Tuesday, 17 September 2013

Causes and Consequences of broken family.



Causes and Consequences of broken family.

By Laldanmawia
……………………………………………………………………………….

Introduction:
Family is said to be the first institution where one starts to equip oneself to grow. But differences have been found to each family. According to the administration and organizing family, each produces various kinds of character. Having healthy and happy family is what everyone’s dream. But many could not succeed it. Due to different problem, the healthy families have been broken up as well. When unwanted things are coming up, many families have been broken, and the members are separated. This is a tragic happening out of unrestricted reasons as well as unfortunate reasons. So, in this paper we will explore more on the causes of broken family and their consequences.

1. Broken family: Meaning and Implication:
No matter how ideal a family in the terms of their relationship, there are still hardships and misunderstandings that will come along the way. It is just part of any relationship anyway. But, the sad part is when one of the family members gave up and the others have no choice but to accept and let go. Thus, the family starts to be broken.[1]

When we say broken family, it is not distinct and strange thing, rather common and experiencing problem in and around us. Family life is in a crisis when some problems aroused and which causes separation of the members in the families, which is simply called broken family. 

However a mere separation due to education, job, etc is not broken family, even though the family members are staying away from each other. To be broken in the family, there must be some crises which are arisen out of misconception, mistreating, misunderstanding, mis-acceptance, etc. Then the occurring crises lead to the divorce of parents, disposal of sons or daughters and leaving home by any members of that family. It is very controversial that whether to claim every splitting up is broken family, while they still run the family well. There are many families without father, mother, and other members but still conditionally and systematically running. They may not like to call them broken. Of course they are not broken, rather just some members left away. 

2. Causes of Broken Family:
2.1. Parents’ divorce: In anytime, anywhere and anyhow, divorce is not healthy for the family life. But it happens. Divorce is claimed to be the main reason behind broken family. The common disputes between a husband and a wife are the financial issue, sexual misunderstanding, early marriage, teen pregnancy, education, health problem, etc.[2]  When the parents get divorced, usually either of them or sometime both of them leave home. Then the absence of either or both the parents will affect the family administration, then family become broken.

2.2. Death: It is obvious that death reduces the family strength. More adversely death sometime leads to broken family. Like other reason all death in the family do not necessarily bring any broken, but by the death of mother or father children become mother/father less. Moreover if the left partner live a drastic life in search of happiness after losing his/her partner, the results in the family could not be hale and hearty for the family life. Then it starts to be broken.

2.3. Misconception between family members: Apart from divorce parents and death, there can be a family problem caused by misconception between the members in the home. The reason may be differ from each other. However the most common reasons are drugs abusing, drinking alcohol, misbehavior manner and doing other intoxicant things by the father, sons or any other members. Then there comes misconception, ruining and anger, which in turn caused breaking the relationship of himself and herself from the family.

2.4. Unconditional administration: Failure in administration in the family is one cause for the breaking up of family. If the father or mother or any other heads fail to administer, there will be problems among the members of the family. They will be free to do whatever and however they like in the home and outside. Then the unsystematic and improper living will affect the remaining relationship in the family. If the relationship has been worsening, there will definitely be losing of caring which can lead to broken in the family.

2.5. Parental or friends influence: Another reason why a family has broken up is because of parental or friends influence. When a third party has involved itself in the matters inside the home, bad-mouthing will just likely to happen and misunderstanding will only grow worse.[3] Everyone has friends; we used to share our problems with them. But there can be negative impact. To whom we thought helps will come, another unexpected advice may come. Many a time, broken family, particularly splitting up of parents took place due to the influences made by our friends. 

3. Consequences of broken Family:
3.1. To the children: Children are the ones who suffer most of broken family. The immediate effect has been shot upon them. When a couple split up, it is the children that are greatly affected scarring them physically, emotionally and socially.[4] Children are supposed to grow up in a healthy family where they could receive love, care and concern from their parents. However in the broken family, from where children would get such love and care? It is, therefore, children of the broken family are normally growing up with having low and bad manner. Children who make problem, rivalry and discontentment in the school or other gathering place are usually from the broken family. Most of children admitted in the Remand home, or other social centers due to some serious mistakes are brought up from broken family where there is no proper administration and proper living standard. Broken family is followed by financial problems generally. That is why; there are more tendencies for children to do stealing and robbing.

