1

| P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

FOCUS January 2020 Vol. 8 No: 1

Priesthood is a Gift from God, Lal Varghese,

Esq., Dallas – Page 19

Cover Photo: Priesthood is a Gift from God -

(Cover Design by Lal Varghese, Esq., Dallas)

A Publication of Diaspora FOCUS

From Aaronic to Melchizedekian Priesthood

Prof. Plammoottil V. Cherian, M. Div., Ph. D. Chicago – Page 22

Editorial, The Christian Priesthood and

Ministry in Crisis, Dr. Zac Varghese, London - Page 3

Glimpses of Christian Heritage In Ministry

Revd Dr. M. J. Joseph, Kottayam – Page 25

The Eucharistic Experience in a Hospital Bed

Fr. Thomas Punnapadam, SDB – Page 6
The Christian Priesthood in the 21st
Century, Dr. Zac Varghese, London – Page 27

Is Priesthood a Divine Calling or a Just

Another Profession? Revd Dr. Valson Thampu, Trivandrum–
Page 9 The Holy Books: Part-4, Dr. Ian Fry, University
of Divinity, Melbourne- Page 31

How the Clergy Conquered Christianity Ten Years of Metropolitan Alvares Julius
V. Georgekutty, Karunagapally, Kerala – Page 15 Research Project, Ben Kunjacko – OCP - Page 35
2 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1


