DIVORCE AND REMARRIAGE

DIVORCE AND REMARRIAGE

What should we as Christians do and say when we encounter a couple who are seeking to end their marriage, whether for heartbreaking or frivolous reasons? How should we counsel them?

Before we can even begin to answer this question, we need to understand God’s intention for marriage. It was that marriage should be monogamous and lifelong. This is clear from Jesus’ response to the Pharisee who asked him whether it was lawful for a man to divorce his wife (Mark 10:2-12). In his response, he reminded them of the original plan and purpose of God’s creation. First, he quoted Genesis 1:27 to the effect that God created people as “male and female” and brought them together. The Jews interpreted this verse as proof that in the beginning, when God had made everything perfect, marriage was monogamous. Although the verse does not explicitly mention marriage, it is followed in the next verse by the command to “be fruitful and increase in number” (Gen 1:28), which implies a sexual relationship. Jewish rabbis linked Genesis 1:27 with God’s saving one male and one female of each species in the ark (Gen 7:9) as further evidence for monogamous marriage.

Jesus then quoted Genesis 2:24 to make the further point that marriage should be lifelong. A man and woman who become one flesh are joined, and thus Jesus says, “what God has joined together, let no one separate” (Mark 10:9). The word “separate” is a standard term meaning “to divorce”. The mention of separation implies that such a thing is possible, but Jesus is clear that couples should keep their marriage vows and not break up the marriage in which God has joined them. To separate is to oppose God’s action in joining them.

Thus our first step when we meet a couple who are encountering marriage problems is to provide counselling and work for reconciliation. Acceding to divorce should never be our first option.

In the parallel passage in Matthew 19:3-11, Jesus’ hearers reject his command by asking, “Why then … did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?” (Matt 19:7, citing Deut 24:1). Jesus responded by saying that Moses’ giving permission for divorce was a concession to the hardness and sinfulness of human hearts. Sometimes we are in a situation where all the options open to us are evil, and in that case our goal should be to limit harm. But that does not mean that God approves of divorce.

Although it may be necessary, it is still sinful.

Some would argue that Jesus’ reference to “immorality” in Matthew 19:9 implies that adultery automatically justifies divorce.

But this is not what Jesus is saying. A marriage can continue despite adultery, but divorce may be allowable if there is a stubborn refusal to repent of the adultery and turn from it.

Another reason that is sometimes given as grounds for divorce is infertility. But Jesus’ words about eunuchs in Matthew 19:12 clearly indicate that we are not obliged to marry and have offspring. A lack of offspring does not constitute grounds for breaking the covenant of marriage.

What then about remarriage after divorce (Matt 19:9)? Is this always adulterous? In answering this question, we need to remember the type of divorce referred to by those who were debating with Jesus.

They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?” (Matt 19:3). These reasons could be frivolous, and a divorce for frivolous reasons is clearly not covered by Moses’ exemption. Such a divorce is invalid, and so remarriage after such a divorce is adulterous.

But must someone who has had to endure a divorce remain alone for the rest of their life? Here, again, we have to look at what Jesus said. While he made it clear that God intended marriage to be monogamous and lifelong, he also stated that God was aware of human sinfulness, and in his mercy and grace he permitted divorce as a concession. But his mercy and grace do not end at that point.

Remarriage is not God’s ideal, for he did not want there to be any divorce in the first place. But in allowing divorce, he also allows remarriage. Remarriage is a second chance that God gives out of his mercy and grace. We deserve to be punished for breaking his commands, but he shows mercy; we do not deserve a second chance, but God gives us one. However, just because mercy and grace abound, we should not take divorce and remarriage lightly. Divorce should not be pursued for frivolous reasons but should be seen as the last option after every effort has been made to save the marriage.

Remarriage also should not be entered upon rashly, but with reverence and discretion and in the love which is the gift of God himself. What is the role of the church in all this? The church does not have the right to grant a divorce; that is a matter for the courts. However, when a divorced person asks for a Christian marriage, how should we respond?

First, we should ask to examine the divorce papers to be certain that the marriage has indeed broken down and that divorce has legally taken place. Some people have sought marriage without yet being legally divorced from their spouse. If we are satisfied that the divorce is indeed final and that the grounds for divorce were adequate, we may proceed to marry a divorced person. However, some suggest that such a couple should be required to take part in a service of repentance for the broken promises made in the past. The service could take place some days before the second wedding. David Instone-Brewer suggests that the following prayer would be appropriate for such a service:

Heavenly Father, you have cared for me from my birth, and you have promised to love me unconditionally; I come to you in repentance. I confess that I have made promises to you and to others which I have not kept. I have promised to love and care for others, and I have not fulfilled this as I should. Please forgive me for my sin, and give comfort to those whom I have let down and hurt. I ask you for strength for the future, to be able to keep the promises which I will make. Amen.

Paul Swarup

Continue Reading

DISCIPLESHIP AND NURTURE

DISCIPLESHIP AND NURTURE

South Asians are familiar with the concept of a guru (teacher) training a shishya (disciple). Students are brought to the teacher by their parents and live with him (or her, in some cases) for many years. They follow their teacher wherever he goes and they learn by respectfully watching his life and listening to him teach. When they ask questions, he may answer them or challenge them with a counter-question. He may expect them to do research or meditate to find the answers.

Eventually, the guru will decide that the time has come for a student to “graduate”.

The guru–shishya relationship is similar to the relationship between Samuel and Eli in the Bible. It is also similar to Jesus’ relationship with his disciples. He was the ultimate guru, who created an environment in which he could teach deep truths about God and this world. Both the hearts and minds of his followers were transformed.

Transformation is also the goal of Christian nurture. This is a lifelong process in which God gives those who follow Christ knowledge and wisdom as he shapes us into people who will reflect his character and be a good influence in our communities. Our Great Guru is Jesus Christ, who perfectly reflects the image of God. He trains us through formal and informal experiences and the various ministries of the church. The discipline of following him requires us to walk with him day by day, guided by his word, so that our lives become increasingly Christ-like.

