The Passion of Jesus is Commitment to Social Action

The Passion of Jesus is Commitment to Social Action

Jesus’ outlook on the world (meaning the way he saw the world, how he saw himself in the world, and how he interpreted what he saw) in the Gospel of Mark was from the perspective of the poor.  Jesus saw HOPE in the midst of struggle. In expelling demons and healing the sick, Jesus  restored humanity to those of various afflictions. Curing someone or exorcising a demon is but one part of healing.  Healing, in its fullest sense, is the unconditional reintegration of one who was set apart because of some affliction into the community. 

Jesus creates the possibility for reintegration. He cures the illness and exorcises the demon, but the real healing is the change that happens through reintegration. Where someone had been marginalized because of possession or illness, once Jesus confronted the illness and the social stigma attached to the illness or possession, the individual gained personal “agency,” meaning that person was given the ability to move about in society and choose his or her own course of life. The ability to be a member in a community and make free choices in one’s life, in effect, breaks the cycle of marginalization and injustice. 

People healed by Jesus are no longer stuck at the margins of society.  When a formerly marginalized person is reintegrated into the community, the entire community is changed. If I have ostracized someone and now that person is right in front of me (because Jesus put that person there) then I had better check on my attitude of excluding that person.  People that used to push people into “closets”, to the “back of the bus” and keep people “in the shadows,” now have to look at those whom they shunned. Jesus lifts up the poor and outcast, and by doing so, he declares the social system that allowed marginalization to happen, wrong.

Jesus bids those who have been victims of prejudice and marginalization to stand up and be counted. Rather than coddling them and comforting them, Jesus says, “Take up your cross and follow me.” Social transformation is possible when people are willing to take up their own cross and follow Jesus to Jerusalem. The poor and those who live “in the margins” have to rise up.  In other words, we have to make a commitment to the vision and struggle in order to be free.  In the passion according to Mark, Jesus went to Jerusalem to confront not only Pontius Pilate, but the entire system that held people enslaved to Rome and Cesar’s collaborators. This was Jesus’ cross as much as the wooden cross on Calvary. 

The Passion narrative started with a woman who poured expensive oil on Jesus’ head. Some complained about the expense and suggested that the money could better have been spent by feeding the poor. Jesus confronted them by saying that the poor will always be there and that this woman was preparing him for his inevitable death.  By anointing Jesus, this woman was anointing his vision and mission, that is, his determination that he would speak truth to power no matter what the cost might be.

The comments of the detractors about giving money to the poor reflected a short-sighted, myopic perspective. By selling the perfume, you feed the poor a piece of bread for a day. By anointing the vision and mission, you commit yourself to the struggle.  That is, you commit yourself to join the fight against the realities that make people poor in the first place. The anointing symbolized the long-term “lucha” rather than a temporary relief to a systemic tragedy that created suffering in the first place.  This is why this woman’s gesture will be remembered in all generations to come.

The second scene is the Passover scene. When one breaks bread at the Passover and shares in the cup of wine, participants in the Passover are making a commitment to the eternal struggle for liberation. The Passover signified a deep and abiding solidarity with the struggle for the liberation of slaves from Egypt. The bread was known as “Bread of Affliction” symbolizing the harsh realities of being a slave.  The last cup, the “Cup of the Covenant" represented the blood of those who died under the horrific conditions of slavery as well as honoring those who have given their lives for the cause of freedom.  When one shares in the bread and the wine, one has made a commitment be a part of that struggle for freedom.   

Right after the Passover meal, the disciples went to the garden with Jesus but they couldn’t find the energy to remain awake and vigilant. To add insult to injury, Judas betrayed Jesus and Peter outright denied Jesus. Everyone chose self-preservation and denied the cross. At the arrest scene, the young man that ran away naked symbolized the personal shame that comes from abandoning the altruistic teachings of Jesus: freedom and equality.  In short, if you have no vision to live by and no conviction for the mission of justice, you literally have nothing. You are naked.

The remaining part of the Passion narrative is dedicated to detailing Jesus’ decision to save the human family. Jesus’ decision to speak truth to power was his confrontation with the Sanhedrin, chief priests and finally with Pontius Pilate. Jesus was crucified because he chose to stand against the grain and lift a hand of protection on behalf of the poor and a word of advocacy for the oppressed.  At his last breath, a soldier remarked, “Truly, this man was the Son of God!”  Normally throughout the gospel (of Mark) when anyone made that confession, Jesus would stop them and tell them to say nothing. But in this case, there was no rebuke. The resounding silence stood as and still stands today as an invitation to take our cross and continue the struggle. No longer concerned with self-preservation, taking up the cross makes us vigilant and ready to move.  We will not remain silent in the face of hatred.

