"The Royalty of Service is Breaking the Hierarchy" by John Allwyn, Gurukul

The Royalty of Service is Breaking the Hierarchy

(In a missionary perspective)

Text: John: 13:1-17

There are many missionaries who planted a fame and name by their hard and solid efforts in means of propagating Gospel. But it is not the same in all cases. It is anomaly thought of a Christian missionary to think about the welfare and development of a believer. Consciously or unconsciously Christian missionaries have a pride and self identity in means of mission that is gaining the souls in Christ Jesus. There are missionaries really doing their ministry without any pride and self-centered. They renounced all their benefits and profits. Above all they are keeping on maintaining their blameless life before others which is really a tough task. Blameless life does not connote the isolation or the separation from the people or the world, but it is a collaboration with them and being one among people in order to save them through Christ. Especially, they are proving the equality that our Lord Jesus Christ showed. The mission work is not a static but it is dynamic, which flows and spreads ceaselessly. Therefore the missionaries should have such flow to reach people not just up to the level of conversion but the scope of betterments of their welfare.  The missionaries’ part is not ended or stopped at the level of introducing Christ to them, but it has a lot of responsibilities to equip them to live a better life in their struggles. The development of the respected place where a missionary posted is not based on the work of a particular missionary how superior he/she is, but on the outcome or the result of the missionary work how long it has reached the people. In fact, that work should equip the people to stand on their own legs. How long people should depend the missionaries for their betterments? How long they expect the missionaries to meet their needs? These questions came to my mind after my experience in the DMPB mission field.

I was posted as a missionary in the Kalvarayan Hills. The mission work started here before merely more than 50 years. Even though, DMPB have done many works, they have raised only few missionaries as local missionaries. The local missionaries are the original people of the particular land, and they are forbidden by the DMPB mission board not to take any post as leaders of the mission. Though a local missionary has a complete quality for leadership, it has been forbidden by the DMPB missionaries. This shows that, we are failing to follow the models of Jesus in the ministry.

1)         Humility: a tool to break the hierarchy

Here, in this pericope (Jn: 13:1- 17) Jesus exhibits the humility which is a model for all of us. Feet - washing would be understood as a traditional act of  love in one sense in the Old Testament, and also feet-washing will be done when one entered one’s house, not during the course of a  meal. The Passover ritual prescribed a washing of hands after the second cup, but there is no evidence that Jesus’ action was a variant upon that custom. Feet –washing is explained here as being a lesson in humility and Jesus illustrated, by his action this essential feature of his mission and he bids his disciples to follow his example.

The fourth Gospel writer John is very keen in chronology of every event. He pointed out that this feet- washing had taken place before the feast that is Nisan the Passover. John emphasizes his chronology, which differs from that suggested by the synoptists. Moreover, according to John this act of feet-washing had taken time after the meal, exactly at the end of eating. Jesus “got up from the table”. Therefore it is clear that this act is not a matter of purification, or a preparatory act for a meal. It is an act of practical or object-lesson to the Disciples to instruct the Humility. Further, Jesus girded Himself with a towel, as a slave would do, and poured water upon their feet. This act showed us how Jesus the Master served his disciples with humility. John tells us that He not only spoke, but acted what He said. As a rebuke to their worldly strivings, He, their Lord and Master, showed them what dignity is in the Kingdom of God by rendering to them the most menial service that could be asked of a slave. The divine humility shows itself in rendering service. He who is entitled to claim the service of all his creatures chooses first to give his service to them. “The son of man came not to receive service but to give it” (Mk: 10:45).  This kind of attitude should be there in a missionary. 

