Os vinte cinco anos da Fundação Oriente em Goa...
Entrevista ao Dr. Carlos Monjardino, Presidente do Conselho da Administração da Fundação Oriente, por Óscar de Noronha
ON – Senhor doutor, muito boa tarde, e obrigado por nos receber! E desde já parabéns pelo jubileu da prata da Delegação da Fundação Oriente em Goa!
CM – Boa tarde e muito obrigado! É sempre um prazer.
ON – Que balanço faz aos últimos 25 anos?
CM – Os primeiros anos foram, não digo difíceis, mas demoraram algum tempo a passar. Tínhamos algumas limitações – não muitas, porque desde o início tivemos um grande suporte por parte de quem tinha que nos “fiscalizar”: era o ICCR [Indian Council of Cultural Relations]. E logo a seguir quando eu fui ter com eles em Delhi, para lhes apresentar o primeiro projecto, o primeiro plano de actividades da Fundação aqui, que eu insisti que era para a Índia e não só para Goa, porque na altura, é bom saber, há 25 anos, as relações não eram as que são hoje. E, portanto, expliquei que estaríamos instalados em Goa, mas que a nossa acção ia para além de Goa também, como tinha que ser.
Nessa altura não tivemos quaisquer problemas. Analisaram o nosso plano de actividades. Houve uma única coisa que não quiseram que nós fizessemos, que foi ter uma livraria portuguesa em Goa. Não quiseram (a rir) mas isso também não teve problema nenhum, porque, passado muito pouco tempo, fizemos aqui uma feira de livros – foram duas, aliás, feitas por nosso comum amigo António Alçada Baptista, que gostava muito de Goa e que organizou muito bem essas duas feiras... foram um sucesso imenso.
Pronto, as coisas foram correndo. Fomos apoiando projectos aqui; fomos publicando algumas obras de escritores locais; também todos os anos vamos dando algumas bolsas de estudo; fomos apoiando o ensino de português que até hoje continuamos, e nós hoje temos 14 ou 15 professores de português que, de alguma maneira, têm um apoio nosso para ensinar português aqui...
E, portanto, fomos andando… Temos aquela célebre exposição que todos conhecem, do [António Xavier da] Trindade, lá na delegação da Fundação. É um pintor maior e, portanto, em qualquer sítio do mundo era conhecido como o Rembrandt daqui da zona...
ON - O Rembrandt do Oriente!
CM – ... do Oriente, e fomos surpreendidos com uma doação daquelas obras, mas que aceitámos de imediato com algumas limitações que existiam na altura... Depois adquirimos mais algumas obras do mesmo artista, mas não muitas... Também não há muitas no mercado. E agora vamos fazer uma segunda edição do Xavier Trindade com muitas obras que não foram expostas antes e que serão expostas este ano, lá nas Fontaínhas, na nossa Delegação.
ON – Muito bem. Além disso, a Fundação Oriente fez trabalhos com os nossos edifícios – com o nosso património arquitectónico; e programas de música, como o Festival do Monte!
CM – Sim, quanto à recuperação de edifícios de interesse histórico ou simplesmente arquitectónico aqui em Goa e à volta de Goa, nós, porque tínhamos a noção – o que é normal, enfim – que o que distingue Goa do resto da Índia é que tem uma componente cristã muito grande. E portanto tem as igrejas, tem as capelas e os cruzeiros por aí fora, e nós fomos ajudando nisso, mas depois também sentimos que não podíamos ficar só a apoiar essas iniciativas que nos propunham, e resolvemos ir mais longe do que isso: resolvemos apoiar também uma recuperação dum templo hindu, que para grande espanto de muitas pessoas... –mas estas coisas eu, às vezes, como se costuma dizer, tiro um coelho do chapéu... – e fizemos isso... Foi aceite pelas entidades que controlavam lá o templo hindu e recuperámos o templo hindu. Porque havia sempre umas vozes que diziam ‘porque apoiar sempre as igrejas?’... Eu, claro que tanto apoio as igrejas como apoio os templos hindus. Mas é claro que aqui o que faz mais sentido é apoiar as igrejas porque há uma profusão de igrejas que precisam de ser recuperadas... Mas, pronto, vamos fazendo, temos uma visão muito aberta do que devemos fazer aqui...
ON – Aliás, até calha bem porque os templos hindus aqui são muito diferentes dos templos do resto da Índia. Aqui têm uma característica indo-portuguesa mesmo!
CM – É! Portanto se alguém responsável por alguns templos hindus que tenham que ser recuperados, e que me vá ouvir, podem falar com a dr.ª Inês Figueira [Delegada em Goa], que nós teremos maior prazer em apoiar também a recuperação de templos hindus....
Mas depois também a outra parte que estava a dizer: os festivais de música. O festival da Senhora do Monte para nós tem um significado especial porque há dezoito anos que promovemos aquele festival. Primeiro, começámos por recuperar a Capela [do Monte], que foi um trabalho bastante pesado não só do ponto de vista arquitectónico de recuperação, mas também financeiro. Foi muito pesado. Mas, pronto, foi feito e agora é preciso voltar a fazer alguma manutenção porque com o clima que existe aqui às vezes as coisas vão-se deteriorando rapidamente... E agora há uma nova fase de manutenção e de recuperação duma parte que tem que ser feita também....
ON – Os objectivos da Fundação Oriente variam de país para país...
CM – Variam, consoante o que é a realidade em cada país...
ON – O que é que a Fundação gostaria de fazer, mas ainda não conseguiu fazer na Índia?
CM – Há certamente muitas coisas que a gente gostaria de fazer, mas nós temos cingido àquilo que é possível fazer com os meios que temos – porque os nossos meios também não são ilimitados – e passámos a mensagem de que a Fundação Oriente, que foi criada aqui um pouco por iniciativa do dr. Mário Soares... Quando eu fui para presidente da Fundação – foi ele que me convidou, de resto – me chamou à atenção para uma fundação que eu tinha criado, assim, no papel, antes, em Macau, e depois eu fui para Portugal... Ele chamou-me para eu de facto dar vida à Fundação, coisa que eu fiz... Passado muito pouco tempo, ele telefonou-me e diz-me assim: ‘Ouça lá, você não quer fazer qualquer coisa na Índia? Nós precisamos de reforçar os laços com a Índia; as relações ainda estão um bocadinho tremidas. Talvez fosse bom ter qualquer coisa...’ ‘Claro que estamos, e o natural seria Goa’. E ele diz-me assim: ‘Com certeza. Você vá lá e veja se consegue então uma coisa que era muito importante para Portugal e para a Índia, que houvesse uma instituição que fizesse essa ligação, ou que ajudasse a fazer essa ligação.’