The Passion of Mark isn’t merely a commemoration of Jesus’ death, it is an invitation for us to live the Passion - that is to take up our cross and follow Jesus all the way to Calvary. As vigilant disciples, we should be ready to stand up to hateful laws, like the one targeting gays in Indiana.  Taking up the cross makes us more sensitive to the plight of undocumented immigrants and the hassles that they have to endure every day and it makes us more committed to work for a just and compassionate solution. The Passion commits us to work toward ending the aggression and hostility against African American young men.  The Passion commits us to challenge the social inequities that we the poor face everyday in Silicon Valley. Passion Sunday reminds us that Jesus’ work continues in us if only we take up the cross and follow him.

“If you wish, you can make me clean.”

A leper came to Jesus and kneeling down begged him and said, “If you wish, you can make me clean.”

Moved with pity, he stretched out his hand, touched him, and said to him,  “I do will it. Be made clean.”

The stories and references of leprosy in the Bible serve as a kind of metaphor for how we deal with people who we judge as “unclean” and unworthy of having contact with God. Our treatment of lepers must come from a place of mercy and love, not legalism and fear. Our reaction to those whom we deem “unclean” is ultimately the barometer of our own humanity.  Today I want to look at leprosy from the perspective of Jesus’ healing of the leper by making direct contact with the man.

People afflicted with leprosy (http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/1270/1300) were not only ritually excluded from the religion, they were  excluded from the community. Traditional law dictated by Leviticus said that lepers must stand outside the community and even self-declare that they are “unclean.” Imagine the psychological damage done to oneself by being forced to yell to all passers-by, “Unclean! Unclean!”  (see http://www.religiousrules.com/Judaismpurity04leprosy.htm#sthash.YvEH99mm.dpuf). Lepers were never ever again embraced by their families and loved ones.

Being declared “unclean” had two levels of isolation: we already heard about social and emotional isolation but the most heartfelt isolation was religious isolation. The law of Moses said that anything that was declared “unclean” was unfit to use to worship God. When Jesus healed the man of leprosy, he not only restored the man to the community, but also back to God.  

Leprosy was believed incurable by humans and popular thought believed that God inflicted leprosy as a curse for sins. Throughout Western history lepers were restrained from social contact. Because the disease was associated with sin, when people isolated lepers and cut social ties, they felt they were justified in doing so.  They were, after all, punishing sinners.

One of the most infamous stories of isolating lepers was in Hawai’i. The island of Moloka’i was set up as a colony of lepers by imperial American interests.  To understand that statement, let’s look at the history of how Moloka’i became a leper colony. 

Native Hawaiians never had leprosy.  In fact the Hawaiian name for leprosy,  “mai ho’oka’awale," meaning the “separating sickness.” The name came from the effect leprosy had on people.  It wasn’t the disfigurement that came from the disease. In fact, disfigurement was not a problem for the Hawaiians. The most difficult hurt came from being isolated from family and being sent to an unfamiliar place.

Hawaiian culture was tied to family (‘ohana) and land (‘aina). The idea of “‘ohana” family and ‘aina - land came from native Hawaiian belief that people are directly linked by their ancestry to the land and to the gods. ‘Ohana means that we are connected to each other and that ‘ohana is there for all kinds of support: when hungry, there will be food. When there is danger, there are people who would protect you.  You will always have a place: ‘aina. It is your land your place, your family. And when there is illness, there is someone there to accompany you.  Helping someone out is called “kokua.”  

For traditional Hawaiians, it is inconceivable for an individual to face the world alone.  One’s identity came from ‘ohana and ‘aina. When Hawaiians were forcibly removed to Moloka’i, there was a member of their ‘ohana who would join them.  If it weren’t for “kokua,” the people on Moloka’i would not have survived. In fact leprosy wasn’t the cause of death, it was the poor housing from neglect and the social policy of isolation that killed the people.

In the 1860’s Hawai’i was still a sovereign kingdom and not a part of the US. At that time a leprosy outbreak occurred and board members of the Hawaiian “Royal Board of Health” - which by that time were dominated by Americans and descendants of Americans born into royal Hawaiian families - determined leprosy to be a “crime.”  This pretense of the “law” made people feel it was legitimate to round up people and send them away. This so-called “Royal Board of Health” were pawns in American interests: they used the leprosy outbreak to further destabilize the Hawaiian population thus making way for the eventual overthrow of the infamous 1893 overthrow of the Island Kingdom. (see http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/americans-overthrow-hawaiian-monarchy).