The self- identity of a missionary should be vanished through the projection of Christ Jesus. But, still missionaries are holding such dignity and status in order to explicit them as a leader for mission. The action of Jesus broke the hierarchy between master and disciples, the superior and inferior. Some of our Christian missionaries do not want such mentality to be humble and treat other as their equals. They want others to remain in the same state where they are, is that the fundamental level of their spiritual entity. Missionaries’ need should be there always to help them by the domination. People always remain dependents. As a famous saying “a good leader does not make any disciples, but rather leaders”, Jesus proved it by both words and deeds. This is not an event that Jesus demonstrated such humility, which limited with itself alone but, a solid teaching which condemns the pride and superior hearts. The Lukcan Gospel clearly records the dispute about the greatness, among the disciples, followed by the institution of the Lord’s supper. It gives the conclusion of that dispute as follows; Jesus told them, “in this world the kings and greater man order their slaves around, and the slaves have no choice but to like it”. But among you, the one severs you best will be your leader. Therefore, the greatness is not based on the sophisticated life of a person but it is on humility and in respecting others. The demonstration of Jesus washing the disciples’ feet is a centre core of mission, which is recalling us to partake in such service. Let us find out the way to reach people with humility and meekness. 

2)         Recognition: a tool to break the hierarchy

The great attitude of a person is to consider others with their qualities. Respecting others and their talents are needed in God’s mission. For most forms of ministry some understanding of people is necessary. There are people those with multiple talents and gifts which are still not recognized in this world. The Christian mission is a platform for this kind of persons, and the hidden persons should reveal out to the light, since our Lord and savior is metaphorically considered as Light of the world. The recognition is also one way to equality. Jesus in his object- lesson taught to disciples the equality by recognizing them even though the disciples did not know about themselves and their talents. For example:  while Jesus washing his disciples’ feet, Peter denied such act of his Lord, that master comes and doing the menial service is somehow humiliation to the master. But, Jesus’ intention is not like the way Peter thinks. It is more than that, Peter said “Lord are you going to wash my feet?” Jesus replied, “You do not know now what I am doing, but later you will understand”. Here Jesus knew that Peter would go to do many things to the world after his ascension, but Peter did not know that at the movement. Jesus’ recognition is so revealed in this verse even though Peter did not know it. Further, Peter said again “you will never wash my feet”, Jesus answered, “But if I don’t you can’t be my partner”. This is a clear cut statement of Jesus that if Peter does not take part in washing then he will lose the equal partnership with his master.  What does the partnership denote here? This might be our question further dealing with this perecope. The partnership is an involvement in God’s mission that Jesus was doing along with his disciples. Jesus identified himself as a servant of God, by doing God’s mission and his open call to everyone to partake in it too. The “part” with Jesus is a sign of accomplishment of God’s mission and importantly the deeper meaning of it is “heritage with Jesus”. The word “heritage” in verse 8 is significant. The Greek expression echein meros can mean simply “to share with; be a partner with”, and this is mean the “more than fellowship”, the word Meros is used in LXX to translate Hebrew Heleq, the word that describes the God-given heritage of Israel. Peter did not understand that at the time but, as per Jesus said he became a great leader later after, Jesus’ ascension. This is what really needed to a Christian missionary, in order to recognize people and respect them with their qualities and uniqueness. 

It is a major question to us that “why there is no recognition given to deserving persons by the Christian missionaries?” it is a sensitive question because people are really not achieving their destination according to their abilities. The reason behind that disregard is if a person is given such privilege then he might perhaps become stronger and superior to a missionary or a Christian leader. In order not to equip the lay people, missionaries do not encourage them up to such leadership levels. In fact those particular missionaries who think like that are not right in sense, but, they are deceiving themselves, moreover they do still know not the self recognition that they are chosen for God’s mission. Nevertheless, the missionaries those who have such mentality, do not recognize their own efforts and motivations that they put in to people’s lives. If the equipped person comes forward up to the leadership state, the inferiority complex of the particular missionary pulls him/her down.  Jesus did not have such thought in his mission, but he gave the recognition and authority to his disciples to go to the world and make all people as disciple of him. 