EDITORIAL
The Christian Priesthood and Ministry in Crisis
May we wish you all a very happy and blessed New Year.
We also would like to thank all our authors and readers
from across the world for supporting and encouraging us
to publish this Journal over the last seven years. It is with
humility and grateful hearts we are entering into the eight
year of publication. ‘Priesthood and ministry’ was a
theme that was selected in 2018 for the October issue of
the FOCUS (Vol.6. No.4). However, we are revisiting this
theme in this issue because of the continued crisis facing
priesthood in Christian communities across the world.
This crisis has been with us for a long time, Terrance
Card1 summarised his understanding of the crisis in 1988
in the book on ‘Priesthood and Ministry in Crisis’ in the
following way. “It is no longer enough faithfully to
celebrate the sacraments and preach the word,
faithfully to pray and visit the sick, and to hope
somehow to pay the bills. The crisis on all churches is
far more fundamental, going to the very heart of all we
do and believe we are to be, but at the same time
opening up a new way.” We are still searching out for
new ways and models to follow the path Jesus set out for
priesthood and ministry.
The articles published in this issue highlight how
priesthood and ministry primarily evolved to establish the
kingdom values and solve problems through the
unconditional love of God is in itself in a crisis. The crisis
is heading towards large numbers of people leaving
churches for varied reasons. Clericalism, celibacy, power
mongering and divisions are discouraging people seeking
ordination too. The articles in this issue highlight this
crisis, which needs urgent attention. These articles are
not written as a final devastating judgement, but with pain
in their hearts in highlighting the state of affairs, which
need immediate intervention and correction. These
articles are sincere attempts to address some of these
issues. Some of the corrective measures suggested will
not be acceptable to everyone, but the issues raised must
require everyone’s immediate attention and prayers. We
are further encouraged by the attention given to these
issues by Pope Francis and his statement that “being a
priest is not a job, of fulfilling a job contract, but
it is a gift from God.”
Before entering into short discussions on various articles
on ‘Priesthood and Ministry’, I have great joy and peace
in strongly recommending the article by Fr. Thomas
Punnapadam OSB, on how he came to celebrate and
experience a Eucharist in a hospital bed. In his testimony,
we see the life of a humble priest through his lived out
1 Terrance Card, ‘Priesthood and Ministry in Crisis’, SCM They are to be valued and respected all the more in a
Press, 1988. period of general decay; for they are our life support
3 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
experience under the most trying of circumstances. Fr.
Punnapadam writes: “Is not this the noble vocation of and
profound challenge for every priest, not just ritually
celebrating the Eucharist but of actually living it to the full
as Jesus did? If, as we believe, the words of
consecration give birth to the whole mystical body of
Christ, then every time the priest pronounces them he
should first and foremost offer every atom, of his being to
be consecrated, divinized, and transformed into the body
and blood of Christ! Even to a veteran of three decades of
Eucharistic celebrations celebrating Holy Mass, for the
first time in a hospital bed helplessly, is a deeply
enriching experience. “This is my body… this is my
blood”. The grace and power of the words of
consecration penetrate every atom of the universe,
beginning with one’s own body. Every time the words of
consecration are pronounced, it is another step in the
mysterious process of the full incorporation into Christ of
all existence. This is indeed deep, authentic prayer,
letting go in total self-awareness, becoming more
grateful, aware of ultimate perspectives. Such an
experience of the Eucharistic celebration reminds us most
powerfully that the Eucharist is no mere routine ritual.
Every celebration puts us in touch with wider existence,
and entire life becomes unceasing prayer. The Eucharist
becomes a living sacrifice, the earnest appeal of St. Paul
“to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and
acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship (Rom
12/1), is best understood from this perspective.”
Fr. Punnapadam’s concluding words are a very
meaningful summary on priesthood and ministry.
“Experiences like these challenge the priest to conform
evermore fully to what he celebrates. Then his words, his
life, his very person, rather than his words and actions,
will be nourishing food for his people. Through him Christ
will nourish the faith and love of those whom the priest
serves. Priesthood is essentially a transformation in one’s
nature. If one is always and everywhere a priest, he is no
less so in a hospital bed. The people he ministers to by
divine commission are always in his heart, though
geographically far away, physically invisible. We believe
with the Psalmist that “Every one of my days was decreed
before one of them came into being” (Ps 139/16). Hence
the days in bed were no less integral to priestly ministry
than the healthy days filled with exhausting activity. It is
beyond all doubt that even life-threatening, unexpected,
unprepared for illness can carry us deeper into the
mystery of the Eucharist. One could not agree more with
George Bernanos “All is grace”.
The warning that Revd Dr. Vaslon Thampu expressed as
an introduction to his article is equally applicable to all the
authors. “It is taken for granted that there will be, in every
system and institution, individuals who buck the trend
and endeavour to be sincere and faithful to his calling.
systems, so to speak. What I write below is to be read
strictly under this caveat.”
The ministry has become a ministry of power and
posturing for recognition and fame. An overriding theme
of the history of the world is how power structures of the
world rise and fall. Some lasts longer than others, but
each is thirsting for power; this leads to self-destruction.
We see this in our churches locally and globally, and
sometimes we wonder just how long it will be before God
does something about it! And that brings other questions:
Why does God allow it to happen? Why is there so much
suffering in our churches? How is it affecting the wider
community and society? Why are we going through this?
No matter how dark or difficult our life’s
circumstances are right now in our churches, many
faithful followers make it their regular habit to
celebrate and acknowledge God’s sovereignty in their
affairs. Let us accept God’s timing and His will for us,
which may be beyond our understanding. When
power-struck people threaten our faith, be confident
that God always will be with us. He is our Immanuel.
4 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
Although Valson Thampu’s article is critical of the
present state of the Christian priesthood, he admits:
“Yet I believe that priesthood is a practical necessity; just
as teachers and doctors are . . . A sincere, God-fearing
priest is a great blessing. He helps to concretise what,
otherwise, remains abstract . . . So, if spiritual beauty is
embodied in the person of a priest, it is greatly to be
cherished. But there is a problem here; and that problem
is basic to our wellbeing and the authenticity of the Way
of Jesus Christ.” He further states: “There is compelling
all-round evidence today that priesthood, as understood
and practised, runs counter to the culture of the Kingdom
of God. . . .What needs to be done is to reckon its
aberrations and the calling refined and restored to its
pristine purity.” We are publishing these articles entirely
with this purpose in mind. Valson Thampu’s article is not
all about the diagnosis of a malady, but he also provides
us with prescriptions for corrections and for attaining
spiritual maturity. “The question we are addressing in this
piece – Is priesthood a divine gift, or is it just another
profession? – is indeed of immense significance for all of
us. I hope very earnestly that our quest for a truthful
answer to it will not prove a flash in the pan. We need to
sustain an earnest, prolonged debate in which those
concerned can participate with open and fearless minds,
so that the truth is discerned and affirmed without fear or
favour. This is a sacred duty we owe to ourselves, our
descendants and to Jesus himself. Ignorance and
indifference do not help. If Jesus is the truth, and we his
disciples, we cannot flinch from looking truth in the face.”
Georgekutty, a new author to the FOCUS journal, in his
article on ‘How Clergy Conquered Christianity’
painstakingly traces the historical development of
ecclesial structures from the apostolic times to the
present day and comes to the following conclusion. “It is
true that there are well-meaning and honest leaders in the
various factions of today’s church. But, historically, there
has been a tendency for the church leadership to claim
unquestionable authority over the congregation. This is
witnessed in one form or the other even today. This does
not seem to be based on any scriptural authority. It is
doubtful whether the New Testament really envisages a
professional clergy with authority to rule over the
congregation.”
Lal Varghese, Esq., in his article develops the idea that
priesthood is a gift from God and it is a God-centred
vocation. He concludes: “While being a steward in the
Church of Christ, priest has the special responsibility to
shepherd the flock in this world, to participate ardently in
the work of the Kingdom of God through the ministry of
the Word and administration of sacraments, to be a
witness in the Church, which is the body of Christ and in
the name of Christ, involve in the temporal & spiritual
growth of the Kingdom of God. He has the responsibility
to shepherd the flock of God, to render sacrificial service
to the community according to the will of God, to be
fervent in the proclamation of the Gospel, to be
consistent in the ministry of teaching, and to manifest the
dignity of the Christian ministry in the congregation and
society.”
Dr. P. V. Cherian, in a scholarly and a very detailed
article traces the development of the priesthood in the OT
and The NT traditions. He develops Aaronic, Levitical,
Melchizedekian and the high priestly role of Jesus Christ.
Finally, in Christ we see the fulfilment of prophecies for
the high priestly role of redeeming mankind from their
sins once for all. Jesus said, “Sacrifice and offering you
did not desire, but a body you prepared for me” (Hebrews
10:5). Then I said, Behold, I have come, in the scrolls of
the book, it is written of me, to do your will O, God”
(Hebrews 10:7, cf. Psalm 40:7).
Revd Dr. M. J. Joseph, with many years of experience as
a theological educator and ministerial trainer, in his article
on ‘Glimpses of Christian Heritage in Ministry’ states that
“Mission in Christ’s way is the need of the hour as
humankind is facing spiritual and moral problems. There
is thus a huge responsibility before theological educators
and ministers.” Therefore, what is required is a
combination of pastoral and prophetic vision in ministry.
He points out three fundamental ingredients of the
ministry: “commitment to God, compassion for people
and passion for justice are required for a transformative
leadership”. He concludes: “Our concern is to deliver
God’s concerns in Christ as the action plans of Christian
ministry. What we are is more important than what we
have. What St. Paul said to the elders of Ephesus in his
farewell speech is to be remembered in pastoral ministry:
“You yourselves know how I lived among you. . . I did not
shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God. . .
I coveted no one’s silver or gold or apparel. . . .”
(Acts.20:17-38).
Dr. Zac Varghese also traces the development of
priesthood and ministry during the Old Testament, the
New Testament and the present time. He is sympathetic
to the pressures of the present day priests. He says:
“Preservation of physical and emotional health, rest and
efficient time management are important for a parish
priest. A priest’s life is not always administering
sacraments and other official duties; he has to recharge
his batteries through silent meditation, prayer, recreation
and fellowship. Lay people should appreciate this and
provide support as active members of a team ministry.
Bishops also get isolated; they also need help to become
effective overseers of ministers and ministries.” He also
develops the story that we should not get satisfied by
living in the comfortable zones of life in homogenous
communities; opportunities for mission are always is on
the other side, as we learn from the life of Abraham and
the stories of the Samaritan woman and the good
Samaritan. Therefore, it is necessary to look for
opportunities where people are. We need to become
5 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
more imaginative in reaching out to people and to interact
with their needs. In order to provide a safety net for those
found marginalized by society. It may be necessary to
discover new forms and fresh expressions of worship and
ministries to cater for people on the other side of the
boundary walls. He then stresses the importance of lay
priesthood and the need to develop joint ministries with
ordained priests for addressing the needs of the local
parishes and communities.
The problems and challenges presented in these articles
cut right to the heart of Christianity as they are practiced
through the managerial, administrative and pastoral arms
of the world-wide institutionalised Church. We are all in it
together and we need to address these issues calmly and
collectively. The Christian priesthood and ministry are
based on a call and vocation for a radical transformation
of our whole being, amounting to a new birth, born of the
Spirit. Christ’s mission was not to make us nominal
Christians, but to give us an indwelling ‘in Christ’
experiential living. Jesus’ response to James and John
(Mk. 10: 35- 45), wanting to sit at Jesus’ left and right in
his kingdom is to get rid of their love of power and
replace it with the power of sacrificial love. Therefore, in
order for us to realize the inner Christ, the Christ within
us, we must gain freedom not for ourselves but from
ourselves. Only those who are able to practice the
discipline taught by Christ can be regarded as his
disciples and ministers.
Dr. Zac Varghese, London
For FOCUS Editorial Board
http://www.issuu.com/diasporafocus
http://www.scribd.com/diasporafocus
Disclaimer: Diaspora FOCUS is a non-profit organization
registered in United States, originally formed in late Nineties in
London for the Diaspora Marthomites. Now it is an independent
lay-movement of the Diaspora laity of the Syrian Christians; and
as such FOCUS is not an official publication of any
denominations. It is an ecumenical journal to focus attention
more sharply on issues to help churches and other faith
communities to examine their own commitment to loving their
neighbors and God, justice, and peace. Opinions expressed in
any article or statements are of the individuals and are not to be
deemed as an endorsement of the view expressed therein by
Diaspora FOCUS. Thanks.
Web Site: www.facebook.com/groups/mtfocus
E-Mail: mtfousgroup@gmail.com
FOCUS EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS:
Dr. Zac Varghese, London
Dr. Titus Mathews, Calgary
Revd Dr. M. J. Joseph, Kottayam
Lal Varghese, Esq., Dallas
Dr. Jesudas M. Athyal, Thiruvalla
Revd Dr. Valson Thampu, Trivandrum
Jesus – Mary – Joseph (JMJ)
THE EUCHARISTIC EXPERIENCE IN A HOSPITAL BED
Fr. Thomas Punnapadam, SDB
[This paper was previously published in the Vidyajyoti Journal, VJTR,75 (Oct 2011)10,725-731]
Illness is as integral to life as good health and equally
mysterious. The most health- conscious are not always
the ones who enjoy the best of health. Many who are
apparently careless about their food habits and lifestyle
seem to enjoy enviable well-being in body and mind. So
everyone needs to have the right attitude to the God-
given gift of one’s health as also the grace of the illnesses
to which one could succumb. Beyond the chronology of
an illness, how one internally responds to it and the
ensuing long-term consequences, depend entirely on
one’s attitude to illness in general and to the particular
suffering one goes through. On the one hand illness is a
dark night of faith, yet it can be a blessed night, a grace-
filled night of a re-energizing encounter with a healing
God. Illness can be an enriching and purifying experience,
verily a grace. The more unexpected and serious the
illness, the more bounteous the avenues through which
grace flows. The hospital bed can indeed be the place
where the Lord “will tell you great and hidden things that
you have not known” (Jer. 33/3). To the extent one is
open to the experience, despite external turmoil, one
arrives at a place of peace and serenity, even without an
awareness of the grace-filled journey.
The more unexpected and sudden the onslaught of
illness, the greater is the pain and the bewilderment. And
yet received as a grace, the time spent helplessly in a
hospital bed can become a channel of transformation and
deeper intimacy with God. The well-known ‘Footprints on
the sand’ quote reminds us that in the darkest moments
of our life, God is carrying us, albeit one is often unaware.
Illness like other heart-rending experiences of life bring
home to us wisdom of the deepest truth of existence: we
are not in control of our lives, God is. Though being bed-
ridden is a rather solitary experience, paradoxically one
discovers that people are caring far beyond one’s
expectations. Taoism defines life as ‘love-received’. It is
during an illness that one is best enlightened to this
profound truth.
An emergency coronary bypass surgery was the most
unexpected, yet God-given experience I was blessed
with. It is a ‘routine procedure’ for the medical
profession, but a life and death experience for most
patients and their dear ones. The priest enjoys many
unwritten privileges and receives extraordinary care and
concern even from total strangers. The surgeon was
extremely magnanimous in anticipating the surgery and
rewriting his schedules for the sake of his priest-patient.
6 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
So the agony of waiting for surgery was mercifully non-
existent.
After my surgery I opened my eyes for the first time, and
saw the clock clicking away, it was 6.30 in the evening,
exactly twelve hours since I had been wheeled into the
operation theatre. My last memories were of blinding
lights and masked nurses and the irresistible drowsiness
overpowering my whole being, thanks to the anesthetic
that had been injected into my veins. As consciousness
returned to me, the overwhelming, eerie silence of the
ICU was far from friendly. The buzz in the ward, the
doctors in constant rush, everyone busy, responding to
ever-new emergencies, with lives to be prolonged, if not
saved, were all intimidating to say the least. With hardly
any strength to raise one’s voice, one had to resort to
frantic gestures to communicate. I was dying of thirst and
my silent voiceless pleas for a sip of water fell on deaf
ears. Those whose attention I received seemed more
concerned with the machines hooked on to my weak
body or the liquids draining out of the tubes inserted into
the incisions on my chest and ribs.
In moments like these, almost unconsciously one’s
attention is drawn to one’s own body in an incredibly
helpless state. The body with which you identify yourself
so very closely seems to have let you down miserably. It
could be the body was rebelling for not having given it
sufficient and appropriate attention and care. The words
of Genesis seem to come home ever more powerfully:
“you are dust and to dust you shall return” (Gen. 3/19b).
The weakness, the emptiness, the unutterable void seems
unbearable. Every movement in bed seems to call for
super-human effort. The bed sheets seem like heavy
metal sheets smothering you down; the scanty clothes
covering you are a constant irritant rubbing against your
wounds; every tiny gesture to communicate takes its
disproportionate toll of fast-depleting energy from your
feeble body; at every bout of cough your lungs seem to
be falling out; a sneeze leaves you wondering if a bomb
has burst in your entrails.
THE EUCHARIST
As my consciousness became more sustained and less
hazy, it dawned on me a priest of over thirty wonderfully
happy years, that I had not celebrated the Eucharist that
day. Canonically there is no obligation to celebrate Holy
Mass daily. Yet most priests feel a void within
engendered by its absence. On the one hand one would
like to celebrate Mass even in a hospital bed. But how
does one do it in a Cardiac Intensive Care Unit, in a semi-
conscious state, with no altar or missal, liturgical
vestments or sacred vessels and without Eucharistic
bread and sacramental wine, in a non-Christian hospital?
Before a tinge of discouragement or disappointment
could overpower me, it was indeed amazing grace that
revived my memory of the words of the Jesuit mystic,
Teilhard de Chardin, who many times on the road lacked
the requirements for Mass. It inspired him to write in
Mass on the world: “Since today Lord, I your priest, have
neither bread nor wine nor altar, I will extend my hands
over the whole universe and I will grasp this immensity as
the matter of my sacrifice… Is not the infinite circle of
things one final host that it is your will to transmute? The
seething cauldron in which the activities of every living
and cosmic substance are bubbling, is it not the painful
chalice that you wish to sanctify?”
Since I too had neither bread, nor wine nor altar, I was
graced and inspired to raise myself beyond all symbols,
up to the pure majesty of the real itself. The words of
consecration pronounced for the first time at the Last
supper, seemed to spring form the depths of my being.
My weak, emaciated body, almost dead without medical
support, seemed the best symbol of the body to be
broken and the blood to be shed. Helplessly, half
consciously repeating the words of consecration several
times seemed a unique unprecedented way to celebrate
the Eucharist. This is my body; this is my blood. God
alone knows how many times I repeated the mysterious
formula. The words were hardly audible yet the words
were surging from the depths of being. As the formula
moved deeper into consciousness, an ineffable peace
and satisfaction overwhelmed me. As it were, God had
graced me with the privilege of a unique Eucharistic
celebration.
The Bread and wine were consecrated by Christ at the
Last Supper. Could one say Jesus offered his body and
blood symbolized by the bread and wine, in total
submission and the Father consecrated them? The
disciples could only think of Jesus’ body before their
bodily eyes. As Jesus broke the bread, he could envision
his body sweating blood in the Garden of Gethsemane
that very night; he could anticipate the agony of the
scourging and crowning with thorns; he could already feel
the weight of his lacerated body on the cross tearing
through his pierced hands; he could sense the soldier’s
lance at his side and feel the last drops water and blood
ooze out of his dying body. Aware of the ultimate
surrender and supreme sacrifice he had to make, his
dying words were already in his heart and on his lips
“Father, into your hands I commend my spirit” (Lk 23/46).
The one and only Eucharistic offering made by Jesus was
no less real in the upper room than on Mount Calvary.
The sacrifice on mount Calvary was offered with no bread
and wine.
7 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
As the total self-offering of Jesus was accepted and
consecrated by the Father, the priest is called not only to
re-enact but re-live the first and only Eucharistic sacrifice
of Jesus Christ. As Jesus broke the bread, he had
offered thanks to the Father. They were no mere words;
he had lived the reality from the moment of his
incarnation. He had done the will of his Father every
moment of his earthly life, as the true and only high priest:
“Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body
you have prepared for me” (Heb 10/5). Could one not say
that when at the Last supper Jesus blessed the bread
and had ‘given thanks’ (Lk. 22/17, 19) he was offering to
the Father his body soon to be crucified and his blood
soon to flow down Calvary on Good Friday? Was he not
giving thanks to the Father for accepting his offering and
consecrating it? Assured of acceptance and consecration
by the Father, he could proclaim to the disciples, “This is
my body which is given for you” (Lk. 22/19); “This cup
that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my
blood” (Lk. 22/20).
Is not this the noble vocation of and profound challenge
for every priest, not just ritually celebrating the Eucharist
but of actually living it to the full as Jesus did? If, as we
believe, the words of consecration give birth to the whole
mystical body of Christ, then every time the priest
pronounces them he should first and foremost offer every
atom, of his being to be consecrated, divinised, and
transformed into the body and blood of Christ!
Even to a veteran of three decades of Eucharistic
celebrations, celebrating Holy Mass for first time in bed
helplessly, is a deeply enriching experience. “This is my
body… this is my blood”. The grace and power of the
words of consecration penetrate every atom of the
universe, beginning with one’s own body. Every time the
words of consecration are pronounced, it is another step
in the mysterious process of the full incorporation into
Christ of all existence. This is indeed deep, authentic
prayer, letting go in total self-awareness, becoming more
grateful, aware of ultimate perspectives. Such an
experience of the Eucharistic celebration reminds us most
powerfully that the Eucharist is no mere routine ritual.
Every celebration puts us in touch with wider existence,
and entire life becomes unceasing prayer. The Eucharist
becomes a living sacrifice, the earnest appeal of St. Paul
“to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and
acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship (Rom
12/1), is best understood from this perspective.
As days passed, the absolutely astounding resilience of
the body became evident. Almost imperceptibly the body
regains its strength and vitality, day after day. The
medical professionals compassionately liberate your
limbs from invasive tubes and supporting machines. Is it
merely a sign of triumph of medicine and technology or a
clear reflection of the resurrection to a glorious body?
While the body is still very weak, the so very familiar
words of the Eucharistic prayer seem to tug at one’s heart
strings, as if prayed for the first time. This brings home to
us that not infrequently we may have been on autopilot
and the inspiring prayers may have become just sounds,
or as Jesus warns we have been heaping up empty
phrases as the gentiles do (Mt 6/7). We may have given
up allowing the words to go deeper into us. Due to the
still feeble body, one is forced to say them slowly,
deliberately. The forced deliberate articulation of every
word of the Eucharistic prayer has miraculous effects.
Those of us, who have exhausted trying to harvest the
mystery that lies within the words and ritual, will
rediscover it.
Ever since my first ‘mystical celebration’ of the Eucharist
the words of consecration have taken on a new meaning
for me and the depth of my being seems to be stirred
every time I pronounce them. Indeed every celebration of
the Holy Eucharist can be a moment of deep God-
experience and the moment of consecration (despite
changing theology) is a climax. “That we who are
nourished by his body and blood may be filled with his
Holy Spirit, and become one body, one spirit in Christ” -
this is indeed the supreme intention of every celebration.
With constraining, long pauses between the phrases, one
is unconsciously united with innumerable people who
have deeply touched one’s life during the illness – the
loved ones, real good friends, the medical professionals.
One is constantly reminded about innumerable people
one has ministered to and earnestly praying and fasting
for your speedy and complete recovery Indeed there is no
deeper union than the one symbolised, expressed and
deepened by every Eucharistic celebration. While I can
visibly see only a beloved sister of mine at my bedside, I
know that many others “who take part in this offering”
and “all who seek you with a sincere heart” are spiritually
surrounding me.
Experiences like these challenge the priest to conform
evermore fully to what he celebrates. Then his words, his
life, his very person, rather than his words and actions,
will be nourishing food for his people. Through him Christ
will nourish the faith and love of those whom the priest
serves. Priesthood is essentially a transformation in one’s
nature. If one is always and everywhere a priest, he is no
less so in a hospital bed. The people he ministers to by
divine commission are always in his heart, though
geographically far away, physically invisible. We believe
with the Psalmist that “Every one of my days was decreed
before one of them came into being” (Ps 139/16). Hence
the days in bed were no less integral to priestly ministry
than the healthy days filled with exhausting activity. It is
beyond all doubt that even life-threatening, unexpected,
unprepared for illness can carry us deeper into the
mystery of the Eucharist. One could not agree more with
George Bernanos “All is grace”.
8 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
Pearls of Wisdom Series: No.12
We must follow the Lord’s example in caring for his flock
(A reading from the Sermons of St. Asterius of Amasea*)
If, having created in the image of God, we now desire to
resemble him, we must follow his example. The very name that
we bear as Christians is proof of God’s loving kindness towards
men. Let us, therefore, imitate the love of Christ. Consider and
wonder at the riches of his goodness. For when he was about to
show himself to men in in man’s own nature, he sent John
ahead of him to preach repentance, and before John he sent the
prophets to persuade men to change their way of life. Then he
came himself, and with his own voice he cried out: come to me,
all you who labour and are overburdened and I will give you
rest. And how did he receive those who listened to his call and
followed him? He readily forgave them their sins, in an instant
relieving them of all their cause for sorrow. The Word sanctified
them; the Spirit set seal on them. The old man was buries in the
waters of baptism, the new man was born by grace. As a result,
enemies of God became his friends, strangers to him became
his sons, non-Christians became Christians, Idolaters learned to
worship the true God.
It is for us now to follow our Lord’s example in caring for his
flock. We should read the gospels carefully, for they are like a
mirror, showing us the pains he took and the kindness he
showed, and they will teach us how to be like him. Obscurely, in
the form of a parable, we see him there in the shepherd who
had a hundred sheep. When one of them became separated
from the flock and strayed, that shepherd did not remain with
the sheep that were still grazing with the others, but set out to
look for the lost one. He crossed many chasms and ravines, he
climbed over high mountains, he was almost overcome with
exhaustion in the wilderness, and then, at last, he found his
sheep.
When he had found it, he did not beat it, nor roughly drive it
back into the fold, but instead carefully carried it home on his
own shoulders to restore it to the flock, and he was more
delighted over this one sheep than over all the others.
Now there is a hidden meaning in this parable, which we must
try to penetrate; for the sheep is not really an animal, nor is the
shepherd a man that cares for senseless beasts. No; he is
someone very different. In fact, the purpose of this story is to
reveal a sacred mystery and its lesson for us in that we should
not easily despair of men’s salvation, nor should we abandon
them when they are in peril. When they go astray, we are bound
to search them out and bring them back to the fold. Then, when
they return, we should be delighted to receive them into the
fellowship of all right-living people.
[*Saint Asterius of Amasea (C. 350 – c. 410 AD) Asterius, having
specialized in rhetoric and the practice of law, abandoned this
profession to enter the ministry of clergy. He was the
Metropolitan of Amasea between 380 and 390 AD. He was born
in Cappadocia and probably died in Amasea in modern Turkey,
then in Pontus. Significant portions of his lively sermons survive,
this sermon is taken from a collection edited by Henry Ashworth
O.S.B; ‘A Word in Season’, The Talbot Press, Dublin, 1974.
Collected by Dr. Zac Varghese]
Is Priesthood a Divine Calling or a Just Another Profession?
Revd Dr. Valson Thampu, Trivandrum
I need to fix a caveat at the outset itself. When questions
of general significance are discussed, what is kept in
mind are emerging, or general, trends. It is taken for
granted that there will be, in every system and institution,
individuals who buck the trend and endeavour to be
sincere and faithful to his calling. They are to be valued
and respected all the more in a period of general decay;
for they are our life support systems, so to speak. What I
write below is to be read strictly under this caveat.
I have been a priest, most of my life. I don’t regret having
been one. But I do regret what priests are coming to be.
This presents a problem: the problem pertaining to one’s
awareness of a calling, which is fast becoming unlike
what it was meant, or seemed, to be. The dilemma is this:
either my idealistic view of priesthood four decades ago
was naive; or the present dystopic picture of priesthood
is an aberration. But how can something which is
becoming nearly universal be wrong, and what once was,
remain right in the vastly changed circumstances? This is
important, because we don’t live wholly in the past. Life is
a forward flow, not a regressive nostalgia.
This presents a painful dilemma. How can I continue to
harbour my idealistic view of priesthood, where the
ordained journey of my life began, without reckoning the
present aberrations of priesthood? Do I not, by being
indifferent to priestly degradations, which abound today,
falsify my original idea of priesthood? Quite simply: could
it be that my original idea of priesthood was quixotic? Did
I embrace a pleasant piece of fiction then?
Here’s what I saw in a video clip just the other day. A
priest of the Jacobite faction was seen addressing the
faithful of his church. He was urging them to despise and
spite their Orthodox brethren. “Have nothing to do with
them,” he thundered. “Boycott their shops, their
presence. Do not give your daughters in marriage to their
sons and do not let your sons marry their daughters. Do
not buy a piece of paper from a shop run by an Orthodox
rascal. That’s how they deserve to be treated.”
At every word, he evoked applause from his flock.
Obviously, they believed he was discharging a core
priestly function. The question is: where does the biblical
faith, the teachings of Jesus Christ, come into this
picture?
The very same priest would, come Sunday, put on a
pious priestly role. He will exhort his congregation to
forgive even their enemies (perhaps, other than Orthodox
rascals). To walk the extra mile. To turn the other cheek.
Come Good Friday, he will lead tear-jerking meditations
9 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
on the meaning of the Cross. He will not be found
wanting in fasting and praying as per his tradition.
Who instituted priesthood, if this is what it amounts to?
What for? One thing we know. Jesus did not institute
priesthood. He called individuals to be disciples. Rather
than ordain priests, he denounced the priests and their
betters of his day. He called them whited sepulchres.
It is not my contention that we should not have priests,
just because Jesus did not create this order. We do many
a thing that Jesus did not specifically mandate: like
establishing institutions, many of them for worldly profit
and prestige; like building bigger and grandiose churches
out of parochial vanity; like gathering treasures upon the
earth, where they are vulnerable to thieves, moths and (if
Arthur Schopenhauer is believed), priests.
My only contention is that whatever is instituted in the
name of Jesus Christ, and for the sake of his sheep, must
have, and serve, a purpose that harmonizes with his
spiritual vision of life. We will feel troubled, for example, if
an organization to spread communal poison is
established in the name of Gandhiji.
So, I have difficulties in persuading myself to believe that
priesthood is a divine gift, instituted by Jesus himself.
This is, factually, untrue. I have much less problem in
accepting the view that priesthood meets a practical
need. That’s why we find priesthood emerging in all
religions at a certain stage in their historical evolution.
Now, here’s what I have come to understand about the
logic for the evolution of priesthood.
Human beings have metaphysical, not less than, physical
needs. A good illustration of this is Jesus’ saying: “Man
does not live by bread alone, but by every word that
comes from the mouth of God.” To live by bread, or food,
alone is to be no different from animals. We are more
than animals. So, we have needs different from, and
higher than, that of animals. Logically, by living like
animals -on the physical plane alone- we become less, or
worse, than animals.
The realm of the metaphysical, it is widely assumed, is a
sphere of expertise and specialisation. (Jesus taught
otherwise. The understanding withheld from the wise is
accessible, Jesus said, to children and the suckling.)
Whatever is specialized, is beyond the reach of the
common man. The domain of the most rarefied expertise
is the world to come, about which the common folks
know nothing. (They also don’t know that the so-called
priestly experts too, truth be told, know nothing.) He
needs guidance. Guidance can be provided only by those
who are specially trained and accredited, clothed and
commissioned for the purpose. The main alibi for the
existence of priesthood is the metaphysical illiteracy, and
insecurity, of the common man and God’s alleged
partiality to specialists. Or, the need to accredit a set of
specialists ‘ordained’ to mediate divine mysteries. Of
course, it is overlooked, in this process, that Incarnation
is an existential protest against mystifying mysteries. If
mystery were to remain an inaccessible category, it was a
mistake for the Word to become flesh and, especially, to
dwell in the midst of human beings!
It is another matter that the Word becoming flesh, is a
deeper mystery; but it is mystery of a different order. (I
have read none more profound than Soren Kierkegaard
on this point.) That mystery results from God becoming
God-man. The mystery on which priesthood has now
come to stand and operate, stands that mystery on its
head: it tries desperately hard to turn God-become-man
into its opposite: man-become-God, which is no more
than a secular freak.
This enables priests to pass off as experts on the other
world, which is the safest and the most profitable thing to
do. It is safe, because one can say anything about the
world to come and remain safe from being questioned
and contradicted. No one can prove anything for or
against his averments. This is not to say that the world to
come is a myth. It is that it can be –and it often is- turned
into a matrix for locating magical, superstitious, irrational
and hypocritical ideas meant for the consumption of the
credulous. These ideas are such, not necessarily because
they are false in themselves –how do we know, either
way? - but because those who pontificate on them, and
commend them earnestly to the believers, do not believe
in them. Otherwise, how can it be that a priest who
recommends the gains of the world to come to his people
remains obsessed with gains only of this world for
himself? Don’t believe this? Well, find out the extent to
which priests go, or abase themselves, to get an
overseas posting.
10 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
It is my experience, spread over four decades, that not
more than a tiny fraction of priests and preachers believe
in what they proclaim or profess. (This is true also of the
laity. If a group of ardent believers, who are fasting and
praying for the urgent second coming of Jesus Christ,
were indeed to be accosted by the Risen Christ, they are
sure to be shocked and startled.) Well, you don’t have to
go to Dante’s Hell for evidence in this connection. Only
pay heed to what priests do familiarly when
denominational interests are at stake –that’s why I quoted
the instance of the Jacobite priests a while ago- and you
will be readily convinced. If there is a priest who dares to
look beyond the interests of his employer –the
denomination concerned- he is sure to be suspect in the
eyes of his bishops and fellow priests.
Yet I believe that priesthood is a practical necessity; just
as teachers and doctors are. In theory, everyone can
attain knowledge without teachers, and people can mind
their own health without doctors. But it helps to have
them; especially in critical situations. It makes life a lot
easier. But what are we to do when teachers promote
ignorance and doctors prove a threat to health? A
sincere, God-fearing priest is a great blessing. He helps
to concretise what, otherwise, remains abstract. Most
human beings, including me, are incapable of relating to
abstractions. It is any day easier for us to relate to a
beautiful human being than to the idea of beauty. So, if
spiritual beauty is embodied in the person of a priest, it is
greatly to be cherished. But there is a problem here; and
that problem is basic to our wellbeing and the authenticity
of the Way of Jesus Christ.
Spirituality is not a domain of spectacles or of hero-
worship. It is a domain of personal transformation. In the
realm of culture, it is enough if we have assets external to
us: say, a globally celebrated athlete, a great author, a
beauty queen, and so on. But, in the realm of spirituality,
only what we are, avails us. It matters little how great our
denominational forefathers were, or how ancient our
tradition is, or how prestigious our church, or how ascetic
our priests are. Their asceticism does help; provided they
don’t turn it into an ornament of religious vanity, as the
priests in Jesus’ times did. Read the 6th chapter of St.
Matthew, if you need illustrations of this.
So, the spiritual merit of a priest needs to be valued not
as an end in itself, but as a catalyst for the spiritual
growth towards maturity of the body of believers. In the
end, therefore, there is a necessary, indeed inevitable,
norm of judgment: the plight of the people. So, let us fix
this clearly in our minds: a priest is a divine gift only to the
extent that he is a fellow traveller with the people in their
pilgrimage to spiritual maturity. Instead of this, if priests
prove hindrances in the faith-life of believers –of which we
have ever-increasing, instances- there is a need and a
duty to recognize this as an atrocity on Jesus Christ and
be vehemently disapproving of it. It doesn’t help to be
treating shepherds and hirelings on an equal footing, as
Jesus himself said.
What I have stated above is central to the instruction
Jesus gave to Peter: ‘feed my flock’. Due to excessive
and overwhelming denominationalism, priests tend to be
blind to the fact that believers are the flock of Jesus
Christ. They are not denominational assets, like broiler
chickens raised in private farms. What does it mean to
‘feed’ the flock of Jesus Christ? One thing is clear. It
includes the duty to so nurture believers that they
become more and more like Jesus. That is, without a
doubt, the meaning of the expression, “my flock”. A
congregation becomes the flock of Jesus Christ only
when they, in their collective and individual lives, become
witnesses to Jesus Christ by growing more and more into
his essence and likeness.
As Jesus took pains to emphasize, our spiritual calling –
such, presumably, priesthood is – is metaphysical or
divine in its essence. That is why profit motive is wholly
incompatible with it. Hence the instruction: “Freely you
have received; freely give.” To understand this aright,
recall instances from the flood-devastation of Kerala last
year. The fishermen of Kerala were at the forefront of
rescue operations. They sacrificed their livelihood in order
to respond to the distress of fellow Keralites. There were
innumerable instances of fishermen refusing to accept
rewards from the individuals they helped to survive. Why?
They realized that godly deeds are desecrated by profit
motive. Imagine a hypothetical situation. You see a child
(God forbid) drowning in a river. You jump in at personal
risk and save her and take her home to her parents. You
are offered Rs. 10000 for your efforts. Won’t you feel the
‘value’ of your gesture of compassion undermined?
Yet, how come that we associate every priestly service -
covering the space from birth to death- with monetary
rewards? We cannot imagine anything godly without
Mammon’s coins. How has this come about? Certainly,
not from the example of Jesus Christ. Nor from his
teachings.
I have tried, in a humble and inadequate way, to
investigate this issue in a historical perspective. My
findings are disconcerting. I find that all over the world, in
every culture, in every religion, in every age, the priestly
class has served as a fountainhead of worldly corruption
in respect of their religions and religious communities.
This involves a vast historical panorama, and a mountain
of material, and it is quite beyond the limited scope of the
present essay to marshal the details. The readers may
look through just one book to be duly informed on this
