Sunday the Thirtieth

ANTIPHON

Let hearts rejoice who search for the Lord. Seek the Lord and His strength, seek always the face of the Lord (Psalm 104:3-4).

RESPONSORIAL PSALM

I love you, Lord, my strength. (Psalm 18).

SCRIPTURE EXCERPT

“When the Pharisees heard that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together, and one of them, a scholar of the law tested him by asking, "Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?" (Matthew 22:33-35).”

REFLECTION

The person came to the Lenten Penance Liturgy with a paper filled margin to margin with a list of sins committed over the previous few months. When the time came for individual confession of sins and absolution, the person came to me and began by showing me the list. I was told that it had been written over the course of a couple of days in preparation for the evening celebration of the Rite of Penance (I was moved by the seriousness of the person’s Examination of Conscience). Much was on the list, meticulously organized under a few, specific Commandments. No sooner had I seen the list when the person crumbled it into a ball, looked me in the eye and said, “I missed the whole point with this list.” Curiously I asked, “Missed what point and how?” “You see, father, I have all my sins grouped under particular Commandments. But as I listened to the Reading from the Old Testament tonight (we had used Deuteronomy 6:4-9) I realized I never even gave the First Commandment any thought or reflection. I jumped right to number 4 (“Honor your father and mother”) and began examining my conscience from that point. Dealing with the first 3 commandments and especially the First seems so nebulous and vague to me. But it hit me tonight; without the First Commandment I don't stand a chance of getting anything else in its right place.” We then proceeded to spend a few moments examining connections between the First Commandment and everything on the list. Items on the list were important matter for the Sacrament – AND – all of it needed to be viewed in the context of the First Commandment.

We learn from an ancient commentator on Sacred Scripture, Origen of Alexandria (†254), that the question posed by the scholar of the law was not the noteworthy event of the episode. What was eye opening is that Jesus answered the question “which commandment in the law is the greatest?” In other words, by responding to the question Jesus taught that there is, what we might call, an ‘order of importance’ or a hierarchy of truths and values when it comes to the Commandments. Origen further noted, “This is the supreme and the first commandment in which the discourse of Jesus presents a vital point to take-to-heart because of the commandment’s importance. Other [commandments] are secondary to this one (Commentary on Matthew).” Contemporary biblical scholars, following insights that already surfaced in the Age of the Fathers and among Ancient Christian Writers, note that the question concerning ‘which of the Commandments is most important’ reflected discussion that characterized religious life during the time of Jesus’ Public Ministry. There were a number of prescriptions (613 according to theologians and historians) that defined Covenant living. With so many individual precepts, it was a humanly natural question to ask which one was most important. Ask any professor in university or seminary and you will learn quickly that students engaged in any discipline want to know ‘what is most important’ if for no other reason than to pass the test, essay, assignment or course.

Interestingly, Jesus’ response to the scholar-of-the-law’s question is linked to an important discipline of Jewish living. As a devout Jewish Man, Jesus would have practiced the praying of the Shema. Shema is a Hebrew verb that means “to listen / to-take-to-heart.” Shema is also the word that is used to designate an important DAILY prayer that is recorded Deuteronomy 6:4-9. The fact that this prayer defined daily Jewish living makes the scholar’s address to Jesus suspect. Would not the scholar-of-the-law know the answer to the question? (Incidentally, this notes the observation already evident among Ancient Christian Writers that addressing Jesus as “teacher” in the Gospel according to Saint Matthew is an insult. Only truly disciples (“those who are being taught”) address Jesus as “Teacher.” These true disciples manifest their true colors as disciples by the way they live the Kingdom of God.)

Yet there is another reason why the Frist Commandment MUST be taken to heart. The First Commandment is a bold proclamation that God is Person – AND – the only Person Who is the ground of all reality and life. Theologically, personhood and relationality are synonyms. To be a person is to be a ‘being capable of relational living.’ ‘Being capable of relational living’ is the essence of personhood. Philosophy, psychology, sociology and other scientific disciplines can and do weigh in on the question, description and definition of personhood. But the biblical and theological approach is clear: relationship, relationship, relationship. One might (yes, I said “might”) argue that when one focuses on the specifics of thinking, expressing or doing, ones misses ‘Person’ and therefore misses relationship.

