"Do you think all the
Ten Commandments given by Moses continue to be relevant in the modern context?” asked Fr Zachariah at the commencement of the Family
Unit meeting.
The liberal Fr. Z was known for confronting his congregations with questions
designed to instantly shake even the dumbest of participants into articulation.
He believed that the basics of faith could be kept meaningfully alive and
relevant among vibrant parish communities and common laity alike by only
discussing things freely with them on an ongoing basis. Mechanical learning of
official catechism would result in faith stagnating without making sense in
daily lives, in which process even the holy sacraments could become just
ceremonial for the common laity.
His
question on the Commandments was quickly followed by verse John 1:17, which states that the law was given by Moses, but
grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. “Now, in the
backdrop of this statement of St John let us discuss the subject”.
A teenager challenges the 4th Commandment
The young Samson blurted out: “I
don’t know how others would react if I say I don’t agree with the 4th
Commandment in the form it has come down to us. It is biased in favour of the
parents. Instead of ‘Honour thy parents’, I would prefer ‘Honour thy children’. Such a
reoriented fourth commandment
would give me greater comfort. Honour
the dignity of your children now; they would surely reciprocate, especially in
your old age.”
Antiquated teaching methods of the Church
His maverick grandson Samson’s impulsive response
momentarily nonplussed the octogenarian Prof
Peter, but he soon recovered and said the younger generation’s
concerns would never be known unless they were given the opportunity to freely
speak out. In that respect, Fr Zachariah was doing a great service to the
congregation by adopting open methods of teaching that would appeal equally
well to different age groups and differing temperaments. The Professor said the
conventional teaching methods of the Church had become antiquated and
counterproductive. Today’s laypeople think
and, to them, free thinking and free will take precedence over blind obedience
to authority.
The road to altar
helped by an atheist!
Prof
Peter recalled how, a long
time ago, his young neighbour was eager to serve as an altar boy, but was put
off by the parish priest who didn’t have the time or patience to explain to him
the meaning of the Latin verses he was required to chant. The youngster thought
he would be cheating God as an altar boy by mumbling the prayers without his
head or heart in them. And when he thought it was the end of his road to the
altar, help came from an unlikely source. Noticing his despair, his uncle some
twenty years his senior said there could still be a way to honestly understand
the liturgy. Was it sheer coincidence that this agnostic uncle himself became
an instrument in the hands of God in procuring for him a parallel translation
of the liturgy? And that boy went on to become a Capuchin priest!
Prof Stephen narrates his experience
Prof Stephen narrated one of his
experiences to illustrate the unproductive teaching attitudes of Church
officials at the lower end. He had difficulty in getting marriage licence for
his daughter. The nun to whom the girl was assigned for catechism test would
not signal her clearance, because the girl did not know how to cross herself in
the “right manner”! The parish priest might have had a positive regard for that
nun, for he too joined her in ragging the girl. The bride-to-be had won good
many prizes in catechism exams during her brilliant academic career and was
then a practising medical professional serving in a reputed hospital. The nun
retorted, “Even atheists could win prizes in catechism by taking up the subject
for study!” The professor said, he warned the nun he would refer the matter to
her superiors. The problem ended there.
The unmoved Fr. Zachariah said he wouldn’t
dismiss the story as unusual. Prof Stephen said the incident demonstrated the
poor teaching attitude of everyday church officials. In contrast, Fr Z’s open approach was refreshing.
Ninth Commandment challenged
Politician Rosaline said the young Samson mistook the fourth commandment
to be offensive to his teenage dignity. But he would surely change his
adolescent views as he grew older, and most certainly in his old age. That
meant the fourth commandment’s relativity was of a passing nature. “But what do
you think about the ninth and tenth commandments read together? Together they
say one shall not covet the neighbour’s properties including his wife. Now,
Sam, do me a favour. Please read out Exodus 20: 17.”]
Young Samson obliged:
“You shall not covet your neighbour's
house; you shall not covet your neighbour's wife, or his manservant, or his
maidservant, or his ox, or his ass, or anything that is your neighbour's.”
Rosaline asked: “Is wife then a property of her husband? This
obvious gender bias makes the ninth commandment unacceptable to women of any
age group.”
Poet Roy, who spared no opportunity to make fun of Rosaline,
wondered how the commandment that placed an injunction on men should offend any sensible woman.
“Complaints from men are
understandable; it is on them that Moses had placed the unbearable burden of
the ninth commandment. He has not prevented women
from coveting other men”. In the din of laughter that followed, Fr Z maintained a dignified silence and
tried his best to appear sympathetic to the frowning Rosaline.