3.2. To the adolescence: The impact of having a broken home usually manifests in the adolescence experiencing the feeling of separation. It may cause an internal conflict which may result to depression, anxiety, disobedience, aggression and low self-esteem.[5]
 On the other hand, broken family opens the door for the young people to live their life as they wish. When children are growing up, they like to learn something more and explore new thing as much as possible. They adjust with the new things quickly. In that situation if there is no proper guidance, they will learn and enjoy bad things more. It is hard to see young people of broken family behaving well manner. They usually have free time to roam around. There is no much controller who could guide them in the right ways. Controlling and guiding adolescents in a right way is difficult even in a proper family, how much more will it be in a broken family.

3.3. To the parents: The consequence of broken family to the parent is caused by death and other reasons apart from divorce. When they lose their children, they develop grieve and anxiety. Their mental suffering adversely affects their health. There are some parents lost their health and eventually died. There the breaking of the family is great lost for each and every members of the family.

3.4. To the Society: Broken family is a major problem of the society that should be given enough attention. The behavior of family setup affects the social, economic and political aspects of a country.[6] More broken families produce more negative affects in the society. Society is built up with communitarian life of the people who live there in. However just and pleasant society will last on the strength and capacity of mutual care to each other. There should be proper living standard. In the mean time, society used to have serial problems of robbing, killing, raping, stealing, disturbing others, making some noise, etc. It is said that all these societal problems are coming out of people who do not get proper teaching at their home; usually those are broken families.

4. From Family counseling perspective:
It is not possible to provide accurate and concrete suggestions, which are suitable to all situations of broken families. Therefore some few suggestions have been mentioned here with mixing up of the overcoming and preventing suggestions:

4.1. Re-marriage: If it is possible, remarriage is the first medicine to provide for broken family, particularly divorcing broken. But it may be difficult to remarry, basing on the situation how they get divorced. The divorced parents must reconsider the future effects of their deeds to their children. The children may grow up with having step-family or rather they will lose their nature of life if the family goes on as broken. To remarry, trying to develop new positive relationships within the family or between the couple is very necessary.[7] Majority of the children support the remarry of their parents.

4.2. Coping with the conflict:  This is the other step that we can look for the solution of broken family. To remarry, coping with the problem is a must. Let the parent started to use their strength to cope with the difficulties in the family, the children will follow.[8]

4.3. Forgiveness in the family: Family problems have to be found in every home, whether is any kind of family. Due to some conflicts and some mistakes we made, the other members got discontentment. Whenever problems come in the family, mutual forgiveness is the needed step to be taken. Forgiveness will prevent the splitting up and it will also restructure the relationship.

4.4. Going on with the matter: Sometime there are impossibilities to cope with the problems, and unsolvable splitting has come. In that situation, remaining members need to strengthen themselves to go on with the matter. Whether they may lose father or mother, son or daughter, if there is no hope to get back the lost ones, they should go on with trying to have the proper running family. Here preparing them to have courage to go on is our responsibility.

4.5. Keeping family relationship unchanged:  This is preventing suggestion that the family need to keep the relationship of the members unchanged or more keeping it more strength. To have that kind of family, there should be proper arrangement of doing things together. Some suggestions made by Drenda Keesee are:[9]

4.5.1. Having family day once a week. Let a different family member choose the “perfect day” each week, keeping in budget, of course.
4.5.2. Praying on family day: Even if only for a few minutes, praying together creats better relationship.
4.5.3. Planning a break away from everyone and everything except spouse and children for some time is sometime to be practiced.
4.5.4. Engage teens in the planning process: Letting children or teens to help the father with research, reservations, and ideas is very meaningful points. Adventure is important, and can make you “way cool” to your teen.
4.5.5. Find something to do together. Doing something together as couple or family is another ideal developing relationship. Nearly any activity done together can inspire communication.

Conclusion:
By being human beings we all have limitations and shortcomings, due to these we used to make problems for other for some time. Family filled with mutual love and care is the ideal for all of us. But because of such human incapacity, we cannot succeed it. Then conflicts aroused which caused broken family. There can be many reasons as we have discussed previously. There can also be various consequences in every development stages of life, even in the society. However, it is to be noted that when there is problem and impact, there is also the solving idea. Broken family also can be solved at the same time, it could be prevented. In these ways we can go on with the broken family. Even though it has the adverse effects on the society, looking down and condemnation is not to be our responses. The Christian response and Counseling response should be rooted in this way, “My brothers, if someone is caught in any kind of wrong doing, those of you who are spiritual should set him right; but you must do it in a gentle way. And keep an eye on yourselves so that you will not be tempted, too. Help to carry one another’s burdens, and ion this way you will obey the law of Christ” (Galatians 6:1-2).