As a confessor (and yes, as a regular penitent as well … that means I ‘know’ what it is like to be on the other side of the screen or sitting before a confessor confessing my own sins), it is easy to focus on the ACTIONS that are sinful. It is another ‘thing’ to delve into the realm of relational living. I recall a recent conversation with friends married about 10 years. A spouse lamented the ‘feeling’ of not being loved. When I asked if the ‘feeling’ had been discussed, the response was most telling, “My spouse talked about all the WORK that is DONE for me and the family.” As human beings created in the “Image and Likeness of our Creator,” our lives are defined by ‘being’ (image and likeness) not by the work any of us do, no matter how significant. The same is true when we speak about our relationship with the Divine Persons. None of us can be content with what any of us does religiously. Sunday Mass, daily charity to one another – especially those in need – are importantly and laudable actions. Yet if they are not lovingly done in response to the love that has been revealed to us by the Divine Persons, we gain nothing.

OPENING PRAYER

Almighty and ever-living God,
strengthen our faith, hope and love.
May we do with loving hearts
what You ask of us
and come to share the life You promise
Who lives and reigns with You and
the Holy Spirit, One God for ever and ever. Amen.

Sunday the Twenty-ninth

ANTIPHON

I call upon You, God, for You will answer me; bend Your ear and hear my prayer. Guard me as the pupil of Your eye; hide me in the shade of Your wings (Psalm 16:6, 8).

RESPONSORIAL PSALM

Give the Lord glory and honor (Psalm 96).

SCRIPTURE EXCERPT

“Thus says the LORD to his anointed, Cyrus, whose right hand I grasp, subduing nations before him, and making kings run in his service, opening doors before him and leaving the gates unbarred: For the sake of Jacob, my servant, of Israel, my chosen one, I have called you by your name, giving you a title, though you knew me not." (Isaiah 45:1. 4-5).”

REFLECTION

The Lord speaks and addresses him by name. He is the Lord’s “anointed (Hebrew, מָשִׁיחַ mashiach, this is the same root for Messiah).” The Lord grasps his “right hand.” He conquers. He strikes fear among leaders of nations. He is “chosen.” He is given a mission that all people may know “I am the Lord and there is no other.” Sound familiar? Perhaps it is Isaiah or Jeremiah or one of the other prophets. Wrong. Perhaps it is one of the kings of Israel? Wrong again! He is Cyrus, the pagan, gentile king of Persia! This point becomes even more interesting as we take a crash-course in a particular period of Israel’s history.

The historical context of the Isaian proclamation this Sunday is the era of the Babylonian Captivity, second only to the Exodus as a pivotal event in Israel’s life as the Chosen People. The Babylonians conquered Israel in 587 BC (the Northern Kingdom had fallen to the Assyrians about 134 years earlier, 721 BC). Despite repeated warnings from the prophets to return to living the Covenant faithfully and devoutly, many in Israel preferred a life of pleasure and instant gratification. Covenant living was too hard and certainly inconvenient. Such a way of living was also an embarrassment when it came to wanting to be like everyone else. Israel once again ‘forgot’ that she was different: she was set-apart (Hebrew, qadosh which eventually is translated “holy” in English) but wanting to be like her neighbors, Israel forsook monotheism and its radical demands of living. Yes, God is One – AND – monotheism requires that this oneness of life be demonstrated in how one as an individual and as a community lives. Morally weakened, Israel had no power born of a disciplined, covenant way of living to battle an enemy. Not only did Jerusalem fall to the Babylonians, but the glorious Temple of Solomon lie in ruins. The movers-and-shakers of society were rounded up and marched back to Babylon to be assimilated into a new culture. The elderly, sick, criminals, women and children were left behind in Jerusalem. As the Babylonian conquers returned home, they gave Jerusalem and her inhabitants one last gift: salted water supplies and fields. Those who were left behind died from dehydration and starvation.

