Good Shepherds in Society

In ancient times in Palestine--around the time of Jesus--a man was supposed to be someone in control of emotions, someone who can influence others with words and deeds, and someone with force and courage in front of battles and violence. A man had to show qualities of leadership. 

In the gospel accounts we see the gospel authors picturing Jesus precisely as a leader with skills to pull out of adverse situations. Jesus was so persuasive he was followed by the excluded, the poor, the ill, etc. He was even considered a master--a "rabbi"--by some who chose to follow him closely. 

But then he was also crucified. He was publicly humiliated by those in power. In the account of Mark Jesus was abandoned by all and Jesus himself cried out a feeling of being abandoned by God. 
The 4th gospel gives a different picture. Jesus was viewed by his executioners as a bandit, a thief. For John the evangelist, Jesus was killed because he was a shepherd...a "good shepherd".
Shepherds, at the time of Jesus, were marginalized. They lived far from the social milieu. They were more in the company of beasts, animals. 

In the Old Testament, however, the picture of a king was that of a shepherd taking care of the people, his flock. Hence the kings who did not serve as shepherds were so negatively recorded by the historical authors in the Old Testament. Think of king Ahab, for example. 

The 4th gospel pictures Jesus as a shepherd--excluded from society but close to the ideal of kingly leadership. Unlike a king, however, Jesus did not rule over people. He was a leader in terms of witnessing to the path leading to God. 

Hence the crucified is leader, an ideal leader. The man on the cross had a command of his own emotions. He gave his life to others to a radical extreme, " I lay down my life in order to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down on my own" (Jn1o/17-18). The good shepherd offers his own life while battling against the wolves that harm the flock. 

We know the story. Jesus said yes to his mission of the Father, and the Father said yes to what the Son did through the resurrection of the Son. With this Jesus was able to assure us of our own eternal life. Hence John tells us about the guarantee of Jesus himself, "I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish. No one can take them out of my hand" (Jn10/28). 

We can pause a bit and ask how we can "lead" also not with the usual powers and wealth around us but with giving of self. In other words, maybe we can build a social life which is based less on the capacity to buy lots of things from the mall and the capacity to have powers over others....and based more on a more fraternal social life where we offer ourselves, daily, to others. 

Can we be good shepherds to each other? 

Mark, Constipation and Christianity

Remember that story when Jesus was criticized because his disciples were not following the same religious practice--fasting--like many others? Jesus replied with that expression: new wine and new wineskin. (See Mk2/18-22). Remember too the story about the day--the Sabbath day--when Jesus and his disciples were walking in the wheat-fields? The disciples started eating grain heads. They were heavily criticized for not doing what the religious practices required. (See Mk2/23-28). 
In the account of Mark we see that Jesus and his disciples were constantly spied on. They were doing things that were quite ordinary. But the Pharisees sought something wrong in the ordinary things that the disciples were doing. It was time to find reasons to accuse Jesus. In the gospel account of Mark Jesus was, at this point of the story, well-known among the people. Crowds followed him. His teaching was so simple and quite "relaxed" (compared to the traditional teachings.) Jesus announced God's forgiveness and he was close to the "little ones"--the publicans, the ill, the prostitutes. He was too “cool”, so to speak. But the Pharisees did not want the “cool” and “relaxed” type. The Pharisees were, to coin a term I once learned, “constipated”. 
The disciples of Jesus were equally cool. Hence the accusation: Jesus and his disciples were not religiously constipated enough. "“Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the sabbath?” (Mk2/24). For the Pharisees, to live religiously meant following the practices and observing prohibitions. In other words they were so focused on what one should not do. For them religiosity meant strict observance of rules norms, precepts required by the Law and ancient tradition. 
It may be interesting to note that in the account of Mark, all this polemic against Jesus starts right at the very early chapters. If we try to understand this strategy of Mark, we might say that Mark was raising a question, namely: "What does God want from us, how does God want us to relate with God?" Does God want us to relate with a dictator or with a partner in the covenant? 
In the Old Testament we read, for example, texts about laws. But the authors always insisted that the institution of laws were meant for life and liberation from slavery and injustice. Hence the God offering the laws was a God of life and liberation. When the Laws were instituted as the people of Israel entered Canaan the aim was that they will live a social life of justice and fraternity. They were not to repeat what was being done in Egypt during their days of slavery. 
In the laws was the stipulation that God and the people of Israel agreed on a covenant--a partnership. God and people were partners. In fact, from the very start of Genesis we read  that for God the human was created as God's image and likeness, not as slaves.
Over time there emerged a rather strict observance of laws to the point of being fixated by the letters of the laws. The accusers of Jesus were precisely stuck in that mentality. Hence to bow before God was to be like a slave in front of a fearful master.
Jesus wanted to make it clear. The God he introduced was a different type, a God who was a partner of the covenant. God was a Father, Abba. Jesus did not deny the role of the Law. But he understood the Law as facilitating fraternity and justice. God was not a despot; God was a God of tenderness and pity. 
Was it not that the mission of Jesus was to "promote" the Kingdom wherein the love of God reigned? The desire of God was not exactly the strict literal observance of laws. The desire of God was to make the human stand up and pull out from things that prohibit the fullness of life. God did not seek to crush the human and have the human nailed to the cross and then have the Son serve as substitute. God's desire was to help the human make the effort to be fully and truly human. 
I love the word, "bloom". God wants us to bloom in life. To bloom, we place ourselves in front of God as Our Father and partner in the Covenant. To bloom, we stand in full confidence that God is Abba and we are God's children.
This, I think, is so central in the account of Mark. I am reminded constantly of what Claude Geffre wrote. Christianity is not exactly a religion. Oh, do not get me wrong. It is also a religion, but a "religion of the Gospel". Christianity is not a religion, period. it is not a religion obsessed with ceremonies and rituals and all sorts of practices and observances. Oh, these too are found in Christianity, as in other religions. But the central focus is not on these but on Jesus who points to the Father. Christianity is gospel based wherein we take the responsibility of being partners in the Covenant. The Gospel is not proclaimed to promote the constipation of people. It is about life and the fullness of life. Voila, my thoughts this morning. 

