Grace and Stigma

One of the hallmarks of a developing and progressive society is the degree to which it is inclusive – inclusive of minorities, marginalized and other vulnerable sections of society who may normally not expect to find a place under the sun. Such a place of equality is what the Indian constitution guarantees in Article 14(equality) and Article 15(no discrimination)

So what is one to make of the recent Supreme Court ruling that those leprosy patients cannot contest a civic election or hold municipal office in Orissa state? The case was brought to court by two men who were elected to a civic body in Orissa in 2003, but were later disqualified as they had leprosy. The Orissa Municipal Act of 1950 bars people suffering from tuberculosis or leprosy from holding such posts.

"The legislature in its wisdom has thought it fit to retain such provisions in the statute in order to eliminate the danger of the disease being transmitted to other people from the person affected," Supreme Court judges CK Thakker and DK Jain said in their ruling.

In the colonial era, the central government passed the Lepers Act of 1898, which provided legal provision for forcible confinement of leprosy sufferers in India. A hundred and more years have passed by; politically India is an independent state, has become a signatory to the UN resolution which says discrimination against leprosy patients must be ended. Medically, leprosy is detected early and thanks to a multi drug regime, cured early too. And yet a few years short of the second decade of the 21st century, piles of archaic legislation keep those who happened to have contracted leprosy at some point on the margins of society.

I always think of that fear and stigma when I read the stories about leprosy in the Gospels. Leprosy was of course greatly feared in the ancient near east. No one had contact with a leper(as they were referred to till recently). They were, instantly, removed from every social sphere. They couldn’t worship in the synagogue, they couldn’t live with other people, they couldn’t participate in the economic system of the time; who would take money from a leper?

We are familiar with the story of Naaman. Successful military man and leader, struck down by disfiguring disease –But Naaman’s disease is likely to get him ousted from his post, in a society even more fixated on appearance than ours. If Naaman can’t get his skin cleaned up, not only will he have to leave office, he’ll be banished from polite and religiously observant society. Naaman’s route to healing reads almost like a spy novel. A word dropped by the slave girl who works for his wife – and why would this little girl who was captured in an enemy raid want to help him? But her tiny shred of hope has him rushing off to his king to get a letter of passage to the enemy. When the letter comes to the king of Israel, he despairs, for he knows he can’t fulfil this request. But Elisha gets wind of the visitor and says, “Come see me and I’ll see what I can do.” Naaman goes, but he’s too proud to enter Elisha’s house. Elisha sends a message out – “go wash in the Jordan, and you’ll get what you’re after.” It must have sounded amazingly dismissive, because Naaman leaves in a huff. But his own servants offer him encouragement, and he finally goes off to the river, and gets his youthful appearance back. Maybe this is where the fountain of youth idea came from…Slave girl, servants, enemies, kings, and prophets – an impressive set of links that bring Naaman to his knees.

Jesus’ healing of the leper is more direct. The leper appears and asks to be healed. And Jesus reaches out his hand and touches the leper and says, “I do want to; be clean.” Jesus chooses to foul himself – touching a leper makes him unfit for polite society. Being gut-wrenched may also carry the sense that Jesus touched the man in spite of his own revulsion – or, more likely, the revulsion of the people around him. Those onlookers, just like the people around Naaman, are accustomed to keeping themselves “clean” by excluding anybody who threatens them. They don’t want to get too close, and they certainly don’t want their eminent visitor and rabbi to get too close.

Several secular laws and courts of course discriminate against those who have leprosy and those who are “different” in subtle and not so subtle terms. But maybe we can be brave enough to admit there are banished ones within the household of faith too. There was a decade or two at the beginning of the AIDS epidemic where more than one preacher declared those with the illness were socially unclean; some even claimed those with the disease were going to hell for the depravity of their sin as preachers declared that the illness itself was a sign of God’s curse. There have been days not too long ago when a divorce was enough for a couple to feel the wrath of the church. Some of us still remember days when watching television, going to movies and many other social activities were the sins that would stigmatize you in way that would eventually shun you from the good fellowship of the church.

If the church is to be a different kind of community transformed by grace and surviving by grace, then in my reckoning, we are called to be the compassionate community moulded by the Lord. We must forever look over the wall of the community to see who’s outside the gates, banished there by the people of God, unable to get in other than to get on their knees to beg. There’s a risk in loving the outsiders to be sure. But if we’re the people of faith we claim to be, that’s the kind of love we must share.

Healing takes a whole community of unlikely partners, and it takes getting past our own fear of contamination. it is time for us to seek to be liberated from our own hidden demons and stigmas.