issue: Our Oriental Heritage by Will Durant. If a
sociological perspective is desired, the foundational text
by Max Weber titled The Sociology of Religion can be
11 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
consulted. All that is actually unnecessary, if only
Christians would read the Gospels with an open mind.
The degradation of priests as a class is addressed
adequately by Jesus himself.
You shall know, Jesus said, a tree by its fruits. Let us
adopt the same standard in dealing with the present
issue. What are the fruits of priest-craft currently on
evidence? Are our congregations serving as places of
growth for our people? Are they becoming more and
more mature, spiritually? Or, are they becoming petty and
shallow? What is the vision with which priesthood is
practised?
This is a major issue and I cannot deal with it in sufficient
detail in an essay of this kind. I limit myself, in what
follows, to a simple-enough analysis of its operative logic.
I start with a secular illustration, so that we begin our
journey from familiar grounds.
There are, we all know, two types of individuals. First,
those who derive all their sense of personal worth from
the opinions and dispositions of others. They die for a
good word from anyone around; likewise, they could also
die of a bad word from anyone else. They are habitually
complaisant and always over-eager to please others.
The second category of people, evidently much smaller in
number, have their equilibrium within themselves. They
derive their worth from what they have in themselves.
They are unaffected by the uncharitable and calumniating
things others say about them, even if they are not
indifferent to people in general. They don’t go out of their
way to create a favourable impression on others. Unlike
the first category of people, individuals of this kind ‘are’
what they seem to be. If this is true, then the following- In
our religious life, we could well resemble the first kind.
The difference is that in place of ‘others’ we place God.
Instead of being men-pleasers, we are God-pleasers, as
though God is waiting to be pleased and humoured by
us. All our religious practices and strategies are aimed at
keeping God on our side, favourably disposed towards
rewarding us by way of worldly favours. So, we feel
flattered when we are spoken of as godly! We are eager
to be seen as zealous in our religiosity. We also fear
priests and bishops, because their displeasure –as
several of my fellow Christians have told me – could make
God angry with us with dreadful consequences. We try to
please God after the fashion of the world. The means
and strategies we use are also worldly. We value flattery.
So, we assume that God also does, and we have
developed sanctified expressions and formulae for the
purpose. We crave for material benefits. So, we assume
God too is similarly inclined and try to win his favours
through material offerings. We have our cases, when we
are not sure of our merit, recommended to the powers
that be by those who have special statuses. Likewise, we
think God too needs to be nudged by ordained
middlemen, to act mercifully towards us.
What is the problem in all of this?
Those who live entirely on the favours and opinions of
others become hollow within. Banking entirely on
borrowed worth, they fail to develop inner, intrinsic worth.
They remain unaware that they can have intrinsic worth.
They remain preoccupied with ways and means for
pleasing others. Dale Carnegie in his popular and
misleading book How to Win Friends and Influence Them,
counsel his readers that before they go to meet someone,
they should ascertain the main interests of their hosts and
read books relating to them, so as to be able to leave a
good impression on them. What is wrong about this, you
might ask? Well, nothing, so long as all you want is to be
gilded specimens of humanity, thriving by pleasing all and
sundry. This is seriously wrong if, on the other hand, if
you are authentic human being with a well-defined
personality core and want to be only as you are. In that
case, your prime consideration is not whether or not you
appeal to this person or that, but if you are being true to
yourself in dealing with every human being. If you are,
your aim will not be to impress but to enrich, which can
be undertaken only in truth and humility without any play-
acting. Any amount of reading done with this end in view
is indeed desirable and a mark of respect for others. In
that case, we are doing our reading for the sake of those
we meet, and not for our own sake.
Now let’s ask ourselves. Is not our religious life mostly
about putting up an appealing face before God?
Otherwise, why are we different on week days, as
compared to Sundays? There is an issue even more
important. Don’t we bear false witness to God when we
assume that God can be easily deceived with our play-
acting? Can it be that God who sees us on Sundays does
not see how we live the rest of the week?
To me there is an ironic link between the following
contrary features. First, the influence and power of priests
are increasing. Second, the ethical authenticity of our
12 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
community – priests included – is dwindling. They are but
the two sides of the same coin: the coin of
institutionalized religious hypocrisy.
That is why Jesus identified himself as the truth. Truth is
the alternative to hypocrisy. If our personality is founded
on truth, we will be in ourselves what we appear to be to
others. We will be consistent. There will be no need to
‘whitewash’ sepulchral individual personalities. The fact
that, instead of evolving and improving the spiritual and
ethical mettle of our individual and communitarian lives,
we are degenerating points necessarily to the reality that
our religious life is structured on flattering and pleasing
God through hypocritical appearances and pretensions
rather than on worshipping God “in spirit and in truth”.
The teachings of Jesus Christ are all about who we need
to be. His core emphasis is on ethics. There is not text in
religious literatures that can rival, as Gandhi realized, the
Sermon on the Mount. But, under priestly influence, we
have shifted the core of our religious life from spiritual
ethics to religious ritualism, where priests are at home
and in full control. But a gap has opened up between
what is good for the people of God and what is profitable
to priests. The authority of the disciples of Jesus Christ
was not based on rites and rituals, but on making the way
of Jesus prevail in the life of individuals and societies.
They incarnated and proclaimed the Good News. Priests
today sustain religious practices in a mechanical and
quasi-professional fashion, from which profit-motive is
never afar.
Priest-craft, predicated on loyalty to denominational
authorities and interests, rather than on accountability to
the Lord Jesus Christ and fidelity to his teachings, is a
hindrance to spiritual maturity. Priests of this kind bear
false witness to God that he, like us, is swayed by shallow
flattery and is blind to the truth of the live we live. You
only have to take a biblically informed view of what
priesthood has come to be in our times to know how
crafty this craft has indeed become. The religiosity we
have adopted – in which the coming generations will be
nurtured – needs an urgent re-look. If a secular cadre of
service produces effects contrary to what is envisaged to
be achieved by it, it will be re-examined, rectified or
dismantled. Of course, this is a thankless job. The cross
is its reward. Not a welcome prospect, especially at a
time when everyone wants resurrection without
crucifixion. So, in the end, we get the priest-craft we
deserve.
Nothing of what I have stated above is to be construed to
mean that priesthood is in itself an aberration, or even
that it has to be dispensed with. My argument is a limited
one. There is compelling all-round evidence today that
priesthood, as understood and practised, runs counter to
the culture of the Kingdom of God. It is becoming,
increasingly, a domain of hirelings. But a calling is not to
be judged by its aberrations manifested through the
intruders into it. What needs to be done is to reckon its
aberrations and the calling refined and restored to its
pristine purity. Defending the indefensible may be the
order of the day in politics, but it is reprehensible in
spirituality.
The key to priestly reform does not rest with priests, but
with the laity. As long as the laity wants priests to be
glorified servants and convenient middlemen, serving as
specialists in securing from God blessings and
advantages they don’t merit, the downward trend is sure
to continue. The day they want to be authentic disciples
of Jesus – willing to deny themselves, to take up the
cross and to follow him, unmindful of risks and rewards-
priesthood too will change. But it is like the egg-or-
chicken-first situation. Which should come first? My
experiences convince me that a new beginning will not
come from the priestly class; for they have become
habituated servants of the system. To them,
denominational authority supersedes the authority of
Jesus, despite all pretensions to the contrary. Every
system serves the status quo as its de facto God. There
is no instance in history of a new beginning having been
initiated by a system or by the custodians of a system.
God initiates new beginnings through individuals who are
outsiders to systems. Else, the daughter of the High
Priest, not Virgin Mary, would have been the mother of
Jesus.
So, let us ask. Is priesthood a gift from God? Well, yes. In
the sense that parenthood is a gift. Caring for others is a
gift. Preaching and teaching are gifts. Being a faithful
friend is a gift. Being a sensitive doctor, or a just ruler is a
gift. Is priesthood a special gift? Well… No. The moment
we think it is, we envelop it with pride. Corruption begins
to knock at the door. All my life as a priest I have lived
with the tension that I am just like everyone else, but I am
assumed to be different or special. I never was. I was as
much vulnerable to the weaknesses that flesh and blood
is heir to.
Christians go wrong in believing, in the face of
overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that priests are a
special people. Ordination, and the license issued to a
priest consequent to that, mean nothing unless the
consecrated way of life is not sustained till the end. It is
only in the final moments of a priest’s life that he can
know for sure if his life was indeed ordained and if he led
a consecrated life. It is necessary that we abandon our
superstition in favour of the truth in this respect. Priests
are ordinary human beings, called upon to perform
extraordinary duties. They need to do so in fear and
trembling, under the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ. A
priest who abases himself before a bishop because the
13 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
latter could otherwise hurt or humiliate him, or deny him
special privileges, is already in the payroll of Mammon.
The question we are addressing in this piece - Is
priesthood a divine gift, or is it just another profession? -
is indeed of immense significance for all of us. I hope
very earnestly that our quest for a truthful answer to it will
not prove a flash in the pan. We need to sustain an
earnest, prolonged debate in which those concerned can
participate with open, and fearless minds, so that the
truth is discerned and affirmed without fear or favour. This
is a sacred duty we owe to ourselves, our descendants
and to Jesus himself. Ignorance and indifference do not
help. If Jesus is the truth, and we his disciples, we cannot
flinch from looking truth in the face.
To judge justly and fairly, we need a relevant norm. What
is the distinction between a spiritual calling and a worldly
profession? Fortunately, it is quite simple. The spiritual
calling brings two worlds together: heaven and earth, the
domain of God and the world of man. A profession is
strictly earth-bound, immune to any extra-terrestrial
discipline. All professions are secular; spiritual callings are
a hybrid of heaven and earth. That is the incarnational
principle. This can be readily understood with reference
to a major distinction. The spiritual realm, unlike the
secular, depends heavily on symbols. There is a reason
for it. Symbols hold two distinct, but complementary,
realms together. The word ‘symbol’ literally means
‘thrown together’. Secular professions are univocal. They
don’t depend on symbols, even when they bank on
emblems. A priest, for example, wears a cassock. A
soldier has his uniform. Is there, or is there not, a
difference between the two? The answer to this could
guide us to the answer to the question we are trying to
settle.
A soldier’s uniform too, you may say, is a symbol: the
symbol of state power. It is possible to see the vestments
of a priest also as similar: they symbolize a denomination.
(I used to enjoy causing much confusion among my fellow
Christians by wearing a black cassock. I was taken for an
Orthodox priest.) But that was, clearly, not the original
intent. Every item of priestly vestments symbolizes a
spiritual discipline. The cassock, for example, is a symbol
of purity. The girdle, a symbol of self-control. The stole, a
symbol of the priest being under the yoke of Christ. And
so on. But it is also possible to treat them together as
constituting a priestly uniform in a worldly sense in which
case it suggests only (a) a mark of priestly distinction
from the laity and (b) a sign of the special privileges and
entitlements -especially, respect and authority- that a
priest is professionally entitled to. Understood
symbolically, the vestments denote both: a functional
identity and a spiritual discipline, the latter determining
the former.
In a period of spiritual decline, priests could succumb to
the temptation to have the best of both worlds. Ironically,
in such a context, the distinction of priestly vestments
increases. You are not a priest, if you are not thus
arrayed. And you are an authentic priest, even if inwardly
you are a ravening wolf, so long as your true nature is
hidden behind the priestly plumage.
Let us hope that the Franco Mulakal case is entirely
trumped up. But let us assume, for the sake of argument,
that there is an element of truth in the allegation of rape
and unnatural sex as stated in the charge sheet. In that
case, what happens to the priestly calling in respect of
him? What meaning do his vestments have, except that
they constitute the official uniform of a privileged
profession? Something that is expected function as a
bulwark against censure by the laity and even by the
public?
Furthermore, what are we to make of the bevvy of
bishops who stand by the accused, as if by sheer herd-
instinct? How different are they from trade unionists who
are ever-ready to stand by any in their ranks who is held
to account for his misdemeanour, irrespective of the merit
of the allegation? Do they believe, and behave as though,
priesthood is a divine calling, which entails accountability
to the God of justice and truth?
What Christians as a whole need to realize, and insist on,
is that truth is, in its very essence, consistent. You can’t
be chameleons of shifting stances and claim to be
shepherds of truth. There must be some meeting point
between one’s identity as a Sunday priest and a week-
day human being.
Every secular profession is bound by a few bottom-line,
non-negotiable, requirements.
1. There is a code of conduct corresponding to each profession.
The ethical rigour of a profession increases in proportion to the
authority of its professionals over the individuals they deal.
14 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
Medical ethics, for this reason, has been very robust and
rigorous from the beginning. A physician has immense authority
over his patients and they trust him limitlessly. The position of
priests is comparable.
2. All professions combine privileges/rights with responsibilities
within an ambit of accountability. There is none exempt from
this. All professionals have a duty to their managements, their
colleagues and co-workers as well as clients and the society at
large.
3. Every profession demands competence and faithfulness at
work. As Jesus said, a worker needs to be ‘good and faithful’.
Incompetent professionals are like barren trees. They are a
liability and, if the system cares for accountability, it weeds out
such pseudo-professionals.
4. When, in a profession, rights and responsibilities polarise, it
ceases to be a profession and becomes a mere privilege. It was
a privilege, say, to be a feudal lord; but it is not a privilege to be
doctor or a teacher or a prime minister. Priesthood, in particular,
degenerates utterly when it is seen in terms of privileges. Jesus
said of himself, “The son of man has come to serve…” An
annual ritual of feet-washing is no substitute for living a life of
spiritual meekness as Jesus did.
A spiritual calling, like priesthood, by imitating
professional patterns, and that too in their degradation
becomes worse than a worldly profession. That is why
Jesus denounced such priests as ‘hirelings’.
Given how things stand today in our community, Christian
laity carry a heavy burden of responsibilities on their
shoulders. They cannot afford to be indifferent or take
refuge behind ignorance, saying, “Oh, I did not know”. As
St. Paul wrote to the Romans, “Now you have no
excuse.” We have a duty to keep our eyes and minds
open. There are many -especially my fellow priests- who
misinterpret Jesus’ teaching against judgmentalism, as
though it proscribes Christians from making any judgment
whatsoever! This is absurd and motivated. Jesus was
only alerting us to the aberrations of making prejudicial
judgments ‘with our eyes closed’, or keeping a beam in
our eyes, which is in effect the same as being blind.
There are only two possibilities. Either priesthood is a
divine calling or it is a perverse profession. It cannot ever
be a normal profession; for the reason that the moment it
embraces worldly goals and patterns, it gets overridden,
as Jesus said, by hypocrisy. No profession becomes
hypocritical by pursuing worldly goals, though
professionals would be condemned for being bad,
incompetent or selfish. I have never heard a professional
being damned as hypocrite. Yet, the only charge that
Jesus brought against the priests of his times is that of
hypocrisy. There is nothing nearly as bad as anyone
claiming the benefits of being ordained by God, but living
by motives that mock the nature of God. Of all
aberrations in the world, this is the most condemnable.
How the Clergy Conquered Christianity
V. Georgekutty, Karunagapally, Kerala
“Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.” (Denis Diderot, French
philosopher, art critic, and writer)
When the Apostle Paul started establishing the first
churches, many people saw it as an opportunity to exploit
it for personal aggrandizement. As the church evolved
into a political and financially powerful establishment, this
tendency to capture ecclesiastic power also
increased. Paul, Peter and Jude all speak out against the
activities of men in the early church, who were attempting
to take over the control of the churches. It is true that
there are well-meaning and honest leaders in the various
factions of today’s church. But, historically, there has
been a tendency for the church leadership to claim
unquestionable authority over the congregation. This is
witnessed in one form or another even today. This does
not seem to be based on any scriptural authority. It is
doubtful whether the New Testament really envisages a
professional clergy with authority to rule over the
congregation.
According to the New Testament, the people who acted
as leaders in the local churches were ‘presbuteros’, a
Greek term translated as ‘elders’. It meant ambassadors
or guides. We have no information on what process was
used to select the elders or what duties and
responsibilities were assigned to them. But, what is quite
clear is that the elders were not called upon to build their
own little empires or wield any unquestionable authority
over the faithful. They were only assigned the task of
serving their fellow believers in the capacity of spiritual
guides or mentors.
Paul instructs the elders, “Keep watch over yourselves
and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you
overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he
bought with his own blood”, (Acts 20:28). We might
roughly rewrite this verse to obtain the spirit of the advice
of Paul as, "So, continue to watch over your own lives, as
well as the lives of the others in the church; remember,
the Holy Spirit has chosen you to watch over them, and in
so doing, guide the Lord’s church, which He bought with
His own blood."
In about 64 CE, Paul was apparently released from house
arrest in Rome. He then writes his First Epistle to Timothy,
who was assisting the church at Ephesus at the
time. Therein, he uses the Greek term episkope, (1
Timothy 3:1). In the King James Version (KJV), this word
is translated as "office of a bishop". However, this word is
used to denote "someone who has been appointed to
watch over" (an elder). So, in many later translations, the
word is translated as ‘overseer’.
15 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
But, there is a verse the church leadership often cites as
proof of its authority to keep people under perpetual
subjugation. It comes from the Epistle to the Hebrews,
probably written by Paul. It says, "Obey them that have
the rule over you, and submit yourselves…” (Hebrews
13:17, KJV). The word translated here as "Obey”, is the
Greek verb ‘peitho’, meaning, "to persuade, to gain
confidence or trust". And “them that have rule over you”
comes from the Greek word hegeomai, meaning, "to lead
on or forward". A more fitting and expanded translation of
the verse might read as, "Have confidence in those who
are leading you forward in the faith by their good
example. Follow them without reservation, because they
are sincerely watching out for your soul’s wellbeing…."
We find nothing in the New Testament suggesting that
the earliest elders/overseers went through any sort of
ordination or consecration. We also do not find any
mention that they wore special garments, crosses, or
wielded any significant power over the rest of the
congregation. Nevertheless, the early Church soon
changed its presbyters into priests, borrowing much of
the styling from Roman paganism in which priests were
holy men who enjoyed a special relationship with God
and made sacrifices to the divine being. At some stage,
the leading elders/overseers of the New Testament seem
to have monopolised the title of bishop, and acquired
pre-eminence over their fellows. Initially they were merely
first among equals, and for centuries to come, they would
address other presbyters as "fellow presbyters". But in
due course, they became masters of the rest of the
presbyters and the congregation.
The transformation of the authority of the clergy in the
second century was influenced by Ignatius of Antioch (35-
108 CE), the bishop of Syrian Antioch. In the first part of
the second century, he wrote several letters while being
escorted under armed guard to Rome where he was to be
martyred. In his letters, we encounter for the first time an
ecclesiology, which exalts one "bishop" over the rest of
the "presbytery." He wrote to the Trallians, "It is
necessary therefore that you should act, as indeed you
do, in nothing without the bishop. But be subject also to
the presbytery, as unto the Apostles of Jesus Christ our
Hope". "Your bishop presides in the place of God," he
wrote to the Magnesians.
In short, after the death of its last Apostle, the church saw
the initial emergence of an ecclesiological system, which
was to have devastating consequences. The creation of a
new caste of Christians was not far behind. The
theoretical link to the apostles allowed bishops to claim
apostolic authority. Imperceptibly, there has been a
change from a theme of service and humility to one of
authority and command. Bishops were soon pointing out
that disobedience to them amounted to disobedience to
God. To fail to obey a priest or a judge was deserving of
death, and bishops were both priests and judges. And
they freely pronounced death to those who challenged
their views or authority. By the fifth century, bishops
became important people, who expected others to kiss
their hand, maybe, even fall on their knees. Abject
obedience is still expected, particularly in the Catholic
Church.
The followers of Jesus thus came to be divided broadly
into two sects – the clergy and the laity. The New
Testament never uses the term ‘laos’ (laity). Only once do
we find it used in all the Christian literature prior to the
third century. In the fortieth chapter of his letter to the
Corinthians, Clement of Rome (writing towards the end of
the first century), illustrates the need for church order by
appealing to the Old Covenant protocol. God's "peculiar
services," he writes, "are assigned to the high priest, and
their own proper place is prescribed to the priests, and
their own special ministrations devolve on the Levites.
The ‘layman’ is bound by the laws that pertain to
laymen", (1 Clemet 40:5). Here Clement uses the term
‘layman’ to describe the Old Covenant system of
Judaism. Even he did not use it in reference to Christians.
Obviously, the concept of a Christian "laity" was unknown
to Clement I. It was also unknown throughout the second
century.
The term kleros (clergy) was not frequently used during
the second century. We find it used mainly in reference to
martyrs of the first half of the century. According to
Alexadre Faivre, ‘We have to wait until the beginning of
the third century before encountering the term kleros
being used to describe a limited group within the
Christian community. It was only then that certain
16 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
Christian ministers became clergy. It was also at that time
that the term "layman" came to be employed again. This
was not purely by chance. By analogy with the Old
Testament layman, the Christian layman could only be
defined negatively’.1
The word, bishop is derived from the Greek word
episkopos, which can be translated literally as overseer or
supervisor. But their functions and status bore little
similarity to those of modern bishops. During the second
century, it came to be accepted that there should be only
one bishop in each city. The arrangement was meant to
avoid conflicts of authority. As time went by, bishops laid
claim to more and more authority. Around the end of the
first century, St Clement of Rome had adopted the idea of
apostolic succession. It was developed into the
proposition that the first bishops were the apostles (or at
least were appointed by the apostles), and that all
subsequent bishops were authorised by the ones already
appointed. Thus, it should be possible to trace back a
succession of bishops from any modern bishop to at least
one of the apostles. Bishops became the spiritual heirs of
their predecessors. So, bishops alone could consecrate
new bishops. By AD 250s, apostles and bishops were
being equated, and the chain of succession was being
used as an explicit argument for arrogating authority and
demanding abject servility from the laity.
In the third century, we find that the Bishops, Presbyters,
and Deacons together made up the "Clerical Order" as
distinguished from "the laity". Clement of Alexandria
referred to "bishops, presbyters, deacons" as "grades
here in the Church", the episcopate being the highest.
Women were not considered part of even "the laity". The
Church establishment was simply modelled on the first
century pagan Roman Empire. Ancient Rome did not
regard women as equal to men under its law. They had
no voting rights. They received only a basic education, if
any at all, and were subject to the authority of a man.
Women were valued mainly as wives and mothers. The
Church happily copied the system.
The monarchical bishop rapidly assumed near-divine
status. The exalted role that Ignatius had ascribed to the
bishop was further emphasized by the ‘Constitutions of
the Holy Apostles’, which lays down, ‘The bishop is the
minister of the word, the keeper of knowledge, the
mediator between God and you in the several parts of
your divine worship. He is the teacher of piety; and, next
after God, he is your father, who has begotten you again
to the adoption of sons by water and the Spirit. He is your
ruler and governor; he is your king and potentate; he is,
next after God, your earthly god, who has a right to be
honoured by you.... let the bishop preside over you as
one honoured with the authority of God, which he is to
exercise over the clergy, and by which he is to govern all
the people’.2
As Christianity became the official religion of the Roman
Empire in the fourth century, a number of unhealthy
practices entered it. One of it was the increased
involvement of the church in Roman politics. Extensive
legal privileges (including complete tax exemption) turned
the priesthood into a lucrative and rewarding career.
Bishops drifted even further from the congregations they
"served," often leaving smaller churches for churches that
are more prestigious and profitable. As "the clergy"
continued to develop, so did the concept of "the laity,"
which at this time was defined more broadly to include all
non-clerics - including women.
The cult of Martyrdom developed in the face of
persecutions against Christians in the early centuries. The
faithful sought to die for Christ since they believed that
the most desirable thing was to die and join Christ in
heaven as quickly as possible. So, many Christians went
to the Roman authorities and demanded that they be put
to death. The Romans often had to refuse and turn them
back. When Christianity was legalized in the Roman
Empire in 313 (The Edict of Milan) and became state
religion in 381 (Edict of Thessalonica), the door to
martyrdom was suddenly shut before the faithful. But
fervent believers did not wish to live in a corrupt and
sinful world. Suicide was considered sin. So, they just
withdrew into the deserts and mountains and started
living a life of suffering, learning and meditation. Thus,
Christian monasteries developed and became the
fortresses of what they considered true faith in a world
filled with evil. Then the Church started recruiting monks
as priests. Shortly, monk-priests began to fill the ranks of
"the clergy," touting their ascetism, and questioning
family values. Celibacy came to be celebrated. As "the
clergy" continued to drift apart from "the laity," the
hierarchy of the Church continued to evolve.
Early Christianity was ‘Orthodox’ in the sense that they
supposedly followed ‘correct teachings’. The
Mediterranean Sea had divided the Roman Empire into
two regions viz. the Eastern Empire and the Western
Empire. The common language of the learned was Greek
in the East and Latin in the West. Thus, two ‘Orthodox’
Christian segments emerged – ‘Greek Orthodox’, which
came to have its centre in Constantinople (modern
Istanbul) and ‘Latin Orthodox’ centred in Rome. Those
Christians, who differed with the ‘correct teachings’ of
Orthodox Christianity, became heterodox Christians.
Their views were branded heresies. Heretical Christians
and their writings were mostly burned by the powerful
Orthodox Church. The Western Orthodox Christianity
soon became the Roman Catholic Church. It was but a
short step to the recognition that the monarchical bishops
of some churches were above the rest. The exaltation of
the monarchical bishop by the middle of the second
century soon led to the recognition of the special honour
due to the monarchical bishop of the church in Rome.
17 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
Most denominations tend to model their organization on
the popular government at the time of their formation. So,
the Roman Catholic Church organization came to be
modelled on the lines of Imperial Rome. The emperor had
the title of ‘Chief Priest’ (Pontifex Maximus). He was the
high priest of the College of Pontiffs (Collegium
Pontificum) in ancient pagan Rome. The title of "Pontifex
Maximus" was applied within the Catholic Church to the
Pope. (The ‘College of Pontiffs’ apparently became the
‘College of Cardinals’ in due course). Anglicans use a
parliamentary system. Denominations that are more
modern use a representative democracy style. Some
have adopted a corporate governance model with a
board of directors, such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses or
the Mormons. But what remains common is that the
clergy is separated from the plain believers and that
ultimate control rests beyond the local congregation in
the hands of a few people occupying glorified positions.
They pulled all the strings. The role of the laity came to be
marginalized to that of people coughing the moolah to
sustain this enormous apparatus of a pompous
ecclesiastic system.
But the bishops refused to be contented. They sought
positions still more exalted. The bishop of the metropolis
of each imperial province came to be styled
‘Metropolitan’. These metropolitan bishops came to
dominate their fellow bishops as the bishops had
dominated their fellow presbyters. By the canons of the
First Ecumenical Council summoned by Emperor
Constantine in Nicaea in 325 CE, the Metropolitan
Bishops were given certain powers of veto.3 the bishop of
the primary see in each state came to be styled Primate
("first" or "principal"). Outside the Empire, the title Primate
was used much as the title Metropolitan was used within
it. In the fourth and fifth centuries, the bishops of
important sees such as Alexandria and Antioch came to
be considered super-bishops and started being styled
Archbishops.
In early times the title ‘Pope’ was widely used by leading
figures in the Church. It is a variation of the Latin word
‘Papa’ and Greek ‘Pappas’. Bishops and Patriarchs were
accorded the title ‘Pope’ by those who stood in a filial
relationship to them. Thus, for example the African
bishops addressed their own Primate in Carthage as
Pope, but called the Bishop of Rome merely ‘Bishop’ (and
not Pope). There is no record of a bishop of Rome being
accorded the title ‘Pope’ before the late fourth century,
and it was not until the time of Leo the Great (Pope 440-
461 CE) that the title started to be used by the Western
Church specifically of the Bishop of Rome. In fact, it was
not claimed exclusively by the Bishop of Rome until 1073,
and the (Greek) Orthodox Church never accepted this
claim.
The first centre of Christianity was Jerusalem and
remained the natural centre until the Ebonites were
expelled along with other Jews after the Second Jewish
Revolt in 135 CE.4 When Jerusalem ceased to be the
single focus of the faith, Christians from Egypt and Libya
looked to Alexandria, those in Asia Minor (modern Turkey)
to Antioch, and those in southern Italy to Rome. In the
fourth century, the heads of the churches in Rome,
Alexandria and Antioch were all being accorded the
honorific title of ‘Patriarch’, and the Bishop of
Constantinople soon joined them. In the fifth century,
Christian communities had again grown up around
Jerusalem, and the Bishop of Jerusalem too was
accorded the title.5
In the East, the Patriarch of Constantinople became first
among equals. Constantinople had become the seat of
the Roman Emperor after Constantine moved the capital
of the Roman Empire to the city of Byzantium in 330 CE,
and renamed it Constantinople. As the bishop of the
capital city of the Roman Empire, the bishop of
Constantinople was accorded the rank of Ecumenical
Patriarch. The bishops of Rome (the former capital of the
empire), keen to establish themselves as superior to their
brother patriarchs, awarded themselves the title of
Ecumenical Patriarch, and later appointed their own
patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and
Jerusalem (in the Eastern Roman Empire).
This new ecclesiastical hierarchy led to new forms of
abuse. Powerful men continued to aspire for positions
that are ever more powerful. Some of the most famous
Christian leaders were rich laymen, whose offices were
not gained by piety, merit, election, or hard work, but by
influence and bribery. Rich families routinely bought
Church offices. For instance, St Ambrose was
consecrated as a bishop of Milan eight days after his
baptism.
Let me say in conclusion that the long and short of the
story is that the leadership of early Christianity simply
arrogated to themselves monarchical powers as their
divine right. Ordinary believers, who had no access to the
Holy Scripture until quite late in history, believed the
untruths and half-truths told to them by their leaders
about their right to enslave the faithful. The faithful had no
means of knowing whether priesthood was truly
authorised by the Bible. The New Testament canon was
finalized in the fourth century. By this time, the
ecclesiastic hierarchy was already securely established
into their lofty thrones. And for approximately thousand
years, the New Testament was available only in Greek
and Latin - the language of the learned. Obviously, the
faithful believed that the priests were divinely ordained.
By the time they woke up to the fraud, it was too late.
And when they found that even the political rulers lived in
18 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
fear of the rulers of church, they knew that the game was
over for them.
In many ways, the twenty-first-century church is more like
the third and fourth century church. The church has
monarchical bishops who rule over the congregations.
The bishop is the Omni-competent administrator, teacher,
evangelist, theologian, and counsellor, the paternalistic
authority figure in the church. Nowhere in the gospels, in
the writings of the apostles, or in the early Church Fathers
is there a hint of the need for Metropolitans, Primates,
Archbishops, Cardinals, Patriarchs or Popes. In the
earliest times, there were not even bishops or priests, but
merely people who acted as community elders or
overseers. The whole edifice of ecclesiastical ranks and
grandiloquent titles is a later development. It did not
develop out of any scriptural authority or spiritual
exigency. It was developed and thrust down the throats
of the faithful by clergy who were turning increasingly
powerful, worldly, and luxury loving.
Foot Notes:
1. Alexadre Faivre, ‘The Emergence of the Laity in the
Early Church’, trans. by David Smith, 1990.)
2. The Sacred Writings of Apostolic Teaching and
Constitutions’, II: XXVI.
3. A Church Council (Synod) is an assembly of bishops
that is considered a rule making super-body of the
church. The term Ecumenical means ‘of universal
scope or application’. Therefore, the representatives
from various church denominations were invited to the
Ecumenical Synods and its decisions are deemed to
have worldwide effect. The First Ecumenical Council
was summoned by Emperor Constantine to meet at
Nicaea. Constantine had presided over it. The most
important task assigned to the council was the drafting
of the Nicene Creed.
4. Ebionites were Jews who had accepted Jesus as the
Messiah and the Gospel of Matthew, but rejected the
Pauline Epistles. The group had continued to live
observing Jewish customs.
5. Patriarch is a title adopted from the Old Testament and
was universally accepted as the highest honorific
available.
Mr. Georgekutty is a former Central
government officer and academician.
He is a gold medallist of the Institute of
Cost Accounts of India (ICA) and its
Fellow Member (FCMA). He holds
postgraduate degrees in Business
Management, Computer Application,
Commerce, Journalism, English,
History, Philosophy, Politics, Public
Administration, Sociology and Gandhian
Thoughts. He is passionate in studying Philosophy and
Religions. After quiting his post retirment job as director of a
business school, he has been devoting his entire time on
reading, writing and some public speaking. He has also written a
number of books.
Priesthood is a Gift from God
Lal Varghese, Esq., Dallas
At some point in life, almost everyone needs a priest.
Even today, in an evermore-secular world where people
live as though God does not exist or believe that God
does not play any significant part in the way they live their
lives, people find there are times when they want a priest.
No matter how much church ministry changes, some
elements remain the same. For many years, priests have
performed baptisms, dedications, confirmations,
weddings, funerals, and holy sacraments. Today, that role
remains constant, but today’s context should force
priests to continually re-examine their roles in the lives of
parishioners they serve to make their ministry more
meaningful and a blessing to others.
Bishop Erik Varden of Mount St. Bernard, Leicestershire,
Great Britain in the Scandinavian Bishops’ Conference,
stated that “in a world, in a time that is increasingly
affected by indifference and cynicism, by desperation and
division, our job is to do something different: to show the
light that no darkness can extinguish, to stoke good will,
to let ourselves be reconciled, to help a community built
on trust, to show that death has lost its power and life is
meaningful, beautiful, inviolable.”
Christ empowered the Samaritan woman at the Jacob’s
well to go and tell the Good News to her villagers (John
4). In partnership with the power of God, she shared her
story and many people came to believe in Jesus as a
result. Partnership centered in love for God and his
beloved is the most powerful, life transforming, and
lasting ministry model priests have to offer. Priests are all
called through the beautiful invitation of Matthew 28—to
“go and make disciples of all nations”—and they are
equipped with a powerful promise of Emmanuel, “I am
with you always, to the very end of the age.” A priest is a
pastor and a teacher; someone set aside to proclaim the
Good News and to care for the souls of those who
believe in Christ. But priestly ministry isn’t just the domain
of ordained pastors. Christians of all types participate in
19 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
“the priesthood of all believers,” by proclaiming the
gospel and caring for those who name Jesus as Lord.
As the Lord’s messenger a priest is expected to proclaim
the gospel of Jesus Christ. Seeking the lost, announcing
God’s justice, warning and correcting those in error are
some of the responsibilities of the Christian priesthood.
Priests have to encourage and build up the body of
Christ, preaching the Word of God, leading God’s people
in prayer, declaring God’s forgiveness and blessing. That
is the substance of the priestly service of the gospel. Paul
reminded Timothy, “I call to remembrance the genuine
faith that is in you, which dwelt first in your grandmother
Lois and your mother Eunice, and I am persuaded now
lives in you also” (2 Timothy 1: 5). Lois and Eunice were
ordinary women who lived in ordinary circumstances,
who were faithful in a rather ordinary way. Their teaching
was an instrument God used to work genuine faith in
Timothy. Ultimately, Timothy was not the only person to
benefit from the godly influence of his mother, his grand
mother, and his spiritual father, but the entire church in
Ephesus reaped the benefits of their godly influence.
The sling and stones were what David was used as his
armor, and God used them to bring joy to the ranks of
Israel that day. Whenever someone felt unsure of one’s
ability of being a priest and thinking if I just had what
someone else has, my ministry would be
different consider the gifts or experiences God has given
specifically to each one of us and trust the God-given
armor. When Jesus cured the leper, the blind, lame, devil-
possessed man, forsake of the sins of the prostitute,
rebuked the winds and waves, we do not see an ordinary
Jew, but a Christ in action filled with faith in His father,
the God in heaven.
Events in a priest’s life can be alarming or discouraging,
but he is sustained by God’s guidance, protection and
reassuring presence (Zech. 10: 1-8). Israelites were given
more bricks and less straw, but God assured them that ‘I
will rescue you; I will redeem you with an outstretched
arm.” (Exodus 6:6). God asked them to seek peace and
prosperity of the city to which I have carried you from
exile and assured that I have plans for you. This is the
same assurance given to us also that He will be with us
and He will send the Holy Spirit to guide and lead us to
fulfill His mission. In Isaiah 17: 7-11, we read “because
you have forgotten the God of your salvation . . . the
harvest will be a heap of ruins.” Yes, if a priest forgets the
Lord and the ministry entrusted to him it will be a ruin for
him and also the people entrusted to that priest.
Pure and undefiled religion before God and Father is this:
to visit the orphans and widows in their trouble. (James
1:27) Let the roads you tread is rough and dreary and its
end is far out of sight, foot it bravely, stronger and trust in
God. In the days of the American civil war, one of the
President Lincoln’s advisors said he was grateful that
God was on the side of the Union. Lincoln replied, “Sir,
my concern is not whether God is on our side; my
greatest concern is to be on the God’s side, for God is
always right.” Psalm 139:23-24 says: “Search me, O God
and know my heart . . . And see if there is any wicked
way in me, and lead me in the way of everlasting.” Priests
need to be on the God’s side and never try to carry God
on their side.
Bishop lays hands upon a person during the Rite of
Ordination the priest is consecrated. He is sent forth by
the Father through the mediatorship of the Jesus Christ in
order to live and work by the power of the Holy Spirit in
the service of the church for the salvation of the
world. The Church is the Body of Christ in time and in
space. Christ is the Head of the Church as St Paul tells us
and we are His Body. Therefore, it is just this relationship
between Christ and the Church that we see present and
tangible in the person of the consecrated priest. Since
both Christ and Church are holy, a priest also should be
holy.