Bibliography:
Tyler, Don and Martha Tyler. Foundations for the Family. Illinois: Regular Baptist Press,
1990.
Santrock, John W. A Topical Approach to Life-Span Development. New Delhi: Tata
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, 2008.
http://ivythesis.typepad.com/term_paper_topics/2010/07/causes-and-effects-of-broken-family.html (27 August 2012).
http://www.drenda.com/family/tips-mending-preventing-broken-family (30 August 2012).
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_effects_of_broken_families_on_children (30 August 2012).



[7] John W Santrock, A Topical Approach to Life-Span Development (New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, 2008), 529.
[8] John W Santrock, A Topical Approach to Life-Span Development (New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, 2008), 527.
Posted by at 8 comments:

Monday, 13 August 2012

Indigenization and Contextualization & Theological and Ministerial Training Institutions.


Indigenization and Contextualization & Theological and Ministerial Training Institutions.
Presented by: Lalhlenzova, Lalrammawii Thangluah and Laldanmawia
………………………………………………………

Introduction:
The 20th Century brought a new pattern in mission which looked for all places and situations. It put more emphasis on setting the foundation of mission in the culture of where it’s being preached. Then there came indigenization, inculturation and contextualization. They all have same idea and goal but used interchangeably from time to time. Then these movements made great contributions in mission. So in this paper, we will look upon the concepts and approaches of indigenization, contextualization and theological and ministerial training institutions which came under the sub topic of ‘indigenous and national Christian movements and churches’ in the syllabus.

1. Definition and Elaboration of the Terms:
1.1. Indigenization: The word indigenization means putting self into the other side of its situation, and to make increase local participation. According to Kosuke Koyama[1], Indigenization means
 “theologically informed endeavour to make the content and expression of Christian theology, ministry and life adapted and rooted in a community of different cultural localities”.[2]
This definition seems to be the adaption of Christian theology to be rooted in the local culture. To the word indigenization, one person is remembered, who is none other than Robert de Nobili.[3] We can bring him as an example as he got himself changed as Indian as much as he could in order to make his mission more meaningful. At the same time he wanted to present Christianity to the Indians in an Indian way.[4] Giving first priority to the people’s situation rather than self is one of the main aims of indigenization. It is very true to the life of De Nobili as mentioned above. To be accepted by the higher caste, he put himself to their feet and ate among them.[5]

1.2. Contextualization:  According to the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, the word contextualization means “considering things in relation to the situation in which it happens or exists”. Here the meaning refers to putting importance to the situation according to the context where something is done. R. Yesurathnam defines contextualization as “part of an evolving stream of thought that relates the gospel and churches to a local context”.[6]
In a theological field, the term contextualization can be defined as ‘doing theology in relation to the place where it is being done’. In other words, we may say it is bringing salvation in relation to the people’s condition, encountering their socio-cultural environment. It stresses more on the situation of the people’s economic, cultural, social and political contexts. We may also say that it is all about doing mission works to the people according to their present situation and by considering their own conditions.
The word Contextualization itself is formulated in Christian mission dated back to 1970’s. It is a missiological must and is really imperative that brings the concern for relating gospel and culture.[7]

1.3. Theological and Ministerial Training Institutions: The 19th and 20th Centuries witnessed development in founding and running theological and ministerial training institutions throughout the world, particularly in the West. These institutions were the places where people had been doing their studies and their researches. And from there, ideologies in large numbers had been coming up to meet the challenges of each situation.
In America, today’s well known seminaries laid their foundations to these centuries. We can learn how their functioning was effective. The famous Princeton Theological seminary (1812), Union Theological Seminary (1836), Andover Newton Theological School (1807), Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (1859), American Baptist Theological Seminary (1924), Nyack College (formerly known as Missionary Training Institute, 1882),[8]  and other theological and ministerial training institutions promoted the national integrity in one way or another.

