Salvation and Sacramental living: In Reference to St. Irenaeus of Lyons

Are you saved? Are you born again? What is salvation? Have these questions bothered you? It has been with me and more often than not I found the question a threat more than a concern. I always blocked myself from such questions and felt that it was waste of time. But as I kept meeting people in the church, I realised that such questions of salvation were very pertinent to them. I would ignore it at my own peril. But I strongly felt that the commonly held understanding of Salvation emphasizes more on the sinfulness and the fallen state of man, rather than on God and His magnanimity wrought in Jesus through incarnation, life, death and resurrection. This question was at back of my mind and with this disturbing curiosity I asked the seminary principal, Rev Dr Abraham Kuruvilla. His answer was excellent which is the base of this article. His answer made me search deeper and wider for the question. This is my conviction that in consonance with Sacramental living, Salvation has to be connected with the Creator, Creation and the Creative purpose.

Three Historic Centers-

 There are many accounts of understanding and interpreting the Creation. As a reformed Church we are tempted to assume that we do not need to look into teachers of early faith. I salute and internalize the emphasis given to bible but it is important to remember that every reading of the bible is an interpretation. The Church Fathers read the bible and interpreted it in a particular way. We will have to consider three Centers in Early Christian Church history and the representative Church fathers. For this I am using the division made by Church Historian Justo S. Gonzales in his book Christian Thought Revisited.

 a) Carthage- Carthage was an important Center in theological formulations which was situated in the north coast of Africa, which is now found in the city of Tunis. Latin was the language used here for discourses. We cannot go into the details of the history of this place but it is commonly held that Christian faith was brought from Rome. This place produced a great theologian in Tertullian who is considered to be the founder of Western Christian Theology. Tertullian was a lawyer by profession, and therefore his theology was influenced by the concepts of legality. So as a lawyer, law is the one overarching word that characterizes Tertullian’s basic theological concerns. He saw Christianity as superior to any human philosophy, since in it one receives the revelation of the ultimate law of the universe, the law of God. Gospel was the Second and superior law, and God was a legal God who had to be appeased. Saw the interpretation in this school of theology is that the Bible is law. We cannot go into the details beyond this.

 b) Alexandria- While Carthage was the most Latin of the cities, Alexandria was the most Hellenistic. This city got its name after Alexander the great and this was a prime philosophical center situated in Egypt. It was in Alexandria, that centuries before the birth of Jesus Christ, the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek- the Septuagint. This center was known for its Philosophical heritage and therefore the theology that was formulated out here was ‘Christianity as True Philosophy’. Clement of Alexandria is the most famous of the theologians here. But Origen is the one who set the foundations of this school. If Tertullian based his theology on law, then Origen we can say based his arguments on Truth as that was the search of Philosophy. Truth for him is transcendent, immutable, ineffable and eternal. Truth is not dependent on time or transition. So Jesus was this truth revealed and gospel was universal truth. So the emphasis was very cognitive and elite.

 c) Antioch- The final place here in our deliberation is Antioch. Antioch was one of the most important cities in Roman Empire. Antioch was never razed by Romans like Carthage, so the ancient traditions were intact and therefore it was less Romanized and Hellenized. The Acts of the Apostles says that it was in the city of Antioch that the followers of Christ were called Christians. Ignatius and Polycarp represent the Christianity found in Antioch. But the chief exponent of the theology of Antioch is Irenaeus of Lyon. In comparison to other representatives we have considered above, only Iranaeus was the Shepherd of a Congregation as he was also a Bishop. So his theological formulations were based on the interest of his flock. The Church was his emphasis. His theology was eminently pastoral. He saw God as a Great Shepherd who leads the flock towards divine purposes. As Tertullian’s main emphasis was Law, Origen’s Truth, so we can say that Irenaeus’s emphasis was History. Here History has to be understood as the events that take place within time as being guided towards God’s future. At creation, God had certain goals which were to be fulfilled through the process of History. In spite of sin, those goals have not been abandoned, and right now God, the Great Shepherd, still continues to lead History towards them.

 Understanding the Theological Concepts of Irenaeus of Lyons

 Of the above representative theology of the Beacons of the three schools, I find the interpretation of Church father Irenaues as the most Sacramental, and as one inviting us for a sacramental living. In this regard I would use his theology as an anchor to understand Salvation in a sacramental framework. Before understanding Salvation, it is imperative to comprehend the very understanding of God, Creation and Sin to which I shall turn to.

 a) God - As we have seen above that God understood by Irenaeus is that of the image of a Good Shepherd who engages in history. Irenaeus attributes to God not only intellect and Spirit but also sight and hearing. His main concern in depiction of God is to see that it is accurate with the scripture. Irenaeus’ doctrine of Trinity is very unique. For him God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit and the image he uses to refer to Son and Holy Spirit is “the hands of God”. He uses this to show that God relates directly with world. This is not meant to be anthropomorphic but symbolic that God uses his very hands (Son and Holy Spirit) by entering into the world in the work of creation and in the leading of History.

 b) Creation- Irenaeus single most emphasis is that the entire world is created by God. Normally it is held that Creation was perfect and salvation is seen as returning to that perfect state, which assumes to be cyclical. Irenaeus refers to the Genesis narrative of Creation as “the beginning of History”. What God made at that point of time was only the beginning, which was expected to develop later through a historical process. God’s purpose was the human creature should grow in such a way as to enable it to enjoy an-ever increasing fellowship with the divine. It is within this framework that “the image of God” should be understood. According to Colossians 1:15, the image of God is none other than Jesus Christ. Therefore, being made after the “image of God” means that humankind has been created with Jesus Christ as a model. God did not make human beings and then decide to take human form in the incarnation, but rather, from the very beginning, God meant to become incarnate, and therefore used the incarnate Word as a model for creating humans. So the human beings were created good- not in the sense that they were finished, but in the sense that they were made from the model of the Incarnate Word. They had the capacity to grow to further resemble the Word and therefore would come to the point of being able to enjoy close communion with the Creator. So the goal of Creation is to have communion with the Trinity.

 c) Sin- For Irenaeus laws established by God was to help humans in its own process of growth and development toward closer communion with God. The Creator placed man and woman in the garden so that they could grow in wisdom and be closer to their Creator. The law that ruled life in paradise was not to glorify God, but its function was to train Adam and Eve in the knowledge of God. The prohibition of not eating the fruit was not intended to be permanent. God eventually intended that humans would acquire the knowledge of good and evil, live eternally in communion with God. So the Sin here was that, being tempted by the serpent, Adam and Eve short circuited God’s purpose and plan for them. Death was a curse but not a final verdict, as Jesus would die to defeat death, and in him all will live again so as to have closer communion with God. The result of the sin is that human beings became subject to evil represented in Satan. In refusing to obey God, Adam and Eve became servants of Satan. And since they were the entirety of Humankind or “Head” of humanity- in them all were made subject to that evil power. This is what we mean when Paul says “In Adam we have all sinned.” So he emphasizes on our collective bondage to Sin.