Just as shishyas submit to their gurus, so Christians must submit to the teachings of our Lord. But this is not a forced obedience. Rather, it is a loving response to his love for us and his giving himself for us on the cross. He shed his precious blood to redeem us and to free us from bondage to sin.

Discipleship can be costly. It may involve suffering and persecution, for God has called us to make disciples of all nations. We do this by proclaiming the gospel, sometimes in innovative ways, and by living with a wise and loving integrity that attracts others to Christ.

Our love, compassion, forgiveness and sacrificial service should draw them to him. So should the power of the resurrected Lord working in us, as evidenced by the gifts the Holy Spirit gives to the church. Many have come to Christ because they have experienced healing in their lives and have received a peace they have long been searching for.

New believers need to be individually nurtured by teachers and mentors within the church who help them mature according to God’s plan. Then they will become disciples who make other disciples, which is the only way that we can fulfil Jesus’ commission to make disciples of all nations.

Flourishing Tree of Discipleship - Strong Roots and Growth in Faith

Because individuals are at different stages of the maturing process, the church needs to use various strategies to nurture them.

We also need to pay particular attention to nurturing our children and young people, since they are the future of the church. We should appreciate their intellectual, psychological and social needs as they grow towards adulthood. In our homes and in the church, we must demonstrate that local and global concerns can be integrated in our understanding and living out of Christian values.

Our ministries of preaching, teaching and healing should equip disciples so that they

• grow in knowledge of and love for God (Phil 1:9-11).

• acknowledge God as the one who gives life and growth and obey him without expecting any earthly rewards (1 Cor 3:7).

• can distinguish good from evil, and take a stand for goodness and honesty, which will bring peace in the community (Heb 5:14).

• live lives that impact other lives for good (2 Tim 2:2).

Our goal must be to see the body of Christ, the church, grow to maturity and build itself up in love (Eph 4:14-16; Col 1:28).

Continue Reading

DEATH AND LIFE AFTER DEATH

DEATH AND LIFE AFTER DEATH

Our neighbours of other faiths often arrange costly funeral rituals and give alms to increase the merit of someone who has died. In comparison, Christian funeral rites may look austere and give the impression that Christians dishonour their dead.

This is not true. The funerals described in the Bible include elaborate rituals much like those in South Asian culture. The body was washed and anointed with perfume (John 19:39-40; Acts 9:37); there was mourning and weeping (Gen 23:2; 50:1; 2 Sam 18:33-19:4; John 11:33-35); laments were composed (2 Chr 35:25); and the dead person’s virtues were recited (Acts 9:39). Family burial plots were considered significant (Gen 23:29; 25:9; 49:31; 50:13, 25).

The differences that exist between Christian funerals and other funerals are rooted in the Christian view of death, which for believers is seen as opening the door to a blessed life. The sting of death has been taken away through the death and resurrection of Christ (1 Cor 15:51-58).

Like all religions, Christianity addresses the issue of facing the consequences of one’s actions after death (Gal 6:7). The Bible and the Qur’an explain this in terms of judgement following a single earthly life for each individual (Heb 9:27). Both speak of two possible destinies: heaven and hell. In the Bible, while one’s works are a criterion for judgement (Eccl 12:14; Matt 25:31-46), the main determining factor is one’s response to the work of Christ (John 3:36).

The Qur’an puts the emphasis on both God’s mercy and one’s works (Sura 23:104-5).

Other South Asian religions – like Hinduism, Buddhism and Sikhism – see the consequences of one’s actions being worked out through karma and reincarnation (or rebirth in orthodox Buddhism), whereby one’s spirit (or the net effect of one’s karma in orthodox Buddhism) takes on a new body in a new life. The quality of this new life is determined by one’s behaviour in previous lives. The only hope that such religions hold out is that after a seemingly endless cycle of reincarnations/rebirths one may finally achieve a state in which all desire that causes suffering and frustration is extinguished. Liberated from the cycle of rebirth and attachment to the material world, the spirit will then be absorbed into the divine (Brahman). Buddhists differ on whether this is a state of extinction (Theravada Buddhism) or somewhat heaven-like (Mahayana Buddhism).

Many prefer the idea of an endless cycle of reincarnation/ rebirth to the Christian concept of salvation through grace. They want to be responsible for their own destiny – the same desire that lay behind the basic sin that brought death to humans (Gen 3). But the Bible teaches that we cannot save ourselves and have no grounds for boasting (Eph 2:8-9).

Christians are promised eternal life, which is essentially a personal relationship with God (John 17:3) that begins on earth and is consummated after death (John 5:24; 17:3; Phil 1:21-23; 1 Thess 4:17). This afterlife will be one of rich blessings (Rom 8:24) in a new heaven and a new earth that have many of the same features as the present earth but are untainted by sin. This final state will arrive after the second coming of Christ (Rev 21–22). We will retain our identity after death, recognise others and know that we are experiencing the consequences of our life on earth (Luke 16:22-25). This seems fairer than having to suffer repeatedly for behaviour in past lives that one cannot even remember.

The Bible is not totally clear about the details of the new heaven and the new earth or the sequence of events before they arrive. Thus there are differences of opinion on matters such as the intermediate state between death and the resurrection and the final judgement. But the Bible is clear on the matter of people’s eternal destinies. Those who reject God have to face his wrath (Rom 2:8; Eph 5:6; 1 Thess 2:16). They will be consigned to hell (Matt 5:29-30; Rev. 20:15; 21:8), which is a place of torment (Luke 16:23, 28; Rev 14:9-11). The Bible speaks of degrees of punishment in the afterlife (Matt 11:20-24; Luke 12:47-48; Heb 10:26-29), but gives no details about this. However, Jesus asserts that there is no moving out of hell once one is there (Luke 16:26).

