Picture of Jesus Christ that was exhibited in an Exhibition connected to the State level meet of Communist Party of India(Marxist) has kicked up a new controversy with Political parties and Church organisations taking sides.The Puthan Cruz Society(who calls themselves Jacobite Church) is almost on the verge of a split.The crisis is so serious that the Patriarch of Antioch has summoned Bishops of both sides to Damascus despite the fact that the city is torn by Civil war.The Bishops have found that as a very convenient excuse for not responding to the summons since a decree by the Patriarch is bound to snub one of the sides.
That apart,let us examine the issue in depth.The facts are as follows:
A picture of Jesus Christ was displayed in an exhibition conducted by CPM titled Revolutionaries-Christ to Marx.The logic of CPM was that since History is divided into AD and BC,They have taken into account revolutionaries of Anno Domini,chronologically Jesus happened to be the first.They have describe Christ as a revolutionary who stood for the cause of the sections of society who were sidelined by the establishment of those days,consisting of the Roman aggressors and Jewish Clergy and the upper class.
Political parties opposed to CPM and the Catholic Church cried foul.According to them a political party who has dialectical materialism as an article of faith are not entitled to use the picture of Jesus.Catholic Church had a different angle to it.The CPM has seen only one part of the work of Jesus,they do not recognize Him as a Perfect Man and Perfect God.The Marthoma Church took a mid path stating that Jesus indeed was a revolutionary and there was nothing wrong in somebody recognizing Him on those lines.From the Puthan Cruz society,one Bishop visited the exhibition and endorsed the CPM view,some other Bishops and a laymen organisation took more or less the same stand as the Catholic Church.
Now lets examine the issue.Jesus have been defined in many different ways over the centuries by different people.In fact the very fist split in the Universal Christian Church was over the personality of Christ.There has been hairsplitting debates among 3rd to 6th century Church fathers on defining the personality of Christ.Finally it turned out to be much sound and fury,signifying nothing.All that happened was splits ,excommunications,and calling each other heretics.
In the 7th century Islam defined Christ as a prophet but not as son of God,although they acknowledged his miraculous birth.
The Commies have now defined Christ as a revolutionary and that is the current issue.Was this a sudden revelation to them?Or is it a deft political move? I subscribe to the view that the move is part of a well planned political strategy.It is part of a plan to get supporters from Christians of Central Kerala who are not favourably disposition ed to Commie ideology.The conventional Christians view Commies as atheists and against Christianity.Hence the party is weak in areas dominated by Christians.
The forces aligned against Commies found red signal there and their survival instincts prompted them to react sharply or perish.Dents in Christian vote bank is something they can hardly afford.So they had to done the mantle of protectors of Christ from atheists.This could perhaps contain some erosion of their vote bank,if at all the Commie strategy is to work.
The real questions are:
Can Christians insist that all others need to define or understand Christ as they do(especially since different sects of Christians understand ?Define Him differently)?
If someone is willing to accept one part of the personality of Christ,why should a Christian object to it?
That apart,let us examine the issue in depth.The facts are as follows:
A picture of Jesus Christ was displayed in an exhibition conducted by CPM titled Revolutionaries-Christ to Marx.The logic of CPM was that since History is divided into AD and BC,They have taken into account revolutionaries of Anno Domini,chronologically Jesus happened to be the first.They have describe Christ as a revolutionary who stood for the cause of the sections of society who were sidelined by the establishment of those days,consisting of the Roman aggressors and Jewish Clergy and the upper class.
Political parties opposed to CPM and the Catholic Church cried foul.According to them a political party who has dialectical materialism as an article of faith are not entitled to use the picture of Jesus.Catholic Church had a different angle to it.The CPM has seen only one part of the work of Jesus,they do not recognize Him as a Perfect Man and Perfect God.The Marthoma Church took a mid path stating that Jesus indeed was a revolutionary and there was nothing wrong in somebody recognizing Him on those lines.From the Puthan Cruz society,one Bishop visited the exhibition and endorsed the CPM view,some other Bishops and a laymen organisation took more or less the same stand as the Catholic Church.
Now lets examine the issue.Jesus have been defined in many different ways over the centuries by different people.In fact the very fist split in the Universal Christian Church was over the personality of Christ.There has been hairsplitting debates among 3rd to 6th century Church fathers on defining the personality of Christ.Finally it turned out to be much sound and fury,signifying nothing.All that happened was splits ,excommunications,and calling each other heretics.
In the 7th century Islam defined Christ as a prophet but not as son of God,although they acknowledged his miraculous birth.
The Commies have now defined Christ as a revolutionary and that is the current issue.Was this a sudden revelation to them?Or is it a deft political move? I subscribe to the view that the move is part of a well planned political strategy.It is part of a plan to get supporters from Christians of Central Kerala who are not favourably disposition ed to Commie ideology.The conventional Christians view Commies as atheists and against Christianity.Hence the party is weak in areas dominated by Christians.
The forces aligned against Commies found red signal there and their survival instincts prompted them to react sharply or perish.Dents in Christian vote bank is something they can hardly afford.So they had to done the mantle of protectors of Christ from atheists.This could perhaps contain some erosion of their vote bank,if at all the Commie strategy is to work.
The real questions are:
Can Christians insist that all others need to define or understand Christ as they do(especially since different sects of Christians understand ?Define Him differently)?
If someone is willing to accept one part of the personality of Christ,why should a Christian object to it?
No comments:
Post a Comment