 Development of a Doctrine of Salvation Based on Sacramental Living-

On the basis of the above premises it will be possible to understand Salvation. Our main theological category would be History in this regard. The commonly held view when it comes to salvation is that we owe a debt to God because we are sinners and therefore Jesus died on the Cross for our Salvation. But then what kind of a God are we portraying, a despot or an angry God who needs to be paid so that our damnation can be averted? The human predicament is not that we owe a debt because of sin but that we are slaves of the satanic forces. Since humankind stands in solidarity, in Adam’s sin we all have sinned, and jointly with him we all have been made slaves of Satan. What we need is liberation from our slavery, and to be guided to have greater communion with the Creator. Jesus is the one who liberates us. This he accomplished by turning himself to the powers of Satan and coming out as conqueror. What took place in incarnation was what God had intended from the beginning, that is the divine and human were bound into one. Because of sin incarnation has a redemptive dimension. As Paul says Jesus is the New Adam, the beginning of a new humanity that is not subject to Satan. He broke the slavery of humanity and he submitted himself as a slave. When the life of Jesus led to the cross and the powers of evil believed that they had conquered him, He rose again, thus destroying the powers of death and slavery in Resurrection. Just as we all are sinners because we are members of a body of humanity whose head was the first Adam, so our liberation from the powers of evil is due to our being part of a new creation, a new body whose head is Christ. Through His incarnation (birth, life, death and resurrection), Christ has become the New Adam, as he is the image after which Adam was modeled after. The idea of the Church as the body of Christ is Sacramental. In Jesus a new humanity has been inaugurated, so those who are in Christ are a “new creation.” In Jesus, the New Adam, the new creation is victorious over the powers of evil. Incarnation is the culmination of divine purposes. That is the work of Christ, of which the union of the divine and the human is at the centre, consists in overcoming the powers of evil and liberating us from their sway and joining us to the new head by making us members of the body of the new creation. This signifies the meaning of Baptism. Baptism is the means by which we are united to Christ. Baptism is a grafting which makes us branches of the True Vine and also the members of the Body of Christ. Through baptism, we are members of the Body of Christ- both at the beginning of our Christian life and through its duration. Because of the union with Christ, we are now part takers of his victory and therefore freed from the power of sin and from the subjection of the old creation. If baptism is a grafting that makes us the members of the body of Christ, Holy Communion is the means God gives us to be nourished as members of that body. A grafted or baptized member lives by the blood and nourishment it receives from the body. In this nourishment we are strengthened, and therefore our participation of Christ’s victory is renewed. As we have seen that humans were modeled after the Word (Jesus Christ) in Creation, so the Goal of Creation is to be in communion with Creator revealed in the Word. This process consists of being children of God and increasingly resembling our Creator. The gift of eternity is part of this process. The vision here is of a new reality and a new order, a ‘Kingdom without end’, a kingdom in which all shall be coheirs of God and continue to exist and grow in Freedom, justice and communion with God.

 Conclusion

 My main understanding is that the prevalent understanding of Salvation portrayed in popular spirituality calls for an ‘other worldly’ existence and a disengagement with the world. This is damaging for our witness. The above said understanding of Salvation is the worldview of our Bible and Worship (liturgy). This takes the world and creation very seriously. God intervenes in history and therefore has a purpose for everyone. Salvation is not just by the ‘Blood of Christ’ but by the entire Incarnation (Birth, Baptism, Public Ministry, Crucifixion, Resurrection, Ascension and Second coming of Jesus Christ). The entire Created order is included in this Salvation. Salvation is the Goal of Creation. Salvation is growing in the image of God and having close communion with the Creator and Created order, through the Incarnated Son by the Holy Spirit.                    

Understanding Islam and the Politics of Jihad

Introduction

In the last two decades the political identity of Islam has become very prominent  and has been equated with fundamentalism and terrorism. It is a clear case of globalization of stereotypes and prejudices towards the Muslims. What I would like to argue is that there is a certain geo-politics without which understanding the Muslim identity as such is difficult. In the matrix of the geo-politics I would argue to locate the contemporary attitudes towards Muslims. There is a strong “otherness” constructed through media representations and war discourses. In an international matrix we have to consider 3 landmarks.

a)      Middle east crisis post the creation of Israel.

b)      Later cold war after Vietnam with special reference to Afghanistan.

c)      The post 9/11 scenario of world politics.

In between the creation of Pakistan will also be mentioned and necessary focus would be given.

The constructed Muslim identity

Mahmood Mamdani, the author of “Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: Islam, the USA and the Global war against terror”, attributes the distinction of Good Muslim, bad Muslim to George W. Bush. He says Bush moved to distinguish between “good Muslims” and “bad Muslims”. From this point of view, “bad Muslims” were clearly responsible for terrorism. He said that there are Good Muslims who were anxious to clear their names and consciences of this horrible crime. What underlies this is, unless proved to be “good” every Muslim was presumed to be “bad”. So all Muslims were now under obligation to prove their credentials by joining in a war against “bad Muslims”. So Mamdani contends that judgment of “good” and “bad” refer to Muslim political identities, not to cultural or religious ones.[1

Now we have to trace the root of political Islam that has roots in the colonial context, clubbed along in the process of Decolonization. The creation of Israel in 1948 is the root of the emergence of political Islam. The politics after World War II has to be also kept in mind.