Dear partners, as so far we have seen the lack which is existing in the mission field and has to be restored with good qualities that our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ had done. Our great mission is not to project our own Identity where we are doing ministry but we should follow the steps that Jesus demonstrated at the upper room. The mission of Jesus not ended by His resurrection and ascension but it is been continuing still through us.  He sent us the Holy Spirit to strengthen us to accomplish the mission with humility and equality. There is a good deal ahead of us to succeed that, therefore, my partners let us take part in God’s mission without our Ego and selfishness and let’s start recognizing others who are also partners of God’s mission. Why Because, Jesus had given us an example to follow: “Do as I have done to you” let us do the same. Amen.

[Mr John Allwyn J., the preacher of this sermon, is a final year BD student in Gurukul Lutheran Theological College and ResearchInstitute, Chennai, India.]

An ecological reading of John 4: 3-15 by Fourth Year Students of Gurukul Lutheran Theological College and Research Institute

Withering lands to Renovated Earth

The word Ecology is derived from two Greek terms oikos (house) and logos (knowledge). The term ‘house’ is one of the most powerful analogies used in the Bible to depict the relationship between God and creation. Ecology defines the experiential approach of relating the whole cosmos as our house. Ecology, economics, ecumenics are all derived from this common root oikos. This symbolism of the earth as our common home evokes the communal and inter-relational nature of life on earth, touching into felt experiences of safety and shelter, house or habitat, justice and security.

The passage John 4:3-15, talks about the meeting of Jesus and a woman in Sychar, a Samaritan town. The time of this conversation, on the sixth hour, still arises a question whether it happened at noon (according to Jewish time calculations) or in the evening (according to Roman time calculations).

 A story parallel to Jesus and Samaritan woman can be seen in Buddhist traditions also, where Aananda, Buddha’s favorite disciple ask a girl of chandala caste who is drawing water from the well for a drink.

The meeting of Jesus and the woman near a well in Samaria can be viewed and understood in various perspectives. In this paper we are trying to interpret this text in an ecological perspective.

Reaffirming the inherent worth of land

Samaria was a region of Palestine comprising the northern kingdom of Israel created when north and south split after the death of Solomon. The region was named after its capital city, Samaria.

Samaria was a country beautifully diversified with mountain and hill, valley and plain.  The extremely fertile soil had resulted in the growth of vines, olives, fruit trees, barley, wheat (v.4:35) etc.  Josephus speaks about excellent grass, by reason of which the cows yield more milk than those in any other place. This city was built during the reign of King Omri and later became the capital of Northern Israel. The name "Samaritans" clearly applies to the Israelite inhabitants of the Northern Kingdom.

But as results of the colonisation and continuous invasions by the empires (e.g Babylon and Assyrians), many people are deported to other lands and replaced with foreigners. As a result, a mixed tribe gradually began to develop in that area. Moreover the influence of foreign cultures has led the land to adopt idol worship. Because of this, Jews regarded this place as the ‘land of heathens’ and the people as a "mixed race" contaminated by foreign blood and false worship. As a result many Jews avoided the journey through Samaria and chose a long route across the Jordan and up through Perea to travel between Judea and Galilee. In other words, for jews Jerusalem is the holy place and Samaria is a cursed place. Similarly there was theological opposition for jews to worship in the land of Jerusalem.

From this passage it is clear that Jesus deliberately chose his way to Galilee through Samaria not only to deconstruct the notions of purity and pollution, but also to reaffirm the intrinsic worth of the land of Samaria. Here, Jesus rejects the very concept of division of land based on ‘purity’ of blood.

 Every land has its own worth. The value of a land exists within the natural order.  The worth of a land is determined neither by its residing people nor by its utilitarian value for human beings. In v. 21 Jesus tries to say that no piece of land is a perfect entity or more holy than others and hence the true worship should not be confined to a particular area or place.

The term used to signify a territory in earlier times in Kerala was Amsham (which means a portion). Now this term is considered as an apt word that used to indicate that the particular land was not an entity but only a part of the whole cosmos.

The Earth was so good when God created it. But later due to the dualistic Cartesian concept, nature was considered as a resource for human utility. This dualism in turn resulted in the subjugation of nature by man and gave rise to a new world view in which nature is inert and passive; uniform and mechanistic; separable and fragmented within itself; separate from man and inferior to be dominated and exploited by human. 