The prospect of future judgement is presented in the Bible as an incentive to discipleship (Mark 8:31-38), to holiness (Mark 9:43-48) and to involvement in mission (Matt 10:28).

Continue Reading

DEAD SEA SCROLLS

DEAD SEA SCROLLS

The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls was a providential accident. It happened in 1947 when three Bedouin shepherds were grazing their goats near Qumran on the north-west shore of the Dead Sea. While searching for a goat, one of them noticed two openings on the face of the cliff. He threw a rock into one of them and heard the sound of breaking pottery. He was excited at having found what he thought were some treasure jars.

Two days later, his younger cousin woke up early and entered the cave. He found pieces of broken pottery and a lot of jars along the wall, some with their lids on. Inside the jars was something wrapped in cloth and two bundles of leather. He was deeply disappointed at the lack of treasure. Little did he know that he had found a great treasure– the oldest complete copy of the book of Isaiah, an ancient commentary on the book of Habakkuk, and an account of the rules governing the religious community from which these scrolls came.

The shepherds crammed these and other rolls of leather from the cave into their bags and hung them on a tent pole until they could find some antique dealer who might be interested in old scrolls.

When archaeologists eventually learnt of the existence of what came to be known as the Dead Sea scrolls, they set out to explore the caves. Between 1947 and 1956 eleven caves were found to have manuscript material. In all, fragments or large sections of over 850 manuscripts dating from between 250 BC and AD 70 were discovered. Most of the books of the Hebrew Bible are represented, except for the book of Esther. Biblical scholars were very excited because before the discovery of these scrolls, the earliest Hebrew manuscripts for the OT dated from around AD 1000. The scrolls were more than a thousand years older than that! They showed that the OT manuscripts had been well preserved and accurately transmitted over the centuries.

A few of the scrolls were published as early as 1950-1951, but until 1991 many others were accessible only to the original team of archeologists and those who worked closely with them. This led some to develop conspiracy theories and claim that scholars were hiding something that would shake the core of our faith. However, today the Discoveries in the Judaean Desert series put out by Oxford University Press has published more than forty volumes of scholarly editions of these texts. There is no evidence of any conspiracy to hide their contents.

Most of the scrolls were written in Hebrew, although a few are in Aramaic and Greek. They fall into four broad categories:

• Biblical books: All the Old Testament books are represented (except Esther). Some like Psalms, Deuteronomy and Isaiah exist in multiple copies. There are also some fragments from books like Tobit and Ben Sira that belong to the Apocrypha.

• Jewish religious texts that are not part of the Hebrew Bible. These include books like 1 Enoch and the book of Jubilees.

• Documents setting out the ideology and practices of the Jewish community that preserved the scrolls, whom many scholars identify as the Essenes. The documents include manuscripts like the Rule of the Community, Thanksgiving Hymns and the War Scroll.

• A group of miscellaneous texts. To this category belong scrolls like the Copper Scroll which is a list of hidden treasures, or the Prayer of Nabonidus, the Targum to Job and the Genesis apocryphon.

The study of the Dead Sea Scrolls is exceedingly important because they help us to understand Jewish thinking in the intertestamental period – that is, the years between the end of the OT (the Hebrew Bible) and the start of the NT. This knowledge helps us to interpret the Bible better and gives us a better understanding of the Jewish context in which Jesus ministered. Many themes that have been found in the NT can be traced back to the Dead Sea Scrolls and to the OT.

There are also some theological similarities between the Qumran community and aspects of the Jesus movement.

Continue Reading

DALITS

DALITS

Dalits have long endured the injustice and indignity imposed on them by the caste system, which operates in various forms through South Asia, especially in India. They have suffered discrimination, dispossession and subjugation, and the theory of karma has been used to make them accept their plight as their punishment for sins committed in a previous life. The name they have chosen for themselves, Dalit, is apt.

It comes from a root word dal, which is also found in the OT. In Hebrew it literally means “crushed”, “hanging down”, “languid”, “weakened”, “low” and “feeble”. Unlike the Dalits in South Asia, the people referred to by this name in the OT were not untouchables, but the “poorest” of the poor (2 Kgs 24:14; Jer 52:15). The word used to describe them emphasises their broken condition rather than just their poverty.

The origins of the South Asian caste system may lie in the subjugation of the original inhabitants of the region by the invading Aryans in the Vedic Age (1750-500 BC). In the centuries that have elapsed since then, the system has not gone unchallenged. Both Mahavira (540-468 BC) and the Buddha (563-483 BC) rejected it, but Buddhism did not find widespread acceptance in India. Dalits also experienced some emancipation under Muslim rule after AD 800, in that they were allowed to serve in the army. The Sufi sect of Islam also advocated social equality. Then in the twelfth century AD the Hindu Bhakti movement undermined the caste system by emphasising belief in one God, the equality of all castes and the unity of religions.

This movement later produced great saints and poets like Namdev and Ravidas, both of whom belonged to the Sudra or lowest/servant caste.

Despite these movements towards equality, the caste system continued. In the British era, Dalit self-assertion contributed to the 1857 Uprising. When Mangal Pandey, an upper-caste Hindu soldier, refused to give water to an untouchable on the ground that his touch would pollute the vessel, the untouchable reacted by taunting him that the cartridges he would have to bite off were coated with pork and beef fat. Pork was anathema to Muslims and beef to Hindus. This shock, in combination with other events, led to the full-blown Sepoy Mutiny, later referred to as the First War of Indian Independence. The British put down the mutiny and assumed direct government of India.

The next phase of the Dalit struggle against oppression was marked by the mass conversions of entire Dalit groups to egalitarian religions, particularly Christianity. These conversions shook the foundations of the Indian social order. So did the spread of Western education and the Western legal system, new land policies, industrial development and the rise of movements advocating for democracy and civil rights. Dr B. R. Ambedkar, one of the first Dalits to receive higher education, propelled Dalit consciousness to new heights by exposing oppressive caste-driven conditions. He argued that liberation was possible if the untouchables pursued self-organisation, education and protest.