Some thoughts on "the power of the resurrection"

Jesus is risen. This is in the heart of Christian proclamation. St. Paul himself said it. If the resurrection never happened then proclamation and faith will be empty: "if Christ has not been raised, then empty [too] is our preaching; empty, too, your faith"  (1Cor15/14). The proclamation comes from an experience.

Remember what the Gospel accounts tell us. The death of Jesus made his disciples go nuts. Their hope went to the tomb with Jesus. We can read about this in the "road to Emmaus" story. Jesus then had to show up--appear--to his disciples. He made himself recognized to his disciples--that the same Jesus they met and lived with was the very same Jesus risen. This made the disciples open up to a new understanding of their hope and faith. The Jesus they saw die on the cross and put in the tomb...well, he was risen from death. St. Peter proclaimed the faith. "God raised this Jesus; of this we are all witnesses" (Act2/32).

The experience of encountering Jesus risen changed the life of the disciples. From doubt they moved to faith. From despair to hope. From sadness to joy. What they had in mind before, such as the renewal of the nation, had to give way to a new insight. God had his plan and now, in the resurrection, it was fully revealed.

Henceforth, the disciples were encouraged and ready to proclaim even at the risk of losing their lives. Remember that they were excluded from the synagogue. Peter and Paul were killed. Etc.
Belief in the resurrection was not an academic topic. It was not just a simple affirmation. The resurrection became a power for them, a "force". It was a power to transform life, the life of the disciples. This is why St. Paul called the resurrection of Jesus a "power": "to know him and the power of his resurrection" (Ph3/10).

For St. Paul and the disciples the resurrection became a force of transformation. It became a force not just for the hope of life after death; it also became a force working in concrete daily life. Christian life, thus, is a life that leaves itself seized by the power of the resurrection; becoming a life that bears fruit.

This may sound too "ole ole, bruhaha", abstract and meant only for "churchy" people. But come to think of it, indeed, there is power in the resurrection. Many words can describe it, but one word that comes to mind is "healing". The resurrection is healing even in the here and now.

Just pause and think about it. Think of what St. Paul said:  without the resurrection we are empty. I am sure that at certain moments in life we are stuck in situations that are so tough...there is no "solution". We're stuck. As what Fritz Perls said (and this is my mantra, so to speak), "the only way out is through". In other words, there is no way out of the gutter, the hole, the mud, the tomb. We just have to "go through" the situation and see what might happen next. You know what I mean.

I am reminded of Camus' discussion on Sisyphus and Sartre's nausea. We're just rolling that rock uphill then downhill and there's no exit from it. But then there is the resurrection! This rut or tomb we might be in does not hold the final destiny. Just the thought--nay, the belief--in the resurrection, can transform life inside the rut. It can be healing even as the wound stays gaping wide. If the only way out is through, then go through it with, but this time with the power of the resurrection. In the 4th gospel we read: "I have told you this so that you might have peace in me. In the world you will have trouble, but take courage, I have conquered the world (Jn16/33)”.

Even in the small dark corners of a dreary life, some gestures can be that of the resurrection. St. Therese of Lisiex was a master on this.

Maybe just around us, next door maybe, or even those in our households...there may be persons stuck in their own ruts unable to step out. They sense that there is "no solution". Anyway, I have no monopoly of all ruts. There is a whole solidarity of rutfullness among us. We might just be a bunch of smelly Lazaruses stuck in the tomb with bandages covering us. Others may need a word, a gesture, a sign of acceptance, a smile, whatever.... They too might need to have a sense of the power of the resurrection. The tomb is empty. It will be empty for them and for each of us. This is Easter’s message for me today, and it is healing.