Arabs and the creation of Israel:

The Arab countries went to have unity among each other that could be carried much further into some sort of political and economic union, like the European community. As early as 1931 an Islamic conference in Jerusalem put out this announcement: ‘The Arab lands are a complete and indivisible whole, all efforts are to be directed towards their complete independence, in their entirety and unified. For this Arab league was founded in 1945.

In such a context of building. Arab unity, the creation of Israel took place. We need to survey the reason of such an eventuality. The origin of the problem went back almost 2000 years to 71 C.E., when most of the Jews were driven out of Palestine, which was then their homeland, by the Romans. There were some Jews who remained. In 1897 some Jews living in Europe founded the World Zionist Organization at Basle in Switzerland. Zionists were people who believed that Jews ought to be able to go back to Palestine and have what they called a “National Homeland”, or a Jewish state. Jews had recently suffered persecution in Russia, France and Germany, and a Jewish state would provide a safe refuge for Jews. Britain became involved in 1917 when the Foreign Minister, Arthur Balfour, announced that Britain supported the idea of a Jewish national home called the “Balfour Declaration”. After 1919, when Palestine became a British Mandate, large number of Jews began to arrive in Palestine and the Arabs protested to this. But Nazi Persecution of Jews in Germany after 1933 caused a flood of refugees and by 1940, about half the population of Palestine was Jewish. In 1937 the British Peel commission proposed dividing Palestine into 2 separate states, one Arab and one Jewish, but the Arabs rejected the idea. The World War II made matters worse. There was an exodus of Jews from Europe and in 1945 the U.S.A pressed Britain to allow 1,00,000 Jews into Palestine, but the British refused. So Jews started a terrorist campaign and the most spectacular event was the blowing up of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, which the British were using as headquarters. 91 people were killed and many were injured. British pressurized, asked the United Nations to deal with the issue and in November 1947 the U.N. voted to divide Palestine, setting aside roughly half of it to form an independent Jewish state. In 15 May 1948 Ben Gurion, Jewish leader declared the independence of the new state of Israel. It was immediately attacked by Arab states like Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon.[2]

War of 1948

Creation of Israel brought on a war which most people expected the Arabs to win easily but Israelis defeated them and even captured more of Palestine than the UN partition had given them. They ended up with about 3 quarters of Palestine plus the Egyptian part of Eilat. Israel fought with desperation and the Arabs on the contrary were divided and poorly equipped. King Abdullah of Jordan was more interested in seizing the area of Palestine, west of the River Jordan which is known as west bank, so that he could make it part of his own state. The most tragic outcome of the war was that the Palestinian Arabs became the innocent victims who found themselves without a state or a homeland. Some lived in the Jewish state, some lived in the land seized by Jordan and some fled into Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan R Syria, living in refugee camps. Jerusalem was divided between Israel and Jordan. Arabs did not recognize Israel and they regarded this war as the first round in struggle to destroy Israel and liberate Palestine.

Suez war of 1956:- 

This was due to emergence of Col. Abdul Gammal Nasser, who became the President of Egypt who was a strong proponent of Arab unity. Britain and France was insecure as Nasser Nationalized the Suez Canal and many British and French, stock holders lost employment which would be compensated. Except Israel, all nations’ ships were allowed to pass through it. Britain, France and Israel decided to take on Egypt. Israel invaded Egypt on 29^th October 1956, capturing the Sinai Peninsula. Britain and France also attacked Egypt which created a huge outcry and USA fearing the Arabs drawing closer to U.S.S.R. refused to support Britain and France and U.S.A. and U.S.S.R agreed on a ceasefire where UN peace keeping force was sent. After this war Arabs and Nasser grew strong. Israel also succeeded in their goals but Britain and France were humiliated.

Six Days War of 1967:- 

In 1967 the Arab states joined together again in a determined attempt to destroy Israel. The lead was taken by Iraq, Syria and Egypt. From 1963 Iraq influenced by Baath party in Syria, believed in Arab Independence. Syria was ruled by Baath Party from 1966 and supported al Fatah, the Palestine Liberation Movement. In this while Nasser became hugely popular for his policies and leadership and he grew in confidence with the support of Iraq and Syria and decided time was ripe for attach, so he began to move troops up to the frontier in Sinai and closed the Gulf of Aqaba. Jordan and Lebanon massed troops around the border and Algeria joined them. Israel’s situation was hopeless. Israelis took initiative and launched a series of devastating air strikes which destroyed most of the Egyptian Air Force. Israeli troops moved with remarkable speed capturing the Gaza Strip, whole of Sinai from Egypt and Golan heights from Syria. With this Israeli victory, the Palestinians were again in Jewish state of Israel, living as refugees. The identity of Jews V/s Muslim/ Arabs became even more political and strong around the cause of liberation of Palestine.

Yom Kippur War of 1973:- 

The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) under its leader Yasser Arafat brought pressure on Arab states to act. They hijacked a plane from Jordan and blew it up. Its climax came when the P.L.O murdered the 9 Israeli team in 1972 Munich Olympics. Anwar Sadat who succeeded Nasser to become president of Egypt, along with Syria deiced to attack Israel so that Americans would intervene. So they attacked Israel on the feast of Yom Kippur, hoping to catch the Israelis off guard. After some early Arab successes, Israelis using American weapons, were able to turn the tables. They could keep the 1967 area and even crossed the Suez Canal into Egypt. The US intervened. The Palestine cause seemed far from being achieved.

Two significant events after that were Camp David a peace accord between Egypt and Israel, 1978-79 mediated by Jimmy Carter, President of USA. It was signed between Anwar Sadat of Egypt and Menachem Begin of Israel. After this Sadat was assassinated for betraying the Muslim, Palestininian and Arab cause.