Prof
Stephen said the Ten
Commandments were couched in the idiom of the day and should be understood in
that spirit. In those male-dominated days, languages and their phraseologies
had acquired a masculine flavour or slant. And it was pre-supposed that
anything said in those days about man automatically applied to woman as well,
unless otherwise specified. The term ‘man’ included woman. Mankind meant
humankind. “My English Professor used to make this clear jocularly: ‘man
embraces woman’. Viewed in this light, all the seemingly gender-specific
injunctions contained in the Commandments were invariably used reflexively to
include both the genders. Hence, women can’t assume that they have been
excluded from the ambit of the ninth commandment. In other words, women have
not been spared, even by default, from coveting other men!”
Rosaline
was sportive enough to
heartily join the laughter that followed. “Why not we then re-write such
statements in today’s gender-neutral idiom?”
Sr
Ann responded. Jesus had
always treated women with utmost respect; yet his language was abundant in
gender-biased idiom and phraseology of his day. Jesus said, for instance:
“Every
one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in
his heart.”
Now, would anyone think that women were allowed by
Jesus to lustfully look at men? “So, let us give some space to the
gender-innocent, albeit patently male-dominated, idiom of antiquity. Let us not
hurriedly proceed to “translate” the old idiom into the new. When you go
through the scripture, always keep in view the spirit of the ancient idiom.”
Fr Z said these and other concerns were genuinely
agitating the minds of different segments of people. Possibly in the course of
the evening’s discussion such concerns would address themselves. “So, let us proceed. One of you may initiate
the discussion.
History and evolution of the Decalogue
Advocate Dimmy
said that as a student at
the graduate law school at Oxford years ago, she had occasion to study the
evolution of law codes in human history beginning with the first written code
known as King Hammurabi’s code (18th century BC) and was amazed how
closely this law code had influenced the Mosaic code. Hammurabi’s code
consisted of some 282 injunctions
and corresponding punishments for their infringement. The well-known phrase “an
eye for an eye” appearing in Exodus 21:23-25 had come from Hammurabi’s code.
She read out this verse from the Exodus:
“ 23If any
harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24eye for
eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25burn for
burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.”
This law is known variously as the law of
retaliation, law of retributive justice, or the law of equivalency,
Dimmy said the punishments prescribed by
Hammurabi might seem harsh to modern minds; but his contemporaries thought them
most lenient. Before his code came into force, any one who had lost one eye in
a fight could legitimately claim both eyes of the culprit and even kill him
with his family members with impunity. Hammurabi limited the retribution to the
extent of the damage caused and not beyond that. And thus his code of law was
considered lenient in his day. One could legitimately state that Hammurabi had
inaugurated the principle of equity - a foundational legal principle to this
day.
Engineer Antony observed that in North-Western India and
Pakistan, the cruel pre-Hammurabi punishments were still in vogue. “Honour
killings”, for instance, is most common in such places. Some four years ago, a
lower caste teenager dared to fall in love with an upper caste girl in
Pakistan. By way of retaliation, the boy’s elder sister was dragged to the
market square and publicly gang-raped by the girl’s relations as directed by
their tribal court!
Poet
Roy said they probably needed
a Hammurabi now. Under his law of equivalency, the tribal court would have “punished”
the young lovers with “love for love”!
Sr.
Ann heartily joined in the
laughter and said precisely that would be the “punishment” Jesus would prescribe
in such a situation!
Dimmy continued: Moses had incorporated
Hammurabi’s “eye for eye” principle in his code. The Mosaic Law consisted of
some 613 laws, excluding the seven rabbinic laws. Most of these laws (like
washing one’s hand before eating) were meant for regulating the daily lives of the
Jews, and had no spiritual relevance. Superficially viewed, the Ten
Commandments, or the Decalogue, had evolved from the Mosaic Law; yet they are
quite distinct in spirit.
Dimmy added: “The Decalogue appears in near-identical
terms in Exodus 20:2-17 and Deuteronomy 5:6-21. Different churches, however,
have grouped them slightly differently; for instance the Orthodox and Anglican
Churches have split the first Commandment into two, and merged the ninth and
tenth Commandments into one.”
Prof
Stephen thanked Advocate
Dimmy for educating the group about the evolution of the Ten Commandments.