One can only imagine the state of mind that gripped the Israelites living in captivity. It began to dawn on them gradually that the reason for the destruction of Jerusalem was their own sinfulness and lack of attentiveness to the demands of Covenant living. But it was now impossible to atone for those sins. Even if they could get back to Jerusalem there was no Temple within which to offer a fitting sacrifice. To say that Israel was depressed was certainly an understatement. They needed an infusion of hope and that was the mission God entrusted to Isaiah (see chapter 40).

One can appreciate Israel’s reticence to immediately embrace Isaiah’s hope-filled words. They seemed too good to be true, and human nature knows that if something is that good, chances are it will backfire on you. Israel could also point to obstacles: mountains, valleys and rugged terrain. Isaiah proclaimed boldly that the obstacles would be transformed (not destroyed) by the hand of God. Practically speaking, people wondered how they would be able to leave from under the Babylonian rule; they were, after all, prisoners of war. That changed in 539/538 BC when Cyrus (King of Persia), known in history as “the Great,” conquered Babylon. Unlike many leaders before him, Cyrus believed it made good political sense to permit people to hold onto their culture, their way of life and even their religious beliefs and practices. So long as people paid their taxes and kept the peace, the Persian government was happy. Cyrus believed that if people could keep their customs, such would reduce civil unrest and make the task of managing an empire far easier than imposing a particular culture or exiling whole groups of people to foreign lands. With Cyrus as sole ruler, Israel travelled home and began to rebuild the temple.

On one level, this appears as a ‘happily ever after story’ since everything works out in the end. Yet within the context of Isaiah, there is much about Cyrus and his work that is important for believers of any age – ours certainly included – to take to heart for the good of the salvation of all. The first point I speak to concerns the individual believer and her/his faith community. There is the temptation for people of religious traditions, especially those with a substantial human history to live by the 11th commandment: ‘we’ve always done it this way. God can’t certainly act in any other way.’ Intellectually we know that such a commandment never made it to the list but our ways of thinking, speaking and acting reveal otherwise. Historically, we can look back and marvel at the hand of God and give thanks for great thinkers and leaders such as Cyrus. Yet at the time, I do not know how many in Israel’s camp would have tolerated the good talk about Cyrus. He was a pagan, a gentile and not numbered among the Chosen People as Israel understood it at that time. For many I am sure they considered Isaiah a heretic when he delivered the prophetic word calling Cyrus an anointed, a chosen and one entrusted with a Divine mission. Hindsight is 20-20 and when we’re in the thick of things, it is hard to think outside the box. When life as we know it is crashing in all around us, we naturally revert to the familiar and fight change at all costs. Yet the covenant-person and covenant-community must be properly attentive and discern the will of God in the present time. Thankfully in this setting, Israel was docile and pliable enough to discern the movement of God in their lives and in the world. It resulted in a joyous return home and the rebuilding of a cherished culture and life in what would be the iconic Second Temple.

The second point I speak to from this biblical episode concerns civil authority. He may never know Cyrus’ motivation for permitting conquered cultures to retain their ways of living and beliefs so long as the common good flourished. Whether Cyrus was noble or utilitarian in governing in such a way, history has demonstrated that nations lived in relative peace and cultures matured. Civil authority must exercise its power with attentiveness and vigilance to the common good that enables legitimate diversity within society to mature. As we are witnessing in our present age, this is a most delicate issue and wrought with all sorts of implications, known and unknown, for our future and the future of generations to come. Cyrus the Great ruled with authority and wisdom that benefitted an expansive land filled with much diversity. May our leaders do as well in our time and may we continue to pray for them by name.

OPENING PRAYER

Almighty and ever-living God,
our source of power and inspiration,
give us strength and joy
in serving You as followers of Christ,
Who lives and reigns with You and
the Holy Spirit, One God for ever and ever. Amen.