Dr Ambedkar subsequently converted to Buddhism along with nearly 400,000 of his followers. This event in 1956 began what was later to be known as Neo-Buddhism (the modern Buddhist revivalist movement). Interestingly, in designing Neo-Buddhism, Dr Ambedkar closely followed the patterns and structures of Christianity.

The famous Ambedkar-Gandhi 1932 Poona Pact gave shape to the present reservation policy mandating that certain places in schools, government offices and public sector units be reserved for Dalits.

Unfortunately, as a result, Dalits are still defined in terms of their relationship to other castes. Moreover, when Dalits turn from Hinduism and embrace Sikhism, Islam or Christianity, they are often denied access to positions and benefits reserved for Dalits. The result has been that some Christian Dalits have publicly reverted back to Hinduism while remaining Christians at heart.

The Dalit Christian movement gained visibility in an all-India demonstration in New Delhi on 17 August 1990. This demonstration was organised to protest the continuing marginalisation of Dalits within the church and the withholding from Christian Dalits of facilities extended to Hindu Dalits under the 1950 Presidential Order.

Although the church in South Asia has publicly declared its support for Dalits and its opposition to caste discrimination, the caste system is still very much part of the church and the lives of Christians in this region. To some extent, this may be traced back to the missionary period, when foreign missionaries found it difficult to understand and deal with casteism and its ramifications. Some of them opposed it totally, while others tried to adapt it and use it rather than reject it altogether.

Today, in some parts of the country, there is widespread casteism within the church, with opposition to inter-caste marriages and even to embracing Dalits as full members of the church, with the same rights and privileges as all other members. On the other hand, in North India, for example, a significant majority of church members are from Dalit and Adivasi (tribal) backgrounds, and Christianity is thus perceived as a religion of the untouchables. This, in turn, creates problems in reaching out to other groups.

Churches must be sensitive to the discrimination experienced by Dalits and should set up specialised structures or strategies to equip and empower them with knowledge and information about their rights and duties, to mobilise them into organised bodies and to enhance advocacy for their education in state, private and church-run educational institutions.

Continue Reading

CREATION AND THE ENVIRONMENT

CREATION AND THE ENVIRONMENT

The Bible starts with the powerful proclamation: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen 1:1). We proclaim this truth every time we recite the opening words of the Apostles’ Creed:

“I believe in God the Father, maker of heaven and earth.”

This must be our starting point for any discussion of creation and the environment. Creation reveals God as “the heavens proclaim his righteousness and all peoples see his glory” (Ps 97:6; see also Rom 1:20).

As Creator, God is both distant from his creation and in an ongoing relationship with it. Understanding this helps us to avoid two errors. The first is pantheism, which sees God everywhere and in everything. Pantheism confuses the Creator with creation. The other is dualism, which sees God as having no continuing relationship with created life. But the Bible teaches that although God is transcendent, and thus apart from the world, he is still immanent, that is, intimately involved in the real world he has created. Psalm 104.5 affirms that he is the one who has “set the earth on its foundations”. Paul states that “all things” are created by God in Christ, who continues to hold “all things … together” (Col 1:16-17).

Human beings are given a special place in God’s creation because we are made in his image. Unfortunately, we Christians have sometimes been only too happy to assert this while forgetting that with privilege comes responsibility. We have sometimes used God’s command to Adam and Eve to “rule” or “have dominion” over the earth (Gen 1:26) to legitimise arrogant exploitation of nature. Critics claim that such emphases have resulted in an anthropocentric (humancentred) attitude. No wonder some Westerners have been leaning towards Hinduism and Buddhism, which they see as more biocentric (nature-centred) and therefore ecologically sensitive.

But we should be neither anthropocentric nor biocentric; we should be theocentric, acknowledging that the one in whom “we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28) has assigned us the responsibility of caring for his creation. “The earth is the Lord’s and everything in it” (Ps 24:1). We are only caretakers. This relation between humanity and God’s earth is something that must be central to our environmental concern. Jeremiah underlines God’s ownership:

“With my great power and outstretched arm I made the earth and its people and the animals that are on it, and I give it to anyone I please” (Jer 27:5).

The other Christian teaching we must never forget when thinking about the environment is the adverse effects of the fall. We cannot simply celebrate God’s glorious creation and ignore the fact that creation has been affected by human sin. But the fall has not totally obliterated the goodness ascribed to creation by God. And, the fall does not give us any right to dismiss the present world and creation as evil and remain apart from it while we await a future renewal. We need to work to counter the environmental degradation caused by human sinfulness.

We must do our part, but must also recognise that God has planned the final restoration of this fallen creation. In Romans 8:20- 21, the Apostle Paul refers to creation being liberated from its bondage to decay. This is generally understood as a promised reversal of the curse that creation was subjected to as a consequence of human sin (Gen 3:17-19). In the book of Revelation, the Apostle John foresees “a new heaven and a new earth” (Rev 21:1).

In working to restore the environment, we need to recognise that God has not given us a haphazard assembly of organic and inorganic matter, natural energy and resources. Creation consists of ecosystems that are intricately woven together in interdependent cycles. The survival of all of creation depends on protecting these interdependent relationships.

We are called to be stewards, protecting this intricately planned world God has entrusted to us. Even more, we are called to be “responsible stewards” (Gen 2:15; Matt 25:20-21; 1 Cor 4:2; 1 Pet 4:10). Responsible stewardship demonstrated through God’s love will result in practical actions to promote sustainable living as well as right attitudes towards the environment. As Bible-believing Christians, we are called to care for creation in order to protect, conserve and bring healing to our wounded world.