Pope John Paul II's book ‘Gift and Mystery’ was written
on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of his ordination
as a priest. He received what he called the “gift and
mystery of the priesthood.” He said that every priest
should be humbled to represent Christ—because through
the priesthood, the world can “catch a glimpse of the
Lord.” Truly, the priestly vocation of Karol Wojtyła, who
would become Pope John Paul II, was heroic, generous,
and holy. Indeed, every priest is called to a heroic,
generous, and holy life of ministry, and service.
Priesthood is a gift and mystery—a source of profound
grace and wonder—for us all. Every priest is called to the
adventure—the “gift and mystery”—of a life configured to
Christ: to his mercy, to his truth, to his love. The
priesthood is an extraordinary gift for each man on whom
it is conferred, an extraordinary gift for the entire Church.
Through the priesthood comes the love, grace, and truth
There is only the one priesthood; that is the High
of God in the sacramental mystery of the Eucharist, and
priesthood of Jesus Christ. The ordained priesthood links
the healing mercy of confession.”
him to Christ's own priesthood. The man who is a priest
allows Christ the crucified and risen Lord to exercise His
In this book ‘Gift and Mystery” and also in his annual Holy
own priesthood for us. This means that in every age and
Thursday letters to priests Pope John Paul II emphasized
in every place where there is a man ordained by Christ
the influence of the joyful priestly witness on the lives of
exercises His priesthood for us and for our eternal
men considering their own vocations. Support from
salvation. We understand this by the Latin phrase which
priests is important, but what is even more influential is
describes a priest as in persona Christi i.e. in the Person
the witness of a priest visibly fulfilling his vocations in his
of Christ or as an alter Christus. He stands in relation to
ministry. The late Pontiff wrote, "Vocations will certainly
the Church in the way that our Lord does to us. Jesus is
not be lacking if our manner of life is truly priestly, if we
Head of the Church, which is His Body. He is Bridegroom
become more holy, more joyful, more impassioned in the
of the Church, which is His Bride, and He is Shepherd to
exercise of our ministry. A priest 'won' by Christ more
the Church who is His Sheep. The priest stands in relation
easily 'wins' others, so that they too decide to set out on
to his people in just the same way that Christ does.
the same adventure" (cf. John Paul II, Letter to Priests,
Holy Thursday 2005) Priest, as a delegate of the Bishop, has a role of authority
in the Church at a local level. This authority is to guide
God continually invites men to serve His Church as
and govern the community. The Church is not simply a
priests. Are those being invited listening to His call, and
democratic entity that operates by the vote of the
responding with a generous heart? In a culture in which
majority. Priest has entrusted to him the task of leading
every voice is competing for a person's attention, in
the people to holiness and seeing that their spiritual
which commitment is to be avoided and self-gratification
needs are met. In this way he mediates the kingship of
is to be encouraged, and in which silence is hard to come
Christ, because it is Christ who governs us. This does not
by, it is truly more difficult to be attentive to God's call
exclude the valid and valuable involvement of the laity.
and to respond with openness and generosity.
There are many things that the laity can and must do
The origin of the Christian priesthood has its source in the which the priest cannot and shouldn't do. But the work of
Blessed Trinity, like every Christian identity. When the the laity is principally to be in the world as bearers of