E então eu cá vim, como pessoa bem-comportada – que não sou – mas naquela altura fui – vim cá a mando do dr. Soares, para criar a Delegação cá. E ele tinha a noção de que era necessário naquela altura fazer mais qualquer coisa porque aqui – vocês aqui se calhar não se lembram... vocês são todos muito novos, você incluindo é muito novo – vocês não se lembram que há 25 anos não havia nada de português em Goa...
ON – Sim, a gente aqui em Goa perdeu uma geração... completamente... houve um hiato, mas graças a ...
CM – Pronto, mas não havia nada, não havia Consulado, não havia nada. Não havia o Instituto Camões, não havia nada. Por isso é que a gente assumiu o ensino do português também... Bom, e o Consulado, nem pensar nisso!... Bom. E, portanto, estávamos aqui um bocado sozinhos. Não temos funções consulares, portanto não podíamos substituir-nos ao Consulado, mas iamos fazer aquilo que achámos que podíamos fazer, com grande ajuda do Governo, de então, de Goa... Eram pessoas muito compreensivas, e que entenderam bem aquela ideia que o dr. Soares tinha na cabeça, que era preciso fazer qualquer coisa aqui, na Índia e a partir de Goa.
ON – Mas ainda falta algum passo a tomar? O senhor doutor acha que o Governo da Índia ou o de Goa deve tomar um passo que ajude depois a Fundação a actuar melhor?
CM – Eu acho é que poderia haver... Eu gostaria – gostaria, mas este é um desejo e isto tem outras limitações – eu gostaria que o Governo local estivesse mais próximo daquilo que nós fazemos, mas não está muito... Digo a si, em abono da verdade, não está muito... Houve uma altura, há uns anos atrás, que esteve, razoavelmente próximo.... Agora não vou por aqui dizer nomes porque se não arranjo por aqui um sarilho de todo o tamanho, porque já não são os mesmos partidos... arranjo por aqui uma trapalhada, portanto o melhor é não dar nomes... Mas houve uma altura em que estavam muito próximos daquilo que nós fazíamos. E portanto, gostaria que fizessem mais; que o responsável da Cultura aqui tivesse um melhor interesse naquilo que nós fazemos. E em Delhi também, mas em Delhi eu acho que, apesar de tudo, – é longe – mas apesar de tudo, quando se vai lá eles mostram interesse naquilo que nós fazemos na Índia em geral e em Goa em particular...
ON – Os anos 97 e 99 devem ter sido marcos importantes para a Fundação...
CM – 97, não tanto, 99, sim. Em 97, para a Fundação teve um pouco foi o problema da China e o Hong Kong. A questão de Hong Kong não foi dar em nada. O ano de 99 foi mais importante por causa da saída da administração portuguesa de Macau. Isso foi muito importante.
ON – Mas eu falava dos fundos dos casinos, que cessaram...
CM – Não, já antes não havia nada. Eu já tinha tido uma pega com os chineses – que é o meu costumo arranjar assim umas pegas de vez em quando!... (a rir) Não, porque os chineses não levaram a bem que a Fundação tivesse sede em Lisboa e não em Macau. Portanto criou-se ali um mal-estar, e esse mal-estar levou a que eu tivesse que ceder – o que é difícil, porque normalmente eu não cedo com muita facilidade! Em 1997, com efeitos retroactivos em 96, deixámos de receber dinheiro local... E era muito dinheiro que recebíamos de Macau.
ON – Exacto! No entanto, a Fundação soube gerir as coisas: investiu noutros lugares, etc...
CM – A Fundação soube investir e tinha guardado uma almofada grande em termos de liquidez, não gastando tudo aquilo que tinha recebido do passado e pondo de parte... Eu não adivinhava o que ia acontecer, mas felizmente pus de parte uma parte substancial daquilo que tínhamos recebido no passado – coisa que as pessoas me acusavam muito, dizendo: ‘Recebe tanto dinheiro e gasta tão pouco!’ E eu disse: ‘Olhe, é para outros dias.’ Olhe, eles vieram – os dias mais complicados vieram depois. Mas tivemos muita sorte e algum saber... Já não gosto de dizer isso porque quem faz os investimentos sou eu...
Fizemos dois ou três muito bons investimentos que criaram mais valias importantíssimas para a Fundação... Para lhe dar uma idéia – esta é uma área de que as pessoas acham graça, mas que é um bocado árida – nós hoje temos em termos de activos praticamente a mesma coisa do que tínhamos quando começámos a Fundação. E já gastámos para cima de uma fortuna nestes 25 anos, porque ao princípio gastámos muito dinheiro na China, muito mais, se calhar, do que devíamos ter gasto, mas nós tínhamos que afirmar uma posição na China, portanto fizemos um esforço grande em relação a subsídios para a China e, depois, em Macau, e só um bocado depois é que nos virámos para Portugal. E só começámos a trabalhar mais a sério com Portugal já passados alguns anos porque era a altura, fizemos o Museu [do Oriente], que também foi um investimento particularmente grande e onde temos peças indianas muito bonitas ...
ON – A “almofada” de que o senhor doutor falava ajudou a absorver todos os choques dessas bruscas mudanças económicas que houve na Europa...
CM – Exactamente, exactamente!
ON – Apesar de todos os problemas, conseguiu abrir um Museu de que agora falou e que, se calhar, é o maior projecto da Fundação até hoje...