Continue Reading

CONFLICT AND RECONCILIATION

CONFLICT AND RECONCILIATION

Despite the fact that advances in travel and communications have shrunk the world to a global village and drawn communities and nations into closer interaction, we still experience interpersonal, interracial, inter-religious and international conflicts. How is it that humanity, which yearns so much for intimacy, almost inevitably moves towards conflict?

The answer is that conflict has been part of human existence ever since the fall. Sin brings people into conflict with God, with others and with the natural world. It results in a deep sense of shame, fear and an unhealthy self-consciousness (Gen 3:6-10). It led Adam and Eve to attempt to cover their nakedness and to Adam blaming Eve for his failure (Gen 3:12). The differences between them were no longer something to be celebrated. Instead, they became a source of threat.

Cain reacted against Abel’s righteousness by murdering him (Gen 4:1-8). Thereafter, conflict among brothers becomes a major theme in Genesis. As is often the case today, most of these conflicts arose due to ownership and sharing of land and resources. The subsequent history of Israel is one of continuing conflict – intertribal and international – until first Israel and then Judah went into exile. The trauma of such conflicts created a longing for reconciliation and peace, captured in the psalmist’s exclamation, “How good and pleasant it is when God’s people live together in unity!” (Ps 133:1).

Prophets like Isaiah hold out a more comprehensive vision of reconciliation that includes all people, not just “God’s people”. They envisage a day when humanity will live in peace with God, with each other and with the natural order (Isa 11:1-9; Amos 9:11-15).

Reconciliation lies at the heart of the gospel. Paul explains that the ultimate purpose of God’s work of salvation is to reconcile the world to himself (2 Cor 5:18-21). Consequently, both the ministry and message of the apostolic church are fundamentally about reconciliation. Paul brings out the social dimensions of this reconciliation when he points out that Christ’s sacrificial death has taken away the hostility between God and humanity and made it possible for hostile communities to experience peace with one another (Eph 2:11-21).

Christians are not immune to conflicts. We even experience them in the church and families because of our deep-rooted insecurities, our acquisitive tendencies and the perceived threat of whatever is different. Those who insist that “wisdom comes with age” clash with those who are young and seeking change. There are clashes between those who speak one language and those who speak another, between castes, and between those who live in the city and those who live in rural areas.

Conflicts, however, are not insurmountable because Jesus, by his trust in God, selflessness and embracing of all humanity, has destroyed the basis of conflict and opened the way for reconciliation.

Through his teachings Jesus not only anticipated conflicts that would emerge in the new community he inaugurated but also provided pointers to help the church aim for reconciliation in such instances. In Matthew 5:23-25 he introduced the radical concept that the efficacy of our worship is directly related to the harmony between us. Thus we should settle our differences before coming to worship him.

In Matthew 18:15-17 he sets out the logical but limited steps a Christian community should take when dealing with someone who is a source of conflict. He advocates that disagreements should be settled gently, in private or with only two or three witnesses (see also Gal 6:1; Jas 5:19-20). This approach resonates with typical shame-cultures as in South Asia. The implication that disputes are better settled by corporate rather than individual effort also parallels the situation in South Asia, where village councils and similar bodies play a role in dispute resolution. On the other hand, there are tendencies in our South Asian context to play down and cover up serious ethical violations. The fact that an unrepentant Christian faces public exposure and even excommunication is the counter-cultural gospel corrective to these tendencies.

Continue Reading

COMMUNALISM AND SECULARISM

In India, “communalism” refers to the belief that Hindus and Muslims form well-defined, unchanging and totally separate communities whose economic, social and political interests are mutually and essentially opposed. This type of division of society is in part a legacy of colonial rule, in which all inhabitants of India who were not Muslim, Christian, Sikh, Jain, Parsi or Buddhist were labelled as Hindu. The classification of the population by religious and ethnic categories separated by well-defined boundaries continues today and is used to explain and justify hostility between groups.

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, some Hindu and Muslim political leaders encouraged the development of mythic histories to mobilise their respective communities against each other as much as against colonial rule. Some, though not all, Muslims argued for separate political representation on ideological grounds as well as on the basis of practical interests. Thus the imposition of Western political and administrative institutions, coupled with economics of scarcity, provided new scope for the expression of communalism.

In the project of Hindutva, or the political assertion of “Hinduness”, India is now referred to as Bharat, the name of the brother of Ram in the Hindu epic poem the Ramayana. The pre- Muslim period of Indian history is held up as a golden age of progress, of high cultural, intellectual and economic achievement that was brought to an end by the Muslim hordes, who introduced an age of barbarity, forced conversion, cultural decay, religious repression and economic collapse. Many now advocate the regeneration of Bharat, with a restoration of Hindu unity and the glories of the pre- Muslim age.

Similar mythic narratives have been created in Sri Lanka by the Sinhala Buddhist majority to assert their right to dominate the state.

Other ethnic and religious groups are seen as tainted by “foreignness” and the interests of the nation are identified with the interest of the majority community.

Such “communalists” or “religious nationalists” argue that democratic governments must give priority to the demands of the religious majority. This has been a constant theme in the propaganda of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the VHP/BJP in India and Sinhala Buddhist organisations in Sri Lanka. But this is a naïve understanding of democracy, which opens the way for the tyranny of the majority.

There is good reason for the insistence that India is and should remain a secular democracy. But the term “secular” may have various meanings. Archbishop Rowan Williams has helpfully distinguished between “procedural secularism” and “programmatic secularism”. Procedural secularism is a public policy that declines to give a legally favoured position to any particular religious community. It does not require any specific religious allegiance from its officials, but acts impartially, seeking to enlist their resources of different communities in discerning and implementing the common good. Such a state is open to critique and correction by all religious traditions. This is the type of secularism espoused in the Indian constitution.

In France, however, the government favours programmatic secularism, which attempts to exclude from public visibility every manifestation of religious allegiance, whether language, symbols or rituals. Such allegiances are seen as threatening a more fundamental civic identity. Expressions of religious convictions are banned from public space and confined to the private realm.