In Indian cosmology, the nature as prakriti is an expression of shakthi, the powerful creative principle of the cosmology, in conjunction with the masculine principle Purusha.  Prakriti is considered as sacred and is worshipped as Adi Shakti. In contrast to the Cartesian system, Indian cosmology considers person and nature (Purusha-Prakriti) as a duality in unity which are inseparable complements.

  Resources as God given Gifts

The woman is the central character of this passage. Jesus found her as she came to fetch water from Jacob’s well. In Palestine, water is commonly drawn out of the wells or cisterns by females, and carried, upon the shoulder or head; in large leathern or earthen vessels. Moreover, Deep wells (probably about 100 feet deep) are not uncommon there as the shallow wells will become dry in summer.

 During the conversations with Jesus, the problems posed by the women reflect her concerns about the deep well, v.11, (may indicate the scarcity of water) and her difficulty to come up to the well continually, v.15 (may because of the long distance).

The drying up of India is a man made rather than a natural calamity. This water seeking Samaritan woman in this passage can be compared to one among hundreds of the women in our country who walk kilometres daily to fetch water for their family due to mega dams and other developmental projects. The availability, accessibility, affordability and quality of the water are still a question before them. Thus the scarcity of water is a complex theological, socio-economic and political issue. Women and water are the most vulnerable elements in the nature that are easily exploited by the dominant powers.   Violence to the water cycle is probably the worst and most invisible form of violence. Due to technology assisted pollutions on water, it has now becoming a non-‘renewable’ resource.

Water and well were considered as a symbol of pride and prosperity in Old Testament times. To give a name to a well denoted a right of property, and was also a mark of conquest, or an encroachment on territorial right claimed or existing in its neighbourhood.

The present day context is not too different. Due to Globalization and privatization, Earth and its natural resources are considered as mere commodities. Rivers, sea shores that are acquired and encroached as private property, Bottled water labelled as ‘mineral enriched pure’ are excellent examples of packaging of God given resources.  Human violence towards nature is still continuing since it is not considered to be violence.

Every religion gives prominence to water. Every civilisation formed beside the water. Both the creation accounts in the book of Genesis simply assume the existence of water. God does not have to create water; it was presented fundamentally as a part of divine reality. Water was used in bible as a means for personal, social and planetary transformation. In this passage, Jesus uses water and its symbolism as a means to deconstruct the inferior attitude of the women and to lead her to a complete transformation.

Human beings as Earth bound Creatures

The whole conversation between Jesus and this woman happens near the well. V 11 mentions that this well was a source of living for human and animals for generations. In other words this well was a site for interdependence between human and animals. Earth is a community of interconnected living things that are mutually dependent on each other for life and survival. The Tamil term ‘Mannin manam’ signifies all creations essentially carry the inherent smell of nature. This invisible link makes us all, nexus of a circle of inter-belongingness.

 As the mode of relationship changes, the concept of custodianship is more relevant than the stewardship. Custodianship is a mutual partnership between earth and earth community. Earth has provided food shelter, beauty and other riches to sustain the life of the human beings. In return, the human beings have to assume that    these riches as the contribution of their partners to the earth community. Even on a humanly dominated planet, we do not save the planet, rather the planet saves us day by day, in every cell of our body, in every breath we take and every morsel we eat.

Cries of the creation as voice of the Earth

The hostility between Jews and the Samaritans prohibited them even drinking from the same vessels. In v. 7, Jesus requests the women to give him something to drink. Can’t we hear the cry of Jesus for water from hundreds of poor who are denied to access the wells due to caste problems and environmental issues?  Millions of people in this world suffer because of water shortages or supplies that are contaminated by toxic chemicals.