20 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

Christ where they live and work and come into contact
with the world. The Church, whether we like it or not, is
hierarchically structured. That means that it is governed
by priests. That may not be very popular or fashionable
but that is the mode of the Church given by Christ. Christ
proclaimed himself a king and shares that with his
Church. Peter is placed at the head of the apostles not
because he was better or more competent, but to be the
voice of Christ among his people to articulate what the
mystery of faith holds for us.
The Alter is the heart of the priest's life and identity. The
priest stands in the person of Christ offering the holy
sacrifice on the altars, the same that was offered on
Calvary. In doing that the whole Church joins its own
sacrifices and lives to that of Jesus through the sacrifice
of the priest. That is why the priest invites us in these
words. "Pray brethren that my sacrifice and yours may be
acceptable to God the almighty Father." The priesthood is
a gift of Christ to the Church in which Jesus Christ our
redeemer is present and working his saving works in us.
Priest is a visible sacrament of the Person of our Lord
Jesus Christ––priest, prophet and king––living in
intercession and sacrifice, teaching the truth and
enlightening our minds and hearts and guiding us as a
true shepherd to holiness and life eternal.
The central task of a priest is “to bring God to men and
women,” Pope Benedict XVI once told priests in Rome.
Priests are tremendous gifts from Christ to his Church
and its people. Faithful priests are a blessing from God
for his people. There is an element of mystery in the call
to the priesthood. St. John Paul II noted this in his book
“Gift and Mystery,” which was born out of his thoughts on
50 years of priestly ministry. “At its deepest level,” he
said, “every vocation to the priesthood is a great mystery;
it is a gift which infinitely transcends the individual. Every
priest experiences this clearly throughout the course of
his life. Faced with the greatness of the gift, we sense our
own inadequacy. A vocation is a mystery of divine
election: ‘You did not choose me, but I chose you and
appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, fruit that
will last . . . .”
Pope Francis, reminded priests that the Gospel they
proclaim and serve can be described as “Good news. A
single word – Gospel – that, even as it is spoken,
becomes truth, brimming with joy and mercy.” The Holy
Father also counseled his fellow priests, “We should
never attempt to separate these three graces of the
Gospel: its truth, which is non-negotiable; its mercy,
which is unconditional and offered to all sinners; and its
joy, which is personal and open to everyone. Truth, mercy
and joy: these three go together.” In serving the faithful,
priests are entrusted with bringing the “truth, mercy and
joy” of Jesus Christ to them. The enemies of the Church
would like to see priesthood fit in with the surrounding
culture as it becomes more secular, and their tactics have
21 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
not changed over the centuries. If the Church is to be
faithful to her mission, then the laity and priests alike must
renew their commitment to holiness and to supporting
one another. We must return to our first love as Pope
Francis said to a gathering of priests during the Year of
Mercy. “I renew my first love: the memory of that time
when the Lord touched my soul and called me to follow
him, the memory of the joy of having cast the nets of our
life upon the sea of his word.” I urge you to pray that the
hearts of all priests may be filled with the joy of the
Gospel and set aflame with the love of Jesus Christ so
that they may be shepherds after the heart of Jesus.
In the words of Pope John Paul II on the vocation of the
priesthood: “Called, consecrated and sent. The triple
dimension explains and determines your conduct and
your lifestyle. You are ‘set apart’, segregated, but not
separated. What would separate you, would be to forget
or to overlook the meaning of the consecration that
characterizes your priesthood. To be but one more in
your profession, in your lifestyle, in your way of living, in
your political obligations, would not help you to fully carry
out your mission. Your would betray your own faithful
who want you to be priests through and through.”
(Valencia, Spain, November 8, 1982)
Jesus being the high priest through the Holy Spirit has
called priests for a sacrificial service and not for a
profession or vocation, but to submit to Him and to the
leaders of the Church in fulfilling their priestly duties.
There may be orders, which may not be acceptable to
some priests handed down from the leadership of the
Church, but like Jesus Christ did, they need to submit to
the authorities in serving the Lord and His people. No one
should be allowed to separate or segregate a priest from
his calling to serve the Lord.
At a wedding, Jesus rejoiced; at a friend’s graveside,
Jesus wept. At both occasions, Jesus worked miracles.
Jesus sensed these moments as dramas that held
people’s rapt attention. Through Jesus’ ministry at these
occasions, God became the leading actor. That remains
our Priests’ call also by involving both in the temporal and
ecclesiastical matters of the parishioners in this
multicultural society. While being a steward in the Church
of Christ, priest has the special responsibility to shepherd
the flock in this world, to participate ardently in the work
of the Kingdom of God through the ministry of the Word
and administration of sacraments, to be a witness in the
Church, which is the body of Christ and in the name of
Christ, involve in the temporal & spiritual growth of the
Kingdom of God. He has the responsibility to shepherd
the flock of God, to render sacrificial service to the
community according to the will of God, to be fervent in
the proclamation of the Gospel, to be consistent in the
ministry of teaching, and to manifest the dignity of the
Christian ministry in the congregation and society.
From Aaronic to Melchizedekian Priesthood
Prof. Plammoottil V. Cherian, M. Div., Ph. D., Chicago
Priesthood is a doctrine of the Old Testament as well of
the New Testament. However, priesthood developed from
the Levitical Laws of Aaronic order and transformed to
the priesthood of all believers with the death and
resurrection of Jesus Christ is a New Testament doctrine
that every individual has direct access to God and each
individual shares the responsibility of assuring his/her
salvation through personal relationship with the
Redeemer Saviour, and ministering to the others of the
community of believers. The term Levitical applies to the
Israelite Tribe of Levi, third son of patriarch Jacob, the
tribe to which Moses and Aaron belong. Aaronic male
descendants were set apart for the priestly duties (Exod.
28:1-4), the rest of the Levities were designated Aaron’s
assistants to help him in the work of the tabernacle and to
take care of its furnishings (Num. 3:5–10). [1]
While many people consider Aaron as the first priest of
the Old Testament, remarkably the Bible teaches that
Abraham, the Father of faith was met and blessed by an
unknown High Priest of the Most high God, just after a
righteous action performed by Abraham as described in
Genesis chapter 14 as well as in Hebrews (7:1-3). Thus,
contrary to the understanding of most theologians about
the lineage of priesthood, a mysterious Melchizedek is
the earliest priesthood mentioned in the Bible who is
considered the High Priest of God, forever. The true
identity of this Melchizedek is described with ample
evidence in the recent book “Promised Land: Whose
Land, Whose Promise, Who shall inherit.”[2] While we
analyze the progression of priesthood of all believers,
however, we shall begin with Aaron in the biological
lineage of earthly priesthood.
22 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
Levitical Priesthood Inaugurated with Aaron.
Three months after Lord led the children of Israel out of
Egypt, he brought them to Mt. Sinai (Ex.19:1), where
Moses received the Laws and Ten Commandments for
humanity. Moses anointed and consecrated Aaron and
his sons to the priesthood and arrayed them in the robes
of office (Lev. 8; cf. Ex. 28-29). He also related to them
God's detailed instructions for performing their duties
while the rest of the Israelites listened (Lev. 1-7, 11-27).
Priests were also commissioned to bless the people
(Num. 6:22-27). After Aaron completed the altar offerings
for the first time with Moses, they came out and “blessed
the people: and the glory of the LORD appeared to all the
people (Lev.9:23). Some of the prominent names of Bible
such as Eli, Ezra, Zechariah, father of John the Baptist
were Levites.
Historically, there is a truth to be learned of the Levite
Tribe which is the blessing given to Levi by Jacob from
his deathbed in Egypt. When Jacob blessed his sons
Simeon, and Levi, his words were, “Simeon and Levi “are
brother, instruments of cruelty are in their dwelling place.
Let not my soul enter their council, let not my honor be
united their assembly; for in their angry they slew a man,
and in their self-will, they hamstrung an ox. Cursed be
their anger, for it is fierce, and their wrath, for it is cruel. I
will divide them in Jacob and scatter them in Israel”
(Genesis 49:5-7). Jacob’s prophecy of blessing on his son
Levi is a curse because of their unrighteous anger and
wrath, but God changed it into a blessing. The tribes of
Levi were not allotted a portion of the land after the
conquest of Canaan, but God sanctified them to be the
priest of Israel. Levi’s inheritance was far superior to the
land inherited by the other tribes, and their inheritance
was God himself (Num.18:8-14). Thus, they had
enormous privilege of serving God, and they were given
from the abundance of the other tribes, through their
tithes (Num.18:8-14).
The work of the Levitical priests included the morning and
evening sacrifices offered on behalf of the community of
Israel (Ex. 29:38–44), tending the vessels of the Holy
Place (lampstand, altar of incense and bread of the
Presence, Ex. 27:20–21, 30:7,8; Lev. 24:5–9), teaching the
Law and administering justice under the Law (Deut. 17:8).
The most holy sacrifice was to be performed only once a
year on what is known in Hebrew as Yom Kippur, the Day
of Atonement, the tenth day of the seventh month of
Tishri (September–October, Lev. 23:26–32). It was to
atone for all the sins of the entire Israelite community
(humanity, Lev. 16:34). One of the priests was specially
designated as the high priest, just as the present-day
presiding bishop of the Western churches or the ever appoint idol gods or a Canaanite idol worshipper as
Metropolitan of churches in the Eastern tradition. his substitute? Is there any historical record of a
Canaanite king named Melchizedek ever ruled the city
Aaronic Priesthood Vs Melchizedekian Priesthood Salem? Jewish records and Canaanite history do not
indicate such a king in history. Why did he greet Abraham
The Levitical priesthood was an inseparable part of the on his return after defeating the aggressors when the city
Mosaic Law and the priesthood is inseparable from the of Salem and Melchizedek were not attacked or even
laws as priests were appointed to perform the sacrifices involved in the incident? Why did he choose to offer
and the administration of the Law. Nonetheless, the bread and wine instead of bread and milk or honey or
Levitical priesthood was never intended to be permanent. cakes made of fig and raisins? Why did Abraham give a
Animal sacrifice was a common practice in the Ancient tenth to an unknown Melchizedek only, when there were
Near East, but its meaning within the Old Testament is
very different from the volatile, angry gods of Israel’s
neighbors. But it was a custom as we see that first animal
sacrifice was offered by Abel (Genesis 4:3, 4), and later
Noah sacrificed animals after the flood (Genesis 8:20, 21),
which were centuries before the Sinai Laws. God
instituted animal sacrifices, a custom that they were
familiar with to teach humanity that by cutting an animal,
watching its blood (that is, its life) gushing out was a
visceral symbol of the devastating consequence of sins.
Annual sacrifices were only a reminder of sins, because it
is not possible for the blood of bulls and goats to remove
sins. Nevertheless, sin must be atoned, for which God
descended and became man as prophesied by Isaiah.
Therefore, when Christ came into this world, he said,
“Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you
prepared for me” (Hebrews 10:5). Then I said, Behold, I
have come, in the scrolls of the book, it is written of me,
to do your will O God” (Hebrews 10:7, cf. Psalm 40:7).

Christ, Our High Priest Revealed in Melchizedek.