Discussion of the Commandments
Fr
Z decided it was time for
him to intervene and bring the discussion onto the subject proper. “We have
learnt from childhood that the Commandments could be separated into two groups:
(1) the first three together defining man’s relationship with God; and (2) the other
seven laying down the basis for healthy interpersonal connectivity, i.e., how
to live in peace with our fellow humans.
“Of the seven interpersonal injunctions,
the 4th commandment is the only positively worded commandment. Its theme is filial piety (love for parents)
and harmonic family cohesion. And it has a reward, namely that it will ensure
peaceful and long life to members of the family.”
“The next four commandments (5th
to 8th) forbid interpersonal conflicts and immoral acts.”
“And the last two commandments (9th and 10th) warn
against greed & lustful craving for what belong to others. Such cravings
can lead to conflicts and immoral acts.”
The Rev Fr said the Ten Commandments and
their ramifications have been extensively and comprehensively dealt with in the
Catechism of the Catholic Church. He exhorted the participants to get copies
thereof (preferably its English version) and carefully study it. He assured
them it would be a rewarding and heart-warming experience to familiarize and
internalize the message being conveyed through the Catechism.
“And, after carefully studying the
Catechism, you would not complain again about the ‘antiquated’ teaching methods
of the Church!”
Prof
Stephen said he had been
carefully studying the Catechism on an ongoing basis, and that his earlier
reference was only to the teaching methods employed by Church officials at the lower end.
Fr
Z noticed Alice was
silent. He invited her to express her views on the subject.
Summary of the Ten Commandments
Alice
Teacher quoted Jesus’ delectably
positive summary of the Commandments: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and
with all your soul and with all your strength and with your entire mind”; and “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
She added
that Moses had foreshadowed this beautiful summary of Jesus, thus:
·
“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou
shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with
all thy might.” Deuteronomy 6:4-5.
·
"Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against
one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord” Leviticus 19:18
Evidently Jesus was powerfully re-endorsing and re-emphasizing
the forgotten summary of the Law of Moses, lest the worldly and corrupt Jewish
community of his day would forget these foundational commandments.
The Lord’s Prayer reflects the Commandments
The Lord’s Prayer reflects the Commandments
Alice
said, in her perception, the Lord’s Prayer clearly reflected the Ten
Commandments. Look at the spirit of the first three Commandments manifested in
the first part of the Lord’s Prayer: “Our Father in Heaven, hallowed be thy
name, thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven”. In fact
the fourth Commandment too, she said, was manifestly included in this part of Lord’s
Prayer. “For, when we address him as Our Father, we are honouring our spiritual
parent.”
Alice
continued. The fifth to eighth commandments could be seen reflected in the
second part of the Lord’s Prayer: “Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive
those who trespass against us”.
Again,
the last two commandments against lusting after or coveting what is not ours
are covered in the last of the petitions in the Lord’s Prayer: “Lead us not
into temptation; but deliver us from evil”.
“Further,
while the Ten Commandments contain both positive and negative commandments, the
Lord’s Prayer contains only positive and worshipful petitions.”
President
James exclaimed that this angle had not occurred to him, and he thanked the
teacher profusely for this new insight. So, the Lord’s Prayer reflects the
Commandments! They define the just and proper relationship of the self with God
and with other fellow humans.
‘Gloria’ too reflects the
Commandments
James said, likewise, he had been fascinated and
overwhelmed by the clear reflection of the Commandments in the hymn Gloria that
Luke’s angels sang on the first Christmas night. The first line: “Gloria in
excelsis Deo” is a powerful and beautiful summary of Jesus’ summary of the
first three Commandments. And likewise, the response: “Et in terra pax
hominibus bonae voluntatis” beautifully encapsulates the seven Commandments
governing interpersonal harmony.
James
continued: “And the importance Jesus attached to the second part of the
Commandments is manifest in the Golden Rule that he beautifully enunciated: “Do
unto others what you would have them do unto you”
Sr. Ann
said, even before Christ, the Golden Rule had a kind of “negative” existence in
the writings of ancient prophets. The book of Tobit (4:5) says, “Do not do unto
others what you would not have them do unto you”. Not surprising, like most
other Old Testament prophets, he too presented this profound principle as a
negative injunction. This negative edition of the Golden Rule is sometimes
called the Silver Rule.
Fourth Commandment revisited
Fr Z now encouragingly turned to Samson.
He responded that his conundrum concerning the fourth commandment was yet to be
taken up for discussion. Fr Z asked him to read out Eph 6:1-4. He opened the
Bible and read out the passage:
“Children,
obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honour thy father and mother;
which is the first commandment with promise; That
it may be well with thee, and thou may live long on the earth. And,
ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the
nurture and admonition of the Lord.”