The second significant event was Oslo Accord signed between Israel and PLO brokered by US President Bill Clinton. It was signed between President of Israel Yitzak Rabin and PLO president Yasser Arafat. This was a landmark, but PLO became unpopular and Hamas became representative of Palestine identity and cause.[3] 

 What is interesting according to Mahmood Mamdani is that the PLO was secular in comparison, and Hamas was promoted by Israel to defeat PLO. Hamas was highly religious in its identity. Now Israel refuses to recognize the government led by Hamas. There are many aspects of the Middle East Crisis that led to the development of political identity of Islam, which the author cannot include in this paper.[4]  As Afsal Devji says that in the political identity construction of fundamentalist and terrorist groups the unseen and the in accessible Palestine homeland functioned as an almost mythical cause. So the middle east crisis becomes very important in the politicization of the Muslim identity.[5]

Makers of Muslim Political Identity

Before we dwell upon Cold War and Russian Invasion of Afghanistan, we need to understand a very interesting aspect of political Islam in respect to partition of India. Mahmood Mamdani says that while the political Christianity in the United States was work of fundamentalist religious clergy, the development of political Islam has been the work of non-clerical political intellectuals such as Muhammad Iqbal and Mohammad Ali Jinnah in colonial India, and Abul Mawdudi, Sayyid Qutb, and Ali Shariati in post colonial Pakistan,  Egypt and Iran respectively. The glaring exception was Ayatollah Ruhollah Kohomeini. After the Islamic Revolution that over threw the US backed Monarch of Iran, Shah Reza Pahlavi, Ayatollah made clerical power have constitutional sanction. Apart from that the pioneers of political Islam were not the religious Ulama but political intellectuals with an exclusive worldly concern. This is the reason why it makes more sense to speak of political Islam – the preferred designation in the Arab world for this movement than the Islamic fundamentalism the term most often used in post 9/11 America.

As Jinnah is active in the debate let us observe him in brief. The split between religious ulama and political intellectuals was evident as early as the anticolonial movement, i.e. the Partition of India. The intellectuals, i.e., Mohammad Jinnah, not the Ulama, pioneered the development of Islamist political movements, ultimately championing a call for a separate homeland for Indian Muslims, i..e. Pakistan. The conservative Ulama remained inside the secular Indian National Congress, modernist secular intellectuals called for on Islamic polity, at first autonomous, then independent. The secular Muslim intellectuals came to insist that Islam had become a political identity.[6]

A background to Jihad:- Locating in the Mileu of post Vietnam cold war and US – USSR conflict in Afghanistan.

For locting Jihad in the politics of cold war and Invasion of Afganistan by the Soviets, I subscribe to the theory of Mahmood Mamdani in his book ‘good Muslim, Bad Muslim’. He says that after the debacle of Vietnam war, the official America with the help of CIA and FBI fostered proxy wars in Laos, Africa and Latin America. This was by using insurgents and ariel bombings to further cold war politics as the Anti-war sentiment was at the peak, the US congress opposed all wars and no funding was sanctioned. So proxy wars along with nexus with Drug Mafia brought the politics of aiding right wing dictators accompanied by series of Coup de tat in Soviet favored countries by the U.S.A. Rebel groups like Unita in Angola, Renamo in Mozambique and Contras in Nicargua were fostered by the CIA. It is always believed that 24 December 1979 that Soviets invaded Afghanistan and then CIA aided Mujahidin started its operation in 1980. But it was 3 July, 1979 Jimmy Carter, President of USA signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of Pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. But this nexus thrived during Ronald Ragan’s presidency starting in 1980. There was a sustained co-operation between CIA and Pakistan’s ISI. Both intelligence agencies came to share a dual objective: militarily to provide maximum fire power to the Mjuahideen and, politically, to recruit the most radically anti-communist Islamists to counter Soviet forces. The combined result was to flood the region not only with all kinds of weapons but also with the most radical Islamist recruits. They flocked to ISI- run training camps in Pakistan, where  they were ideologically charged with the spark of holy war and trained in guerilla tactics, sabotage and bombings. The Islamist recruit came all over the world, not only from Muslim- Majority countries such as Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt etc but also such Muslim minority countries as the United States and Britain. This is the setting in which the United States organized the Afghan Jihad and that informed its central objective, to unite a billion Muslims world wide in holy war, a crusade against the Soviet Union, on the soil of Afghanistan. A secondary objective was to turn a doctrinal difference between two Islamic sects the Minority Shia and the majority Sunni- into a political divide and thereby to contain the influence of Iranian Revolution as a Shia Affair. So in a way Afghan Jihad was an American Jihad. Right wing Islamism was introduced in Afghan Jihad. The right wing Islamism wad divided. The Reagen administration should be thanked for uniting varied schools in the name of liberation that created an “infrastructure of terror” that used Islamic symbols to tap into Islamic networks and communities. They did not bank on Afghan nationalism, but was cast as an international Jihad, where CIA looked for volunteers from Muslim populations all over the globe. The CIA looked for a Saudi Prince to lead this crusade but was unable to find one. It settled for the next best, the son of an, illustrious family closely connected to Saudi Royal House. He is none other than Osama Bin Laden. As Arundati Roy in her book “ordinary Man’s guide to the Empire” notes that Osama Bin Laden has a distinction of being created by CIA and to appear on the wanted list of F.B.I. After the Soviets were forced to leave Afghanistan in 1989, a meeting was held by Osama Bin Laden to decide the future of Jihad. This meeting was held in town of Khost. It was here the decision to wage Jihad beyond the borders of Afghanistan was taken and that organization to be formed was al- Qaeda, “The Base”.[7]

The Taliban:- 

If the assortment of majhideen group were the ideological products of cold war – the Taliban arose from the agony and the ashes of the war against the Soviet Union. The Taliban was a movement born across the border in Pakistan at a time when the entire population of Afghanistan had been displaced, not once but many times, and no educated class to speak was left in the country. A Talib was a student in the religious school, and the movement of students, Taliban was born of Warefare stretching across decades, of children born in cross border refugee camps of male orphans having company of boys in madrassahs, who were to ironically defend people from the lust and looting of Mujahideen Guerrillas. The promise that made the Taliban popular and brought it to power in 1995 is that it would establish law and order. The Taliban is backed by Deobandi Islam that is a Pakistani Import. Tailban is the result of an encounter of a pre-modern people with modern imperial power.[8] 