And in Europe, the following institutions were established in the same centuries: Budapest University of Jewish Studies (Hungary, 1877), All Nation Christian College (England, 1971), Belfast Bible College (Northern Ireland, 1908), International Christian College (Scotland ), London Theological Seminary (England, 1977), South Wales Baptist College (Wales, 1807), Augustana Divinity School (Germany, 1947), Evangelical Theological seminary (Croatia, 1894), Johannelund Theological Seminary (Sweden, 1862).[9]

2. Approaches in Indigenization and Contextualization:
There can be some more approaches in doing indigenization and contextualization of mission, but this paper limits them into four points only in order to make it concise and rigid. Those are:-
2.1. More participation of the indigenous people: To have more successful indigenization and contextualization, letting the native people involves in that mission is a must. The more indigenous people participate; the mission will run more meaningfully. As the new paradigm of mission looks ahead on promoting people’s oriented, the success will lie on the opening of the gate for the participation of indigenous people. The involvement of the context people is needed to launch with the consent of the missionaries.
2.2. Transferring the ownership: There are three basic elements which make the church more indigenous, they are self-propagation, self support and self-government.[10] To achieve these goals the ownership of the planted churches in the fields are to be transferred to the native Christians.  Developing people to have courage, ability and interest in organizing church is a necessity through which more people will be coming up to take responsibility. However transferring the ownership may not necessarily means giving them full authority at one time; rather it should be materialized from time to time and in a slow and steady developing process.
2.3. Living like them: One of the most important approaches in indigenizing and contextualizing is to live the life like them. Even God has turned down to the world and lived among the people to affirm the contextualization.[11] The Divine One became Jesus of Nazareth, doing ministry in the Jewish context and he immersed himself to be Jewish man who fulfilled the religious requirements as he said in Matthew 3:15. The incarnation is thus a good example for indigenizing and contextualizing ourselves to the context where we work. The greater result will be depended on the absorption of the missionaries to the life of the native people.
2.4. Propagating cultural based Christianity: Unless Christianity is culturally rooted, it may not last long in active. That is why promoting cultural based Christianity is essential in doing mission. The plurality of cultures presupposes a plurality of theologies.[12] Likewise, the plurality of cultures demands their own cultural based Christianity. And then the cultural based Christianity can be promoted through indigenization and contextualization.

3. Approaches in Theological and Ministerial Training Institutions:
Some of the approaches in theological and ministerial training institutions are:
3.1. Institution based on the context: Many of today’s theological institutions aim for training students evaluating contemporary challenges in the light of the gospel and giving strong emphasis on mission and evangelism.[13] They stand on the contemporary context. Similarly, the 19th and 20th Centuries’ institutions were also based on the context. Colleges of different countries were directly or indirectly influenced by their own context and were instituted on their own situational bases. On the other hand, the institutions were established to provide workers in the churches and other organizations according to the needs of their context.
3.2. Institution of social concern: Many of the institutions had been coming up with having social concerns. The social conditions of the respected areas played important role for influencing the curriculum of theological training colleges, because the social problems, social evils and other troubles relating to societies were to be found which caused people to suffer. To bring off all these problems, training institutions also have responsibilities, and they provided students to look for solution for such problems. Some theological training institutions include social concern as idea or department like Princeton Theological Seminaries have ‘social conservatism’ as her ideology.[14]
3.3. Promoting cross-cultural mission: The focus of some training institutions was to train people for cross-cultural Christian mission services anywhere in the world. It is doing mission which covers abroad particularly to the other cultures of countries or places. Committed people got training there; equipping themselves and learning techniques and all. It was these institutions which contributed lot in producing cross cultural missionaries. By sending out missionaries, the mission was promoted.

Concluding Remarks:
The two approaches mentioned above are practiced in the history, even till today. The Mission movement is consolidated with such words like indigenization and contextualization. They bring the missionaries near to the people, particularly to their culture. Even though the terms were formulized a Century back, they are still active to be used for doing mission in today context. The foundation that was laid in the previous centuries brings the results; so that the indigenous people receive their dignity through transferring of authority to them towards the planted churches. The mission fields are now the bodies that make the new mission fields in turn in other places. Indigenization and contextualization made indigenous people to have zeal in mission, as well as to have responsible authority towards the mission.
The theological and ministerial training was given regards; and we may call the 19th Century an Era for establishing such institutions in America and Europe, because most of prominent training institutions in the West were opened in this century. The development in every field of life also demanded development in theological circulation which also encouraged the churches to run theological seminaries in their respective places. And thus training institutions had been emerged in large numbers. Then these theological and ministerial training institutions had a great contribution for promoting theological speculation and mission movement.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Anderson, Gerald H. and Thomas F. Stransky. Mission Trends No. 3: Third World Theology.
New York: Paulist Press, 1976.
Bosch, David J. Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission. New York:
Orbis Books, 1991.
Hodges, Melvin, L. The Indigenous Church. Missouri: Gospel Publishing House, 1953.
Jeganathan, WS Milton, eds. Mission Paradigm in the New Millenium. Delhi: ISPCK, 2000.
Jeyakumar, D. Arthur. Christians and the national Movement. Calcutta: PK Bhattacharya
Punti Pustak, 1999.
Sumithra, Sunand and F. Hrangkhuma, eds. Doing Mission in Context. Bangalore:
Theological Book Trust, 1995.