Why belong to the Church?

When he travelled to Germany, Pope Benedict met with reporters on the plane and responded to a number of questions. One of the Holy Father’s responses in particular has caught the attention of many throughout the Church, especially those involved in various aspects of parish work. The reporter noted that many people in Germany are leaving the Church for various reasons and asked Pope Benedict to comment on this phenomenon.

Pope Benedict said, “I think it important to ask oneself; “Why am I in the Church? Do I belong to the Church as I would to a sports club, a cultural association, etc., where I have my interests, such that I can leave if those interests are no longer satisfied? Or is being in the Church something deeper?”

The Holy Father continued, “I would say it is important to know that being in the Church is not like being in some association, but it is being in the net of the Lord, with which he draws good fish and bad fish from the waters of death to the land of life. It is possible that I might be alongside bad fish in this net and I sense this, but it remains true that I am in it neither for the former nor for the latter but because it is the Lord’s net; it is something different from all human associations, a reality that touches the very heart of my being. In speaking to these people I think we must go to the heart of the question: what is the Church? In what does her diversity consist? Why am I in the Church even though there are terrible scandals and terrible forms of human poverty? Therefore, we should renew our awareness of the special nature of “being Church,” of being the people made up of all peoples, which is the People of God, and thereby learn to tolerate even scandals and work against these scandals from within, precisely by being present within the Lord’s great net.”

What can we take from the Pope's words? Parishes are communities blessed with many people of diverse backgrounds and shaped by equally diverse life-experiences and understandings of both the Church and the Catholic Faith. Yet as a Church we pray each time the Most Holy Eucharist is celebrated that we become, “One body, one spirit in Christ.”

Certainly the work of Christian Unity within a parish is first and foremost the work of the Holy Spirit. The ongoing Divine Work of the Holy Spirit is needed to combat evil that wants to “tear apart (the literal meaning of the word diabolic)” the Church and Her members.

But there are also attitudes alive and well within each of us that pose obstacles to unity that are contrary to Jesus own prayer He made to His Father the night before He died for us, “And I have given them the glory you gave me, so that they may be one, as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may be brought to perfection as one, that the world may know that you sent me, and that you loved them even as you loved me (John 17:22-23).”

Each of us asking “why I believe, why I am part of a parish, why I participate in Sunday Mass” can be the start of reconnecting with faith in an invigorating and conscious way. Reflecting on the Pope’s words can be a start of moving from complacency and apathy to a faith that encompasses and animates every aspect of our existence and leads to building up the Body of Christ in unity.

Sunday the Twenty-eighth

ANTIPHON

If You O Lord, laid bare our guilt, who could endure it? But You are forgiving, God of Israel (Psalm 129: 3-4).

RESPONSORIAL PSALM

I shall live in the house of the Lord all the days of my life (Psalm 23).

SCRIPTURE EXCERPT

“The servants went out into the streets and gathered all they found, bad and good alike, and the hall was filled with guests. But when the king came in to meet the guests, he saw a man there not dressed in a wedding garment. The king said to him, 'My friend, how is it that you came in here without a wedding garment?' But he was reduced to silence. Then the king said to his attendants, 'Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the darkness outside, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.' Many are invited, but few are chosen. (Matthew 22:9-14).”

REFLECTION

“Is there anything in the text we just heard that raises a concern?” This is a question that my undergraduates frequently hear once we have listened to a particular biblical text. It is a question quite applicable to the parable proclaimed this Sunday. A king dispatches servants to gather all who have been invited to his son’s wedding feast. People excuse themselves not once, but twice and even with mind-boggling violence. Since the preparations for the festival are complete, the king instructs another batch of servants to get anyone, both the good and the bad, and bring them to the feast. Yet when one shows up without a wedding garment, he is not only removed from the feast but bound hand and foot and cast outside because of improper attire. Even if we understand the significance of the wedding garment, the sense of the text suggests that there may not have been time for this person to don such a garment. So, what’s up with the white garment?

