Towards a Network of Theological Enquiry
A question of mission – a mission of questions
Freedom of the human spirit from captivity
Theological and ethical issues in the age of globalisation
Towards an Asian theological agenda for the 21st century
Impulses in Caribbean theology
Beyond partnership – Towards a global theological agenda
The people of God among all God's peoples
Globalisation: A myth without a vision?
Democratic impulses in Buddhism
An old Hasidic saying has it that humans were created because God likes to tell stories. A revision adds that humans were created because God likes to hear stories. A so far final revision claims that humans are good story tellers!! 1 So although the method I shall adopt in this presentation is mostly narrative, I am aware that we are all not equally familiar with biblical data, as much as I am aware that everyone likes stories.
My task today is to categorise and highlight the democratic impulse in the life and work of Jesus. There is an immediate problem in attempting this. The material is vast, as almost everything about Jesus can be interpreted as democratic. So the democratic right of choice will have to be exercised, and in the process your democratic rights of preference may be infringed!!
This democratic are not the same as things pertaining to democracy. Democracy is a polity. It is more precisely, a political system embraced by governments and claimed to be, by the people or their chosen representatives.2 Some traditional characteristics of a Democracy are, constitutional government; regular, free and fair elections; the rule of law and a separation of power between the legislature, executive and judiciary.
By democratic, we mean a value system, which because it has pervaded all cultures may be termed universal. It has no historical founder or beginning, is as old as human kind and is innate in humans. Democratic also refers to a connected socio-political ethos this value system is capable of creating. Four core values may be identified. These are:
-The equal value of all human life/beings, regardless of their circumstantial status, whether economic, ethnic, political, cultural and so on.
-The just treatment of all human beings
-The right of human beings to a fully human life.3
-The freedom of all human beings, as individuals and groups to pursue their several aspirations in a spirit conducive to the well being of others.4
Consequently, the Democratic must be distinguished from Democracy. Democratic ideals are known to cut across all political systems, though historically certain regimes have been more receptive and conducive to its growth.5
Similarly the polity of Democracy does not monopolise, or ensure the democratic. In fact, some governments that claim to be Democracies may and do violate democratic ideals. We know this only too well!
The primary meaning of impulse embraces ideas like drive, thrust, urge, force and so on. For our purposes I prefer to understand it as a wave. Waves are not continuous, but they are regular and relentless. They move by some strange unseen force in never ending rhythm. Waves can be loud and forceful; they can also be soft and gentle. But waves are always a movement of water, always move in the same direction, from the deep to the shore, and always, however slowly this process may be, shape the sharp and jagged rocks they encounter. The democratic impulse of Jesus closely resembles the wave.
Jesus' formation was in the tradition of the Old Testament (OT). The democratic impulse of the Exodus, the central and most decisive event in the Old Testament will serve as a background to Jesus' democratic impulse.
The growth in number and prowess of a community of expatriate Hebrews domiciled in Egypt pose a threat to the indigenous population. A new regime changes their status to slaves. Forced labour compels the Hebrews to build the Egyptian economy and culture. In-spite of this, unprecedented oppression continues (Exodus 1: 8-14). The Hebrews are harassed, beaten and exploited; "I will not provide you with straw.... but your output (of bricks) is not to be less" (Ex.5: 6-14). An order commands that their new born males are to be killed at birth (Ex. 1: 15-22).
Hope emerges in the midst of this oppression. Through a combination of resilience and intrigue, an Israelite male child is saved and nurtured in Pharaoh's palace. He is Moses (Ex. 2:1-10). From here on a moving epic of the struggle for liberation of the Hebrews unravels. It is nourished with the stature and leadership of Moses. A troubled conscience at being spared the hardship of his people leading to an attempt at natural justice, drives him into exile (Ex 2: 11f). Here, his alienation from his people, "I am a stranger in a foreign land" (Ex. 1:22) is cause for restlessness. An encounter with the till then un-known God disclosed as "I AM", drives a diffident Moses (Ex. 3:11, 4:1, 4:10b) back to the sense of oppression, no longer as privileged prince but as liberator of his own people. The voluntary option to return to liberate his people, through a change of status in favour of his real identity is a clear manifestation of the democratic impulse now beating in Moses.