CM – Sim, é o maior projecto da Fundação até hoje. As pessoas gostam muito do Museu. É de facto um museu muito activo, interactivo mesmo. Em Portugal é de longe o museu com mais actividades, para miúdos, para crianças e para jovens. E tem várias componentes: tem yoga... tem tudo! É, portanto, um museu curioso, muito diferente dos outros museus que há por lá. Mas foi de facto um projecto maior que, financeiramente mais pesado... mas está lá... É aquilo, e pronto, nós, a Administração, temos agora encostado ao Museu um edifício que é o nosso edifício da Administração, que do edifício que estava no meio da cidade passou para ali... e agora estamos todos juntos. É um projecto que hoje é um todo que faz sentido...
ON – O senhor doutor passou do sector governamental para o sector privado...
CM – Não, passei do sector privado muito brevemente para o sector governamental, como você diz, e depois rapidamente também saí outra vez e voltei. Não é que tenha algo contra o público, não tenho; antes pelo contrário, mas a vida é assim. Tive aquela oportunidade que me foi dada pelo dr. Soares para ir para Macau, e estive em Macau 14 meses, não estive mais, e voltei outra vez para o privado...
ON – E o que significa para o doutor, pessoalmente, o ter estado à testa da Fundação Oriente há 32 anos?
CM – 32 anos: o que é que significa? Significa que estou velho! (a rir) Não, significa que apesar de tudo é interessante – eu não escondo – acompanhar um projecto que eu próprio criei. Isso é interessante para mim ver a evolução da Fundação com uma forma sólida: é isso, e de outra forma não poderia ser, porque eu sou conhecido – e pergunte ali à dr.ª Inês, ela dirá a mesma coisa – eu sou muito agarrado ao dinheiro, de maneira que estou sempre a fazer poupanças em tudo...
ON – E faz bem, porque o senhor doutor disse uma vez que sem dinheiro não se faz nada... não se faz cultura!...
CM – Pois não! Não se faz cultura, não se faz nada! Às vezes as pessoas da Cultura não funcionam bem assim. Acham que o dinheiro tem que aparecer de algum lado, mas não querem saber de onde. Lançam-se e dizem: ‘Ah, agora o dinheiro há-de aparecer.’ Mas não é assim; não é assim, e de facto, sem dinheiro não se faz rigorosamente nada! Por isso é preciso, antes de mais nada, meter uma gestão sã nos activos deste tipo de instituições como doutros, e é preciso fazê-lo...
ON – Temos que agradecer ao senhor doutor por todo o trabalho que a Fundação tem feito aqui por Goa. E queria saber quais os seus sonhos para o próximo futuro...
CM – Os meus sonhos?! Eu já estou velho para ter muitos sonhos! Vou tendo alguns, apesar de tudo! Bom, aqui em Goa? Eu nunca pus de parte completamente a hipótese, noutro campo que não cultural, de investir em Goa. Houve uma altura em que ainda pensei em investir na hotelaria porque a Fundação tinha várias participações na hotelaria, e ainda tem. Tem em Timor um hotel, em Lisboa neste momento só tem um. Mas na área grande de Lisboa, tem um. E pensei depois: é muito longe! E para gerir as coisas assim, à distância, é complicado, portanto esse projecto não avançou. Mas se aparecer um outro projecto qualquer, não digo que não a estudar um eventual investimento aqui em Goa.
ON – Entretanto continuam com as coisas que já começaram... A Delegação aqui está a fazer um belíssimo papel...
CM – Espero que considerem que sim!
ON – Sim! Sim, sim!
CM – Se não temos que agarrar aí a dr.ª Inês! (a rir)
ON – Então, senhor doutor, com isto agradecemos muito esta conversa e desejamos muitos anos de vida para o senhor doutor – que continue com os sonhos – e todo o sucesso para a Delegação da Fundação Oriente em Goa!
CM – Muito obrigado, muito obrigado!
ON – Muito obrigado sou eu.
(Entrevista radiodifundida em 23 de fevereiro de 2020, no programa Renascença Goa, acessível no You Tube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HqO1k5iDX4; e publicada na Revista da Casa de Goa, II Série, No. 4, Maio-Junho 2020)
St Joseph: unsuspecting, silent, forgotten
Those three adjectives popped into my head as I spent 1 May pondering the life of the foster father of Jesus. And come to think of it, what do we really know about him? Except for some passages in Matthew and Luke, even the Scriptures have scanty information on his life journey.
Trust and wisdom
Joseph, who was a descendant of the house of King David, exhibited no trappings of royalty. He was only betrothed to Mary, a virgin, when, mysteriously, he found her pregnant. He graciously refrained from condemning her; as “a righteous man and unwilling to expose her to public disgrace” (Mt 1:19), he'd thought of discreetly divorcing her. But this would surely have left the maiden defenceless against a bigoted Jewish society – or so it dawned on him after an angel revealed him God’s magnificent designs. Trusting the divine messenger, he promptly took Mary as his wife. Thus, the role of Joseph who was blessed with expectant faith and total trust would soon prove to be crucial in the history of salvation.
What was Joseph like, as a husband and father, professional and citizen? One thing is for sure – he wasn’t a loudmouth; quietness was his watchword. Soon after Jesus’ birth, he quietly fled with the family to Egypt, escaping carnage of infants at the hands of king Herod of Judea. They returned only after the ruler’s death and settled in Nazareth, far from the glare of the capital city, Jerusalem. He worked as a modest carpenter, and was helped by his divine son. A dutiful citizen that he was, he’d earlier made a trip to his city, Bethlehem, to enrol the couple in the census. Finally, Joseph was a devoted father too; he joined Mary in searching for their son lost in Jerusalem. But then, quite perplexingly, even here we don’t get to hear his voice.
Pope Benedict XVI has stated that Joseph led a “simple and industrious life, cultivating the conjugal relationship with care and fulfilled with enthusiasm the great and difficult educational mission.” (Angelus, St Peter's Square, 19 March 2006) Yet, in modern parlance, we tend to dismiss such a man as lacking l’esprit. So, could it be that Joseph’s portrayal as an old and unattractive man induced the silence that we’ve weaved around him down the centuries? Some believe that his elderly mien is meant to account for his wisdom fit for the father of Jesus. And hopefully, showing him as past his prime would help explain how he abstained from conjugal relations with a young and pretty wife.