Christians always stand in a position of critical tension in relation to their political identities. They seek to be responsible citizens, refusing to claim special privileges for the church or rights that are not universal. The way Christians defend their religious liberty is by defending the liberty of others. Their ethnic and national loyalties are judged by the priorities of the kingdom of God.

Thus Christians should welcome political pluralism and a procedurally secular state that actively encourages public dialogue among the various faith traditions and also seeks their views on matters of state policy. If open intellectual persuasion is not fostered as a positive virtue in society, then coercion and manipulation result.

The disciplines of the modern state seek to create disciples of the nation-state. The disciplines of the church – the practices of prayer and corporate worship, of Bible reading and bearing one another’s burdens, of gospel proclamation and costly solidarity with the vulnerable and the oppressed – seek to form disciples of Jesus Christ.

They thus make possible a different kind of politics, one that rejects the nationalist politics of exclusion and victimisation and encourages a politics of shared and global responsibility.

Continue Reading

CHURCH AND NATIONALISM

The rise of nationalism in South Asia has followed different paths in different nations. However, it has often been part of a general movement to reject colonialism and foreign rule and demand national autonomy. This movement led South Asian Christians to recognise that the time had come for local Christians to develop indigenous churches that transcended Western denominationalism and presented a united Christian voice. Thus, for example, the Church of South India was founded in 1947, followed by the Church of Pakistan and the Church of North India.

In the early twentieth century, nationalism was interpreted largely in terms of achieving national autonomy for a geographic region. In many cases, this was achieved. However, nationalism has also come to be understood in terms of asserting the supremacy of the dominant culture. Cultural nationalism can be seen in Hindu nationalism in India and Sinhala nationalism in Sri Lanka. The result of cultural nationalism is often a semi-deification of the state and a denial of minority rights.

The political success of nationalism has not been matched by meaningful alleviation of the deep poverty of large sections of society. Nationalist rulers have sometimes been more interested in their rights than in their duties and have failed to strive for the common good and care for the weak and the poor, which is the task the Bible lays on leaders (Deut 17:14-20; 1 Sam 10:25). Given the failure to make progress on this front, the public mission of many South Asian churches has shifted to setting people free from the chains of caste, gender and ethnicity. Many are inspired by Moses’ message to Pharaoh, “Let my people go” (Exod 5:1), and by the prophets’ calls for justice for the oppressed (Amos 5:24; Mic 6:8).

The struggle for national autonomy has also shifted from a concern for political autonomy to a concern for economic autonomy.

Globalisation has enabled transnational corporations based in rich nations to ignore the interests of the people and ally themselves with national elites to pursue their own interests. This has led to the emergence of movements that cut across national boundaries and seek to counter this market-driven and exploitative culture while affirming the need for a peaceful, just and sustainable social order.

As the church grapples with new forms of nationalism, we need to remember both that secular authorities derive their power from God (Rom 13:1-7) and that they can be a force for evil (Rev 13).

Christians are called to be good citizens of their nations, but also to work for their transformation. Our primary allegiance is to the kingdom of God and to the values of that kingdom. We will thus resist nationalism when it is abused to undermine freedom and human dignity, for we are called to speak fearlessly for truth and justice. But we will work with those who promote the well-being of all those who together constitute the nation. The challenge before the churches is to be true to the biblical vision of prophetic participation in public life.

Continue Reading

CHRISTIANS AND POLITICS

CHRISTIANS AND POLITICS

Jesus Christ told his followers that they were to be salt and light in the world (Matt 5:13-16). As such, we who follow him are to permeate society with the values that Jesus taught and be a light to those who are walking in darkness. One way in which we can do this is by being involved in the processes and methods for the governance of society, or in other words, in politics, at the national, regional and local level.

Some Christians would reject this assertion. They argue that this world is doomed and so there is no point in trying to improve society. Since this material world will always be full of sin, there is nothing we can do to change things on earth. Instead, we should concentrate on trying to snatch individuals from the clutches of sin and bring them to a place among those who are preparing for heaven or the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

But such a view ignores the fact that Jesus taught us to pray, “Your (God’s) kingdom come, Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (Matt 6:10). Since the kingdom of God involves the rule of God in every aspect of human society, praying for its coming must also involve working to ensure that governance is carried out in accordance with his will. Moreover, government has been given the divinely mandated task of restraining evil and providing the framework for the good to flourish. Good governance allows Christians to spread the love of God shown in Jesus Christ (Rom 13:4; 1 Tim 2:1-4).

Our involvement in politics should spring from our theology. Since God has created each and every person in his own image (Gen 1:27), it is incumbent upon us to treat each and every person with respect and honour. To deny people human rights is to insult both them and God’s purpose for humanity. Thus Christians should seek to influence the policies of governments so that they do not violate human rights. This will involve speaking out and taking action in regard to issues of caste and gender discrimination.

Similarly, since God created the world and repeatedly called the non-human creation good (Gen 1:10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31), we should be concerned about his creation. We should have a keen interest in promoting policies that impact the health and sustainability of the environment. This concern should be rooted not only in respect for creation but also in our love for others, for our actions today will affect the quality of life of future generations.

Justice issues should also concern Christians. In the law of Moses, God repeatedly stresses the need for justice (Exod 23:6; Lev 19:15; Deut 27:19). If we are to work for justice in the nation, we need to get involved in the institutions of governance. We have to enter the political arena in order to ensure that the laws passed are just and, equally important, to make sure that just laws are implemented and enforced. The search for justice also involves becoming involved in the fight against corruption and bribery (Deut 16:19). It also requires us to address the economic injustice that manifests itself in the form of usurious interest rates on loans and the exploitation of the poor by the rich (Ezek 22:12).