Jesus’ cry can also be considered as a bold attempt to break the traditional boundaries that segregated Jews and Samaritans. The symbolism that Jesus used is the living water that is flowing and bubbling continuously (Amplified Version Bible), which can be considered as an ever moving life force that overrides all boundaries. Living water, then, is free to move and to follow its God given mysterious nature. It is unnatural for water to remain still. Its essential nature is that it is always moving, creating, purifying, healing, energizing, and nourishing life. It must override the traditional barriers of caste, state and so on. The provision for the thirst of the poor is a fundamental measure of one’s faithfulness to God.

Discerning the resistance of Earth

The ecological crisis is one of the major problems which we face in the present context. It destroys the entire happiness and joy of the world and species on the earth. According to Ban Ki Moon, the UN secretary general, “Evermore people are denied food because prices are stubbornly high, because purchasing power has fallen due to economic crisis, it is because rains have failed”. It reminds us the ecological crisis definitely creates problems of the survival of human life.

A new order of life is the will of God and the need of the hour. In this given passage, Jesus identifies himself with the natural element of water. He apparently expresses his ecological concern saying “Living water is the gift of God”, in other words water is life and nature is the gift of God (John 4:10). If we deny it, we are thwarting the very purpose of God i.e. the redemption of all creation.

As Amos 4:1 says the land of the Samaria happened to be the victim in the hands of the prevailing system who oppressed the poor and crushed the needy. But we can explicitly discern the resistance of earth against the injustice of the dominant system in Amos 4: 7-13 where the rain fall became uneven, scarcity of water raises, locusts destroyed the fig trees and so on.

In Indian philosophy earth is portrayed as “Mother Earth or Bhoomatha” who is said to have long lasting endurance. But she loses her endurance on account of human’s greed for more and more. As a result our mother earth resists and protests herself to the injustice of human through natural calamities in the form of droughts, earth quakes, floods, cyclones and tsunami etc.

India is one of the most vulnerable countries when it comes to the effect of Global warming. Two islands have already vanished and 10,000 people have already been displaced in the sundarbans, an area which India shares with Bangladesh. Orissa is another state which is already being hit hard by global warming. The village after village in Orissa’s coastal kendrapara district vanishes into the Bay of Bengal because of rising sea level. Ironically these people hardly contribute to global warming and green house gases. The virulent effect of Tsunami costs 11,000 lives, and about  3,80,000 people were displaced in India alone.

Earth is sensitive to the injustices to which earth is subjected. Though the earth has an inherent ability to revive and regenerate, this ecological healing is limited. Does the groaning of creation (Rom 8) and the vomiting of land (Lev 18:24-30) reflects the struggle of earth against the injustices? Hence the need of this hour is the promotion of a cosmic centred spirituality that is sensitive to the injustices that threaten the total ecosystem of earth.

 [Prepared by Abraham Sudeep Oommen, Anandraj Paul Jacob V.,  Jaya Jesudas Pudi, John Haide Manukonda, Lijo Johnson, Philipose John, Fourth Year BD students of Gurukul Lutheran Theological College and Research Institute, Chennai, India]

Pluralistic Perspectival Reading on John 4: 16-26 by Fourth Year BD Students of GLTC&RI

Text :John 4: 16-26 

Introduction

The Gospel of John is predominantly theological in comparison with the other gospels. His initial assertion--"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God ... The Word became flesh and lived for a while among us" (John 1:1, 14) declares that Jesus was no ordinary person. He was the incarnation of the eternal God, who chose that means of revealing himself perfectly to human.

In the gospel we see that Jesus was an inclusive messiah, one who came for all. Jesus broke the social barrier and went through Samaria. He proves that there are no Jews, no Samaritans, no higher and lower but all are equal in the sight of God.

Christianity and Islam:

No believing Muslims accept the idea of sources or human influence as having a bearing on the Quran, for he holds that it is, in its entirely, revealed by Allah. Not only do Muslims reject the historical-critical method of investigation of Quranic material, they similarly reject and oppose any attempt to explain the Quran and its contents in purely historical terms. . It is divinely revealed in its entirety and one doesn’t investigate God, it is accepted as Arab Muslim say “bila kaif” or without question.