On returning, a democratic process unfolds. Moses consults with the peoples' representatives and addresses the issue of oppression with the people, bringing them reassurance (Ex. 4: 29-31). Negotiations for the freedom of the Hebrews commence with Pharaoh (Ex. 5: 2 f. 8: 21-29, 9: 27-35, 10: 3-6 and 24-29 etc). When reaction intensifies hardship and the Hebrews typically complain against their liberator, the democratic impulse turns inwards in search of justice, "Lord... why do you treat this people so harshly? Why did you send me here?" (Ex. 5:22). After sustained advocacy the release of the Hebrews is finally secured (Ex. 12:51).
The democratic impulse behind this episode does not cease with the dramatic departure of the Hebrews from Egypt. It is tested repeatedly through their wanderings in the wilderness. Changed circumstances now create internal pressure, oppression, disputes, and violence; all of which needed to be addressed (Ex. 16:20, 17.3f; 32:15f; Num. 16; etc).
An anti democratic shift even in Moses, now taking on executive presidential powers, or simply unable to cope or delegate responsibility, and its likely consequences, is challenged by Moses' father in law, Jethro. The ensuring dialogue and democratic impulse of Jethro is too significant not to be quoted in full.
Jethro says, "What is this that you are doing to the people? Why do you sit alone, and all the people stand about you from morning till evening? And Moses said to his father in law, because the people come to me to inquire of God; and when they have a dispute they come to me and I decide between a man and his neighbour ....(Jethro) said to him. What you are doing is not good. You and the people with you will wear yourselves out, for the thing is too heavy for you, you are not able to perform it alone. Listen now... you shall represent the people before God... and you shall teach (the people) and make them know the way in which they must walk and what they must do. Moreover choose able men...(who) fear God,....are trustworthy...hate a bribe: and place them over the people as rulers of thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens. And let them judge the people at all times, every great matter they shall bring to you, but any small matter they shall decide themselves; so it will be easier for you and they will bear the burden with you. If you do this and God so commands you, then you will be able to endure and all this people also will go to their place in peace. So Moses .... did all that he said" (Ex. 18. 13-24).
No doubt Jethro spoke out of personal concern. But given the limitations of the context, the practical wisdom and relevance, and the democratic spirit, order, and scope of these words are outstanding. The importance of shared leadership, encouraging peoples confidence and choice, and peace, that results through this process needs to be noted.
The most significant outcome of this interaction between the pilgrim challenge and the democratic impulse, however, was the Jewish law, summarised as the Decalogue (Ex. 20: 2-17). It is the finest framework for a democratic society. Its first four clauses provides the theology for the ethics of the last six clauses. It this way attributes belief in Yahweh (God) as conditional for an ethos determined by democratic ideals. It admirably balances personal religion with individual rights and community safe-guards. It became the foundational formula for a just society that the OT prophetic tradition, the other democratic high-point of the OT, used to evaluate Israelite Fidelity, polity and morality. Jesus Himself acknowledged the validity of the Decalogue but changed its negative features into a trilogy that held the same balance of allegiance between neighbour, self and God (Matt. 22: 37-39). A legalistic adherence to the letter of the Decalogue that had slowly, crept in, failed to produce the affirmative, interdependent, democratic community it was meant to produce. It in fact produced a religiously rigid and morally conceited hierarchy with little concern for neighbour and distanced from the God of liberation. It was these developments that provoked Jesus' new interpretation. Nevertheless Jesus maintained he had not tampered with its essence (Matt. 5: 17). His interpretation highlighted what the Decalogue also pursued but was unable to achieve; a framework for a democratic society.
Even a cursory glance at the life and teaching of Jesus shows he possessed a relentless drive towards universal democratic values. Yet, Jesus did not propound Democracy or any other political system for that matter. This however does not mean that He was "a political". He went beyond all political systems to offer a vision, spirituality and integrated way of life with clear democratic implications. The adherents of this way of life are expected to participate in, critique and enrich all political systems.