How should Christians get involved in politics? Some may choose to join the major political parties that shape the laws that impact our daily lives. Christians who do this may sometimes find themselves having to compromise their convictions in order to defend wrong policies espoused by the party of their choice. In some contexts, Christians find it more helpful to enter politics as independent candidates or even to launch a party of their own. While it may not be possible to prescribe a preferred “Christian” course of action in this regard, the Christian mandate for responsible involvement is inescapable.

Those of us who are not called to stand for political office must still be involved in politics by ensuring that we use our rights as citizens and our power as voters to support policies, candidates and parties that fight for justice, human rights and respect for the environment.

Continue Reading

CHRISTIAN UNITY

CHRISTIAN UNITY

Throughout history Christians have allowed themselves to be divided by many issues, some of which are theological and some of which are not. It has come to be recognised that these divisions have often been a hindrance to the propagation of the gospel, leading Christians to long for unity. In many Asian countries, political persecution and nationalism have also drawn Christians together.

Ultimately, however, our union should not be rooted in sociopolitical realities but simply in the work of God, the Holy Spirit. Jesus prayed for unity among his disciples, asking “that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I in you. May they also be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me” (John 17:21).

Why did he ask this? Because he knew the frailty of human beings and understood that our diversity in character, perceptions, views and thinking was bound to cause division. The unity he prayed for was both vertical (spiritual unity between us and God) and horizontal (unity among ourselves). The psalmist was referring to this horizontal unity when he wrote, “How good and pleasant it is when God’s people live together in unity” (Ps 133:1). Such unity bears witness to the faith.

Unity between Christians can be expressed in many ways and at many levels. The ecumenical movements of the twentieth century pressed for organic unity and encouraged denominations in India to come together to form the Church of North India (CNI) and the Church of South India (CSI). This unity was extended to the conciliar level with the formation of the Joint Council of the CSI, CNI and Mar Thoma Church, which is today known as the Communion of Churches in India. On the regional level, the councils of Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka have formed the South Asia Council of Churches (SACC), while on the worldwide level these groups form part of the World Council of Churches, a federation that aims to bring different Christian groups together to exchange ideas and share resources.

Organic unity is not the only way in which we can express Christian unity. Our unity is also shown when Christian leaders from different denominations gather for theological discussion of issues affecting this region. Such discussions can lead to joint action on issues related to human rights and religious freedom. They can also lead to different groups working together to produce Christian literature (such as this commentary) or cooperating in running orphanages, widow-rehabilitation centres, old-age homes, hospices for the terminally ill and those affected by HIV/AIDS, and so on.

But it is not only leaders who can act to demonstrate Christian unity. On the local level, churches can encourage Christians to form prayer networks to pray for their community. They can also combine to organise Christian festivals, where Christians from different churches can come together and discover how they can worship together, participate in mission together and serve the community together.

Such expressions of unity help us to understand what Paul means in 1 Corinthians 12 when he uses the body to illustrate unity in diversity within the church. The basis for our unity is not that we are alike in all respects, but that we form one body, united in one Spirit, called to one hope, having professed in baptism our one faith in the one Lord, and we worship our one God and Father (Eph 4:4-6). This concept of unity is both spiritual and organic.

Continue Reading

CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE

CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE

Marriage in a South Asian context is a family affair – it is the coming together of two individuals and their families. Thus the family plays a major role when it comes to choosing a life partner. In the past, the family often made the choice, and the bride and the bridegroom might not even see each other before their marriage. Abraham’s choice of a bride for Isaac (Gen 24) was thus in keeping with the Asian way of choosing one’s life partner. Asian couples accepted this, and whereas in the West most people marry for love, in South Asia the majority of couples choose to love the ones they marry.

Parents in Asia consider the role of choosing a partner for their child as a God-given privilege and responsibility. But many parents have abused and commercialised this privilege, leading urban young people to rebel against the system. They want to choose their own partners, although they will still seek their parents’ consent to their marriage. Both parents and children need guidance from the church as they adapt to this new reality.

The payment of dowry is a glaring example of the commercialisation of marriage. Originally, this practice was intended to ensure that the girl obtained a fair share of the ancestral property, but over time it has become a cover for greed. Girls with an inadequate dowry may be unable to marry, or if they do, they may be murdered by their new family. Unfortunately, even Christian families sometimes demand a dowry, whereas they ought to take a stand against greed (1 Tim 6:8-10). A woman should be valued for who she is, not for the goods she brings with her. A wedding, too, should be a celebration of a union, not an occasion for extravagant spending and displays of wealth that leave families in debt for years.

Then there is the issue of in-laws and parental interference. Parents often find it difficult to release their children after marriage.

Many men are expected to stay with their parents after marriage to take care of them and to ensure inheritance of parental property. In such homes, the parents may act as dictators and cause discord between the man and his wife. Meanwhile the woman loses all her rights as a member of her own family and becomes part of her husband’s family. It is not surprising that the most common conflict in South Asian homes is between mothers-in-law and daughters-in-law.

In Christian homes, such a situation reflects a failure to take seriously what the Bible says about marriage being a covenant in which “a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh” (Gen 2:24; see also Matt 19:5; Mark 10:7; Eph 5:31). God intends the bond between a married couple to take priority over their bond to their parents, so that the two become one functional unit. Jesus emphasised that it is God who puts a man and woman together and any attempt to divide the partners in this holy union is an act against God himself (Matt 19:5-6). Parents who constantly interfere with their children and disrupt a couple’s family life are guilty of working against what God has joined together. They should learn to release their children so that the couple have space to grow in order to achieve God’s purpose for their family life. This is not to say that children should not honour their parents after marriage, but there needs to be a balanced shift in allegiance from parents to spouse. The man, who has been appointed as the head of the family, needs to take the lead in setting this balance.

The fact that the man is to become “one flesh” with his wife also indicates that she is neither a piece of property nor a spare part that can be replaced at will. It also implies that a husband who abuses his wife harms himself, and parents who abuse their daughter-in-law harm their son.