Old Testament parallel in the Quran:

A. The One god:

Pre-Islamic poetry frequently used the term “Allah” not name only but the conception of his unity as well. Thus the unique designation of God was most probably not the result of Jewish or Christian teaching.

B. Revelation:

It’s a cause of wonder that there is only one direct quotation in the Quran that parallels a biblical reference and that is Psalm 37:29.

Four sets of scriptures are singled out in the Quran as being given by the divine revelation.

The Tawrat (Pentateuch) given to Moses, the Zabus (psalms) to David the injil(Gospel)to Jesus;and the quran to Mohammad. All are to be received and believed alike for all confirm one another.

C. The prophet are chosen by God:

The concept of prophet are closely parallel to Hebrew model but the Word was not the Judeo-Christian term “nabi:,prophet,but the Arabic designation “Rasul” messenger.

The prophet in Islam is the divinely appointed viceroy of Allah with even kings being a little lower in status. After many inner conflicts he was eventually convinced that he was Allah’s chosen spokesman and once set on this course, there was no turning back.

D. The Last judgment:

Quran stresses that on this fateful day each will stand or fall accounting to his own recorded deeds, also present the possibility of some awful calamity befalling that transgressor in the present life.

Application

Christianity and Islam share common elements about origins, worship one God who is benevolent, judgement, prophetic .there are elements where they differ too.

In view of the history of religion wars in the past, the present situation where Muslim brothers and sisters feel wronged by the Christian west, one walks in to a vitiated atmosphere.

Islam also denies that Christ died on the cross and questions the concept of the son ship of God.

Though we cannot draw absolute similarities, Jesus walks in to a location where animosity to him can arise from social, cultural and especially religious background.

Jesus draws the conversation into one about deeper meanings of life in terms of in quality, quantity and about an authentic worship of God that demands that one move beyond a handful of fixed rituals. Such a discussion bound to make one reflect.

Jesus also uses His ability to see in to a person’s life. In our setting this could mean that we use our own gifts creatively with discernment and sensitivity.

One cannot in the end avoid a discussion about Jesus himself. But the above themes can be useful rather than engaging in polemic from the outset.

Jesus had something precious to offer and he was not overawed by a potentially explosive and different situation. Instead John’ Portrayal of Jesus shows him engaging with sensitivity and honesty. The ending of the engagement is very positive- people realise that Jesus is the saviour of the world. Our hope is that we could learn lessons from this passage to share the precious gift- the Lord Himself in a way that will result in similar outcomes.

[This Bible study is Prepared by:Anima Samad, Sudhir Kumar Burh, Yacub Kumsr Mundu, Alex Das, Byju Eapen, John Allwyn, Dr.Samuel Sidhartha swamidoss, BD IV Students of Gurukul Lutheran Theological College and Research Institute, Chennai, India]

Re-reading of John 9: 1-34 in Dalit Perspective - by fourth year students of Gurukul Lutheran Theological College and Research Institute

A voice of challenge from the margins.

Introduction

The idea of us is to promote the new understanding about the passage (Jn: 9: 1-34) in the perspective of Dalit and poor. It seems appropriate to explain in such a way to bring out the pain and experience of a marginalized person because of his/her physical lack. There is a great note registered by William Barclay  in his commentary on John Gospel,  i.e.  this  is  the only miracle having  the declaration  that the particular affected person (Born blind) is a blind by his birth. Therefore the person was known to the  disciples  at  the  time  and  familiar  to  the  public.  This  incident  took  place  to  promote  the Old Testament idea whence the sin comes and the consequence of the original sin, namely inherited sin. The demythologization of fatalism or karma which was much focused on  the Law code of Judaism which  completely  discriminated  the  fellow  human  beings  (in  Indian  context  the  Dalits)  is  the intension of our paper.

