"No one puts new wine into old wine-skins: if he does, the wine will burst the skins, and then wine and skins are both lost. Fresh skins for new wine!" (Mark, 2:22).
It is a question of compatibility even in religious attitudes. Those who want to follow the letter of the law ignoring its spirit does not do any service to the law itself! They completely misunderstand the law and sometimes reach conclusions even contrary to the intent of the lawgiver. Similarly, when a new reality like the Kingdom of God is introduced by Jesus, strict law-keepers like the Pharisees among the Jews tend to misunderstand it. It is not that that they had never heard of the Kingdom of God or God's Sovereignty over everything. They were stuck with the old wine-skins of human traditions for the new wine of insight into the working of God's Kingdom offered by Jesus.
Jesus stressed on the importance of interior attitude over and above the external observances of religion. It is not that these observances are completely superfluous and meaningless, but that they should be conducive to fostering and developing the all-important interior attitudes of love, joy, peace, humility, service etc. In cases where the combination of the two is not possible, the interior has the right of way over the exterior, especially because the former is going to produce new and vigorous exterior attitudes.
There are many examples of this new attitude throughout the Bible. However, Jesus was not against the application of laws with social consequences as is seen in the Gospel of Mark, chapter 1, verses 40-45. Jesus insisted that the leper who was cleansed by him go to the priest and make the offering laid down by Moses for his cleansing. It was for the sake of certifying his cure so that he may be freely accepted in the community implying that the law was for his own benefit. However, when it comes to the real internal life of a person, the externals are of secondary importance as is seen from instances where Jesus severely criticized the Pharisees of his day. They failed to capture the import of laws as well as practices for spiritual growth of a person. They preferred to store new wine in old skins and needed urgent correction from someone who was above even the laws and religious practices!
Jesus took upon himself the task of correcting the errant ways of blind guides knowing very well the consequences of his actions. The most glaring irritants were connected with the breaking of the law of Sabbath instituted by God Himself. How could Jesus justify his actions in this matter that persuaded the Pharisees to declare that he could not have come from God? The justification of those actions of breaking the law of Sabbath could be summed up thus: The enforcers of the law deviated from the spirit of the law and imposed on people restrictions never meant to be part of the law. God instituted the law of Sabbath for the good of the people so that they may be helped to enter into the rest of God Himself. For, the Sabbath was meant to be a day of rest for inculcating in oneself spiritual bliss, peace and love. This was never attained by their practices at the time of Jesus.
Jesus boldly criticized the human tendency to pay lip service keeping our hearts far from God. "You neglect the commandment of God, in order to maintain the tradition of men" (Mark,7:8). Fresh skins (attitudes) are required to keep the new wine of observing the Sabbath meaningfully, praying always but fasting on appointed time, forgiving sinners, dining with them and the marginalized, keeping the hearts clean over and above the ritual cleansing etc. These are the signs of the arrival of God's Kingdom on earth to be completed and fulfilled in eternity. The observations of Jesus regarding the religious practices of his times are equally applicable to all of our practices in the name of religion. In this context, it is worthwhile to ponder over the recent judgment of the Supreme Court of India distinguishing between the religious faith and religious practices. While the Court upheld the constitutional right of everyone to profess, practice and propagate one's own faith as a requirement of the nature of secularism, it severely criticized the tendency of some to advocate any practice in the name of religion as legitimate. Whatever goes against the spirit of religion, morality, social order etc. cannot be tolerated as genuine even if it is in the name of one's own faith or religion, the Court admonished.
It is a question of compatibility even in religious attitudes. Those who want to follow the letter of the law ignoring its spirit does not do any service to the law itself! They completely misunderstand the law and sometimes reach conclusions even contrary to the intent of the lawgiver. Similarly, when a new reality like the Kingdom of God is introduced by Jesus, strict law-keepers like the Pharisees among the Jews tend to misunderstand it. It is not that that they had never heard of the Kingdom of God or God's Sovereignty over everything. They were stuck with the old wine-skins of human traditions for the new wine of insight into the working of God's Kingdom offered by Jesus.
Jesus stressed on the importance of interior attitude over and above the external observances of religion. It is not that these observances are completely superfluous and meaningless, but that they should be conducive to fostering and developing the all-important interior attitudes of love, joy, peace, humility, service etc. In cases where the combination of the two is not possible, the interior has the right of way over the exterior, especially because the former is going to produce new and vigorous exterior attitudes.
There are many examples of this new attitude throughout the Bible. However, Jesus was not against the application of laws with social consequences as is seen in the Gospel of Mark, chapter 1, verses 40-45. Jesus insisted that the leper who was cleansed by him go to the priest and make the offering laid down by Moses for his cleansing. It was for the sake of certifying his cure so that he may be freely accepted in the community implying that the law was for his own benefit. However, when it comes to the real internal life of a person, the externals are of secondary importance as is seen from instances where Jesus severely criticized the Pharisees of his day. They failed to capture the import of laws as well as practices for spiritual growth of a person. They preferred to store new wine in old skins and needed urgent correction from someone who was above even the laws and religious practices!
Jesus took upon himself the task of correcting the errant ways of blind guides knowing very well the consequences of his actions. The most glaring irritants were connected with the breaking of the law of Sabbath instituted by God Himself. How could Jesus justify his actions in this matter that persuaded the Pharisees to declare that he could not have come from God? The justification of those actions of breaking the law of Sabbath could be summed up thus: The enforcers of the law deviated from the spirit of the law and imposed on people restrictions never meant to be part of the law. God instituted the law of Sabbath for the good of the people so that they may be helped to enter into the rest of God Himself. For, the Sabbath was meant to be a day of rest for inculcating in oneself spiritual bliss, peace and love. This was never attained by their practices at the time of Jesus.
Jesus boldly criticized the human tendency to pay lip service keeping our hearts far from God. "You neglect the commandment of God, in order to maintain the tradition of men" (Mark,7:8). Fresh skins (attitudes) are required to keep the new wine of observing the Sabbath meaningfully, praying always but fasting on appointed time, forgiving sinners, dining with them and the marginalized, keeping the hearts clean over and above the ritual cleansing etc. These are the signs of the arrival of God's Kingdom on earth to be completed and fulfilled in eternity. The observations of Jesus regarding the religious practices of his times are equally applicable to all of our practices in the name of religion. In this context, it is worthwhile to ponder over the recent judgment of the Supreme Court of India distinguishing between the religious faith and religious practices. While the Court upheld the constitutional right of everyone to profess, practice and propagate one's own faith as a requirement of the nature of secularism, it severely criticized the tendency of some to advocate any practice in the name of religion as legitimate. Whatever goes against the spirit of religion, morality, social order etc. cannot be tolerated as genuine even if it is in the name of one's own faith or religion, the Court admonished.
No comments:
Post a Comment