Events post 9/11:- 

The collusion of the Boeings against the Twin Towers his etched in history. This is also due to the impact created by unabated visual displays. It is ironical to say the least that the partners of Afgan Jihad turned against its own creators. Even today to bear an identifiable Muslim name, or to have beard or head dress would raise suspicion and racial profiling. The category of Islamic terrorism is artificial. Islamic Terrorism is thus offered as both description and explanation of the events of 9/11. It is no longer market (capitalism) nor the state (democracy) but culture (modernity) that is said to be the dividing line between those in favour of a peaceful, civic existence, and these inclined to terror. Artificial distinction are made of those who are modern and pre-modern. Muslims are portrayed as premoderns and also Anti-moderns. If we contrast earlier depictions of Africans with contemporary talk about Muslims, interesting insights can be mined. During the cold war, Africans were stigmatized as pre-modern not capable of modernity. But with the end of cold war, Islam and the middle east have displaced Africa as the hard pre-moderns, who oppose modernity in a rapidly globalizing world. In such a background Samuel Huntington’s ‘Clash of civilization’ theory has to be placed. He compartmentalized the Nation states and people into civilizations and said that conflicts of global politics will occur between different civilizations. Huntington cast Islam in the role of an enemy civilization. So from this point of view Muslims could only be bad.[9] Amartya Sen says that such monolithic formulation of identity is naïve. It assumes that civilization must be antagonistic, the civilizations to which people belong are antagonistic to each other. The assumption of classifying people according to civilization is faulty. The assumption of seeing people exclusively or primarily, in terms of religion based on civilization is a pervasively intrusive phenomenon in social analysis, refusing to see other richer ways of seeing people or recognizing other aspects of identities. He says that word ‘Islamic Terrorism’, where every man who follows Islam is fitted into one proto-type because there is an over dependence on the religious identity which suppresses other identities.[10]     These debates are of high value especially in the post 9/11 context.

Understanding Jihad and Islamic Fundamentalism

As we traced the root of Jihad, we have to understand that this also has to be understood in the context of Geo- Politics. After the disintegration of USSR, post-cold war Islam became the ‘other’. Before 9/11 US counseled other countries to reconcile with terrorism, but after 9/11 it declared ‘war on terrorism’ which is similar to Ronald Reagan’s ‘War on terror’ and the ‘war against the Evil Empire’ (Soviet).The Bush Government was a direct descendant of Reagan legacy in a post cold war context. The invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq in the pretext of 9/11 gave wings to imperial designs.[11] In such a context Jihad needs to be understood. The Jihad has replaced what used to be called fundamentalism at the edge of Muslim militancy. Islamic fundamentalism was part and parcel of Cold War politics and was concerned with the founding through revolution of an ideological state, fashioned in many respects on the communist model that was so popular in Africa and Asia following the World War II. Mawdudi and Jamaat- I Islami were Vanguards of Islamic fundamentalism the motivation to produce a utoplan society. That sort of fundamentalism enjoyed only one success i.e. the Islamic Republic of Iran. But this trend broke down with the end of cold war and beginning of globalization. So here the distinction between Islamic fundamentalism and Jihad becomes sharp according to Faisal Devji. Jihad is not concerned with political parties, revolutions or the founding of ideological states. In Jihad particular sites of struggles are themselves unimportant, their territories being subordinated to a larger and even metaphysical struggle for which they have become merely instrumental. It ends by de-territorializing Islam altogether, since it is not one country or another that is important, but instead Islam itself as a global entity. So Al- Zawahiri describes the importance of invoking the Palestinian struggle solely in terms of a way t gain the support of Arabs and Muslims. Here we see subordination of  local in favour of the global. Jihad is based on failure rather than success of local struggles. Some commentators say that after the fall of Soviet Union and end of cold war, Jihad took the role to challenge US hegemony.

Two factors make the Jihad into a global movement: The failure of local struggles and the inability to control a global landscape of operations by the politics of intentionality. These factors point to a radical individuation of Islam that is as divorced from modes of collective solidarity and action based on some common history of needs, interests or ideas. What is interesting is that after 9/11 a host of clerics and fundamentalists who included leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and Jamaal – e Islami denounced the attack on the Twin towers. Their protest does not show solidarity with the dead or opposition to a Muslim practice or violence against civilians. Their protest recognizes the Jihad’s radical novelty on grounds of Jihad’s globalization beyond a politics of causes and intentions that is organized around shared and therefore very particular histories of needs, interests or ideas. Jihad subverts traditional hierarchy of Islam and displaces hegemony. So whatever the future of this struggle, the Jihad is a product of globalization and modernity and has stolen the radical edge from fundamentalism. So in comparison to Al- Queda or other Mujahid groups, revolutionary groups like Muslim Brotherhood, Jamaat – Islami and Hamas look pale.[12]

Ijthihad:- 

Ijthihad is hermeneutics is Islam or legal interpretation of Sharla. Ijthihad refers to the institutionalized practice of interpretation of Sharia to take into account changing historical circumstances and, therefore different points of view. It makes for a substantial body of law constantly changing in response to changing conditions. The attitude to war Ijthihad is the single most important issue that divides society centred Islamists from state-central Islamists. Whereas society centred Islamists consist that the practice of Ijthihad be central to modern Islamic society, state centred Islamists are determined the “gates of Ijtihad’ remain forever closed. Mandai argues that the theoretical roots of Islamist political terror lie in the state centred, not the society centred movement.[13]  

Political Islam from the Indian Perspective

The International Discourses of stereotyping the Islamic identity has its ramifications in India as well. We have to bear in mind that the Partition of India the scars of migration that was inflicted on people the Kashmir problem the Demolition of Ayodhya, in 1992, the Bombay riots in 1993, Gujarat riots in 2002, have strengthened the overemphasis on the political identity of Islam. The recent Sachar report shows the consistent ‘ghettoziation’ and marginalization of the Muslim community. Especially after Gujarat riots 2002, the Muslim community feels even more alienated. The consistent stereotype of a Muslim is his anti-patriotic stance. This is taken as a given, with the over-emphasis of identity in relation to the idea of a nation state. The Muslim has to exhibit extra- ordinary patriotism or tolerance towards other fellow Indians to be accepted as a citizen itself. The logic of Good Muslim, bad Muslim works even in the Indian milieu. After the Shah Bano case, the Debate for Uniform Civil Code led to the construction of ‘otherness’ of the Muslim community.    