The core idea of the reign of God

The core of our argument and perspective is mainly  focused on  the key verse of John 9: 3. “Jesus  answered neither  this man nor his parents  sinned, he was born blind so  that God’s work might be demonstrated in him,” this is the statement of Jesus which seems as a condemnation of the concept  of Sin. Here he breaks the old ideas about the understanding about the original sin and its inheritance. Moreover the reign of God is present at  the  time and deeply  the reign of God  is understood by  this miracle which performed among the marginalized. The goodness that happening among the Dalits is the  sign  of God’s  reign.  The  immanent  of  the  transcendental God  is  the  comprehensible  sign  of God’s reign. The work of God is been demonstrating through Dalits and poor is a great sign of reign  of God. This paper mainly  invites us to understand the transformation of the blind man towards the new  life  or  a  restoration.  We  are  called  to  concentrate  upon  this  kind  of  transformation  and restoration amidst Dalits and poor.

The Re-reading of the text 

This is a story of how a man who was poor and marginalised sat in the darkness was brought to see the light not only physically but in his discernment to identify the light of the world. During that time dalits are characterised by those who were ignorant of the law and physically challenged.

Jesus after leaving the temple left to the peripheries where the outcastes are situated. Unlike the common passages of healing, here Jesus takes the initiative to heal the blind man, on seeing him. The impulsive response of Jesus speaks us the concern and care Jesus have to the people left in the peripheries. And with this immediacy to restore the lost dignity of this man, Jesus heals this man without asking anything to him.

The question of the disciples is typical of the outlook of the ancient world.  The Jews colligated sin and suffering as they worked on the assumption that wherever there was suffering, sin is the cause of it. ‘The sins of parents could “visit” on children’ is the maxim contained in the Decalogue as we see in Exo20: 5, 34: 7, Deut 5: 9. This view strikes one who has in mind the Indian philosophical thought of Karma and Samsara. A logical thought of Indian philosophy which triumphed for ages to legitimise the living conditions and poverty of weaker sections.

But the answer of Jesus not only had in view human suffering generally but also this particular individual’s life in relation to his mission. Affliction, sorrow, pain, disappointment, loss always are opportunities for displaying God’s grace. First it enables the sufferer to show God in action. For Jesus it is not the sins of the man or his parents. This stands true with the life stories of dalits. They have suffered in the past and continue to suffer in the present. This is not because of their own sins or the sins of their ancestors. So this need not or should not subscribe to any describe of Karma and Samsara. The response of Jesus assures their place in the God’s economy of Salvation. Among the different meanings given to the term Dalit is ‘Manifested’. This passage reveals how much a life of Dalit in Jesus’ times becomes the space of manifestation of God’s glory.

By touching the man’s eyes Jesus profoundly speaks to us in the context of our dalitness and the dalitness of all our brothers and sisters. The use of mud to heal the blindness makes us remember that all human beings are ‘muddish people’ build out of mud. The use of saliva, mud and the water of Siloam for healing by Jesus implicate the negation of Jewish community towards the people at margins. The contempt of this community expressed through Human saliva is used as tool of healing. A symbol creating derogation is made the symbol of life assertion. Similarly the pool of Siloam is a powerful symbol of purity and pollution. Jesus turns the waters of division into waters of life giving.

The neighbour’s disagreement about the blind man’s identity and his healing (vv. 8, 9) positions the healed man to serve as his own witness and to provide his own attestation to the miracle. In v. 9b the man is depicted as repeatedly identifying himself through keep on saying (elegen, the verb is in imperfect tense) as the former blind man. People never expected the work of Jesus on this blind man as they considered him as lacking everything for God’s manifestation of Glory. For them someone like him can never be a site of God’s revelation, which is why they consider that this healed man is not the one who begged whom they know. Though they were continuously negating his identity as the man whose sight is restored, he was crying out loud “I am the man” (V.9b). The people who questioned the identity of this man also question the identity of Jesus. Which is why “for those who do not love a brother or sister whom they have seen, cannot love God whom they have not seen” (I John 4: 20). Today also the God of Dalits is considered decrepit and their God concepts are infirm to the mainstream religious thought and particularly among Christians. Their voices are unheeded and their voices are despised, grounding them as irrational.