Thus did St Paul interpret the fourth commandment - as
a “two-way” street. The law of
equity or reciprocity works here. “But, Samson, I certainly agree with you: Explicit
statements carry emphasis; implicit or derivative statements are like a shadow
of the explicit.”
Fr Z said this concern for children under the fourth commandment
had been clearly stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church too.
“The
commandment includes and pre-supposes the duties of parents …” (Article 2199).
“Are you satisfied, Sam?” asked Prof Peter. “No
Grandpa, not at all.”
Samson continued. “Even the best of parents treat their
children lightly in myriad ways. All the time they humiliate them, foolishly believing
they are nurturing them. Ok; they feed
them, clothe them, educate them. That is not enough. At one end they ‘discipline’
them; at the other, they pamper them. Through both such kinds of treatment,
they are insulting the children. Surprised? Believe me: Unless children feel
honoured, respected and esteemed, parental love and concern won’t reach into
them. This was so in the beginning, is now and will ever be, unless parents wisely
nurture their essential dignity. Children
are taken for granted all the time in all civilizations; and they get disaffected,
estranged, alienated from parents as they grow and as they become self-sufficient.”
“This very evening one of the parent-figures here took
my views lightly by patronizingly dismissing my grievance as of adolescent kind;
she said it would disappear as I grow, etc. I am sure Madam Rosaline did not intend to insult me; but she surely did.
She herself demonstrated, albeit unconsciously, how parent-figures ignore and humiliate
youngsters all the time.”
Taken by surprise,
Rosaline feebly made a tentative apology.
Psychologist Dr Susan endorsed Samson’s view. In the name of bringing them
up in this competitive world, parents do everything possible to educate their
children. If the child fails, parents often insult him instead of empathizing
and supporting him. The child is convinced that parents were doing everything
for his education for their own glory. In other words, parents had been
self-centric and not child-centric while they seemed to give a mighty push for
his education. The child feels humiliated that he was being used.
Prof Stephen intervened and said, “I graphically remember my
childhood. Whenever I succeeded, my parents applauded; and whenever I failed,
they shamed me. There were frequent occasions when I experienced huge lumps in
my throat. My parents were unaware of that. After all, every parent thinks
children could be punished even physically. They think children are resilient by
nature and can easily get over their hurts. No, your Excellencies, grievances
do not disappear; they mount unless addressed on a real-time basis.”
Dr Susan continued, “Have you ever seriously considered why
children are virtually abandoning their old parents these days? You might say,
‘they are away, busy in their job’. But the question is: Do they have a concern
for their parents back home? Do they remember their parents once in a while
when away? My understanding is a big No. Philosopher John Jacque Rousseau
famously said: ‘You become a man the day your father die’. He meant that the very
existence of parental figures forever loom over their children constantly
reminding them of their inferiority and obligation. He meant their memory
rarely evoke love!”
“Therefore I fully agree with Samson that elders
should treat their wards with respect and honour. Then, and only then, they
would grow into a relationship guaranteeing mutual friendship as envisaged in
Indian dharma, tradition and philosophy.”
Engineer Antony agreed. He said Indian philosophy and outlook was adequately
reflected in the fourth commandment. As Rev Fr stated clearly, parents’ obligations
are latent in that commandment.
Prof Stephen retorted. “What use is there in hiding such reflexive
commands under a bushel? This is mentioned in Ephesians and the Catechism. But,
are they ever being explicitly taught? It is there technically, tucked away in
between some pages of holy books. They need to be taken out and made part of
the regular religious teaching and discourse.”
Dr Susan said, “Personally, I would prefer teaching of the
fourth commandment with a corollary, worded somewhat on these lines. ‘And
honour thy God-given children; in turn they will honour you in your old age in
fulfillment of the fourth commandment, and you will live long.’ This is what St
Paul had effectively said in Eph 6:4. So, consciously emphasize this converse
or corollary in the teaching of the Commandments. Especially, in marriage
preparation courses the obligation of the would-be parents should be
emphatically brought home. If only the parents honour their children, they
would in turn be honoured by their children.”
Fr Z said, “The message is clear. The church in its
teachings needs to place greater emphasis on parental obligation to honour
their children. You agree with that, Samson?”
“Yes, Rev Fr,” replied the young Samson.
A freelance interpretation
James
sought leave of the Rev Fr to interpret the Commandments from a practical angle
in order to reach out to the present generation in their daily life. Fr Z gave
the nod.