When Abraham returned from the arduous fight in Canaan

described in Genesis 14, Melchizedek, an unknown King
abruptly received and offered “bread and wine” to refresh
his body and soul. From the description we understand
that: (1) Melchizedek was the priest of the most high God
as well as the King of Salem, who blessed Abraham. (2)
He was not mentioned in any of the nine Canaanite kings
engaged in war. In Jewish theology, the most high God is
five other kings for whom he fought for? Why none of the
El-Elyon above any other gods. (3) Melchizedek appeared
kings he freed did not receive him or offer a word of
as the high priest of God and blessed Abram.
thanks, except king of Sodom, who sardonically offered
Melchizedek attests that Abraham is favored by God
some of the spoils that belonged to him, which Abraham
(Abram of God most high). (4) He reveals God is the
graciously rejected?
possessor of heaven and earth and that Abraham belongs
to God. (5) He blessed (gave thanks to) God. (6) He
Melchizedek was neither a Canaanite king nor a human
acknowledges the fact that the living God is the one who
being can be proved from the following facts: (1)
delivered the enemies to Abraham. (7) Abraham
Abraham would not accept any gift from king of Sodom
voluntarily offered a tenth of all what he recovered to
who epitomized wickedness (Gen. 14:22–23). (2)
Melchizedek, the act of tithing to the Lord for the first
Melchizedek typifies Christ, and it is significant to note
time in the Scriptures (Gen. 14:17–20).
that he offered Abraham the elements of the memorial of
Christ, bread and wine, who fought against injustice and
Who is Melchizedek?
immorality of a gang of cruel rulers with his righteous
attitude. (3) The scriptural references to Christ, the
The questions we must answer are, which Canaanite king
ultimate Seed of Abraham as “according to the order
could have been known to Yahweh other than the Melchizedek,” suggest the royal, superior, and everlasting
pantheon of idol Canaanite gods? Would a living God
23 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