The socio-political ethos of Jesus' time was complex. The Jews were the majority community, but some ethnic pluralism prevailed in the presence of minorities. Israel, by then was a colony under Roman imperialism. The Samaritans with whom there was some ethnic mix were considered half cast. All foreigners, ("Gentiles") and those like tax collectors who worked for them were resented. The Jewish religious leadership was permitted some power and privilege out of a sense of expediency. This was utilised for political bargaining with the Romans and suppression of an already oppressed people. Barriers of religion, race and class divided the people. Many groups such as the Samaritans, tax collectors, Lepers, Women, Children and the poor, were marginalised. Feelings of animosity and prejudice were widely spread, the people experienced undue hardship, and restlessness prevailed.
Jesus' democratic vision is best understood through the concept of the Kingdom of God (KOG). This was the central theme in his life and work. He was conscious of being sent to proclaim and establish the KOG.
The KOG, was the influence of the Sovereign God, ever-present, but now intervening in human history in a new way through Jesus. Its thrust was to restore and bring to fulfilment "the original intention of creation"6. The KOG is neither a Utopia nor is it simply located in the hearts of people. It has everything to do with the affairs and struggles of people and is enacted in human history as a movement towards an interdependent, integrated, fully just, human society. It is God's gift but people may participate in its establishment through their acceptance or rejection of Jesus (Jn 1:12). To pray "Thy kingdom come" (Lk. 11:2b) implies the eschatological nature of the kingdom, which will come to fulfilment and completion with the end of history. Then all life will find meaning in harmony with the purpose of God. Consequently, history is the interim period during which democratic values are being articulated and consolidated through the democratic impulse. This process necessarily draws resistance from evil, within humans and human structures of hierarchy, power and oppression. But the sovereignty of God prevails and evil will succumb at the end.
Jesus was often criticised by religious legalists, for not adhering to the then prevailing cultural norms of segregation. On one occasion, Luke the evangelist historian tells us that Jesus was at a meal with some Jews considered traitors because they collected taxes for the Roman imperialists. Also with them were a group of anonymous persons, so dehumanised that they could only be identified as "sinners" (Lk. 15: 1&2). This was probably a judgement on their dependence on daily labour that prevented them from adhering to the Sabbath law. There are several more of such instances where Jesus deliberately cultivated intimate relationships with socially marginalised persons regardless of social expectation or criticism (Lk. 19:7, Lk. 15: 1,2).
In this instance Jesus picks up the harsh comments of his protagonists and goes on to relate three of the finest short stories. Drawing from the everyday interests of his listeners he describes how a shepherd leaves his flock in search of a lost sheep, a woman diligently sweeps her house in search of a lost coin, and a father receives a wayward son, separated for a while (Lk. 15: 3-32).
The point is made succinctly. Organised, structured and competitive societies tend to judge, devalue, isolate and forget those individuals who for some reason do not or cannot conform. Consequently the democratic impulse in Jesus recognises and highlights the value of the individual. God as represented by the shepherd, woman and father attach value to personhood. Persons are made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26). There is a touch of the Divine in each and all regardless of their circumstances in life. The violation of individuals have theological consequences as this is tantamount to a violation of God. So, none has the right to exclude another.
In a related teaching Jesus suggests that "little ones", the vulnerable, default owing to the irresponsibility of the powerful (Lk. 17: 1 & 2). So he exposes the hypocrisy of the oppressors who mislead the people. They, "bind heavy burdens hard to bear, and lay them on mens' shoulders, but they themselves will not move them with their finger" (Matt. 23: 4f). Using more forceful language Jesus goes on; "Woe to you scribes and Pharisees... You travel sea and land to make a single proselyte and... you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves... for you tithe.... (but) have neglected the weightier matters of the law, justice and mercy and faith" (Matt. 23: 15, 23).