James
said no man is an island unto himself. Everyone is part of the mainland or the
humankind, which is part of the Universe. And Universe is just a reflection of
God. Within the humanity, we are networked with our fellow humans. And, the
humanity itself is linked to the Universe under the Providence of God. Whenever
our relationship within this networking is troubled, we become sick, physically
and mentally. Our wholeness is affected. Hence, management philosophers speak
about the importance of inter-personal relationship and about relationship
management. If we connect ourselves in harmony with the community, we would be
nurtured by the community. And this is similar to the Golden Rule. If we harm
others, we upset our interpersonal equations; and we violate the seven
Commandments.
Alice
Teacher
wondered if it was that simple.
No,
James said. An inner mechanism begins to smite you from within whenever
you stray from the Golden Rule. Consciously or unconsciously, you begin to feel
bad about yourself. Your guilt weighs you down. Consciously or unconsciously,
you begin punishing yourself from within. In other words, your self-respect
suffers in the process. Newton’s second law applies here: For every action,
there is a reaction, a price to be paid.
It could be a proportionate price, or it could be disproportionate. For
instance, an adulterous aberration at a weak moment can lead you to various
sorts of family troubles and even irreversible illnesses; and once you
experience that, you begin to curse the moment of your folly. Life becomes a
burden. In the dark moments of your black despair, you wish your mother had not
borne you. If you happen to kill someone even defensively, his ‘ghost’ would
unceasingly chase you wherever you are, over the hills, across the river, under
the waters, as the psalmist would say. And the so-called ghost is none other
than your own tortured conscience.
Secretary
Leelamma wondered if she noticed here an allusion to Psalm 139.
The
learned Prof Peter made a reference
to the Greek myth in which the young Orestes killed his mother and her paramour
to avenge the murder of his father King Agamemnon (a great hero in Iliad).
Winged Furies (personified) chased the young man like thunder and lightning,
storm and hurricane, and he fled over the hills, across the deserts, under the
waters, through treacherous swamps, before he found refuge at the oracular
temple at Delphi, far from his homeland. James said, translated into secular
language, it simply meant that the young man was severely tortured by his own
conscience day in and day out, he thus suffered long and passed through many a
nightmare before he repented and found refuge in God; and, with His help and
free-flowing grace, he finally reconciled with himself. By the way, the term ‘repentance’
is more akin to ‘change of heart’ than something related to
punishment.
Engineer
Antony asked, “Are you referring to consciousness of sin and repentance
instinct?” “Precisely”, James said. “When you become conscious of
your sin, there is turmoil within you. At one moment, I, the sinner, blame
myself and the next moment I labour to justify myself. It is as if there was
more than one James in me. When the guilt is heavy, it is as if there were many
selves in me, acrimoniously fighting amongst themselves and accusing each other
and destroying my very self in the process. So, I might as well say, ‘My name
is legion’, as the demon-possessed man said, whom Jesus cured. This means that
my inner-personal relation is not whole but fragmented. The next
question is: How to bring all my internal persons together, in alignment? The
answer is this: By magnetising them - as we had done in high school, by
continually rubbing inert iron rod into a live magnet. And who provides the
magnetic energy? God himself.”
The
very consciousness of sin, the very conscience itself, and the repentance
instinct are a free gift from God. Without them, you are but savage in essence,
and your civilisation will perish.
Prof
Stephen, who taught physics in his days,
appreciated the metaphor of life-transmitting energy from God, and marvelled
about the essential centrality of God in restoring and fixing our lost inner-personal
equilibrium and inner-personal wholeness.
To
sum up, failure in our inter-personal equations results in troubled inner-personal
(internal) harmony, and then, through repentance and God’s grace, we regain
mental and spiritual wholeness. Right?
James
said the Professor was nearly right. But no one has mastered the right language
to express matters so supremely divine, and one has to do with imperfect idiom.
To that extent, what Stephen said was nearly on the dot.
So,
the Commandments 4-10 dealt with interpersonal equations while the first three
brought inner-personal equilibrium into one’s personal life through God’s
infinite mercy and grace.
Fr
Zachariah expressed his appreciation for the
spirited and meaningful contribution from the learned members. He, however,
added that the subject was infinitely more serious and deeper, and that even a
person like Thomas Aquinas had not succeeded in explaining its full
implications in the limited language of the mortal man. “Hence, my agreeing or
disagreeing with the strains of today’s thoughts is immaterial. The important
thing is that you all took much interest in the subject. That is what matters
for me for now”.
K X M John
22/10/2010
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment