Ponmala

Who do they say I am? This question Jesus asked His disciples is still ringing twenty centuries since. And the right answer for it was first given by His beloved disciple John: “The Word was the source of life, and this life brought life to mankind.” And how did the Word bring life to mankind? By turning the world topsy-turvy with His teachings. To a world that believed in an-eye-for-an eye, He preached that one must love one’s enemies. To a world that was divided into the chosen people of God and the gentiles, he preached every man is a precious child of God. To a world that divided men into masters and servants, He preached that he who aspires to be master must wash the feet of those whom he considers servants. To a world that taught that man is for the Sabbath, He taught that the Sabbath is for man.

To the rich young man who claimed that he had obeyed all the commandments of God, Jesus asked to sell all that he had and give to the poor. “But when the man heard this, he became very sad, because he was very rich.” To those who seek perfection in the meticulous observance of the commandments, Jesus was a renegade who spurned God’s Law. And for the Pharisees of today, Pope Francis is a betrayer, solely because he is turning established notions topsy-turvy. Because he is reading the signs of the times, he has become the antichrist for blinded traditionalists, who hardly know who Jesus truly is.

When the renowned theologian Ratzinger became Pope Benedict XVI, the Church become the rich young man of the gospel – too unwilling to forego the burden of traditions that reduced the Church to a square peg in a round hole in this day and age. The Pope Emeritus has put a spoke in the move by Pope Francis to lift the restriction on married priests in remote areas by suggesting that in the Church’s tradition, renouncing marriage “became a criterion for priestly ministry.” Which tradition does he refer to, one that is hardly nine centuries old? Were not all but one of the 12 pillars which Christ built His Church married men? Has priestly ministry nothing do with the Last Supper, which Jesus shared with married men? And are married clergy of Eastern Rites lesser priests? The only tradition we need to hold fast to are the gospel values, which have the divine stamp and are eternal. The rest are all accretions of various times, and have to be shed like trees do leaves: If trees do not shed leaves and put on new ones, they will remain stunted bonsais, beautiful to behold but of no worth otherwise. There is a tree that the Church could take as an example. It is the banyan tree. As it grows, it branches spread and roots drop down from the extending branches to the ground. And thus one tree may in time occupy acres of land – there is one such tree in Kurnool of Andhra Pradesh – supported by dropping roots that grow into supporting trunks. The banyan tree would not have achieved so vast a spread if it were supported only by the main trunk – tradition.

Each new age should have its own tradition to support it, remaining part of the mother tree, which for the Church is Jesus of the gospel. When the Church refuses to adapt to the times, it becomes irrelevant. Foreseeing that, Pope John XXIII called Vatican Council II, which lived up to the task entrusted to it. But traditionalists gradually shut the doors that the Council had opened to the current times. A great opportunity was thus lost. The result was obvious. The Church has been rendered irrelevant in its traditional stronghold, Europe.

It is so sad that the Syro-Malabar Church has not learned a lesson from Europe. Single-minded pursuit of tradition has turned it into a quagmire. Ethics, Christian witnessing, ecumenism, inter-religious harmony – all these are not for it traditions worth preserving. Signals are coming from the very top that right hardly matters and that tradition, represented by the shape of the cross, the liturgy, episcopal attire etc., are the be all and end all of Christian living. Where does Jesus, the renovator-redeemer, stand in this scheme of things? Reduced sheerly to an object of liturgical worship, He is totally out of the scene as life’s inspiration. The image meltdown that the Syro-Malabar Church has suffered recently can be traced back to a persistent conflict between liturgy-centric traditionalists and overwhelmingly outnumbered gospel-centric progressives.

There is no meaning in crying yourself hoarse about Love Jihad when youth abandon a fossilised Church that has lost its relevance. That sort of scaremongering can only serve the purpose of setting one community against another. Youth need a tradition that is holy. For that it should be ensured that catechism does not contribute to distancing from gospel values to emphasize community interests. Maybe, if we return to Vedopadesam– teaching ethical and moral values of the gospel – the Syro-Malabar Church will get back to the golden age when its children cherished their identity as Christians.