WEBLIOGRAPHY:
http://www.bible-college.co.uk/html/directory.html (13 July 2012).
http://en.m.wikipedia./org/wiki/list_of_evangelical_seminaries_and_theological_colleges
(13 July 2012).
http://www.qtc.edu.au/aims-what-we-believe.html (13 July 2012).

[1] Kosuke koyama  was a Japanese well known missionary to Thailand who propounded the so called Water Buffalo Theology.
[2] Sunand Sumithra and F. Hrangkhuma, eds. Doing Mission in Context (Bangalore:
Theological Book Trust, 1995), 17.
[3] Robert de Nobili was an Italian Jesuit missionary who came to Madura (India) in 1606.
[4] Sunand Sumithra and F. Hrangkhuma, eds. Doing Mission…, 19.
[5] Sunand Sumithra and F. Hrangkhuma, eds. Doing Mission….
[6] R. Yesurathnam, “Contextualization in Mission” in Mission Paradigm in the New Millenium. Edited by WS Milton Jeganathan (Delhi: ISPCK, 2000), 52.
[7] R. Yesurathnam, “Contextualization in Mission” …, 52.
[10] Melvin L. Hodges, The Indigenous Church (Missouri: Gospel Publishing House, 1953), 22.
[11] David J Bosch, Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission (New York: Orbis
Books, 1991), 426.
[12] David J Bosch, Transforming Mission…, 452.
Posted by at 1 comment:

Saturday, 11 August 2012

The Jesus Movement: The Am-ha-aretz’s Arts of Resistance for Justice and Humanhood


The Jesus Movement: The Am-ha-aretz’s Arts of Resistance for Justice and Humanhood

By: Laldanmawia
………13 August 2012……………………………………………...……………………………

Introduction:
The person and works of Jesus Christ are taken into consideration to imply for different aspects of life, particularly to the right sides of situation. If it is in the subject of Justice and Humanhood, his personhood and teachings can be used to make judgment or verdict. Likewise he is very inclusive, as well as tyranny but to the unhealthy situation. Meanwhile, to promote indigenous and marginalized people’s resistance for their justice and dignity, He becomes on their sides. And His teachings and His life can be studied in these ways. Then we will discuss more by looking up to the topic called Jesus Movement: The am-ha-aretz arts of resistance for Justice and Humanhood.

1. Definition of the Terms:
1.1. Am-ha-aretz: The word Am-ha-aretz is a Hebrew term combining of two words like ‘am’ (עם) and ‘eretz’(ארץ), which means people and earth/land respectively.[1] The full form ‘am-ha-aretz’ can be translated as ‘people of the land’.  It refers to the Jews primarily. It is a Hebrew Biblical term which occurs 52 times (e.g. Genesis 13:7, Leviticus 4:27, Exodus 5:5, etc.)[2] It is appropriate to define it as indigenous people. At the same time there can be another dimension, i.e. calling someone with feeling of putting down from normal level, because it means an ignorant or boorish person.[3]
In today’s contemporary world, when we say am-ha-aretz, we can focus to the people of land of every country, particularly to the native or indigenous dweller who need an upliftment from various kinds of exploitation. It considers the marginalized people in the society. Bringing to the Indian situation, we can term it as Adivasi.

