January 15, 2024
In the Latin rite, the first reading from the first Book of Samuel (15:16-23) presents the bold prophet Samuel stops the anointed King Saul, and points out to him that his act of sparing the Amalekites was against the explicit will of God. This is a terrible statement on the part of God - God being a God of one party, and calling for the extermination of a race! Unimaginable for today's theology, though even today, within various religions, it is still possible to see such hardliners who would really look at such act of racial cleansing may be an act appealing to God.
However, it seems that Saul was moved by humanitarian concern on the one hand, and on the other hand motivated by the booty available - goods and animals, perhaps even people, who could be put to better use for the country. (Though, in no way is such calculations justifiable today, for those days when might was the rule, it was also possible to have learnt from past experience that such intermingling with other races eventually led to their downfall. Perhaps, it was such foresight gained from experience with other races that prompts the God men of those times like Samuel, to present it in the idiom of those times as God's command. Even today, when people stamped as terrorists are caught alive, and in some cases, those found to be hard-core in criminal history, the forces combating them, are found to finish them off, giving this same logic - that they are likely to contaminate and cause a constant threat to the life and security of the common people.)
Interestingly, Saul seemed to have utilised the booty, the animals and the wealth thus gained, for offering to God. But the justification is not found satisfactory and there comes the classic statement of Samuel: 'obedience is better than sacrifice'. Perhaps, that is the sacrifice. And when it comes to Jesus, he shows this to be still valid, and shows submission to the will of God, though it could never be found to be justifiable. Such a culture keeps Church a strong community. However, in this also corruption can emerge in two ways.
1) using obedience as a tool of an ungodly manner of exploitation and subjugation by the unscrupulous authorities 2) feeling complacent by adhering to the ritualistic observances prescribed by the religion, but hardly ever seeking Christ's will, and perhaps, blissfully unaware of one's status as devoid of the spirit of Christ.
In either case, the joy of being the friends of the bridegroom (Mk 2:18-22), who would care less for the rigorous religious observances like fasting (not that they are unnecessary), would not be there, other than a pharisaical satisfaction of being a holy (holier-than-thou) person.
I am afraid in the entire acrimonious controversy regarding the Syro Malabar Liturgy, both these forces appear to be in operation. On the one hand, there is a group wielding the weapon of 'obedience' to enforce the ritualism of bygone days, on the other hand, there is another group, which feels oppressed and exploited, and instead of accepting Christ's model of self-suffering for the cause, presents a model of very unchristlike revolt. I am seriously doubtful whether either of the parties is enjoying the bridegroom's company - May the Lord who was obedient, who asked us to go beyond the prescribed 'mountains', who asked us to perpetuate the memory of his humbling and self-effacing sacrifice in our lives, rather than the tantra and mantra of the liturgy, guide the paths of the followers of Christ.
In all these, are we totally missing prophets like Samuel who are able to directly present God's will today, and enforce the same? If not with Saul, finding a viable alternative like David?
May we be friends of the bridegroom, and the joy of his company be ours! And if warranted, prophets like Samuel, able to address, and confront the ungodliness of our power centres. Amen!
No comments:
Post a Comment