The Movie Mumbai Meri Jaan’ reflects beautifully the stereotype of how Muslims in Urban spaces, with their head gear and outfit are perceived as terrorists or criminals. They are also perceived as premodern. These are the products of the political identity construction that may also be appropriated by some sections of the Muslim community. Amartya Sen critiques such monolithic understanding of identity. He says that well intentioned Film-makers, Novelists, activists and artists counter stereotypes regarding Muslims by portraying them as peace loving and nation loving people. But they also subscribe to the same monolithic understanding of identity of over emphasis on the political religious identity. The understanding of multiple identities needs to be reinforced.

Conclusion

As theological students we are not insular to stereotypes regarding Muslims. We have to be aware of our prejudices and comprehend the process of political construction of Islamic identity. It is not given or essential. It is imperative that we doubt every prevalent discourses on Islam. We have to engage with its hermeneutically as a faith tradition and not from a comparative study perspective. Dialogical engagement with Islam, its literature, scholars and community at large is very important.   

  

Bibliography

Chomsky, Noam. Middle East Illusions: Peace, Security and Terror. New Delhi: Penguin Books, 2006.

Devji, Faisal. Landscapes of Jihad: Military, Morality, Modernity. London: Foundation Books, 2005.

Lowe, Martin. Mastering Modern World History. New Delhi. Mac Millan India Ltd, 1997.

Mamdani, Mahmood. Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: Islam, the USA and the Global War Against Terror. New Delhi: Permanent Black, 2005.

Sen, Amartya. Identity and Violence: Illusion of Destiny. New Delhi: Penguin Books, 2006.

Submitted to: Rev. Dr. M.M. Abraham

Submitted by: Merin Mathew

Submitted on: 10/09/2009

                                     

---

[1] Mahmood Mamdani, Good Muslim, Bad Muslim. Islam, the USA, and the Global War Against Terror. (New Delhi: Permanent Black, 2005), 15, 16.

[2] Norman Lowe, Mastering Modern World History (New Delhi: Macmillan India Ltd, 1997) 223, 226-228.

[3] Ibid., 228-238.

[4] Mamdani, op.cit., 216.

[5] Faisal Devji, Landscapes of the Jihad: Militancy, Morality, Modernity (London: Foundation Books, 2005), 2,3.

[6] Mumdani, op.cit., 46-48.

[7] Mamdani, op.cit., 63-159.

[8] Mamdani, op.cit., 160-172.

[9] Ibid., 19-21.

[10] Amartye Sen, Identity and  Violence: Illusion of Destiny (New Delhi: Penguin Books, 2006), 40-42, 75-79.

[11] Noam Chomsky, Middle East Illusions: Peace, Security and Terror (New Delhi: Penguin Books, 2003), 235, 6.

[12] Devji, op.cit., 26-32.

[13] Mamdani, op.cit., 60, 61.

Baptism- Some answers to often asked Questions

This article is a search for some questions that we often ask about Baptism. Its an attempt to comprehend the essence n beauty of this Sacrament.

Introducing Baptism

The Sacrament of Baptism is the core action of the Church and the key factor of faith. The whole idea of Baptism is to consecrate by setting apart for a special object and a new life. Baptism is inextricably bound with the ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It is actually a reflection of the death of the sinful human being with Christ and the resurrection thereafter. , resulting in the union with the body of Christ, viz. the church. It is a sacrament performed in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit and it is a gift from God. Through this sacrament God enters into a new covenant with his people. Here I would like to primarily focus on the theology of Baptism and the theological and Biblical basis for Infant Baptism as followed by the Mar Thoma Church. I am deeply indebted to Rev Dr K. G. Pothen for igniting my quest in the Sacrament of Baptism as his classes on Baptism were the foundation for my understanding of the profundity of Baptism. The basic premise of the article is heavily drawn from the article, “Baptism: Divine Gift and Challenge” written by Rev. Sam Koshy written for the study material for the Mar Thoma Clergy Conference 2009- Self Formation Through Worship And Sacraments.

Every image and metaphor used in the baptismal liturgy and the symbolic actions are of endorsing the dimension of discipleship. The sacrament of baptism is not done as proclamation of content of faith, rather it is initiating to the way of life of discipleship.

Baptism for New Birth and Resurrection

Discipleship becomes a possibility through new birth and resurrection. The Pauline thought on baptism goes more on line with the resurrection. But the Johannine tradition gives focus on the new birth. Our liturgy of baptism combines both. Or else we can say both the new birth and the resurrection are not separate rather they are part of the life of discipleship. Hence baptismal pond is both Eden and Golgotha. This is the reason why the Pauline and Johannine readings found special place in the baptismal liturgy. The epistle and the gospel portion are affirmation of the new birth and resurrection. The gospel is read and only then is the person named, or otherwise a person is named in the gospel tradition. Every baptism service is a kind of burial service. The self of the individual is buried, the new self is given. It is the putting on of a new nature. The new nature is that of light, of the new Adam.

The wording of the baptism can be reflected in this sense…..

So and so is baptized in the hope of redemption and eternal life.

The dimension of new birth and resurrection is otherwise portrayed as the redemption and eternal life. The usage “in the hope” is very important. This is a call, a potential and a challenge. The holy baptism is the sacrament of hope. This is realized and yet not completed. Here baptism is a gift from God and is a challenge to live in wholeness.

God-parent. 

God parents symbolize the mentoring of the Christian way of living/ discipleship. Mentoring is a biblical activity. Samuel was mentored by Eli. Moses was mentored by Jethro. Elisha by Elijah, and the disciples of Jesus. It is not a denominational activity .It is an activity of the church. The baptized ones become corporate ones. Both old and the new, senior and junior all of them need God parents. God parents are not for kids. It is rather accepting the corporate identity. John Zizoulas comments that the baptism is giving us the ecclesial identity. Therefore what the black theologian John Mbiti’s saying “because we are, I am” is very baptismal. So the saintly and sinful state of the baptized one has got a corporate dimension and responsibility. God parents represent the corporeality of the disciples.