While the Pope Emeritus makes ample references to how Joseph treated Mary with love and care, Fulton Sheen, portrays the Saint more dramatically, in The World’s First Love. He profiles him as “probably a young man, strong, virile, athletic, handsome, chaste, and disciplined, the kind of man one sees… working at a carpenter’s bench.” Although society then was probably less conscious of physical attributes than we are today, those are some that would rightly distinguish the holy family of Nazareth. And practically speaking, how else would a man provide for a family of three?
The insightful Archbishop has a take on Joseph’s libido as well: “Instead of being a man incapable of loving, he must have been on fire with love.” But, then, as a counterpoint he sheds light on how “young girls in those days, like Mary, took vows to love God uniquely, and so did young men, of whom Joseph was one so preeminent as to be called the ‘just’. Instead, then, of being dried fruit to be served on the table of the King, he was rather a blossom filled with promise and power. He was not in the evening of life, but in its morning, bubbling over with energy, strength, and controlled passion.”
That’s how Joseph must have lived the elevated life that God had called him for. The circumstances of his death are unknown, but it is surmised that he died before Jesus’ public life began, if not, certainly before the Crucifixion (Jn 19: 26-27). We could reason out that God thus saved him the anxiety of seeing Jesus vilified in his public ministry: really, how would a father – an honourable man – take it lying down? It might have well compelled him to come out into the open and defend his son. But if this conjecture be false, God for sure saved him from the cruelty of witnessing the humiliating death of his Son on the Cross.
Honouring Joseph
Be that as it may, Joseph was an unsuspecting man, for he trusted in the Lord; he was silent, as he knew how to take it all in his stride. So now the moot question is: why do we forget him so very easily?
Curiously, veneration of Joseph began in his land of self-exile, Egypt, and the same took about thirteen centuries to take root in the West. This finally happened when the Servites, an order of mendicant friars, began to observe his feast on 19 March, the traditional day of his death.
Later promoters of the devotion included Pope Sixtus IV, who introduced the feast circa 1479, and the celebrated sixteenth-century mystic St Teresa of Avila, who attributed her miraculous cure of paralysis to him. After Mexico, Canada, and Belgium declared Joseph their patron, Pope Pius IX in 1870 declared him patron of the Universal Church. In 1955, Pope Pius XII established the Feast of St Joseph the Worker on 1 May as a counter-celebration to the communist-sponsored May Day.
A feast day, however, should rise above tokenism. We must therefore have recourse to this admirable saint – emblematic of the world's forgotten fathers – in the ups-and-downs of our daily life. No artist or writer has captured the essence of the man as beautifully as the litany in his honour has: “St. Joseph – chaste guardian of the Virgin, foster father of the Son of God, diligent protector of Christ, head of the Holy Family, most just, most chaste, most prudent, most strong, most obedient, most faithful.”
Closer to our times, Pope Benedict XVI highlighted a much neglected aspect of Joseph’s life – chastity – by introducing the reference in the Eucharistic prayer, after Mary: “St Joseph, her Most Chaste Spouse”. (Why many celebrants avoid the operative word is anybody’s guess) The Pope revealed that his predecessor, John Paul II, who was devoted to St Joseph, and dedicated to him the Apostolic Exhortation Redemptoris Custos (Guardian of the Redeemer), experienced his assistance at the hour of death.
In an era when fatherhood is relegated to the background even in birth certificates; masculinity is equated with machismo; and chastity disdained in the age of the sexual revolution, we are invited to emulate the counterexample of St Joseph.
In particular, on 1 May, let us make Pope Pius X’s Prayer to the Model of Workers our own, so that our labour and toil may draw abundant fruit in this valley of tears, particularly given the rapid and complex changes due to happen in the covid and post-covid eras.
(To the memory of my parents Fernando de Noronha and Judite da Veiga, on their 56th wedding anniversary)
Credits:
Pic 1 - Statue at Our Lady of the Rosary Church, Heralds of the Gospel Seminary, Caeiras, Greater São Paulo, Brazil. Taken from the magazine of the Heralds of the Gospel (Vol. V, No. 43, May 2011)
Pic 2 - Frame that my parents made it a point to gift to each of their five sons at their marriage.
Pic 3 - Death of St Joseph: panel of the Church of Our Lady (Onze Lieve Vrouwekerk, Amsterdam). Information provided by my friend Caetano Filipe Colaço (Margão/Dona Paula)
Pic 4 - Prayer to St Joseph, Model of Workers, composed by St Pius X. Source: magazine of the Heralds of the Gospel (as above)
(Also published in The Examiner, December 2021)
He has risen, Alleluia!
EASTER SUNDAY 2020
Readings: Acts 10: 34a, 37-43; Ps 117: 1-2, 16-17, 22-23; Col 3: 1-4; Jn 20: 1-9
After a quarantine marked by a grim Liturgy of the Word followed up by a Triduum of hope, the day has finally come when our Light, Life and Hope has broken all barriers and made Himself manifest. What joy for those who observed the Lenten period in prayer, fasting and almsgiving!
Nine readings are prescribed for the Easter Sunday Vigil Mass, seven from the Old Testament and two from the New Testament. But let’s restrict ourselves to the three readings prescribed for the Easter Sunday morning Mass.
Today begins a new cycle of readings, all of them from the New Testament writers. Particularly the first reading – from the Acts of the Apostles – will go on uninterruptedly up to Pentecost Sunday (with the exception of the Vigil Mass). This fifth book of the New Testament, written in all probability by the Evangelist Luke, provides a valuable history of the early Christian church.
Today, we see Peter joyfully announcing that Christ has risen. A man who lived with Jesus vouches that He is not just a man: anointed by God’s Spirit, He has the fullness of God in Him. He is undoubtedly the Messiah, who showed His true nature by way of miracles, of which the Resurrection is the most definitive. He is the Life who has conquered death. He has commanded Peter and the other apostles “to testify that He is the one ordained by God to be the judge of the living and the dead.” He is the Saviour whom all of humankind is invited to follow and accept, and “everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins through His name.”
Peter, who had once lost it and denied his Master, now speaks with the courage of his convictions. He is already showing up as the leader of the nascent Apostolic College. And so was it with Paul. He had persecuted Christ but now, filled with the Holy Spirit, he urges others to follow Christ. Pointing at the One “who is seated at the right hand of God”, he vouches that “when Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with him in glory.” We too, by our baptism, have died to sin and risen with Christ to a new life. Hence, in the world in which we live, whatever our station in life, we are duty-bound to work towards our collective happiness on earth but never forgetting that Heaven is our final destination.