In proclaiming the individuals ability to turn to God and experience freedom (Lk. 8: 31-38) through forgiveness and repentance independent of the controls of the powerful, (Lk. 7: 48 & 49) Jesus wrests true religion from the dictates of institutionalised religion. This gets him into trouble. Allegations of "trouble maker" and "blasphemer" emerge. Evil forces threatened by his democratic manifesto of liberation, collaborate to plan his assassination. The democratic impulse, when exercised generates resistance and a price. Jesus' democratic impulse on the value of the person is far from limited to teaching. He offers a praxis as well. The four Gospels are punctuated with numerous stories of the self worth and dignity. He showed people again and again. He once received a member of the Jewish ruling class, an important Pharisee, at night so as to respect his desire to conceal his association with Jesus. A profitable conversation on rebirth in this life ensued (Jn. 3: 1f). On another occasion, he shows dignity for a twice discriminated Samaritan woman by asking her for assistance to quench His thirst (Jn. 4:7f). When a desperate woman in haemorrhage secretly touches His garment in the hope of healing, He publicly acknowledges her personhood by addressing her directly in the midst of the crowd (Mk. 5: 25f). Again, in a crowd, he acknowledges a tax collector hiding in a tree and ends up at a meal in his house. This recognition empowers an excluded human being and leads to personal transformation and social justice, when Zaccheus decides to restore four-fold of all he has defrauded, and give half of his wealth to the poor (Lk. 19: 1-10). At the hour of His death He offers reassurance to His neighbour on the adjoining cross, caught up in the throes of guilt and fear (Lk. 23: 39-43).
Jesus also recognised that people are different and asserted the individuality of personhood. This democratic impulse is demonstrated in the persons He invited to be closest to Him (Lk. 6: 12-16). Among these twelve were a tax collector, some fishermen, a zealot, a member of a nationalist liberation movement and a sceptic. In the choice of Judas Iscariot, always named last by the synoptics and described derogatorily as "the traitor" (Lk. 6: 16) and "the one who betrayed Jesus" (Matt. 10:4; Mk.3:19). He seemed to go further, recognising the right of the person to think and act independently. Other than stating His own disagreement, Jesus makes no attempt to expose or deny Judas of his democratic right to betray his Guru7 (Matt. 26: 20-25; Mk. 14: 21-27; Lk. 22: 21-23).
When faced with the option of a premature death, Jesus like Judas exercises His right to decide. He opts for death in response to the democratic impulse (Mk. 14:36). And then comes the resurrection. This is an affirmation from the Divine that this democratic choice based on an impulse finally overcome the very forces of evil (Mk. 16:6). It implies that Jesus' democratic impulse is reciprocated by the source of all that is democratic – the Creator God.
Jesus sensed that His life and work were intrinsically connected with a life of wholesomeness for others. In a treatise where He compares Himself with the Good shepherd He states that His coming makes it possible for people to have abundant life (Jn. 10: 10).
In His first sermon preached at Nazareth, acknowledged as his manifesto, He had already elaborated this life as:
"good news to the poor, .....release to the captives, the recovery of sight to the blind, and liberty, for the oppressed." (Lk. 4: 17-19)
This is a holistic manifesto in response to identifiable socio-political oppression. To be truly free people must be liberated from all oppression, economic, social physical and political.
This collective democratic thrust for the liberation of trapped persons pushed Jesus into conflict with the Jewish authorities. The question of the Sabbath law was one such area (Lk. 6: 6f). The conflict centred on healing on the Sabbath and spread to other areas (Matt. 12: 1,2). But healing is an act of God, and it is good and necessary for humans. So Jesus challenges the law (Lk. 14: 3,5); Matt.12:12). Laws are made for the benefit of people, not people for laws (Mk. 2:27). Consequently, laws that hinder the fully human life are bad laws and a contradiction of the democratic ideal and in need of revision.
Jesus' teaching, preaching and example expound his manifesto of freedom. He summarises the Decalogue as the positive way to freedom (Matt. 22: 37-39). Interdependent interaction (love) of the three most indispensable entities; Self, the Other and God brings freedom. This is the dynamic scope and standard for the democratic life, both individual and social. Where these three loves operate in balance, self-worth and dignity, the worth and dignity of the other, and an acknowledgement of the sovereignty of God over all over sovereignties, national, racial or even religious, there true democratic freedom is the outcome.