In this seemingly helpless situation, came Damien de Veuster, or St. Damien of Moloka’i. (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTS0mZcbffk  and http://www.catholichawaii.org/catholic-essentials/scripture-tradition/saints/saint-damien.aspx) Fr. Damien arrived in Moloka’i in 1873 to minister to the people of Moloka’i.  The colony had no real laws, no housing, farms or schools. Under this priest’s direction, the colony established rules, improved housing and organized farms.  Children attended school and the lepers were restored to human dignity.  When Fr. Damien contacted leprosy  in 1884 he was sadly shunned by civil and religious leaders, yet that did not deter him from continuing his work. He enlisted the help of other people to participate in “kokua.”  A Franciscan sister, Marianne Cope, joined in the kokua. (see: http://www.npr.org/2012/10/20/163269139/mother-of-outcasts-to-be-a-saint-for-leprosy-work

and http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2221026/Pope-canonizes-Native-American-Hawaiian-saints-huge-crowds-Vatican.html#ixzz3ReQ4goas)  She helped homeless female children of leprosy patients and cared for women and children who might be vulnerable to exploitation and abuse by establishing a home for them.  As Fr. Damien laid in bed, she was the only one from the Church to care for Fr. Damien in his last year of life.  She remained in Moloka’i after Fr. Damien died. She died of natural causes in 1918.

In 1995 Fr. Damian was named a saint and throughout Hawaii, Catholics and non-Catholics venerate his image as a sign of true ‘ohana and kokua.  His remains were returned to Moloka’i, his ‘aina after his canonization.  In 2005 Marianne Cope was named a saint as well. Her remains are in Connecticut.

Saints Damien of Moloka’i and Marianne Cope emulate Jesus. They restored humanity to outcasts. They became family to the dispossessed and their steadfast presence reminded the lepers of Moloka’i that they were precious in God’s eyes and the world was wrong not to see their humanity.  Sadly it wasn’t until 1969 that the old laws that classified lepers as criminals was repealed and that lepers would not have to live in fear of arrest or exile.  There is indeed much to do as we move forward from here. There are people - as this community knows from our experience - that will enact laws and label people as “criminals” thus giving bigots and small-minded politicians license for exiling people. We as Americans come from troubling history of isolating people we find “inconvenient.” Look at the Trail of Tears - the forced migration of several Native American tribes in 1830 (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trail_of_Tears) , The internment of people of Japanese descent in the 1940’s (see http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2011/08/world-war-ii-internment-of-japanese-americans/100132/), the way AIDS patients were first treated in the 1980’s, the mass isolation of Haitian refugees in the 1990’s, and how some congressmen today call for the mass deportation of undocumented persons.  

We can do better. We must do better. Faith demands that we reach out and touch others. To restore humanity. To stand with those who are isolated. To embrace the vulnerable. And to break bread with everyone. 

All Are Welcome Mass

The “All Are Welcome Mass” is significant for our IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY because we need to work together AS ONE BODY, the BODY OF CHRIST and the BODY OF CHRIST has everyone in it: our movement of justice is only as strong as it is diverse.  We MUST THEREFORE find a way to WELCOME EVERYONE! 

Today’s Gospel begs the fundamental question: Who, then, is welcome?  This woman came out at noon to fetch water.  Why? Noon was the hottest time of the day to get water. Village women and children would fetch water early in the morning or evening and when they gathered at the well, friendships and kinship were affirmed and gossip was exchanged. Those who came out at noon would do so for any number of reasons: that they wouldn’t be harassed, they had something to hide, or they might be ashamed of something. 

Another important dimension is that Jesus initiated a conversation with a Samaritan woman. Typically men did not initiate conversations with a strange, unaccompanied women. Rabbis and respected religious leaders would never initiate a conversation with a Samaritan. It would be very atypical for a rabbi to ask for water which would require that hands touching lips. We can tell from this interchange that Jesus did all these things…but keep in mind that he did this in plain sight in the absence of his own disciples. This is an important feature because it would indicate to us that the disciples had much to learn about Jesus’ radical call about LOVING and INCLUSION.  They weren’t ready to take that step.