Indeed Christ’s Resurrection is His glory. What a slap it was to those who didn’t believe and put to Him to death. Against facts there are no arguments! At first, only a few remembered Him, had faith and persevered. One of them was Mary Magdalene. She came to the tomb and, wonder of wonders, the stone had been rolled away! Did she understand what had happened? Was she scared? She suspected sabotage, as we can conclude from what she told Simon Peter and John. When these two reached the tomb, they saw and believed. Mind you, till that moment “they did not know the scripture”, that is to say, they’d never understood what Jesus had told them in his three-year ministry. Only just now it dawned on them that He had really risen from the dead!
Don’t we too go through many Lents and Easters of our life as though they are mere rituals? Let’s hope that our faith has progressed such that this year it has dawned on us that Christ really rose two thousand years ago after an excruciating Passion and Death. Let’s believe and testify that He does so every day at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. This is what is meant by the "Real Presence" of Christ in the Eucharist. The Risen Christ is present to his Church in many ways but most especially sacramentally, through His Body and Blood.
Never again, my Lord!
LENT 2020 – Day 45
Readings: Is 52: 13-53, 12; Ps 30: 2.6, 12 13, 15-16 17.25; Heb 4: 14-16, 5.7-9; Jn 18: 1-9, 42
Isn’t it amazing that the saga of Jesus Christ was charted eight centuries before the coming of the Messiah? In the fourth Servant Song, Prophet Isaiah speaks of the One who God would choose to free His people from oppression. He would carry out His mission as Servant of God, in humility and pain. He would teach but they would despise and reject Him. With His appearance marred beyond human semblance, this man of sorrows would carry our sorrows. He would be wounded not for His sins but for ours; He would do no violence nor show deceit, yet He would be punished; He would not utter a word but let Himself be taken like a lamb to the slaughter. The punishment He would bear would heal humankind, and God would exalt and lift up the Servant.
St John the Evangelist, the favourite disciple of Jesus who most closely lived His Passion, captured it all so vividly. The Son of God was indeed despised and rejected, denied by one of His own, Peter the Rock, and betrayed by another, Judas Iscariot. As this was also the theme of the Gospel according to St Matthew on Passion Sunday, today let’s focus on the crux of Good Friday: the unfair trial of our Lord which led to His death.
The Jewish authorities put forth religious motives justifying the death of Jesus. However, the Jewish leaders had powers to impose only flogging and prison, not death. By making Jesus look like a political conspirator, they took Him to Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea. It was a flimsy accusation, Pilate learnt, yet he told the people to judge Him according to their law. He proved an ineffectual, vacillating man. Even after Jesus clarified that His kingship was not of this world, Pilate lacked the courage to face the crowd whom the Sanhedrin chiefs had instigated. The Messiah touched a raw nerve in Pilate when he said, “I have come into the world to bear witness to the truth.”
Then, perhaps in jest, Pilate famously said, “What is truth?’ His own rhetoric shook him out of his complacency at least temporarily. He went out to the Jews again and told them, “I find no crime in Him.” But soon thereafter this weak and pliable judge washed his hands off the gross injustice that the mob wanted to mete out to the most just man on earth. He consented to HIs crucifixion, as demanded by the rabble outside his palace. Through all of this the only act to which Pilate did not bend was to change the title “King of the Jews” that he had already put down. Thus, unwittingly, he who had earlier said, “So you are a king?” now crowned Jesus who had then answered, “You say that I am a king.”
We see that Pilate who had power to save Jesus proved powerless, simply because he wanted to save his skin. And so did the chief priests: didn’t they bend over backwards when they said, “We have no king but Caesar”? While they showed their true colours, suffering did not overwhelm Jesus. Very dignified, He went ahead to meet His death. And when He reached the appointed place and hour, one of the crucified criminals, with a humble and repentant heart, did what the learned and vicious of Jewish society did not have the gumption to do, that is, acknowledge that Jesus is God.
In this picture of desolation, three Marys stood at the foot of the Cross: Mary, the mother of Jesus, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Copas, and Mary Magdalene. Women, the less powerful and voiceless in Jewish society, comforted Jesus every step of the painful way to Calvary. We also know that the meek and simple Simon of Cyrene shared the burden of the Cross for a while, and finally an old and secret disciple Joseph of Arimathea took charge of the body of Jesus and laid it in an absolutely new tomb.
St John’s Gospel passage should convince us that this was the most unfair trial in history. Injustice was meted out to the long-awaited Messiah. About this we have to be thoroughly convinced and refrain from being unfair to Jesus in our daily lives. Aren’t He and the Church often detested because they bear witness to the truth? And what do we do? We remain in our own comfort zones and wash our hands of it like Pilate. Isn’t our Lord mocked at and His laws struck down? And what do we do? We let Judases, Caiaphases and Pilates walk free and even rule over us.
Well, every time we fail to fearlessly defend Our Lord, we let Calvary be real in our own lives. But never again, my Lord! We who’ve been waiting for the Messiah for millennia now must say, Never again! He will soon rise from the dead and walk into our lives if we let Him do so. He is our high priest who can sympathise with our weaknesses. Let us with confidence, then, as St Paul’s exhorts us, “draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.”
The Lord calls us to love one another
LENT 2020 – Day 44
Readings: Ex 12: 1-8, 11-14; Ps 115: 12-13, 15-16, 17-18; Cor 11: 23-26; Jn 13: 1-15
Maundy Thursday is the first day of the Easter Triduum. The readings of the Mass of the Lord’s Supper form a bridge between the historic liberation of the Israelites from slavery in Egypt and the final liberation of the world from the bondage of sin.
The reading from the Book of Exodus points to the origin of Israel as God’s Chosen People. The Lord commands that this month be the first of the year, in commemoration of the beginning of their liberation. He ordains on how to observe the Paschal rituals. These foster a feeling of religious community through the sharing of the paschal lamb. The staining of doorposts with blood of the expiatory lamb is the stamp of the divine that wards off all evil. Unleavened bread eaten in haste accompanied by bitter herbs is a symbol of the suffering from which the Israelites had fled.