We must now pay some attention to the democratic methods by which Jesus conveys the fully human life. These are:
The birth of Jesus in a cattle shed (Lk. 2:7) signalled the absence of barriers in reaching him. The poor and the affluent, Jew and Gentile received him at birth (Matt. 2: 1-2; Lk. 2: 15-16). During his ministry, people of all types had direct access to him. This included the powerful and the marginalised (Lk. 5: 17; Lk. 15:1). We earlier saw how He himself made deliberate intervention into the lives of people. He particularly associated with women, children, lepers, tax collectors, Samaritans, and Gentiles, all ostracised groups, and considered them his friends. H showed them compassion, healed them, taught them and on occasions provided them with food. He regularly visited their homes and sat at their tables, conveying the deepest intimacy (Mk. 1: 40-41; Lk. 19:5, Jn 4:40; Lk. 9: 16-17). There does not seem to be any record of Jesus' rejection of any person at any time. Even those who sought to destroy him were received (Lk. 11:17). He was accessible to all and related with all. This was a characteristic democratic impulse in the man.
But Jesus' association with people was far from merely social. It had theological implications. In their midst, He was the key to their understanding of, and entry into the Kingdom of God (Jn. 14:6,7). His presence with them extended the incarnation that the God who entered human history through a human was physically present in the struggles and affairs of the people (Jn. 1:14). He was in their midst to turn their attention to the God reference, and to this way help them rediscover their place in society as useful members of the KOG. Every opportunity was seized to edify, encourage and empower people.
A classic example of this is Jesus' teaching on servant-hood (Mk. 10: 35-46). This teaching emanates from the desire for prominence and power of the two brothers James and John, using this opportunity Jesus teaches the character of true democratic leadership. His disciples are not to follow the power embracing model of authoritarian leadership, very real in the world. The servant model of leadership is the option He offers. In the servant model, power is understood as a means of facilitating the freedom and growth of people. True leadership ceases when power is used to impose and control. Servant leadership seeks to give more than it receives; but in giving there is fulfilment. Just before His death Jesus symbolically washes the feet of his disciples to indicate that servant leadership is costly. It does not bring material and even personal benefits and gain. The best leaders of today wear themselves out, creating better leaders to take their place tomorrow (Jn. 13: 12-14). Nations, religions, Societies, communities, institutions and even families led by people with the servant mentality are more democratic. They are less conflictual than a society led by all masters and less oppressive than a society of some masters and many servants.
On another occasion Jesus was compelled to reprimand His disciples when they attempted to prevent children from being brought to Him. Mark tells us that He was "indignant and said .... let the children come to me, do not hinder them for to such belong the Kingdom" (Mk. 10:13f). And then He takes them in His arms and blesses them. This behaviour is typical of Jesus. His democratic passion for wanting to be with the people, included the forgotten ones. He teaches the democratic status of the child. The child is not simply a potential adult of tomorrow. The child has an immediate status and value of its own that has already qualified it for fullest membership in the KOG. His physical embrace of the children is powerfully symbolic, and is meant to endorse his teaching that the child has arrived in that place where all adults aspire to go.
The Beelzebub incident records yet another such instance of edification and empowerment through interaction (Mark 3: 20-35). Jesus is with the crowd. This is a primary democratic impulse, to participate with the "Ochlos"8, the masses who survive on the margins of life, powerless and helpless, and whose only identity is their collectiveness. Mark hints at participatory physical identification between Jesus and Ochlos, when He has no food to enter a not infrequent experience of the Ochlos (Mk. 3:20).
Then comes the reaction. This behaviour is mistaken for lunacy by friends who seek to take him away (Mk. 3: 21,22); caricatured as demon possession by his protagonists, the scribes, for his authority over unclean spirits (Mk. 3:23) and adequate reason for a family intervention to save their kinsman from the wrath of the authorities (Mk. 3:31). Jesus' refusal to be sucked back into the apparent safety of hierarchical family dictates provokes a fresh democratic dynamic. A classic preferential option is taken. He chooses to remain with the "Ochlos", the "no people" family of no identity. Their real identity, unknown to them, is in fact the family of God, for they are brother and sister and mother who "do the will of God" (Mk. 3: 33-35). Here again Jesus pronounces a foundational democratic impulse that all life is sacred and of value. God is with the people, and very specially so with the "no-people". Strangely it was the secondary reaction of friends, protagonists and family that provoked this life giving democratic impulse.