In my mind the third important feature of this story is the confidence of the woman. She didn’t get up and leave - which would have been the normal behavior of a single unaccompanied woman. From the vocabulary and grammar used, it would appear that this woman possessed the confidence to still sit and chat with Jesus and even question him openly while making no “apologies” for who she was. In fact, her eventual conversion was built upon this confidence. This woman FELT WELCOME!  A RADICAL WELCOME!

Eventually the woman got up from the well and went to the very people that she avoided - or those who avoided her - and she TOLD THEM her story. Her story - built upon her sense of who she was - was so compelling, that they were moved THEY were converted. Eventually they were led by her example to live differently and they were able to tell their story based on their experience of radical welcome.

The turning point for the woman was when Jesus asked if she wanted “life giving” water.  She Jesus promised her that she WOULDN’T “HAVE TO RETURN TO THIS PLACE AGAIN.”  Let’s think about this, she wouldn’t have to be in a place in her life in which she had to avoid social contact, to live as a stranger in the midst of a community.  The “this place” was more than the time and location of the well - the “this place” was an INTERIOR DISPOSITION. With “life giving water,” this woman could be in the open and what was this water? It was Jesus.  Jesus is the deep well that quenches the thirst of those who have been in “that place” in the back of the bus, sitting alone at the lunch table, or hidden in a closet.

Jesus is the moving, life-giving stream of water that flows from his heart into ours. His is the stream that never stops, the LOVE that is NON-JUDGMENTAL.  His water allow us to tell our story without the fear of rejection. His water allows us to believe that we are accepted and loved by GOD and by our brothers and sisters.

Jesus is the life-giving water of SELF-ACCEPTANCE. Jesus is the stream that washes away shame. He is the water that allows us to see blessings, not brokenness. Forgiveness, not guilt.  This cleansing water gives us the clarity to FEEL that GOD has always been a part of us and this CLARITY brings us faith.

When I hear from the people from the LGBT Catholic community I am struck by their faith and resilience.  They believe that there is no such thing as a “disorder” in their lives. They do not see any “grave evil” in their love. In fact, if there is any “disorder” it is the disorder of the lack of self-acceptance.  The LGBT Catholic community has a story to tell and their story affirms for us what we should experience within our own lives: that God made us and what God made is good.

Jesus is the life-giving water this is the  LOVE present in COMMUNITY.  Jesus is the water that connects all life it is the river of acceptance and affirmation.

I invite all of you - especially our visitors and those who are new to this dialog - to come to the reception to hear our community’s stories and to share your story, and after being here in our humble community, live the story yourselves!

Religious Violence and relationship to God: killing in the name of God

Religious Violence and relationship to God: killing in the name of God

Today’s first reading is one of the most problematic passages in the Bible because God appears to be calling upon Abraham to commit murder. Reading the story at a literal level tells us that Abraham received a “call” from God with the intent that his son would be sacrificed. Abraham’s faith in what he felt to be God drove him into the mountains to do what we would think would be the unthinkable: killing his son. How is it that Abraham could put aside the commands of love and obey this God who now commands him to kill his son?

If we were literalists reading the bible (and in our tradition we are NOT) we could take a reading of the bible and discover that there are several stories of the use of sanctioned violence. (see http://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/atrocity.html). For example, in chapter 34 of Genesis the Israelites kill Hamor, his son and all the men in the village and then they plundered their houses taking cattle, children and wives.  We could read the Exodus story of the escape of the Israelite slaves and feel the pain of Egypt as they lost all the innocent children killed by the angel sent by God. Reading Exodus 32 with no critical lens, we are horrified that the Israelites slaying 3000 men and we are puzzled in First Kings that the greatest prophet Elijah goes on a murderous rampage and slaughters the priests of Baal, sparing no one.  An uncritical reading of the Scriptures would lead us to believe that God approved torture, murder and genocide.  This is dangerous because an uncritical reading of Scripture allows clever people with an agenda to manipulate the Sacred Texts in such a way that you would be led to believe that violence in the name of God can be justified.  (see http://www.motherjones.com/media/2013/07/evangelicals-gay-rights-ihop-god-loves-uganda-sundance)