1.2. Justice: The 21st Century Dictionary defines Justice as “the quality of being just; just treatment; fairness”. It is a concept of moral rightness which is based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, religion or equity. It is also the act of being just or fair. John Rawls claims that, “Justice is the first virtue of Social institutions, as truth is of system of thought”.[4] It is the rightness of thought to be practiced in the social life. But Justice is a very controversial subject which we can discuss from different understanding and definitions like Justice as Divine command, as harmony, as natural law, as human creation, as mutual agreement, as subordinate value, etc.[5]
In a Biblical term, the Old Testament uses the words mispat and tsedeqah which are more related to righteousness, whereas, New Testament uses the Greek word dikaiosune which also can be translated as righteousness.[6] In individual and personal usage, justice is appropriately defined as individual righteousness, but in a community usage it consists more of maintaining right, equality and peace among the people. 

1.3. Humanhood: The word is strange and uncommon even to the dictionaries of different edition as well as online dictionaries. It is hard to find the clear cut definition. But we can relate it to the words personhood and humanness, and it has some relations to the word humanity as well. From that perspective we can define Humanhood.

Personhood is the status of being a person, and is the state or condition of being a person, especially having those qualities that confer distinct individuality.[7] Humanness refers to the quality of being human. And Humanity also implies the qualities of human beings, especially in being kind or merciful.[8] Then Humanhood can be defined as the condition or the quality of being human/person particularly in reflecting his/her nature, dignity and quality. It focuses on the equality of every person irrespective of race, caste, sex, colour, ethnic, class, possession, etc. 

2. How does Jesus Movement becomes Am-ha-aretz?
The paper will go straight to the point (by hoping that there is no need of explaining first what Jesus movement is) that how Jesus movement can be the am-ha-aretz’s exposition. To address this issue some portions of the Gospels can be made use for encountering with the point mentioned above:
2.1. He proclaims good news for the marginalized people (Luke 4: 18-19): The given texts is from the Hebrew Scripture of Isaiah, read by Jesus Christ in the synagogue, which talks about justice for the poor, the prisoners, the blind and the oppressed. Jesus himself is the answer for what Isaiah is talking about, He is to bring the justice and humanhood for all the marginalized people.

2.2. He heals the sick: Jesus healing ministry shows that he is caring for them and their humanity. He opens the block of the people who cannot fulfill their justice and humanhood because of different sickness and diseases.

2.3. He makes parable using Samaritan man (Luke 10: 25-37): He teaches the parable of Good Samaritan. For the Jews, Samaritan would not bring good things because they are people with same level of dog and are untouchable. But Jesus uses him to teach lesson to the people; by dehumanizing priest and Levite to whom righteousness is claimed to be there.

2.4. He visits marginalized people (Luke 19:1-10; John 4: 1-42; Luke 10: 38ff):  Jesus even visits the marginalized people like Zacchaeus, Samaritan woman, Martha and Mary. They are not thought to be visited by being Jewish teacher. But Jesus wants to break the unnecessary boundary among the people of the land.

There can also be other points for Jesus’ concerns about the am-ha-aretz. But merely by looking the above four points, we can come to conclusion that Jesus movement is toward am-ha-aretz. 

3. The Am-ha-aretz’s Arts of Resistance for Justice:
Why do the indigenous people needs a resistant for their Justice? What is the problem? How does Jesus focus about them? How can we make use Jesus Movement for the arts of resistance for the Justice of am-ha-aretz? By giving some approaches along with answering all these entire questions, we will try to make clear the point ‘the am-ha-aretz arts of resistance for Justice’.

3.1. Through Creation: Every person is created in the likeness and resembling of God (Gen 1:26). There is no point to make difference between human beings since all are God’s image. But because of development of the world and as time’s passing, differentiation have been developed in diverse ways. Then there came unjust treatment and approaching to each other. Women, poor, minority, people with some kind of diseases, uncivilized people, etc. are the main sufferers. Why do these people get unjust treatment? It is not fair at all for them, because they are also created in the image of God having dignity, right, and value. Then to resist justice, equality of being made should be one important aspect.

3.2. They are original inhabitant: The indigenous people but minority in number in different places and times are big sufferers of injustice. Their lands are confiscated by the immigrant bigger groups of people. What is Justice for them? To live in their mother land with peace is what their cry for. Jesus deals with the original dwellers like Samaritan (John 4: 1-41). Other Jewish people may not like to go there, but Jesus dares to do justice for them.