In the past, spousal abuse has been tolerated and women have been told to endure it rather than risk divorce. But just as the OT prophets spoke out against abuse of the poor, so the church should speak out against the abuse of wives. Husbands should be made to realise that it is a sin to abuse anyone (Matt 5:22), and especially the one whom they are particularly commanded to love, protect and cherish (Eph 5:25; Col 3:19). The church has a responsibility to hold such abusive husbands to account and counsel them, while helping their wives to find healing for themselves and their families.

The changing economic environment in South Asia is also having an effect on marriages. Many men and women are working directly or indirectly for multinational companies. Women thus have some independent income, which has empowered them and disrupted traditional roles. Men are often no longer the sole breadwinners, and the increased assertiveness of women has sometimes led to even minor disagreements becoming reasons for couples to separate.

Family routines and parent–child relationships may also be disrupted when the parents work in places like call centres, with odd hours. The fact that men and women now work together provides more opportunities for extramarital relationships.

In such circumstances, the church needs to help couples to safeguard their marriage and family from damaging influences. The best defence is a solid foundation in Christ. Psalm 127:1 says, “Unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labour in vain.”

Money, education and the like can never provide security, but a home that has Christ as its foundation will weather the storms of life.

Good communication also acts like a wall protecting a marriage. Thus churches must encourage communication between husbands and wives, and couples must ensure that they share quality time together if they are to understand each other well.

Christ is the foundation of a healthy marriage, communication is the wall surrounding it, and committed love between the spouses is the roof over it. True love drives out fear and covers a multitude of wrongdoings. It can even be said that a marriage is a coming together of two forgivers, who do not hold grudges against each other. If a couple finds loving each other difficult, they need to turn to the cross of Christ. The springs of love that flow from the cross can keep filling and replenishing their hearts. This love will then overflow into their relationships with their children and those around them.

Continue Reading

CHRISTIAN BHAKTI

Bhakti is devotion to a deity, who was traditionally a Hindu god. Some forms of bhakti stress the obligation to honour caste affiliations; others are more egalitarian and emphasise the genuineness of the devotees’ emotions. The latter encourage love for and surrender to a deity and reliance on grace rather than on rituals and austerities as a path to spiritual fulfilment. This egalitarian understanding has been embraced by the poor and Dalits and has inspired bhakti cults.

However, bhakti is not a “Hindu Protestantism”, giving rise to dissenting sects outside mainstream Hinduism. Rather, it permeates all forms of Hinduism. Worshippers of Vishnu express their devotion by worshipping him as their child, parent, friend, master or beloved.

The concept of bhakti is also very important in monotheistic Sikhism.

In Hindu bhakti traditions, the divine is understood as one God manifested in the various deities of sacred myths. Christians, however, worship the Trinitarian God of the Bible, who manifests his power in creation, in the OT history of Israel, in the saving, redeeming and peace-loving acts of Jesus Christ, and through the work of the Holy Spirit.

Hindu bhakti involves the use of images, which are regarded as receptacles in which the spirit of the deity is invited to rest. Thus, an image is both a representation and a manifestation of the deity, and gazing upon it symbolises the meeting of the deity and the devotee.

By contrast, Christians believe that God is an invisible Spirit and that no images should be made of him (Exod 20:3-6; Acts 17:29). The only image of God that Christians have is the living Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1, 18; 14:8; Col 1:15; 2:9; Heb 1:3). He is the focus of Christian devotion.

Both Hindus and Christians recognise that humans are unworthy to offer worship to God. In Hinduism the priest or the chief worshipper acts as a mediator, presenting offerings and returning parts of the offering to the devotees as symbols of the deity’s grace and power. For Christians, Jesus is the high priest. Because he is holy and is himself God, he is the perfect mediator between the invisible holy God and sinful humanity. He presents the perfect offering (himself) to God on our behalf and, in return, offers us God’s Spirit and his grace.

Hindu devotees honour a deity by bathing, dressing appropriately and removing footwear before approaching its image, and by presenting themselves at appropriate times with appropriate offerings.

They acknowledge their sinfulness and request forgiveness. By adoring the image of the deity and receiving the part of their offering that is returned to them, they notionally receive grace from the deity.

Christians, too, recognise that they are sinful, but they know that they have been saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, who died, was raised and is now seated on the throne. Christians acknowledge their sinfulness and seek forgiveness by offering themselves in worship and service to the Lord.

The rituals of bhakti worship include prostrations before the deity and surrender to the deity, praising the deity’s name, and treating the image of the deity to the hospitality due to a royal guest. In Christian worship, believers offer themselves to Christ’s service through singing praises, listening to the reading of the Bible and its exposition by preachers, praying, giving offerings, and absolute obedience to God.

In some parts of India, Christian devotees are trying to adopt elements of bhakti ritual in Christian worship. For example, in their singing they draw on the classical Hindu tradition of devotional songs with simple tunes and repetitive words that create almost meditative chanting. In the practice of offertory in church, there is also partial Christian adaptation of the Hindu practice of presenting a vegetable or fruit offering that is cut, pinched or broken by the priest to signify that the devotee is dying to self and living for the deity. The offering is seen as redeeming the devotee. Christians bring no such offering, for Christ’s death is the perfect offering on our behalf (2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tim 2:5-6). But we do acknowledge that in accepting Jesus Christ as our offering or sacrifice to God, we die to ourselves and live for God (Col 1:21-22).

The Hindu practice of returning part of the offering to the devotee as a symbol of divine grace offers parallels to the role of the bread and wine in Christian worship.

The appropriation of bhakti by South Asian Christians often reflects their background prior to their conversion to Christian faith.

Those who were Brahmins like Bishop A.J. Appasamy draw on the understanding of bhakti in Hindu philosophical schools. Dalits are attracted to bhakti in its simplest, egalitarian form and are in the process of developing their own theology and forms of worship.

Continue Reading