In his dealings with people, not only questions and issues, but even controversy became a means to dialogue and growth. Repeatedly Jesus is known to have invited discussion and raised questions to generate reflection and awareness. Once He asks who the people and His disciples think He is and then goes on to offer the most profound teaching about His death and self denial in discipleship (Mk. 8:27-38)
On another occasion a lawyer's question "who is my neighbour?" does not stop with a short answer. It provides the opportunity for one of Jesus's most radical political pronouncements; that the one who kept the Jewish law was the outlawed Samaritan. In his closing words, "Go and do like wise" Jesus makes the Samaritan an example to the Jews (Lk. 10: 24-37). It is surprising they did not kill Him then. In contemporary terms, this would amount to Christians being told that a Muslim, or a Buddhist or a Marxist is the best example of Christian discipleship.9
Through such democratic interventions Jesus provoked people to review their assumptions and prejudices and to engage in critical rediscovery of themselves and their relationship with God and others.
Some of His finest teachings come out of encounters with protagonists whose intention is to test or trap Him. So the question on taxes to Caesar becomes an opportunity to teach religious nationalists that if image signifies ownership, taxes may be paid to Caesar provided the human created in the image of God acknowledges God's sovereignty (Matt. 22: 15-22). This teaching on the sovereignty of God undergirds Jesus' democratic impulse. God is the source of the truly democratic and the truly democratic is achievable to the extent that God's sovereignty is acknowledged.
In the instance of the woman accused of adultery, Jesus turns a volatile and potentially violent situation into an experience of learning for a bigoted patriarchal society through his challenge that the person without sin ought to "cast the first stone". Here He asserts the democratic principle that none has a right to claim moral superiority over others (Jn. 8: 1-11).
Another aspect of the democratic critical encounter adopted by Jesus, was the public appreciation of marginalised groups considered too depraved to achieve or offer any good. So, He highlights the gratitude of the single Samaritan leper in contrast with presumably the other nine Jews who did not bother to return to give thanks (Lk. 17: 17 & 18); draws attention to the offering of the poor woman who relatively gave more than the rich (Mk. 12:43), and is impressed with the spirituality of the Syrophonecian woman (Matt. 15:28).
Jesus does not stop at appreciation. He goes on to commend the marginalised as examples. This echoes His democratic impulse of recognising the value of all humans. Romans were considered outside the faith community. But Jesus commends the faith of a Centurion (Mk. 8: 10). We have noted Jesus' citation of the Samaritan as best example of "keeper of the law" and how Jewish adults are reminded that children, the "not yet" silent ones, are full members of the Kingdom of God and that unless they become like children they will not gain membership (Matt. 18:3).
The Democratic Impulse of the Church: Some pointers only are possible here.
1. A question arose between the Hebrew and Greek speaking Jews regarding the distribution of alms to their widows (Acts 6: 1-6). When the problem was raised with the leadership the people were given the opportunity to participate in its resolution by themselves selecting a second level leadership of seven trustworthy persons to be set aside for the task of distribution. These became the first deacons of the church, an order exercised to date. These deacons included a non Jew of Greek origin, breaking new ground in the ethnic leadership of the church as well. These clearly historic developments were possible because of the democratic process of consultation and peoples participation endorsed by the leadership.
2. At the first church Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15: 1-29), a question regarding the circumcision of non Jewish converts to Christianity is raised by representatives from the periphery. The centre deals with this seriously, gives it prominence at the central forum, permits wide discussion and then decides in favour of accommodating the thinking of this minority view point without prejudice to the majority. The outcome of this democratic process was just. It initiated the universal nature of the church by freeing it from the bonds of the particular Jewish culture.
3. With the passage of time the church lost this democratic cutting edge. The New Testament offers a glimpse of a compromise that had begun to set in. With concern for survival of the institution, expediency was balanced with the democratic impulse. A good example of this is the New Testament position on women, slavery and political authorities (Eph. 5: 21-23; Tit. 2: 2-5; 1 Cor. 11: 3-10; 14: 34-36; 1 Pet. 2:13; Tit. 3: 1 & 2 and parallels).
1. Since then strong doctrinal assertion with weak practice has been the churches general strategy in its continuation of the democratic impulse of Jesus. Disturbing anti-democratic violations of humanity in and through the crusades, anti-semitism, colonisation, the apartheid system, aggressive evangelism an so on is evidence of the tremendous damage this strategy could lead to.
2. That the spirituality of Jesus has not been entirely lost is evident in the democratic impulse of small groups and some significant movements within the Christian tradition. The South American Base communities and the Christian contribution to the defeat of the South African system of apartheid are contemporary examples of this tradition.
3. The church in Sri Lanka too has its contemporary examples. To name them now may be too premature.
1. In the parable of the wheat and tares Jesus taught that good and evil must co-exist till the end (Matt. 13: 28-30). Any attempt to uproot the evil will also have a bearing on the good. Humans and our structures are a mix of both good and evil. The struggle for democratic ideals will always be in circumstances of oppression, injustice and greed. This is the reality, and this will be so till the end.
2. In the parable of new skins for new wine Jesus acknowledges that all life affirming teaching requires renewed application (Mk. 2: 22). This is true of the democratic impulse as well. Consequently every generation must take stock of its oppressors, review its human need, resources and potential for liberation, and work for sustainable democratic change.
3. In this task, the "little flock" (Lk. 12: 32), small groups, play a particular role as enabler and agent of change. They are to be the watch-persons of society; the salt, leaven, light of every generation (Matt. 5: 13, 14). Put differently, the task of such groups is to continue the democratic impulse, and to challenge and work for the establishment of democratic ideals in society.
4. The Eucharist is the model of true democratic community. The sovereign God is source of all human labour and produce. The labour of humans that produce and offer bread and wine, and these gifts, are sacred. These gifts are meant to be shared equally by a gathering of equals. When this is done, all life, its Creator, resources, labour and relationships are celebrated.
5. Christian spirituality for the democratic option comes through communion in Christ. Christ is present in little flocks (Matt. 18: 20) and the breaking of bread (Matt. 26: 26) to keep the democratic impulse alive in those who dare to walk with Him.
6. A poster in my study says "God is the unrest in us which does not allow us to be tranquil and content"10. This is the moving spirit of the democratic impulse; a paradoxical restlessness, due to human oppression and degradation, and that relentlessly pursues a better age for all. Another feature of the wave is its restlessness.
(1) Lederach, John Preparing for Peace; p7
(2) Originally democracy meant ¨people's power' and stemmed from the Greek citizens participation in direct government.
(3) Lambeth Resolution 44/1908. This resolution acknowledges compatibility between these ideals and the spirit of Christ.
(4) Lambeth Resolution 20/1948. The democratic ideal of freedom is so crucial that Christians are expected to guard it and create public opinion when it is threatened. When freedom is operative national well being is assured.
(5) There is a view that some ancient Sri Lankan monarchies reflected democratic ideals. King Buddadasa (340-368 AD) set up medical clinics for all and even treated sick animals. King Uppathissa 1 (308-401 AD) participated regularly in Dhana, with the people in a common dinning hall; Aggbo V (718-724 AD) based his rule on the avoidance of improper investment, improper treatment and corruption; Sri Sangabo (251-253 AD) sacrificed his life to save his people and so on.... Pranandha, Kuliyapitiya 1986, The Buddhist way to Liberation of Society, VDK.
(6) Richardson, Allan 1979, Theological Word book of the Bible, SCM, p119.
(7) Only Matthew records Jesus identifying Judas as betrayer. Luke and Mark are silent on the question of identity.
(8) The dehumanised sector – the "No people". As against the NT uses "Demos/Laos" for the people of God.
(9) This magnanimity of including outsiders in the community of faith was however not entirely new to Judaism. A slim tradition co-existed along-side their dominant exclusive tradition. Jesus' familiarity with the scriptures coupled with his democratic impulse simply brought this tradition into the limelight at a time when it was felt politically and religiously inappropriate to do so. The paradoxical reaction of the congregation at the synagogue in Nazareth, to his first sermon, demonstrates this Jewish dichotomy (Lk. 4: 21-29). His declaration that the Isaianic prophecy of liberation "...has been fulfilled in your hearing", was received with nationalistic fervour; "And all spoke well of him, and wondered at the gracious words...". But his subsequent reference to the hospitality received by the prophet Elijah from the foreign widow of Zarapeth, and the cleansing of Namaan the foreign leper, both categorically considered outsiders, drew anger for ".... all in the synagogue were filled with wrath", and they tried to throw him down a precipice.
(10) Juan Segundo