Baptismal Acts

There are three significant acts in the sacrament of baptism. These three acts constitute the vision of the sacrament.1. The naming.The baptismal naming is the act of accepting the tradition of the forefathers and mothers. The name of the grand mother is added to some biblical names. The naming is done at the church, during the first part of the baptism service. Baptism is not conviction or confession; rather it is confirmation to a way of living. When we take one name from the bible, we dedicate the boy/girl to order their lives in biblical genealogy. We never take any name like Pharaoh or BAL, rather we take the names of those who led themselves and other dignified before God.2. The sealing.The sealing is the second act done in every baptism. The priest lays hand on the forehead and signs the sign of the cross. This action is for the whole body, the whole person. This becomes our identity. In all the worship and sacrament this sealing is our right, privilege and responsibility .In every Eucharist service , in the second part of the last russma, the community is saluted as sealed by the zeal of holy baptism. This is the affirmed every time. God is in charge of our lives. God takes possession of us. We are possessed by God. The sealing with oil is peculiar to the kingly ownership. Each Christian is God embraced. The sealing has got a dual function. It is a command to us– a reminder, and it is a declaration to the world – a signifier. It is the apostolic commission to be a disciple.3. The anointing In the baptism there are three levels of anointing, i.e. anointing the blessed oil, sanctified water and holy Myron. The prayers done at the three occasions are of appointing for special tasks. The sacraments are the occasion of imparting responsibilities. The baptism is the highest among them. The baptism is being done as the hope of the anointment. The holy Myron blankets the kid all over the body with blessing. After which, there is a prayer that indicates that the baptized persons are expected to rule the world for God. The ruling is in taking up initiatives and to pray before God for the world. As they share the throne with Jesus, they are to lead, to take responsibilities, to be accountable and thereby to rule the world (Rev. 3.21).

The person is called to live according to the anointing of the Holy Spirit. The anointing is for the kings. The baptized ones are anointed to live with Christ in the world, to dine with Christ at the Eucharist, to rule with Christ in leading the world. These are the three levels of discipleship.

Baptism as Illumination

Illumination is a core theme in the bible. The face of Moses was illumined on his return from the Mount Sinai. Illumination of the intellect is also a key term fore the Syriac tradition. The church is neither a collective of holy fools nor a pathological pedantry. Rather it is a group of people with illumined intellect, meaning that they can discern the futility of the world (prayer before promeon and sedra.)

May he/she reject the works of death , may he/she glorify you as father son and holy spirit , May their consciousness be illumined that they discern the futility of the world .

The gospel of St. John considers the discipleship as witnessing to the illumination through Jesus Christ (John 1). The baptized ones are illumined ones.

Baptism as Ordination

Through baptism we are joined to Christ, the head and the church, the body. We share in the priestly, kingly and prophetic ministry of Jesus Christ. Hence through baptism we have become the royal priest. The act of anointing, commissioning are all part of this royal priesthood. Hence the baptized ones are given white dress, symbolizing victory over the forces of death. And the white dress becomes the dress code to worship God. This is the reason that even bishops are expected to wear white dress during the Eucharist.

It is very important to note that in any other ordination service Sythu and Myron is not used. The reason is that the baptism is the highest ordination. And all other ordinations are subsidiary to this. All other ordinations are within the royal priesthood of the church.

Baptism for relations of Serenity

In the writings of Cyril of Jerusalem it is commented that the persons for baptism is turned to the west outside the church symbolizing the evil relations of Egypt, then they are turned to the east symbolizing life in new relation. Romans 6 explicate that the organs are baptized for the acts of justice.

Then no longer present your organs to sin as instruments of wickedness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life , and present your organs to God as instruments of righteousness(Rom 6. 13) .

Baptism is the elevation of the organs into a higher order of living. Col.3.4 endorses that the baptized ones are risen. Every Kauma (the standing posture) is an affirmation of the resurrected existence, the standing symbolizes the same. This is profoundly seen in the sedra prayer of the fourth section of the Kahanaitha order that quote the prayer .

We believe that the tongues that sung your divine songs will not be silenced , the hands that distributed your holy body will not be chained, the foot that touched your Madbaha will not be flamed but will be brought to new life.

In a sense this can be altered to every baptized one , as we can try to reread it as

We believe that the tongues that sung your divine songs will not be silenced , the hands that glorified you will not be chained, the foot that touched your Madbaha will not flamed; but will be brought to new life.

Baptism is for a new order of relations, a new way of relating to the self and others. It is interesting to note that, in the earliest traditions the persons to be baptized were positioned as turning to the Egypt, symbolizing the relations of oppression and death, and then they are turned to the east- the thronos symbolizing the relation of justice and life. Baptism is for the relations of life, love and justice.

Baptism as Identity Constituting

The fourth affirmation of the Nicene Creed declares that the baptismal identity of the church. “We” , is a collective by baptism. “We” are dedicated to the hope of new birth and resurrection. The eagerly waiting is an act of committing oneself to the cause. That is why Nicene Creed endorses it is done only once. But the “once” was with due preparation. It is clear from the patristic material that both the celebrant and the persons and related ones of the baptized used to observe prayer and fasting for three days prior to the baptism. It is also obvious from the Syriac tradition that the baptisms were conducted on the Easter Sundays. In every Holy Communion service in the second part of the last blessing the liturgy of the Holy Qurbana endorses the baptismal identity of the worshippers. In the first prayer of the funeral service, this baptismal identity is invoked.

Through the baptism, biological identity is transformed into ecclesial identity .That is why water of baptism is thicker than the blood. It is the commencement of relations which is more than the biological and cultural, transforming both. That is the call of the community in Acts. 2 .41

As the conception of human constitute his or her biological hypostasis( being) , so baptism leads to a new mode of existence , to a regeneration ( 1 Pet.1:3,23), and consequently to a new hypostasis. Jesus Christ is the basis for this new existence not as he brings the world a beautiful revelation, a sublime teaching about the person, but because he realizes in history the very reality of the person and makes it the basis and hypostasis (being) of the person of every human.

