimentality formed in response to the cruelty and humiliations suffered by Christ can only bring a change that cannot take roots in Christ. (The exaggerated media representations of the sufferings of Christ produce a kind of anti-nonchristian inimical tendencies on one side and a victim mentality within Christians on another side). Christ continued to be on the cross despite the scornful challenges to come down form the cross to prove that he was truly the Son of God. That was the assurance of his love for us. If he had come down from the cross with all his divine power, it would have emptied the interior grace and truth of the stand he took for justice, mercy and love. Because they were to be lived by his followers in love for one another.


Social and cosmic extend of Christ needs to be reflected deeply if Christianity has to find its significance in the future. "Why have you crucified me? "why are you persecuting me" surely come in the line with "you did not give me food to eat and water to drink." We have not meditated sufficiently on our making of the body of christ mutually building through love, service, and communion, and through the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Christ was made an adorable great something, and the living Christ among us was kept aside. Persons, religions, nations, cultures, all kinds of others seek today mercy from the other.