authority of Christ’s high priesthood over the Aaronic
human priesthood that was faulty, transitory, and mortal
(Ps. 110:4; Heb. 5:5, 6). The fact that Melchizedek was a
priest serving the most high God and a priest forever
indicates God’s presence was accessible in Salem
(Jerusalem, the City of Peace) before the Jewish nation
was organized and the regular Aaronic priesthood began.
Why would the eternal everlasting righteous God seek a
model and a pattern of an earthly Canaanite king when
there is no righteous one among men? (Ps. 14:1–3, 53:1–
3; Rom. 3:10–12). No human being can be a model for the
high priest of the most high God. Melchizedek, the king of
Salem who received Abraham, was Christ in apparition,
who is the high priest of God, far better than any priest in
the Aaronic descent or of other lineage. The priest of the
mosthigh God is Christ himself who appeared to
Abraham as Melchizedek, the King of Righteousness.
Christ typifies God’s High Priest in the order of
Melchizedek because: (1) Melchizedek appeared to
Abraham as a human being (man) foretelling Abraham
about his incarnation later in history. (2) He was not man
ordained (Ps. 110:4; Heb. 7:4, 1 Tim. 2:5). (2) He was a
king-priest (Gen. 14:18, Zech. 6:12–13); (3) Melchizedek’s
name means “my king is righteous” and he appeared as
king of Salem (Isa. 11:5–9). (4) Melchizedek had no
recorded beginning of days or end of life (Jn. 1:1, Rom.
6:9, Heb. 7:23–25). Can a human being ever be
designated without beginning or end? While there may be
comparison between Christ and a human king, the
greater contrast between the high priesthood of
Melchizedek and Aaron is only as to person, in the order
of appointment, and duration of kingship and priesthood.
Christ is King and Priest forever.
Christ, the High Priest and Kingdom of Priests.
However, we should not misinterpret the priesthood of all
believers as some fundamentalist denominations interpret
24 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
and appoint themselves as pastors and bishops. They
claim that priesthood was abolished forever, which is
wrong theology and against New Testament teaching. It
is Christ who appointed Apostles and gave some
apostleship, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers
(Eph.4:11). The book of Hebrews or the New Testament
does not speak of abolition the priesthood, but gives
preeminence to Jesus Himself, yet calls us to do good
and to communicate,” sacrifices of good deeds
(13:15,16). Paul calls the Romans to present their bodies
“a living sacrifice” (Rom. 12:1) and Peter calls Christians
“a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices” (1 Pet.
2:5). What is intended by such statements is that the
Church by its corporate relationship to Christ, by its being
“in Christ,” is “a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual
sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.” It
does not mean priesthood is abolished forever. The
individual member shares in Christ’s prerogative as high
priest. There must be orderly priesthood for
administration, to perform sacraments, and to give
directives and guidance so that we become living
sacrifices by word and deed, bringing others to the throne
of grace.
Melchizedek was not a king of the Levitical Order and not
of the genealogy and heredity of Aaron. Christ’s genes
are of mixed pool from Rahab the Canaanite woman,
Ruth a Moabite woman, and Judah who married a
Canaanite woman, daughter of Shua from whom the
Davidic line of lineage comes to Jesus (Genesis 38:2).
Christ’s multiethnic genes and the Holy Spirit by whom he
was conceived by Virgin Mary indicate that the blood of
Christ with the human genes is sanctified by the Holy
Spirit, and thus unique for the atonement of all humanity.
Christ is the Mediator, Redeemer and Saviour, and he
made believers heirs and coheirs in the kingdom of God.
Christ fulfilled the promise God made to Israel as they
were freed and brought to Sinai. “Now if you obey me
fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you
will be my treasured possession. Although the whole
earth is mine, you will be for me a kingdom of priests and
a holy nation” (Exod.19:5,6). Thank God, we are priests in
the kingdom of God through, Jesus Christ, our High
Priest to whom we are brothers. Remember the claim of
Christ, “I am the Alpha and the Omega; I am the first High
Priest and the last High Priest of God forever.
Melchizedek, an apparition of Christ appeared to
Abraham, to develop a faith community, the Church, the
Bride of Christ, whom he shall present to GOD.
[1]
Therefore, when the Bible speaks of the “Levitical priesthood,”
it is referring to the narrower lineage of Aaron and his sons
within the tribe of Levi, the rest of the Levities being designated
as his assistants.
[2]
Cherian, Plammoottil V. (2019). Promised Land. Whose Land,
Whose Promise and Who Shall Inherit. Pp.669. Covenant Books.
South Carolina, USA. Chapter 22 of the book pp. 297-311
describes who Melchizedek is and his priesthood.
GLIMPSES OF CHRISTIAN HERITAGE IN MINISTRY
Revd Dr. M. J. Joseph, Kottayam
Introduction
In the pilgrimage of our life, we need to face problems. A
problem always carries a possibility. “Difficulties in your life
do not come to destroy you, but to help you realize your
hidden potential and power. Let difficulties know that you
too are difficult” (APJ Abdulkalam). A ship on the harbour is
safe; but a ship is not meant to remain on the harbour. The
quote above has brought to light the path we need to
traverse in our pastoral and prophetic ministry. The immortal
words of the Church Father Ignatius recorded in the annuals
of history: “I am the wheat of God, and by the teeth of the
beasts, I shall be ground that I may be found pure bread of
God” have sent vibes of spiritual inspiration and courage to
several down through the centuries towards transformative
discipleship. This is also what St. Paul says in 2Cor.6:4-10:
“Rather, as servants of God we commend ourselves in every
way; in great endurance; in troubles, hardships and distress;
. . . sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; poor, yet making many
rich; having nothing, and yet possessing everything.”
1. As a pilgrim of the future
Mission in Christ’s way is the need of the hour as humankind
is facing spiritual and moral problems. There is thus a huge
responsibility before theological educators and ministers.
Church as a called out community being “the special
possession of God “(1Pet.1:9), Christian ministers have to
act as a technician – revealing or unfolding whatever does
not bring forth good by itself (see 1Cor.3:10). Thus mission
is to be carried out by conscious effort using appropriate
skills and methods (cf.1 Cor.9:19-21).To quote the former
General Secretary of the WCC ,Samuel Kobia, “the 21
century will be a century where spirituality will take central
stage in our lives. Spiritual accompaniment, therefore,
should be what social solidarity was in the 20 century”.
When Sri Ravi Shankar, the founder of the ‘Art of Living
Foundation’, was asked about the biggest challenge we face
today, he replied: “Prejudice is the biggest challenge” –
prejudice against culture, against religion, against gender
etc. Prejudice takes different forms in society”. As Christian
ministers we need to act as channels of grace and agents of
change. In a borderless world, we need “ to risk Christ for
Christ’s sake”( Dr. M. M. Thomas).The task before us is to
re-read history and scriptures of all religions so as to act as
“ letter from Christ” (2Cor.3:2) and “ the fragrance of Christ”
(2Cor.2:15), making ourselves known as a happy blending of
dignity and compassion. The recent Flood in Kerala and the
Ockhi cyclone tragedy (2017, 2018) have raised umpteen
spiritual questions before us. The 10 lessons the world
community have realized from the Fukushima Nuclear
mishap (Japan) are indeed gospel truths. The late Thomas
Mar Athanasius used to remind the clergy that they should
always remember the two poles of the gospel truth: God in
Christ for man and man in Christ for God. Further, Thirumeni
used to quote Max Warren’s book, ‘The Divine Imperative’
“Go and preach; go and preach; go and teach.” The real
25 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
question posed by several teachers of faith is this: “Are we
modelling us on Christ or modelling Christ on us? This is
basically a theological and ethical question addressed to the
ministerial leadership.
The well-known prayer of Dag Hammarskjold, the former
General Secretary of UN, quoted below is to be recited and
lived everyday by the Christian ministers: “Give me a pure
heart that I may see Thee; a humble heart that I may hear
Thee; a heart of love that I may serve Thee; a heart of faith
that I may live Thee”.
2. Shades of Christian heritage
Those who take the pastoral ministry of the Church seriously
have the God-given responsibility to protect the weak and
the marginalized from the onslaught of the thieves, robbers
and wolves and to protest against exploitative, manipulative
and competitive tactics of powerful people and institutions of
the day. This is the legacy of the good shepherd (Jn.10).
Legacy of the yesteryears is for today’s wellness. There are
quite a few bishops, clergy and lay people in the Church who
lived and taught ahead of their times . . . A book under the
title ‘Light to the Nations’ published on the occasion of
ECC’s Golden Jubilee (2013) speaks of new vision to
mission paradigms, focusing on the unity of the Church as
well as the unity of humankind and the integrity of Creation.
“The need for re-imaging the Church’s mission in the world
arises out of our recognition that very often mission has
been done from a position of privilege, power and
possession. But the mission in Christ’s way clearly indicates
st an attempt to articulate an understanding of the Christian
heritage from the perspective of the least or the
marginalized.
th
The word “Legacy”/”heritage” has assumed deeper
implications than the one we usually think of allocating
possessions to people according to a ’Will’. The posterity is
expected to imitate such men and women of repute and to
translate their radical concerns into programmes and
projects for the future. ‘Heritage’ is often used synonymous
with tradition. But it is not. Heritage/legacy speaks of our
yester years. The Jews quite often took pride of Abraham as
their forefather. Legacy is not a static monument. It is
indeed a canvas for a better future. Speaking about the
legacy of Reformation in the Malankara Church, Dr. M. M.
Thomas speaks about the three-fold developments as the
values of Reformation. They are: i) the democratization of the
Church polity, ii) the movement of the Church from an
exclusive ethnic group to a more open and socially inclusive
culture and religion and (iii) introducing a radical concern for
the dispossessed and weaker sections of the Kerala society.
This is what we call today the preferential option for the
poor. In the Liberation Theology, this concern is taken
seriously. We need to translate the legacy of Reformation
into living traditions . . . It is not possible to hand down
legacy to anyone as a right of paternal property. With
determination and constant effort we need to appropriate it
in each generation. As members of the future generation we
need to remember what others did for us. (cf. Sib.44:10-13.)
The task before us is to enlarge and re-interpret what we
have received.
We have a pedagogical responsibility in our ministry to
hand over the faith tradition to the posterity as we read in
Ps.78:1-4: “. . . things that we have heard and known, that
our fathers have told us “(v.3).The glory of Christian ministry
is rooted in responsible stewardship. The basic question to
be asked is whether we are faithful in our vocation. We need
to remember Rom.12:11. ”Keep the spirit of service at the
boiling point” (Barclay). For this, partnership in mission must
be encouraged as both men and women are joint heirs of the
divine treasures (1Pet.3:7) the poetic meditation of
Rabindranath Tagore is worth recalling: “Give me the
strength to make my love fruitful in service.” Service is the
rent we pay for our room on earth as someone has rightly
said. Christian ministerial responsibility assumes different
shades in socio-political and cultural contexts as harbingers
of costly grace.
3. A minister is not a manager, but a leader
In Mk. 7: 37 we read “Jesus has done all things well.” The
Greek word “Kalos” in the text is quite illustrative. Road to
success is not straight, but there is a curve called failure.
“My last mistake is my best teacher” is a wisdom saying
by APJ Abdulkalam. We need to recall the oft-quoted African
proverb: “If you are fast, go alone; if you go far, go together.”
In the pastoral ministry, the glory of working together is a
pastoral norm for all ages. St. Paul worked with over 150
people in his ministerial travels. He is scarcely found without
companions. (See the article by E. Earle Ellis “Paul and his
co-workers” (NTS Vol. XV 11, 1970-71, p.437-452). In
Pastoral ministry we need to know the difference between a
leader and a manager: There are three classes of people:
those who see; those who see when they are shown and
those who do not see (Leonardo da Vinci). Whether one is
great or not, he or she is judged by what he or she leaves
behind. The age old biblical norm of leadership-advice given
by Mordecai to Esther is worth remembering: “If you keep
silence, you and your family will perish” (Esther 4:13-14).
Silence is golden; but the conspiracy of silence is devilish.
“In an age of universal deceit, telling the truth is a
revolutionary act” (George Orwell). In the Human Rights
Manual, the warning given by Martin Nimbler (1892-1984) is
written in golden letters. To quote, In Germany, the Nazis,
first they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade
unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a
trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not
speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for
me—and there was no one left to speak for me.” Voltaire, the
French Philosopher, is right when he said, “Every man is
guilty of all the good he did not do”. In an article, under the
title, “The Respect Paradigm”, Noemi Tasarra-Twigg gives
us 5-guidelines for us to follow how to make people respect
us in our pilgrimage of life. They are: i) be genuinely
26 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
interested in people and their concerns; ii) learn how to be
humble; iii) don’t be a doormat; iv) be open to other ideas
and v) deliver on your promises. Leadership is a combination
of strategy and character. A good leadership is revealed
through the management of 4 -Ms: men, material, money
and machinery. There are several models of leadership in the
Bible particularly of Moses, Nehemiah and above all Jesus.
What is required is a combination of pastoral and prophetic
vision in ministry. The three ingredients of ministry-
commitment to God, compassion for people and passion for
justice- are required for a transformative leadership.
4. Character and strategy
Following a Christian strategy is very important in our
ministerial vocation. Let me refer to an anecdote told by
Antony de Mello. A man began to give large doses of cod
liver oil to his Doberman because he had been told that the
stuff was good for dogs .Each day he would hold the head of
the protesting dog between his knees force its jaws and pour
the liquid down its throat. One day he dog broke loose and
spilt the oil on the floor. Then, to the man’s great surprise, it
returned to lick the spoon. That is when he discovered that
what the dog had been fighting was not oil, but his method
of administration”. The great temptation of the minister is to
entertain false presentations and irrelevant strategies to
preserve the timeless.
Let us now look at the leadership traits about which Gordon
E Fadies rightly said, “If you don’t stand for something, you
will fall for anything”. The difference between a leader and a
manager must be remembered: (i) The leader innovates-the
manager maintains. (ii) The leader develops-the manger
relies on systems. (iii)The leader relies on his vision and
delegates- the manger counts on controls. iv) The leader
counts on trust-the manger on texts. (v) The leader does the
right thing- the manager does things right vi) The leader does
not waste his time to do – the manager believes in
procrastination for reasons of his own. To which group do
we belong to?
The work ethics of Azim Premji (Wipro) provide good
directions in fulfilling our ministerial tasks: (i) Begin with our
strength; ii) a rupee earned is far more valuable than five
found; (iii) when you lose, don’t lose the lesson; iv) we need
to live with humility recognizing the worth of others
(cf.Phil.2:4) Strive for excellence; vi) never give up in the
face of adversity; vii) be open to change; viii) and don’t
compromise on values like honesty, integrity, consideration
etc..
Conclusion
Our concern is to deliver God’s concerns in Christ as the
action plans of Christian ministry. What we are is more
important than what we have. What St. Paul said to the
Elders of Ephesus in his farewell speech is to be
remembered in pastoral ministry: “You yourselves know
how I lived among you. . . I did not shrink from declaring to
you the whole counsel of God. . . I coveted no one’s silver or
gold or apparel . . . . “(Acts.20:17-38).
The Christian Priesthood in the 21st Century
Dr. Zac Varghese, London
I wonder whether I should pay attention to the
common wisdom that Jean- Paul Sartre 2 expressed
as an introduction to his famous discourse in Paris in
1945 on ‘Existentialism and Humanism’: “. . . that
you must not oppose that powers-that-be; that you
must not fight against superior forces; must not
meddle in matters that are above your station. . . .”
Therefore, it is with a certain degree of diffidence I
am venturing to write about priesthood. Recent
events in churches of all denominational colours
make me very sad because the noble word ‘priest’
has changed over the last hundred or so years,
certainly after the second world war.
Therefore, it did not surprise me to read about the
pronouncement of Pope Francis that ‘being a priest
is not a job, of fulfilling a job contract, but it is a
gift from God.’ He was preaching to a group of
priests and bishops who were celebrating the Silver
Jubilee of their consecration on 19 th September,
2019 at the chapel of the Pope’s residence at
‘Domus Sanctae Marthe’. He went on to say, “Those
who turn ordained ministry into an occupation ‘lose
the heart of the ministry, lose the gaze of Jesus who
looked upon all of us and told us, ‘Follow me.’” The
text of the sermon was based on 1 Tim. 4: 12-16. He
told his audience that they should not lose the gift
God has given them. When ordained ministry is not
seen and treasured as a gift, he said, “deviations”
emerge, starting with “the worst ones, which are
terrible, to the more everyday ones that make us
base our ministry on ourselves and not on the
gratitude of gift and love for he who gave us this gift,
the gift of ministry.” “Effort, intelligence and also a
bit of shrewdness are needed to safeguard this gift
properly”, he added. The Pope also stressed the
importance of proclaiming the Gospel. He concluded
by praying and saying that priests see their ministry
first as a gift, then as a service and that they should
never become “businessmen, fixers or adopt other
attitudes that make them stray from the Lord.” We
should prayerfully ponder why the Pope was forced
to remind those priests with 25 years’ experience of
ministry with these very basic facts.
How did the Christian priesthood evolve?
The Old Testament priesthood was established
during the time of Exodus at Mount Sinai, when
Moses was instructed to appoint the house of
1 Jean-Paul Sartre, ‘Existentialism and Humanism, Metuhen,
Publishing Ltd., 1973, page 25.
27 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
Aaron, and the house of Levi, to carry out sacrificial
and ceremonial functions as prescribed in the Law
(Ex. 28: 41). One from the Aaronic lineage was
chosen and ordained as high priest for life (Lev.
21:10; Num. 20:26). The descendants of Levi served
in the temple in subordinate roles (Num. 3-4; 1
Chron. 9:28-32; 23: 26-32). From then on, priests
exercised considerable authority and power in Israel,
as mediators and arbiters of every area and aspect
of life. The Aaronic priesthood filled an important role
in the divine plan for the people of God before the
coming of Jesus Christ; this in a way prefigured and
prepared the way for the high priestly royal
priesthood of Jesus Christ as we read in the letter to
the Hebrews (Heb. 10: 5-7). Christ’s entire life on
earth was an act of his priesthood. He came to heal
a fractured-world. Finally, as a priest and a victim,
he offered himself totally at Calvary in obedience to
the will of the Father for the salvation of mankind.
The following verses in Hebrew give a picture of
Jesus Christ’s continuous mediation on behalf of us
as our high priest. “But because Jesus lives forever, he
has a permanent priesthood. Therefore he is able to
save completely those who come to God through him,
because he always lives to intercede for them. Such a
high priest truly meets our need—one who is holy,
blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the
heavens. Unlike the other high priests, he does not need
to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and
then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins
once and for all when he offered himself. For the law
appoints as high priests men in all their weakness; but the
oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who
has been made perfect forever” (Hebrew 10: 24-28).
The Christian Priesthood:
The Church’s model of ministry and priesthood is based
on the ministry of Jesus Christ. After the Pentecost and
the formation of house and Synagogue fellowships, we
begin to see the appointment of ‘elders’ as the leaders of
these groups. From these early informal beginnings we
begin to see the development of ministries through
apostles, prophets, evangelists, deacons, pastors and
bishops. Women were also involved in some of these
ministries during apostolic times. However, the nature of
the ministry is not one of status and power, but a servant
ministry. It is about having a called out experience of
vocation as a set apart member of the faith community,
the local church. This is to exercise a particular service,
according to one’s God-given gift, for the good of the
whole community. Anyone who has read the first edition
of Archbishop Michael Ramsey’s book, ‘The Christian
Priest Today’3,4 would realise the importance that he has
given to priest as a watchman, interpreter and weaver. In
2004, another Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan
Williams5, made a memorable speech on the same theme
at the occasion of the 150th anniversary of Rippon
theological college at Cuddesdon. These men of faith
have described the ordained priest as “a man of theology,
a man of reconciliation, a man of prayer, and a man of the
Eucharist; displaying, enabling and involving the life of the
Church.” Therefore, priesthood is the composite of all
these and much more under the divine guidance and
discipleship. A priest is also like a conductor of a
philharmonic orchestra. When we enter a concert hall,
find our seats, and listen with anticipation as the
members of the orchestra tune their instruments - the
sound is discordant, not melodic. But the tuning is simply
a prelude to the symphony. Doubts and unbelief are
areas, which need fine tuning. A good conductor would
help us to fine tune our lives to reach the harmony
needed for living in a melodic faith community, where
everyone has a significant contribution to make; he or she
would help us to enjoy the heavenly symphonic orchestra
in our parishes and communities.
Priesthood of Laity
When we consider the importance of the priesthood of
ordained ministry, we should not forget the responsibility
and involvement of the priesthood of laity. St. Peter, in his
first epistle, referred to laity as a chosen race and royal
priesthood. “But you are a chosen people, a royal
priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that
you may declare praises of him who called you out of the
darkness into his wonderful light” (1Peter 2: 9). This is
indeed the ordination certificate and legitimacy of lay
people to be responsible and committed members of a
ministerial team of the local parish. Where do lay people
fit into the ministry of an ordained priest?
Thus, all Christians have the right to go directly to God
through Jesus Christ, our High Priest (Heb. 4:14-16).
When one obeys the gospel of Christ, he is added to the
body of Christ and is thereby part of God's holy
priesthood. Heb. 10:19-22 says, "Therefore, brethren,
having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of
Jesus, by a new and living way opened for us through the
curtain, that is, his body and since we have a great priest
over the house of God, let us draw near to God with a
sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts
sprinkled to cleanse us from an evil conscience and
having our bodies washed with pure water." It is good to
2 Michael Ramsey, ‘The Christian Priest Today’, SPCK, 1972 administrators, elected committee members, members of
3 Zac Varghese, FOCUS, October, 2018, Vol.6 (4), page 9.
4http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/sermons_speeche
s/040528.html
28 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
remember five characteristics and responsibilities of this
priesthood as described in Malachi 2: 5-7:
1. Every priest should remember that he or she is an
agent and herald of God. It is a covenant of life and
peace.
2. He or she should understand the will of God and make
it known to others under his/her care.
3. S/he should quietly and honestly walk with God. This is
a sole purpose of creation. Therefore, they should be ever
diligent not only to speak about God but also to maintain
continuous communion with him.
4. Most importantly, they should guard against over-
familiarity with God, which results in a weakening of
devotion. In everything the giving of glory to God should
the priest’s primary concern and preoccupation.
5. The aim and purpose of a priest’s life is turn people to
God and show them the right path. S/he should never be
content with statutory worships and preaching.
Kerygma (preaching), diakonia (service) and koinonia
fellowship) are the essence of priestly ministry. If we as
lay people are bold in claiming our royal priesthood, are
we serious about our God-given responsibilities
associated with the priesthood? Do we see God as one
who understands our needs and is ready to help us? His
voice is ‘still and small;’ we often drown that voice with
our discontent, rebellion and even laziness. Therefore, we
need to learn to be quiet before God. Cardinal Manning
said that the problem of Judas was his over-familiarity
with the holiness of Jesus; this can indeed be a problem
in the mere ritualization of our worship.
Canonically ordained priests of our churches tend to be
mostly conservative in their outlook and approach, trying
to limit the vision of God within the bounds of the codes,
rituals, traditions, and constitutions of institutionalised
churches. These priests hold on to rigid understanding
and revelations of the past, while priests with prophetic
vision trust in an infinite God and worship Him who holds
the future of humanity in His hands. Prophets seek to
understand God by reading the signs of the time and
express the will of God in all sorts of ways. We need to
develop organic partnership with ordained and lay
priesthood for God’s mission. Let God’s glory be our
supreme concern in everything that we do. Prayer is at
the centre of this ministry.
If the ministry is to be a team ministry, how do we define
the membership of the team? Is this limited to just
the Parish Church Council, Church Wardens, vice
president, secretary, trustees, and Lay Readers? The
local church always needs a strong lay-centred ministerial
team for the continuity of its mission, particularly in the
contexts of short three year terms of ordained ministers
in some churches like that of the Mar Thoma Church and
five year terms in the Methodist tradition. The ministry
here means service to the community. This membership
is not a status symbol; it is a response to a call and an
enrolment for servant ministry. What is important in parish
ministry is that each member actively contributes to the
good of the whole community through responsible
participation and exercise of their God-given talents. A
biblical church is a ‘church of the people and not church
for the people’ with a decentralised ministry.
Since priesthood seems to have attracted a lot of bad
press in recent years, it is important for laity to appreciate
their responsibility in God’s mission and for providing
pastoral care for various communities. We all have the
experience of dedicated parish priests and bishops who
are passionate about their calling and vocation that
become exhausted by all sorts of demands people put on
them. Any ordained priest who is passionate about
ministry and who makes himself or herself available to
everyone at all times, may become a sort of blotting
paper by absorbing the worries and needs of others may
get burned out due to compassion fatigue. Preservation
of physical and emotional health, rest and efficient time
management are important for a parish priest. A priest’s
life is not always administering sacraments and other
official duties; he has to recharge his batteries through
silent meditation, prayer, recreation and fellowship. Lay
people should appreciate this and provide support as
active members of a team ministry. Bishops also get
isolated; they also need help to become effective
overseers of ministers and ministries.
The Mission of God:
It is important to equip ourselves for facing difficulties and
challenges in the ministry and not get satisfied by living in
comfortable zones of life. God’s mission (Missio Dei) as
opposed to the comfortable ‘mission of the church’ is all
about going to the other side, which is risky and
challenging. This is what we learn from the story of
‘Abram’ and his calling. Abram is asked to abandon the
29 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
familiar, comfortable and the habitual, and to go to a land
he had never seen before. It is a faith pilgrimage into the
unknown, which is akin to the dynamic of history. Abram
had the choice, at that point, of turning his face away
from the unfamiliar terrain of history, hiding in the
undergrowth of familiar customs, ways, and possibilities,
and ‘safe in the arms’ of the given. But after the
transformation and having had the new identity as
Abraham, he decided to go to the other unknown side
and as a result he became a ‘blessing for many’.
This is beautifully illustrated in the story of ‘calming the
storm’ in Luke’s gospel (Lk.8: 22-25; Mt. 14: 22-24).
When Jesus asked his disciples, “let us go to the other
side of the lake”, and when faced with a storm – a whirl
wind, while sailing; they thought they were going to
drown. They forgot that their redeemer was with them;
they thought he was sleeping, but our redeemer never
sleeps. “. . . Indeed, he who watches over Israel will
neither slumber nor sleep” (Ps. 124:4). And when they
reached Gerasenes, which was on the other side of the
lake, they met a demon-possessed man and Jesus cured
him; this man wanted to stay with Jesus, but Jesus sent
this man away; he went and told everyone how much
Jesus had done for him. Following this many others came
to Jesus for healing. The opportunity was on the other
side. We see this again in the story of the Good
Samaritan and the Samaritan woman. The other side is
the place of mission; the other side is where new
opportunities exist. Therefore, people involved in the
mission of God should not stay put, but should go to the
other side and experience miracles of life. The diasporic
experience and opportunities opened to immigrant
Christians are fertile fields for mission.
As people are more and more disinterested in
participating in traditional worship on Sundays and other
parish-based activities, the church membership is
declining. Therefore, it is necessary to look for
opportunities where people are. We need to become
more imaginative in reaching out to people and
interacting with their needs. In order to provide a safety
net for those who themselves find marginalized by
society. Revd Rodney Marsh founded the ‘Romero
Project’ in Wakefield Diocese of the Church of England.
He commented, “I am a priest, not a social worker. My
job is to care for the souls, but what is the use of saying
to folk whose lives are in a mess, ‘God loves you, get on
with it?’,” Commenting on the ministry of Fr. Marsh,
Archbishop John Sentamu6 wrote: “We would do well to
remember that the Church is not the building in which we
worship, it is the people who put God’s love into action.
He calls us not to serve those inside the congregation,
but those outside and on the periphery of society.” In his
role as the Archbishop of York, he spends a lot of time
5 John Sentamu, ‘Faith Stories’, DLG, 2013, page 79.
meeting people and becomes involved with all sorts of
issues affecting them, In 2015, he got to know his
Archdiocese intimately during his ‘Diocesan Pilgrimage of
Prayer’, witnessing and blessing where he spent weeks
walking 1,578 miles covering every corner of the Diocese.
He was indeed meeting people and seeing the problems
of people who are on the other side, ‘on the periphery of
society’. It is indeed the same sentiment that an earlier
Archbishop of Canterbury, William Temple, expressed
during the Second World War: “The Church is the only
society that exists for the benefit of those who are not its
members.”
This problem is slowly being addressed in the Church of
England through other new initiatives such as ‘Emerging
Churches’ and ‘Fresh Expression of Church’. ‘Messy
Church’ and ‘Taize-style worship’. These are ways of
going over to the other side for supporting people beyond
one’s own close knit homogenous groups. Let us learn to
submit ourselves to be guided by the Holy Spirit. Priests
themselves need to be liberated from the demands of
their job descriptions in order to be all comprehensive,
ultra-efficient, multi-talented, good communicators and
super-human performers. And lay people need to wake
up from their illusion that it is enough to pay the
membership fee and occasionally attend church on
Sunday mornings for the Eucharist. We must have a
longing for justice, love and relationship. We must be
taking on such tasks as working with people on margins
of society, the poor, and the voiceless and creating peace
where there is conflict.
Yes, indeed, as Pope Francis emphasised: ‘being a
priest is not a job, of fulfilling a job contract, but
it is a gift from God.’ When we appreciate and
thank Pope Francis for his ministry, it is worth
remembering the words of prophet Malachi in and
around 450 B.C. “. . . For the lips of a priest ought to
preserve knowledge, because he is the messenger of
the LORD Almighty and people seek instruction from his
mouth. But you have turned from the way and by your
teaching have caused many to stumble; you have violated
the covenant with Levi,” says the LORD Almighty. “So I
have caused you to be despised and humiliated before all
the people, because you have not followed my ways but
have shown partiality in matters of the law” (Mal. 2: 1-9).
Have we learnt anything about priesthood and ministry
over the last 2500 years? Is the time running out for us
too? Therefore, let us remain faithful to the truth delivered
to us in Christ; let us have God-given courage to face
challenges of the 21st century, particularly those facing
ordained ministry in some churches and be content in
prayer to leave the future to our Lord and our saviour,
Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. It is important to build a
partnership ministry incorporating both ordained and lay
priesthood to cultivate God’s kingdom values.
30 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
BORN IN A CAVE
(A Reflection of the Christmas Saga)
Revd Dr. M. J. Joseph, Kottayam
BABY JESUS,
You were born in a cave.
You were laid in a manger
Your parents had no option, but to do what they could.
They knocked at the DOOR OF HOPE at an Inn
And heard the voice of the inner keeper: “Sorry, Sorry, . .”
“No space in the inn for a pregnant woman”.
I know, you, Jesus, breathed the polluted air in the cave
I know you had no mask to protect yourself.
I know noise pollution was harming your eardrums.
I know Mary could not quench your thirst with a few
drops of pure water.
I know your first cry was a nuisance to the innkeeper and
to the animals in the stable.
I know there were none to see the smile of your mother,
Mary, on your birth.
You might have heard the squeaks of rats, brays of
donkeys and neighs of horses.
The flora and the fauna around you did not know who you
are!
But you communicated with them by the words of
silence.
I know silence is also the voice of dissent.
The unexpected turn of events happen even to the
righteous,
But the God of Grace will give them strength to bear it
with fortitude.
You were wrapped in swaddling clothes.
Your kenosis is the ABC of human pilgrimage towards
eternity.
Why did the Destiny lead you to be born in a cave?
It is in the cave of human heart the power of sin rules;
The power of Death resides.
I want to cleanse the pollution in human hearts;
I was born in a cave for the cave dwellers and its owners;
For the sons of the soil,
And for the ones on the margin.
I want you to stand for the just order (mishpat) and to sing
for peace on earth
I want you to shout for the right and the generous deeds
(sadaqah)
I want you to live and to manifest the power of love
(agape) as the Shepherds did
And be known as the Aroma of the Divine in the
oikoumene.
THE HOLY BOOKS - Part 4
Dr. Ian Fry, Honorary Postdoctoral Associate, University of Divinity, Melbourne
[This article is written for the 8th Holy Book Conference held at
Kuala Lumpur in April 2019 under the auspices of the United
Religious Initiative (URI). Part-2 of this paper appeared in the
July issue of the FOCUS, 2019, Vol. 7 (3), page 26-28. Part-3 of
this paper appeared in the October issue of the FOCUS, Oct.
2019, Vol.7 (4) page 30-32.]
On the Roman Road
For more than three centuries after Pope Stephen II’s
successful bid to increase his power base by means of
the fake Donation, the church struggled on in a bid to
offset the territorial gains of Islam and the tendency for
Europe’s kings and princes to accommodate the foreign
religion in the interests of trade and security. Successive
popes were angry about Jerusalem remaining in Muslim
hands, and various proselytizing ploys were used to try to
reverse it. Eventually Pope Gregory VII devised a plan to
force Christian kings and princes to support him in a
crusade to recover control of the sacred city after 400
years of complex interaction between the three
Abrahamic faiths.
The final trigger for his plan was the invasion by Seljuk
Turks who swept through the Byzantine Empire, halved
its area, captured Jerusalem, attacked the Christians and
forced large numbers of Jews to flee. However, intrigue to
determine who would control the church in Russia had
simmered between Rome and Byzantium ever since the
Caliph allowed the Khazar Khan to determine the religious
and political allegiance of his semi-nomadic Turkic-
speaking peoples – Islam, Christianity or Judaism. He
chose Judaism and independence Rome was infuriated.
Rome and Constantinople were competing for control of
Scandinavia-Black Sea trade while Rome pursued
barbaric Christianization of the Russian principality that
encouraged the prince to favour Islam and resulted in
direct attacks on the Khazar Khanate and its destruction.7
To resolve his diplomatic crisis the prince married a sister
of the Byzantine emperor and invited the patriarch to
send missionaries throughout Russia. It was the caliph’s
turn to be infuriated and confrontation across the
Bosphorus became more bitter. How can anyone say
‘religion doesn’t cause wars?’
7
The circumstances of the destruction of the Khaza Khanate, and its
significance are widely debated. Sources consulted include: Richard
Pipes, Russia under the Old Regime (Harmondsworth:
Penguin/Peregrine, 1977). pp. 35-6,157.Alfred M. Lilienthal, What
Price Israel? (Chicago: Henry Regnery Company, 1953). pp. 220-22.
Martin Gilbert, Jewish History Atlas (London: Weidenfeld &
Nicolson, 1976). p.26. Roth, History of the Jews. pp. 158-62.
31 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
In the meantime, bishops in Jerusalem had stepped up
proselytizing using “miraculous” descending fire liturgies
at Easter at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. They
refused to stop so the caliph put an end it by destroying
the Church in 1009. When an infuriated Pope Sergius
failed to gain support from ‘his’ princes for a ‘Battle of the
Lord’ he signed a peace treaty, and rebuilding began in
1048. Sergius’ successor, Pope Gregory VII, dissatisfied
with the princes, demanded a doctrinal justification for a
Holy War that would strengthen his personal authority by
playing on their moral subservience to him and their
‘sacred duty’ to secure the city that was central to the
beliefs of all three faiths. His twenty-seven-point ‘Dictatus
Papae’ was promulgated in 1075 to promote Crusades to
recover Jerusalem and Spain, and to ensure that the
Roman papacy would remain dominant and the basis of
Catholic self-understanding thereafter.8 Thus, Dictatus
Papae set the pattern for much that was to follow. Its key
clauses are that only the Roman pontiff can be called
universal; it is lawful for only him to make new laws
according to the needs of the time and to assemble new
congregations; all princes shall kiss only his feet; only his
name shall be spoken in the churches and is the only
name in the world; he may be permitted to depose
emperors; no chapter and no book shall be canonical
without his authority; he may be judged by no one, and
no one shall dare to condemn anyone who appeals to the
apostolic chair; if he has been canonically ordained he is
undoubtedly made a saint by the merits of St. Peter, and
he may absolve subjects from their fealty to wicked men.
According to Berman,9 by Gregory VII’s reign
Christendom had become a beleaguered citadel, which
survived mainly because its greatest enemy, Islam, had
reached the end of its lines of communication. The
church-state partnership had been dramatically abused
but the church still had a stabilizing influence after each
imperial conquest that was imposed by fear and the
8
Pope Gregory VII, "Dictatus Papae, 1075 " in The Internet Medieval
Sourcebook, ed. Paul Halsall (New York: Fordham University / Online
Reference Book for Medieval Studies, 1075). The date of
promulgation of Dictatus Papae is disputed. Some authorities say 1075,
others 1090. See Paul Halsall, ed. Internet History Sourcebooks
Project, Online Reference Book for Medieval Studies (New York,
Fordham University: Fordham Center for Medieval Studies, 2006). ,
Harold J. Berman, Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western
Legal Tradition (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983).
p.96. and Tierney, Crisis of Church and State, pp. 59 - 60.
9 Harold J. Berman. Law and Revolution: The Formation of the
Western Legal Tradition. (Cambridge. Harvard University Press. 1983)
p. 110. Berman cites Southern, Western Society, p. 27, saying that
"both the Greek and the Islamic systems were immensely richer, more
powerful, and intellectually more sophisticated than that of Western
Europe. The West was the poor relation of Byzantium."
sword in the Low Countries, Central and Northern
Europe, but the relationship soured when Gregory VII
sought to adapt it further by equating his personal
ecclesiastical power to that of universal dictator and
demanded the protection of the Vatican by all states of
the Holy Roman Empire. Dictatus Papae did not bring the
immediate response the pope wanted but twenty years
later, when Emperor Alexius appealed for his help to
secure Byzantium against the Seljuks the new pope,
Urban II, saw an opportunity to try for Jerusalem again.
Claiming that it was “imperative” for “the servants of
God” to “make a stand against the enemy” in response to
“the voice of Christ which commands your obedience,”
and as an incentive for princes and paupers alike to join a
campaign he announced that “by right of the gift of God’s
power to me,” an indulgence with remission of all
penances would be granted to those who “took the
cross” and lost their lives as martyrs, and whatever lands
or properties of the infidels the Crusaders managed to
locate (discover) or seize (possess) would belong, as
spoil, to the Christians who first seized it.10
With that incitement the first of the series of nine
crusades over two hundred years following Dictatus
Papae – a rambling, drunken disorganized affair – was
declared a success in 1099 in spite of depravity and the
destruction of Jerusalem in much the manner of
Ashurnasirpal II’s 9th century BCE victory.11 The pope’s
subordination of the state to religious authority, his
absolute denial of any wrongdoing by him personally or
by the institution of the church, his deliberate provocation
of slaughter and theft, and his claims to exalted personal
status free of any judgement did not reflect the
relationships envisaged by Jesus for the community of
the New Covenant, nor the Qur’anic statement of
Muhammad’s authority as the ‘Seal of the Prophets.’12
10 Régine Pernoud, The Crusaders: The Struggle for the Holy Land -
Urban II: The Pope of the First Crusade (Ft. Collins, CO: Ignatius
Press, 1959)
11 Frederick Turner, Beyond geography: the western spirit against the
wilderness (New York: Viking Press, 1980). p.80. The Archbishop of
Tyre described the destruction of Jerusalem and the massacre of its
population thus: The rest of the (Christian) soldiers roved through the
city in search of wretched survivors who might be hiding in the narrow
portals and byways to escape death. These were dragged out into
public view and slain like sheep. Some formed into bands and broke
into houses where they laid violent hands on the heads of families, on
their wives, children and their entire households. These victims were
either put to the sword or dashed headlong to the ground from some
elevated place so that they perished miserably. Each marauder claimed
as his own in perpetuity the particular house which he had entered,
together with all it contained.
12
Qur’an 33:41. (Al Islam on line.) Muhammad is not the father of any
of your men, but he is the Messenger of Allah and the Seal of the
Prophets; and Allah has full knowledge of all things.
32 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
By the time the Reconquista to recover Spain was
launched in 1212 the country’s ‘Golden Age’ of Jewish,
Christian and Muslim scholarship had already been
crushed by Yusuf bin Tashfin who replaced the religion-
tolerant Muslim king and expelled all Jews and Christians
in 1148. Among the exiles was Maimonides, the
Sephardic rabbi-philosopher-physician-astronomer-
lawyer (see part three), who, with a contemporary, the
Muslim philosopher Ibn Rushd, was among key figures of
the Golden Age. Ibn Rushd, Western Europe’s ‘spiritual
father,’ taught that there is no conflict between religion
and philosophy, and they are different ways of reaching
the same truth. This was a challenge to both Islam, which
was pursuing extreme Shari’ah law, and the church,
which claimed to be the sole arbiter in matters of factual
truth and that there could be no debate after it had made
a pronouncement on the basis of faith. Ibn Rushd also
proposed that “the human soul is a separate substance
ontologically identical with the active intellect; and when
this active intellect is embodied in an individual human it
is the material intellect…”13
Two of Maimonides’ classic works relate to covenantal
understanding: the Code of Jewish Law, the Mishneh
Torah, and the Guide of the Perplexed. Fourteen volumes
of the Mishneh Torah, The Laws of Kings and Their
Wars14 cover Talmudic teaching, the appointment of
kings, their responsibility in war; resettlement of Eretz
Yisrael; relations between Jews and gentiles; the Jews’
obligation to teach gentiles the seven key
commandments; re-establishment of the monarchy, and
the future Messianic Age. He wrote that at some time in
the future the Messianic King will arise, renew the dynasty
of King David, return it to its initial sovereignty, build the
Temple and gather the dispersed of Israel. He said that
anyone who does not believe in him or does not wait for
his coming denies not only the statements of other
prophets but also the Torah and Moses. He began very
deliberately with Deuteronomy 30:3–5 which is to the
effect that “your God will bring you into the land that your
ancestors possessed, and you will possess it; he will
make you more prosperous and numerous than your
ancestors.15
Maimonides supported the view of both Jesus and
Muhammad that neither the Abrahamic nor Mosaic
Covenants had been abrogated but he embittered both
the church and Islam by proposing that there can be no
greater stumbling block than Christianity, that Jesus of
Nazareth who aspired to be the Messiah and was
13 H. Chad Hillier, "Ibn Rushd (Averroes) (1126 - 1198 CE)," in
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy., ed. James Fieser .
14 Moses Maimonides, Mishneh Torah: The Laws of Kings and Their
Wars, ed. Eliyahu Touger, trans. Eliyahu Touger, First of new
translation with commentaries ed., 14 vols., vol. 14 (New York:
Moznaim Publishing Corp, 1987).
15
New Revised Standard Version English translation, Deut. 30:4–5.
Emphasis added.
executed by the court had been alluded to in Daniel’s
prophecy as one of “the vulgar among your people [who]
exalt themselves in an attempt to fulfil the vision, but they
shall stumble,” (Daniel 11:14), and that “all the deeds of
Jesus of Nazareth and that Ishmaelite who arose after
him will only serve to prepare the way for the Messiah’s
coming and the improvement of the whole world,
[motivating the nations] to serve God together.”16
One down: Dictatus Papae. Three to go
In 1442, more than three centuries after Dictatus Papae,
Pope Eugenius IV promulgated the Bull of Union with the
Copts. It was based on the teaching that holy sacrifices
and sacraments, because they were instituted by
Judaism to signify something in the future, and although
they were adequate for the divine cult of that age, once
Jesus was signified by them as the Lord and had come
they were no longer relevant and the sacraments of the
New Testament had their beginning. Therefore whoever,
after the Passion, placed his hope in the legal
prescriptions and submits himself to them as necessary
for salvation and as if faith in Christ without them could
not save, sins mortally.17 Rome denounced Christians
who continued to observe the practices of circumcision,
the Jewish Sabbath and other legal prescriptions that
were practiced by the Copts as strangers to the faith of
Christ in an attempt to reunite them with other Christian
groups. The exercise failed miserably, driving a wedge
between Christian communities, as well as between
Christians and Jews, by substituting one law for another
and, in particular, banning circumcision.
Within ten years the Balkans and several states in Eastern
Central Europe were either under Ottoman rule or, being
threatened by it, were accommodating its interests. The
remnants of the Byzantine Empire were isolated and
directly threatened, and the rapid expansion of the
Ottoman Empire and growing Muslim influence in Europe
posed a real threat to Rome’s role and papal ambitions.
The bull Dum Diversas was devised to encourage
Portugal to project Christendom southward into Africa to
offset the church’s loss of influence in Europe and Islam’s
growing influence in sub-Saharan Africa. Citing Apostolic
Authority Eugenius IV granted the kings of Spain and
Portugal full and free permission to invade, search out,
capture, and subjugate any “Saracens and pagans and
any other unbelievers” to perpetual slavery.18 It thus
legitimized and facilitated the Portuguese West African
slave trade, and ushered in the Age of Discovery.
16
Maimonides. Mishneh Torah. P.236.
17 Norman P. Tanner (ed.). Decrees of the ecumenical councils. 2
volumes (in Greek and Latin). Washington, DC: Georgetown
University Press 2008.
18 Pope Nicholas V, "Dum Diversas. Bull," in Select Historical
Documents of the Middle Ages, ed. Paul Halsall (London: George Bell
1910).
33 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1
Dum Diversas was shocking and marks the last act of the
Third Epoch.
Three down. One to go
The world didn’t have to wait very long. In May 1453, the
church and its associated powers had to contend with
the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople and the end of
Byzantium. Rome lost access to the Black Sea states and
much of its trade and influence over the churches in
states that had relations with the Ottomans or found an
accommodation with them necessary, and there was no
will among the princes for an attempt to recover
Constantinople. The Roman Catholic Church said the
future of Christianity was at risk,19 but in reality, it was
only the influence of the papacy.
Soon after the fall of Constantinople, Pope Nicholas
promulgated Romanus Pontifex in a bid to minimize risks
by giving basically the same authority to all Catholic kings
and prices as Spain and Portugal already enjoyed. His
aims were the prior occupation of all new countries, a
final overwhelming crusade against the heart of Islam
from the rear, and raising funds to finance that crusade.
The theological justification for the bull was the statement
attributed to Jesus that: All authority in heaven and on
earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make
disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching
them to obey everything that I have commanded you. (Mt.
28:18-20)310
However, Jesus said nothing about subjugating,
enslaving, exploiting and instructing them in canon law,
church creeds or doctrine, and the Qur’an anticipates and
insistently teaches that the return of Jesus will precede
the Hour of Judgment and involve him in a preparatory or
participatory role in the process of judgement. The church
therefore has no basis to teach that Muslims are enemies
of Jesus and must be destroyed. The two critical ayat are
complemented by about 70 hadith entries in the Sahîh Al-
Bukhâri, including the one here.
And there is none of the People of the Book but must
believe in him before his death; and on the Day of
Judgment he will be a witness against them. (S.4:157-
159)
And (Jesus) shall be a Sign (for the coming of) the Hour
(of Judgment): therefore have no doubt about the (Hour),
but follow ye Me: this is a Straight Way. (S.43 A61-64)
"By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, son of Mary (Jesus)
will shortly descend amongst you people (Muslims) as a
just ruler and will break the cross and kill the pig and
19 James Lees-Milne, Saint Peter's - the story of Saint Peter's Basilica
in Rome (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1967).
abolish the Jizya.311 (Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 3. Hadith no.
425)
REASON FOR THE SEASON
Lal Varghese, Esq., Dallas
Many of Europe’s crowned heads preferred to make
peace with the Ottoman Empire. They were not interested Jesus was chosen to be born as a carpenter’s son in a
in more papal wars, but neither would they allow Portugal manger and to be buried in borrowed tomb. The one who
and Spain to take exclusive control of whatever world created the whole world chose to be born in a manger.
was “out there” to be discovered and exploited. They The one who has our destiny in His hands chose to
acted independently and the pope’s bid to gain total submit to His father’s will to die on the cross. We
control of world affairs by sponsoring subordinate celebrate Christmas without knowing the reason for the
monarchies and principalities had far-reaching season. We often forget the child born in the manger
consequences that he had not anticipated. when we celebrate His birth. This child’s life and His
death on the cross should be able to change our life and
For a long time Romanus Pontifex was the critical factor the life of others around through us, and our parish life.
in determining the pattern of world events and
relationships between communities of faith and, in He became poor so that we may become rich because of
particular, relationships between Christianity, Judaism His grace. When we live in a market culture we often
and Islam. The decision to promulgate that bull, and every forget about the Christ. Christmas should be an
consequence of it, involve neglect or abuse of obligations experience of emptying ourselves. Birth of Jesus Christ
under covenant. Its immediate effect was to legitimize the was a painful experience for Joseph and Mary. But they
expansion of slavery, encourage exploitation and the age- listened and obeyed God so that their agony became our
old practice of military colonization. None of Judaism, joy. Unless and until we experience the pain and agony of
Christianity or Islam have unblemished records, but others we cannot celebrate the joy of Christmas in its true
attacks on Jews and Muslims for involvement in slavery meaning.
are essentially defensive exercises by Christians.20 The
Christmas must be an embodiment of the sacrifice and
legitimizing of slavery and imperial domination
obedience to God. Our celebrations should reflect the
demonstrated absolute rejection of the church’s basic
pain and sufferings of others, then only it would become
obligation under the New Covenant, and make its primary
real celebration. God is the master carpenter who created
responsibility under the covenant unattainable without a
the whole world. Are we still searching the Christ in the
comprehensive reassessment of its self-understanding.
manger or the crucified Christ on the cross? His birth and
Romanus Pontifex was an absolute travesty of the death should challenge the way we live and should
Gospels and the concept of covenant. It provided enable us to transform ourselves, and the life of others
confirmation that the pope and the church hierarchy had around us. The resurrected Christ’s presence in our lives
totally rejected the concept of Universal Covenant and should enable us to face the challenges of the world.
the guidelines for conduct towards one’s neighbours. It
extended the benefits of papal authority to additional
Christian kingdoms while concurrently protecting
Portugal’s rights by forbidding other countries from
encroaching on the territory reserved for it. It eliminated
any need for the explorer/invaders to exercise care and
responsibility because they had papal assurance of divine
blessing for their ventures and virtually unconditional
forgiveness for foul play. Indeed the bull Romanus
Pontifex ushered in both the European Colonial Era and
the Fourth Epoch. It was a time of change and often
brutal confrontation.