When the twelve Apostles celebrated the Passover with their Master, they followed the traditional rite evoking the old covenants. It was also a thanksgiving for God’s many interventions to rescue the Israelites. What the Apostles did not realize, however, was that the Last Supper marked a new beginning. Jesus had anticipated Calvary where He would be presenting Himself as the paschal lamb, the Lamb of God. He did so mysteriously, by converting bread and wine into His Body and Blood. The Son of God made this supreme act of love so as to redeem the sins of humankind. The Holy Mass thus established became the bloodless Sacrifice of the New Covenant.
The Eucharist is a masterpiece of Jesus’ love, the best proof of His love for humankind. He made the Apostles participants in His Priesthood and ordained them to carry out that mystery. He gave them responsibilities and authority: to bind and loose in His name, to forgive sins, to transform the bread and wine into His Body and Blood. This the ordained priesthood would do infinite times, until the Lord’s return to the world. Their role is vital in helping the faithful to carry out their baptismal priesthood.
There was no better occasion than the Last Supper for the Lord to command His followers to love one another. He said, “A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” (Jn 13: 34-35) This new commandment is a summary of all of God's law and brings about the definitive liberation.
Speaking to the first Christians, St Paul reiterated that this liberation emerged when the Paschal Lamb, who is the Christ, was sacrificed. Given that we Christians aren’t always united in love, we must take seriously the reminder from the Apostle of the Gentiles: that the Eucharist and the Church – the Sacramental Body and the Mystical Body – are intimately connected. We should place ourselves at the service of our brethren, in humility and love, of which the washing of the Apostles’ feet by our Lord is emblematic. A Eucharist celebrated amidst division cannot be a sign that we are followers of Christ.
The time to be a person of integrity is now
LENT 2020 – Day 43
Readings: Is 50: 4-9a; Ps 68: 8-10, 21-22, 31.33-34; Mt 26: 14-25
The first reading from the Book of Isaiah is practically the same as that of Palm or Passion Sunday. Isaiah talks of his prophetic mission: of how the Lord spoke to him and how he went ahead with faith and courage. He accepted suffering with patience, always expecting the Lord’s help at the right moment.
Suffering is not always physical; very often it is of the moral order. This leads us to sever ties with unprincipled persons, which may even include family and friends. But can any suffering – physical or moral – be worse than what the Lord endured? No. We could therefore consider even our little troubles as our sharing in the Lord’s Cross.
The Gospel passage, which is just a tiny extract from the Sunday text, focuses on Judas’ betrayal which caused moral and physical suffering to the Lord. The place of action was the Passover meal that the disciples had prepared in accordance with instructions from their Master. As they were at the table Jesus saw the movement of His disciples’ hearts. Our Lord first saw the dishonourable act that Judas was going to perpetrate; He saw it even before the consummated the deal with the chief priest.
St Matthew tells us that after Judas had dipped his hand in the dish with Jesus, Satan entered the apostle’s heart. What Judas had actually envisioned only he and God know! Perhaps used to seeing things through the prism of money, here was an occasion to make a fast buck. But did he foresee the serious consequence of his action? Maybe he did. Or maybe he didn’t, for later he wished to retrace his steps. But it was too late to change.
We may not be at the level of the proverbial Judas but we too have failed our Lord. Even if we don’t commit a serious crime, abetment is bad enough. But knowing human nature, God instituted the sacrament of Confession, whereby we can reconcile ourselves to God and win back His grace and favour.
Getting to know Judas’ act at close quarters is surely a traumatic experience. It is a supreme lesson on one of the most painful experiences that one might experience in life. Betrayal often begins with small things: lies, compromises and opportunistic behaviour. If left unchecked by self, parents or other authorities, it grows into unfaithfulness in great things, or what we commonly dub back-stabbing. Lack of integrity that begins with the individual can infect an entire society. Thus public men in a Godless society soon become unprincipled and corrupt.
In all that we do, let’s strive towards the greatest level of integrity: loyalty and faithfulness to God and neighbour. “Whatever is true, whatever is honourable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things,” says St Paul in his letter to the Philippians (4: 8). This is sure to promote a welcome sweetness and an integrity that is pleasing to God by whom we are called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord (1 Cor 1: 9).
By His side, in His darkest hour
LENT 2020 – Day 42
Readings: Is 49: 1-6; Ps 70: 1-2, 3-4, 5-6, 15-17; Jn 13: 21-33, 36-38
The text of Isaiah’s second servant song speaks of his prophetic mission assigned by the Lord God. He has a message of great import for Israel: the Chosen People are to return to the right path and fulfil their vocation as light to the nations. Holding them in high regard, the Lord God urged them to accept and then take His message of salvation to the ends of the world.
Was it a tall order? Maybe it was, but then they could always rest assured of the Lord’s help. They had only to ask with expectant faith and success would be theirs. The Lord is always our refuge, our justice; He pays heed and saves us. The Lord is our rock, a mighty stronghold. He is our hope, our trust, our help. Every person that has tasted of the Lord’s generous hand will tell of His justice, of his help; his heart will overflow with the Lord’s teachings and His mighty wonders.
What, then, was the problem with Israel? Theirs was indeed a long and sad story. They failed to appreciate the marvels and settled on trinkets. Busy with their petty lives, by and by they forgot the Lord God. They set aside the covenants and began to do their own thing. Their lack of earnestness in God’s things soon gave way to flouting His commandments. The Israelites had long taken the Lord for granted, and they finally paid the price.
Let’s face it. They betrayed the Lord… much as we do when we feign ignorance of our religious duties or are busy with our other duties. We do so because it suits us at that moment. But then, it’s not God who needs us; we need God. He is infinitely powerful and all is grist that comes to His mill. When Judas leaves the scene, Jesus talks freely to His reduced but true flock. He waxes eloquent – “Now is the Son of man glorified, and in him God is glorified; if God is glorified in him, God will also glorify him in himself, and glorify him at once.”