For the Jews the identity of this man is an unanswered question and so seeks the opinion of the parents of this man. When they respond to this pertinent question, “Is this your son, who you say was born blind? How then does he see?” (v.19) they try to escape. They agree that the man as their son but fears to acknowledge the God’s glory manifested in him, because of their fear towards Jews who threatened to outcaste all who confess Jesus as the messiah (v.22). This forces us to think that these parents also identifies with the dominant ones and the dalitness of this man lies clearly on his infirmity and not on his lineage. Today the Indian church easily identifies with these parents to negate the glory of God revealed in their sons and daughters who are dalits. Church is ready to accept them as the part of their fold but fails to recognise their dire needs and respond to them with the mind of Jesus.

Twice in the interrogation scene (v.13- 34) the Pharisees hold their knowledge to the man and expect him to accept their positions (v. 24, 29). Each time however, the man counters with his own knowledge (v.25, 30-33). The fact that the man holds his ground in the face of the Jewish authorities gives this interrogation scene a markedly different cast from the preceding scene of interrogation of his parents (V. 18- 23). The law keepers try to intimidate this man with their status and knowledge but he will not be intimidated. This makes the man an epitome of Dalit confrontation and champion with stern discernments about what sin is and who Jesus, his liberator is. Twice he publicly confesses that Jesus as the prophet (v.17b) and as the man from God (v.33) which made him an outcast again (v.34b), though Jesus restored his physical infirmity, the cause of his first. Again Sin as the cause of his birth defect is reiterated in v. 34a and they still cast him out. Their arrogance prevented them to admit the truth revealed in him and finds it incomprehensible to accept his teaching.

So to view the blind man as the Dalit of Jesus’ time offers us the prospect to empower our Dalitness when we feel wretched in the double standards of society and church. The Hindu philosophical thoughts are still prevalent in the mindsets as to the play of Karma and Samsara. Often in the philosophy of Karma and Samsara we relate the negative acts with negative results and positive acts with positive results. But we have to see that the rich and affluence is the result of oppressing of poor and stuffing themselves through snatching the wealth belonging to the poor also. So the poverty interlinked with dalitness and the blindness to this reality is the original sin of Indian Church and society.

Two questions now also arise from the margins, though Jesus meets the man casted out and welcomes into communion; wasn’t not your eyes He opened? (17b). Do you also want to become His Disciples? (27b).

Conclusion 

The Gospel should reach people and they should be benefited. It is only possible by the Re-reading of the scripture in means of contextualization. Therefore we need to have such a consideration on the process  of  interpretation  of  the  scripture.  Theology  to  be  meaningful  has  to  be  contextual  and relevant; its task is  to address particular situation in the knowledge of  the Christ’s event. In fact the Bible  itself  is a  compendium of  contextualized  theologies. Dalit  theology  rightly understood  is not communal. It does not seek  to promote  the  liberation of Dalits alone, thereby putting the non-Dalits outside  the  place  of  salvation.  Rather,  it  does  seek  to  challenge  the  tendency  to  legitimize  caste oppression  of  the Dalits  but  at  the  same  time  seek  to  include  all  the  really  converted  non-Dalits within its purview.

It  is a duty for theologians  to address the problems of marginalized and poor with an understanding of the scripture, which is so. The comparative study between  the  texts and people in reality is to be needed for the better understanding and a great hope for the Dalits and poor. It is again a problem among us by dealing such understandings of scripture, into equality is somehow lacking.  The  discrimination  is  still  prevailing  in  our  Christianity  in  order  not  to  accept  others  or tolerate others’ growth if she/he would have developed or increased in God’s blessing. This is really a Christian karma and inherited sin among us.

[Prepared by: Daiju K.Joseph, Dalvin Kristi Dass A, Prince John, V.Prabhakar, Remalia Hembrom , & Uttam Kumar Rathinayak, BD IV students of Gurukul Lutheran Theological College and Research Institute, Chennai,India.]