20
See Thomas Wiedemann, Greek and Roman Slavery, First; ed.
(London: Croom Helm Ltd, 1981; reprint, Croom Helm 1983;
Routledge1988, 1992, 1994). Catherine Hezser, Jewish Slavery in
Antiquity (Oxford: Oxford University Press., 2005). Syed Ameer Ali,
The Spirit of Islam: A History of the Evolution of Ideas of Islam with a
Life of the Prophet (London: Christophers, 1922). Ehud R. Toledano,
Slavery and Abolition in the Ottoman Middle East (Seattle: University
of Washington Press, 1998

34 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 1

Ten Years of Metropolitan Alvares Julius Research Project (2009-2019)
Ben Kunjacko – OCP
About MARP
The year 2019 marks the tenth year of Metropolitan
Alvares Julius Research Project (MARP). Launched in
2009 (with the historic visit to Brahmavar Western Rite
Community), MARP is an exclusive research project on
Western Rite Orthodox communities of Oriental
Orthodox Churches with special reference to Syriac-
Malankara Orthodox Churches. The research focuses
on the known and unknown aspects of the missionary
works of Saintly Metropolitan Alvares Julius,
Archbishop Rene Vilatte and their companions.
These missionary champions and their Independent
Catholic movements (Western Rite Orthodox) were not
limited to religious sphere; rather they played an
important role in social transformation. Over the years
MARP became instrumental in publishing several
documents that had not previously been available.
Under the leadership of Dr. Ajesh T. Philip the research
Board was able to rediscover many former Independent
Catholic mission fields, communities and Church
buildings.
The project boasts two research publications, several
historical rediscoveries and findings. Please visit this
link for more information-
http://theorthodoxchurch.info/alvares/our-journey-in-
pictures/
Structure and Ownership of MARP
MARP is a Western Rite Orthodox research under the
Center for Orthodox Studies (COS), an autonomous
center under the Orthodoxy Cognate PAGE Society. Dr.
Ajesh T. Philip is the Head and Chief Research Officer
of MARP. He also serves as the Chief Overseer of
COS. MARP has inspired a large number of individuals
and institutions to take up research studies on Western
Rite Orthodox communities. Please visit this link for
more information on the MARP Research Board -
http://theorthodoxchurch.info/blog/ocrc/about/cos-
board/marp-research-board/
Partnership and Associations
MARP and Center for Orthodox Studies have been
associating with a number of Churches, institutions,
and individuals. Chief partnership with the Ecumenical
Relations Department of the Malankara Church was
formally established in 2018. Intense research
associations are in progress with the British Orthodox
Patriarchate and the Christian Catholic Church Canada.
MARP continue to receive immense support and
guidance from Patriarch Abba Seraphim and Bishop
Serge Thériault. In 2019 COS and MARP began an
35 | P a g e F O C U S J a n u a r y 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o :
1
independent association with Rohit Gupta, the author
of the book -
'Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church: Everything about
Indian Orthodox Church'.
Achievements
MARP is the first Western Rite Orthodox research
project with special reference to Syriac and Malankara
Orthodox Churches. It is the longest and most
expensive Western Rite Orthodox research project in
the Indian Sub-Continent. One of our biggest blessing
and achievement was in the year 2018 when Patriarch
Abba Seraphim published the book 'As Far As East Is
From The West' in response to 'Western Rites of
Syriac-Malankara Orthodox Churches'.
Please visit this link for more information on MARP
achievements
http://theorthodoxchurch.info/alvares/project-
coordinators/achievements/
Finances and Accountability
Eighty percent of the research is financed by the
internal funds of Orthodoxy Cognate PAGE, whereas,
the rest twenty percentages is donated by benefactors.
The expenses include printing and publication, travel,
purchase of research materials, and office
management. The total expense of the project as of
August 2019 is eight thousand five hundred dollars. As
a part of the accountability, regular briefing on the
progress of the research project is made to the
Ecumenical Relations Dept. of the Malankara Church.
Briefing on the progress of the project is also
communicated to the Syriac Orthodox Church as well.
Fr. Abraham Thomas acts as the point of contact
between MARP Board and the Ecumenical Relations
department.
The Future
As of August 2019, MARP has successfully completed
two research phases. The Executive Council of the OCP
Society and the COS Board is expected to decide on
the future activities of MARP.
Gratitude
MARP Board is indebted to a large number of persons
and institutions for their support. We wholeheartedly
thank all our benefactors and supporters for their kind
encouragement throughout our research journey.
Please visit this link for more information on MARP
benefactors -
http://theorthodoxchurch.info/alvares/project-
coordinators/benefactors-of-ocp-marp/
Source:
OCP-COS-MARP