Meanwhile, Jesus is in the goodbye mode: He is going back to the Father who will glorify Him very soon. He also has words of encouragement and consolation for the Apostles and for those who thirst for the living water. Not that He has any dreamy notions about men and women: He knows that we are prone to deny Him – like Peter who disowned Him at His most grievous hour. It’s not that He needed Peter; legions of angels could have come to our Lord’s rescue at that moment. It’s just that He wanted Peter to side with Him… But, of course, Jesus knew the difference between Peter’s moment of denial and Judas’ cold-blooded betrayal.
He wants us to be by His side; He wants us the warmth of our presence; Jesus wants us to be there – for Him – in His darkest hour. And why so? So that He can then pay us back a hundredfold, as is His wont… So let’s never forget the love and faithfulness of the Lord and ask for His grace, by saying, “The Lord is my light and my salvation.”
The fragrance of our greatest possession
LENT 2020 – Day 41
Readings: Is 42: 1-7; Ps 26: 1.2.3.13-14; Jn 12: 1-11
The first reading is taken from the first of the four ‘servant songs’ or ‘Songs of the Suffering Servant’. It is not easy to identify the figure: is it the prophet himself, or historical Israel, or the ideal Israel? From the New Testament we know it is Jesus Christ. Its first verse is reminiscent of the voice of the Father at the Baptism of Jesus and the Transfiguration on Mount Tabor. The seventh verse takes us to the Gospel passage in Luke, chapter 4: 18. In this Jesus says that the Father has sent Him to proclaim liberty to captives, sight to the blind, and to let the oppressed go free.
Only a psalm can cap all those wonders, a psalm that is at once a song of praise and thanksgiving: “The Lord is my light and my help… the Lord is the stronghold of my life.” There is therefore nothing to fear; only in Him we should hope. And we continue to see wonders in the countdown to the Lord’s appointed hour on earth. They witness to the Lord’s goodness throughout the week.
The day following the spectacle that was Palm Sunday in Jerusalem, Our Lord stayed in Bethany. He is said to have spent the night at the home of Lazarus. The family probably hosted Him and His disciples through the week. A great multitude of Jews visited Him there, also eager to know the man whom Jesus had raised from the dead.
Those were indeed live-giving encounters. Another happened when Lazarus’ sister Mary proved herself an exceptional hostess to a divine guest. While her sister Martha took care of the daily chores, Mary fell at the feet of Jesus. She took a pound of costly ointment of pure nard and anointed His feet, which she then wiped with her hair.
Did she exceed her role as hostess? Well, nothing is too much for the Lord. She did something that no Jewish woman would dare do: she loosed her hair before Her Lord, thus expressing love and dedication. An eye-opener to all of us who fear to be different, especially when it comes to Godly things…. Aren’t we worried about what others will say and think of us?
But look who took objection to Mary’s magnanimity: none other than Judas Iscariot. The miserable soul that was to sell Our Lord wanted to first sell the ointment, ostensibly to gather money for the poor! Well, the evangelist is very clear: “This he [Judas] said, not that he cared for the poor but because he was a thief, and as he had the money box he used to take what was put into it.” The fact that Jesus despite knowing his base instincts accepted him as a disciple goes to show His concern for the well-being of his soul than for that of the common purse.
Fact is, “he who is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much; and he who is dishonest in a very little is dishonest also in much.” (Lk 16: 10) This fits Judas Iscariot like a glove. And that’s why Jesus soon hints at His death, in which Judas would soon have a dishonourably decisive role to play. “Let her alone,” says He, “let her keep it for the day of my burial.” And He adds: “The poor you will always have with you, but you do not always have me.” Yes, very often the poor are only a ruse; it’s usually ourselves that we are concerned about.
Sometimes don’t we seem greatly concerned about our little possessions and little concerned about our greatest possession in Heaven? Don’t we fall at the feet of our earthly masters but are only too proud to pray to the Lord? Whereas we set our eyes on the temporal, we let the eternal surprise us only at the time our death! Instead, like Mary of Bethany, let's set our hearts not on saving the ointment; with love and gratitude, let's spend everything on the Lord and save our soul.
Our Lord's saga of pain and suffering begins
LENT 2020 – Day 40
Readings: Is 50: 4-7; Ps 21: 8-9, 17, 18a, 19-20, 23-24; Phil 2: 6-11; Mt 26: 14-27, 66
The first two readings are a prologue to our Lord’s saga of pain and suffering described in the Gospel passage. Eight hundred years before Christ, prophet Isaiah anticipated the happenings on Calvary; and a millennium before Him, His ancestor King David wrote the haunting cry that the Christ crucified would utter: “My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me?” St Paul highlights the fact that the Son of God speaks here as “a servant, born in the likeness of men.” He underscores the humility and love with which our Lord looked at His earthly mission.
Today is commonly known as “Palm Sunday”. The evangelists have passages fit to commemorate this Sunday. Yet, the overarching theme of our Lord’s Passion takes precedence on this day, alternatively called “Passion Sunday”.
St Matthew portrays more than the story of a single day; he gives an overview of the first six days of the Holy Week. Accordingly, the passage comprises the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem on Sunday; His Passion on Thursday and finally His Death on that fateful Friday. However, in real time, Jesus’ last week on earth was packed with many other events as well. All together they precipitated the final meltdown, which soon became a watershed in world history.
With St Matthew as our guide
Let’s walk with St Matthew to see the places that Jesus visited, and why. Let’s also look at the personages that Jesus encountered on the way. They make up an eloquent portrait gallery in which you and I are sure to meet our human types.
When Jesus entered Jerusalem, He met an ecstatic lot. They spread garments and tree branches on the road, and shouted “Hosanna to the Son of David!” The city was stirred with the visit of “the prophet Jesus from Nazareth of Galilee”. Was this for real? Had Jerusalem accepted Him as their long-awaited Messiah? Well, this sudden switch of sentiments, this picture of innocence and goodness, seemed too good to be true. Thanks to human chemistry, an equal and opposite reaction gets underway in the minds and hearts of others following Jesus’ moves.
If the cheering multitude was naïve in its enthusiasm, so were Jesus’ disciples in their lack of fervour. On Thursday, they simply followed His instructions and arranged the Upper Room to hold their supper. Perhaps to them it was just another yearly feast. Did they understand what Jesus meant by saying that He would meet them again only “in my Father’s kingdom”? Ironically, only Judas Iscariot perhaps did, for he’d already conspired to sell his Lord for thirty pieces of silver.