There are some of you out there who are thinking, “I’m not Jewish and these Old Testament readings don’t apply to me.” Or,  “Christian Scriptures do not have violence. Jesus is the Prince of Peace and he does not condone violence.”  If we were to hand-select only Christian texts and completely ignore our Christian history, then could think of ourselves as superior to other religions; however, we cannot do that.  Christians have a long and sordid past when it comes to violence…Think of the Crusades where  the Kings of Europe turned to the Church for a blessing as the armies of Crusaders left Europe and plowed though the Middle East on the pretext that they would be “re-claiming” Christian territory. These Crusaders arrived in Muslim villages pillaging and killing civilians - many who were children and women.  The Crusades were intended to open up trade routes and establish European domination over the region, not reclaim the faith! (see http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/whic/ReferenceDetailsPage/ReferenceDetailsWindow?zid=5ce04720240d6edc41ece33a60c2fc96&action=2&catId=&documentId=GALE%7CCX2877000020&userGroupName=tlc199095657&jsid=4a457e60f27cda06521b9794259c49f7) The Spanish crown, at the end of the 15th Century, was looking to secure their country after pushing out the last of the Muslims from Spain. (see http://religionviolenceandpeace.blogspot.com/2010/10/understanding-religious-violence.html,  http://www.ub.edu/histeco/iberometrics/pdf/Vidal.pdf, and http://www.econ.yale.edu/conference/neudc11/papers/paper_397.pdf)  In an effort to secure Catholic control over the entire country, the royal family sought to unify the kingdom and territories by initiating an Inquisition that would expose the “enemies of the state.”  The Inquisition was set up to scapegoat Jews, target foreign competitors from northern Europe (Protestants) and expel Muslims. The crown used priests and bishops to identify the unfaithful.  Prisoners were subjected to torture, hanging and other forms of painful death.  Did you know that modern torture techniques that are used by the CIA today came from this period in history? 

Today we associate religious violence with Muslim extremists. (see http://www.revealnews.org/article/islam-judged-more-harshly-than-other-religions-in-terrorist-attacks/) We are understandably horrified by images of Muslim extremists decapitating Christians and killing civilians, but looking at history we know that Muslim extremists are not the only ones guilty of killing in the name of God. Violence is violence and clearly there are those who would use Scripture of whatever religion is convenient to justify their actions.  If we are going to survive on this one small, fragile planet with dwindling resources, we have to learn how to get along with each other. We cannot allow religion to be used to keep people at war with one another nor can we allow corrupt and ambitious dictators, prime minsters and presidents to take refuge in religion in an attempt to masquerade their blatant attempts at domination.

I believe that Faith Leaders have a key role to play in shaping a more peaceful tomorrow. We need a more thoughtful way to read and interpret our religious tradition. Take our first reading, for a start. Traditionally we look at the story of Abraham and Isaac with the presumption that God was testing Abraham. At the time of Abraham child sacrifice was a common practice. What if we were to look at the story from the perspective that Abraham was testing God?  What if we were to imagine Abraham was pushing God to make a statement to end the violence of child sacrifice? What if we were to look at Abraham’s silent complicity of going along with sacrificing his son was really about forcing God to initiate a new religion, one that wasn’t based on violence, but on mercy.

Let’s now look at the story of the Transfiguration. A literalist reading tells us that Peter, James and John were at the top of the mountain with Jesus and saw that Jesus’ clothing had become dazzlingly white.  With Jesus were Elijah - the great prophet who slew the priests of Baal, and Moses the lawgiver who killed a man out of anger. The Scriptures say James, Peter and John wanted to make three tents and that they were terrified. Jesus promised his friends that they  could only speak of what they witnessed until Jesus himself died and rose. Understandably Peter, James and John were perplexed but they kept the matter quiet. They had yet to understand that Jesus’ true fulfillment would be revealed in death and self-sacrifice, not self-preservation. 

If we are to read this passage with the lens of non-violence, we might think that Jesus will ultimately fulfill his promise by dying and rising. God wanted the disciples present to know that Jesus’ word had ultimate authority. “This is my beloved Son, listen to him.”  God’s direct voice to these three witnesses was intended to give the people a sense of real power.  That power doesn’t come from lording power over others, but by giving power up.  Power doesn’t come from Pontius Pilate who held the ultimate authority of who would live and who would die. True power comes from Jesus! God’s voice told James, John and Peter to listen to Jesus.  These three would eventually come to understand that real power comes from Jesus and that the last word would be, “He is Risen!”

Religious leaders, Christians, Jews, Muslim, Buddhist, and all other men and women from all faiths, cannot remain divided by theology, ideology and ritual and claim that God is on one side only. They must stand hand in hand: Rabbis, Priests, Ministers, Imams must stand together as one against the totalitarianism of theocratic dictatorships and pseudo-democracies of oligarchies and corporatism.  And as one voice, loudly proclaim,  “If God is for us, who can be against us?” When religious leaders can stand together as one - and apart from the Empire - we will have peace.  Until then, we have hope.