Baptism as Sacrament of Metaphors

In distinction to other traditions of faith, the Syriac tradition works through metaphors. Metaphors are way of narrating the higher order of life and history. Metaphors do not limit reality to concepts; rather they sketch on the shadows of the unfathomable mystery of God and life.

The metaphor of light.

The metaphor of clothing.

The metaphor of crowning.

These three metaphors are to symbolize life with Christ. We are called from darkness to light by the true light of Jesus Christ. As Col 3.10 the clothing imagery is very central to the Syriac tradition, it denotes the new person in Christ. The ruling imagery is from the book of revelation. The ruling is not the one that of Herod or Nero .We are called to rule through just relations. We are commissioned to take initiatives for

Acts 2.47 verse gives the purpose of the baptism devoted to apostolic teaching, fellowship, the breaking of the bread, and prayers.

Requirement and Act of Baptism

Requirements for Baptism are, Minister, Candidate( infant or adult), God-Parent, water (hot and cold), Myron, syth( olive oil), Baptism Register( 9 registers are supposed to be with the priests according to the constitution). We use syth to make cross as it symbolizes rebirth and regeneration.

Liturgical Act of Baptism 

The minister takes water from 4 sides, takes it first front and back and then the two sides signifying the Cross. The prayer, that with forgiveness and eternal life this child is baptized. Baptism is the anticipation of hope of eternal life that the candidate is baptized.

Biblical And Theological Grounds For Infant Baptism

The major confusion of the Mar Thoma Christians is directly related to the validity of Infant Baptism. The lack of clarity on this subject and the illusion that it is not biblically based has caused major concerns for the Mar Thomites who are succumbed to believe that this particular practice is not biblical. This is a challenge and an opportunity to clear certain misconceptions regarding this topic. We will first consider this historically. In the time of the Apostles we have direct evidence that 3 distinct families or households received Baptism; that is the household of Stephanas, Lydia and the Phillipian Jailor. The term household signifies infants and children included as well. Even in Acts 2: 38-39, it signifies clearly Child Baptism. Origen mentions that the “ Church has an order from the Apostles to give baptism to the infants.” At the Council of Cathage, A.D. 251, the question was asked that whether it was not necessary to postpone baptism of infants until the fourth day , when it was decided that “no person should be hindered from receiving baptism, especially infants and those newly born.” The fourth Century Archbishop of Milan, Ambrose, wrote on the subject of “ Infant Baptism in the time of the Apostles.” This also shows that infant Baptism was uniformly practiced by the Early Church. W.F. Flemington in The New Testament Doctrine of Baptism argues that baptism of infants is a thoroughly legitimate development of New Testament teaching, a practice in full accord with the mind of Christ. J. Jeremias , the New Testament scholar says that Colossians 2: 11,12 shows that Paul considered Baptism equivalent to Circumcision that opened the way for Christian parents to baptize their children. The Old Testament says that circumcision was practiced on the 8th Day, which admitted the child into the Jewish Church. Nowhere in the Bible are children treated outside the scope of blessing. As we have seen that Baptism is the seal of faith. Romans 4:2 says, ‘ And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of faith, which he had yet being uncircumcised.’ So there is a connection of circumcision to be ‘ seal of faith’ and baptism that is called a seal of faith which are tied to respective covenants. As in Gen 17: 11,12 that says “Circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and that shall be the mark of the covenant between you and me. Throughout the ages, every male among you, when he is eight days old, shall be circumcised…”. So this is a ‘seal of faith’ and ‘token of covenant’. Circumcision then like baptism now fulfilled a double purpose. It is the seal of the believer’s faith and also the sign of God’s covenant.

So who is included in this covenant? The answer is found in Acts 2: 39 “ the promise is unto you and your children.” Let me quote from Dr. Wall’s “ History of Infant Baptism”( vol 1., p. 3) as follows ‘It is evident that the custom before Jesus’ time was to baptize as well as circumcise any proselyte that came over to them from nations. This was based on their belief that rest all were impure and not worthy to enter into a Covenant without a washing or baptism from their uncleanness and this was called baptizing unto Moses. If any such proselyte , who came over to the Jewish religion, and was baptized into it, had any infant children then born to him, they also were baptized and circumcised. The child’s inability to declare his faith was never looked on as a bar against his reception into the covenant.”

Bernard Manning in his book, “Why Not Abandon the Church”, summarizes beautifully about baptism. He says “In Baptism the main thing is not what men do, but what God has done. It is a sign that Christ claims all men as his own and He has redeemed them to a new way of life. That is why we baptize children and infants. The water of baptism declares that they are entitled to God’s mercies to men in the passion of Christ. Your own baptism ought then to mean much to you. It ought to mean all the more because it happened before you knew anything about it. Christ redeemed you on the Calvary without any thought or action on your part. He did not wait for any sign or confirmation on your part. Similarly we baptize a child and declare to the world in a solemn manner what God does for us without our merit and even without our knowledge. In Baptism, more plainly perhaps than anywhere else, God commends His love toward us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us.”

We have to realize that the objection to infant Baptism needs to be rooted to the cult group called the Anabaptists who gave importance to the profession of faith as an imperative for Baptism. This logic is reductionist and places the onus of faith on an individual. No faith is individual but it is a formation of the community that fosters faith. Infant baptism sets apart a child and he becomes part of the Body of Christ to be formed by the faith practices of the community and the God Parent is the representative of the community to ensure that the child is formed in faith. The family is the nucleus of this faith formation. So the corporate formation of faith has been given emphasis in infant Baptism.

Conclusion

As we have surveyed the theological basis of baptism and the rationale for infant baptism, we the ministers in formation need to engage deeply with the liturgical practices of baptism. I personally feel we need to pay a lot of attention in teaching this to the youths, sevika sanghams and prayer meetings in our parish assignments. I have observed the lack of clarity on this topic has made many of our church members vulnerable. We personally need to learn more about it to be convinced about our baptism and to relive and reaffirm the faith that was symbolized at our day of baptism. May God guide us.

Merin Mathew (BD IV)

Mar Thoma Theological Seminary

Kottayam