That Wednesday night Jesus went out to the Mount of Olives to pray. He knew that His time was at hand. And knowing His sheep, too, He foretold that striking the shepherd would scatter them. To them it meant very little. Humans like us, lost in their own preoccupations, Peter, James and John fell asleep at three crucial moments. Curiously, here we see the human facet of Jesus too. Left to fend for Himself, he cried to His Father to let the cup pass if possible.
However, the human side of Jesus was soon superimposed with His superhuman dignity. When the kiss of betrayal brought in the hour, Jesus addressed Judas charitably as “friend”. And when someone cut off the ear of a soldier who had come to arrest Him, Jesus healed him instantly. What might the soldier have felt at that moment? What did he do thereafter: convert or continue his evil doing? We do not know. What we know, meanwhile, is that the disciples, the greatest beneficiaries of the magnanimous Jesus, took to their heels. What would we have done? And what do we do in the circumstances of our life today?
Next we meet old Caiaphas, yet another picture of human viciousness. He entertained a string of false testimonies. Then came the tipping point. Two witnesses reported that Jesus had declared that He could destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days. It no doubt crossed Caiaphas mind that Jesus was the Messiah but he didn't hail Him. Instead, he turned the tables on Him, crying “Blasphemy”, for which death was the punishment.
Jesus was next in the presence of Pilate, the governor. Here was a typical political figure playing to the gallery. He washed his hands and said, “I am innocent of this righteous man’s blood.” Why did he leave it to the populace to decide when he should have called a spade a spade? These are the undecided and/or the unconcerned who do everything only to save their skin…
At the praetorium, the stage was set for the final tragic act. Here we meet mockers. They stripped our Lord, and in disdain hung a scarlet robe over his body and a crown of thorns on his head. For a change, a man called Simon met Jesus as He wended his way to Calvary. Although they ordered him to help Jesus carry the Cross, he most likely did it with a measure of sympathy for the suffering Lord. Can we, like that Cyrenian, offer up our little sufferings as a humble participation in the carrying of the Cross?
At Calvary the ‘good thief’ said a good word to the dying Lord; he instantly merited Paradise. This goes to show that it’s never too late to convert. However, it’s better to be safe rather than sorry; we shouldn’t test God, as did Judas Iscariot, who stupidly lost his life in a shameful death.
After Jesus had died on the Cross, an old disciple, Joseph of Arimathea took charge of His sacred body. He wrapped the body in a clean linen shroud and laid it in his own new tomb. Like him, we too can help out, by rendering our services to the Bride of Christ. After all, the Church, which our Lord rebuilt on the third day, is the best repository of his memory. The Church also holds His three best gifts for humankind: first, the Holy Mass, held there every day as an unbloody enactment of the Holy Sacrifice on Calvary; second, the Priesthood, which He instituted as a sacrament of the New Covenant; and third, the commandment of love, a supreme example of how Jesus perfected the old law.
Our Lord Jesus Christ thus left us an invaluable heritage whereby we can become worthy candidates for eternal salvation. We will thereby vindicate His coming to the world.
When man was wolf to God
LENT 2020 - Day 39
Readings: Ezek 37: 21-28; Ps Jer 31: 10, 11-12ab, 13; Jn 11: 45-57
Why does the Lord God say "I will make them one nation"? Israel started off as one nation comprising twelve tribes descending from Jacob (whom God renamed Israel). Later, when the people desired a king like the nations around them, God chose Saul as the first king of Israel. However, as a result of Saul's sinful life his family lost the right to reign. Then God chose David to succeed him but only Judah accepted the choice; the other tribes of Israel followed Saul’s son Ishbosheth. A war ensued.
David, the stronger of the two, worked hard to reunite the tribes. At long last, they welcomed him as king of “all Israel and Judah”. His son Solomon followed suit, until a day dawned when he began disobeying God. When his son Rehoboam failed to keep the kingdom united, a new split ensued. God chose Jeroboam, a servant of Solomon, to head the northern kingdom. Eventually, this kingdom fell to the Assyrians the the other to the Babylonians.
This is the time when the prophet Ezekiel lived. Seeing that His people had gone astray, God could well have withdrawn and pronounced national destruction. But He was faithful to His covenant and loved His people. So He made known a new blueprint for Israel: it would be a single country under a revived Davidic dynasty, a united people, safe under the protective umbrella of the Lord God. The only condition was that the people "shall not defile themselves any more with their idols and their detestable things and with any of their transgressions." Cleansed of their defilement, they would be a new people.
We know that before God sent Jesus to the world, He had brought back the captives from Babylon but soon thereafter the country under the heavy hand of the Roman administration. Why God allowed this is a mystery. Did the sins of certain people lead to this fate, or was it God waiting to unfold the grand history of our redemption? This role the Father had assigned to Jesus. But, alas, His countrymen twisted His intentions and misinterpreted His works.
The astounding miracle of raising Lazarus from the dead is a case in point. Soon after Jesus had worked that wonder, many of the witnesses reported it to the Pharisees. So the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered the council. They deliberated that if the people began to believe in Him, the Romans would come and destroy both the holy place and their nation. So they decided to put Him to death.
Very significantly, the chief priest Caiaphas proposed that Jesus should die "not for the nation only but to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad." Caiaphas thus unwittingly prophesied the investiture of Jesus as the High Priest of the New Alliance, and became the last of the high priests of the Old Covenant. No doubt, great was the price that Jesus paid: he sealed it with His own blood.
This is the beginning of the end of Jesus' life on earth. He no longer went about openly among the Jews but into the wilderness, to a town called Ephraim, where he stayed with his disciples. Since the Passover was at hand, many wondered if Jesus too would go to Jerusalem for the feast. He did go... and, lo and behold, he had a reception fit for a king. Indeed a dramatic turn of events. But the question is: will He be crowned? Or will He be king just for a day?
O flickering human mind! O false promise from glib cheerleaders! It is easier to believe that these cheers will soon turn to jeers. And so it was. The chief priests and the Pharisees had already given orders that any one knew where Jesus was should let them know, so that they might arrest Him.... Homo homini lupus? Not just. Man was indeed wolf to God.