3.3. Opposing racism and discrimination: The lepers, Samaritans, gentiles, tax collectors, women and the poor are the groups who suffer racism and discrimination from the Jewish society. Jesus is indeed a Jew, but has positive attitude toward them. His opposition to racism and discrimination, and his acceptance for them could be found in some gospel accounts like: Luke 6:20 (poor); Matthew 14:3-9, Luke 8:1-3 (women); Luke 10:30-37, John 4:10ff (Samaritan); Luke 17: 11-19 (lepers); Luke 19:1-10 (tax collector), etc. In these chapters, Jesus had an encounter with such marginalized people without hesitation, but with love and care in order to bring their justice fulfill. It is the racism and discrimination, which eradicated the justice of the people.   
  
4. The Am-ha-aretz’s Arts of Resistance for Humanhood:
4.1. Incarnation to be Am-ha-aretz: The word became flesh and incarnated into human being, to be human, and to live among the people. Jesus incarnation to be a Jew ensures his humanhood. He lives, works, walks, acts, eats, sleeps, suffers and dies as the dweller of the Canaan land. He is indigenous man, aboriginal and Adivasi of the Canaan and he has self dignity and right as human to develop himself. Then the indigenous man Jesus fulfills himself first his humanhood according to the situation where he lived, in order to let the am-ha-aretz for their resistance of humanhood.

4.2. Jesus: Healing and parables: And then he works for the resistance of humanhood of women, sick, lepers, poor, gentiles etc by healing and nurturing, so that their humanness will be fulfilled. It is Jesus movement which maintains and keeps the humanhood of the am-ha-aretz.

Jesus indicates his view of God and human being clearly in his parables. He often relates everyday situation in which people could find themselves. He introduces them new pictures of God and their fellow human being through parables.[9] He even tries to resist the dignity and humanhood of women by putting up in the role of the parable (like Luke 15:8-10).

4.3. The Passion Narrative: Jesus’ humanhood and his view toward other’s humanhood can be seen in his passion narrative. The way of Jesus through suffering to death on the cross and resurrection is interpreted in the gospel Luke in such a way that we may recognize our way in it.[10] A look at Jesus way will encourage the am-ha-aretz to endure their humanity. Jesus divinity has been scattered down and died with pain to fulfill his humanhood. It is right to suffer as human being, but suffering will ensure the humanness of all kinds of people.

Conclusion
Our justice and humanhood have been exploited many a time by our fellow human beings in different ways and means. At the same time we ourselves also do unjust reaction to our neighbors in the midst of self-centredness. Life is going with this mutual unhealthy reaction. In the mean time, there are people those who get unfair and unjust approaches from the higher and bigger people, who ruled them and chased them out of their mother land. To exercise their justice and humanhood for them is somewhat like impossible, because their dignity have been exploited. For indigenous people, resisting of their justice and humanhood can be a lifetime struggle, since migration is taken commonly. But this is their task that they need to keep their life grow in peace. To maintain peace among them, they have to fulfill their justice and humanhood first. As we have discussed, Jesus takes steps towards the resistance of justice and humanhood of the am-ha-aretz by putting himself in to practice. Resistance for justice and humanhood is not the task for mere the am-ha-aretz themselves, but it has to be maintained and fulfilled with the keeping of mutual understanding between them and the higher class people.


Bibliography:
Kelly, Paul H. Biblical Hebrew: An Introductory   Grammar. Michigan: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1992.
Grun, Anselm. Jesus: The Image of Humanity. New York: Continuum, 2003.
Fonester, Duncan. “Justice” in The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought. Edited by
Adrian Hastings , Alistair Mason and Hugh Pyper. New York: Oxford University
Press, 2000.

Webliography:
http://www.thejc.com/judaism/jewish-words/am-ha-aretz (5 August 2012).
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?word=Personhood (8 August 2012).
http://peacetheology.net/restorative-justice/6-jesus-and-justice/ (9 August 2012).
http://www.talmut/Judean/am_ha_aretz/in_historical_perspective (8 August 2010).

[1] Paul H. Kelly, Biblical Hebrew: An Introductory   Grammar. (Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1992),  375-392.
[5] Duncan Fonester, “Justice” in The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought. Edited by Adrian  Hastings , Alistair Mason and Hugh Pyper (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), 361.
[8] http://www.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?word=Humanness (8 August 2012).
[9] Anselm Grun, Jesus: The Image of Humanity (New York: Continuum, 2003), 53.
[10] Anselm Grun, Jesus: The Image of Humanity (New York: Continuum, 2003), 89.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)