Many biblical scholars suggest that knowledge of first-century Jewish wedding practices is essential to assist in the salvific meaning of the parable. At the same time, scholars acknowledge that we do not have all the relevant information to have a complete or big-picture view of the wedding feast celebrated in this era. We do know that once a couple married-but-before-they-lived-together (what we would call today a ‘formal engagement’) plans were ‘officially’ set in motion for the eventual day of the bride moving into a home (or room) prepared by her husband. An important note here is that the marriage and its announcement (again, in biblical times this was the commitment but a couple did not live together at this point) came after the families (i.e. fathers) worked out the terms of marriage for their children, especially his daughter. With the announcement of the marriage, the couple was committed (or espoused) to each other. In terms of our culture, they could not ‘see’ or date other people. The groom, guided to a degree by his father, began the necessary work of building a home or adding a room onto the family home for his bride. He enlisted the help of family, friends, and skilled people to make all ready. Others in the town made preparations for the wedding festival, a celebration to mark the glorious event. Some would prepare food, some would hope that their wine would be ready while others took care to have a suitable place for the celebration. The bride for her part lived in a state of expectation not knowing the exact day when all would be ready. She and her friends lived in anticipation of the groom’s voice announcing that all preparations were complete and his bride could now come to live with him. The bride’s father escorted her to the new home and she was handed-over to her husband. As the bride was carried over the threshold of the door (marking the start of living together) the celebration began throughout the town. The festivities could last as long as a week, or until the wine ran out – an embarrassment for sure if this happen too early (cf. Cana, John 2). As for the matter of the wedding garment, scant and sketchy historical data suggests that this was a garment worn particularly by those who had a close role in the proximate preparations for the arrival of the bride. Some data suggests that the wedding garment was the change of clothing marking a transition from preparatory work to festive celebration. Especially for those involved in the proximate and last-minute preparations for the bride’s move to her new home, the wedding garment was a refreshing way of leaving behind the work and entering into the celebration.

Many commentators note that this parable has much in common with the parables of previous Sundays. The theme of ‘gift offered, gift rejected and gift given to another people’ surfaces once again this Sunday. Similar to past weeks, we do not want to lapse into a mentality where we as humans decide a person’s or a people’s eternal destiny. There is only one Person who alone will do that – God the Father. But the “wedding garment” is the ‘sticky’ element this week. Why does its absence cause someone to be violently and quickly booted from the festival? Some commentators have mentioned in passing that the garment is a symbol. While not many have offered insight as to the symbolic nature of the garment, it is worth pursuing here. Admittedly, there is a chasm of difference between our present, cultural meaning of symbol and the theological meaning of symbol. Perhaps in the weeks to come I will offer some words on that topic which I often give to both undergraduates and seminarians. The other difficulty is that scholars at times use the word symbol and it seemingly terminates further reflection and discussion on the point at hand.

When it comes to symbol in the Scriptures, there is no better authority than the Fathers of the Church (and a few Ancient Christian Writers, Origen of Alexandria the notable bright-star in the group. Look for a blog entry shortly on the Fathers of the Church. They are surfacing as a vital resource in the Church’s New Evangelization.) The Fathers of the Church know how to “do” symbol in the reading and proclamation of Sacred Scripture. Too often people believe symbol is a license that gives free reign as to what a biblical text can mean. In these cases symbol is often an opinion that does violence to the literal sense of the Sacred Text. Not so with the Fathers. In their commentaries on Sacred Scripture, they show and teach how to be lead more deeply into the saving meaning of the Text.

As for this week’s Parable, a few Fathers of the Church offer insight on the whole episode, but Saints Augustine and Gregory the Great amply address the wedding garment. A good deal of Patristic commentary notes the variety of people invited to the banquet and all the people – good and bad – who come to the banquet as a result of the ‘last round-up’ commanded by the King. Since the Fathers of the Church often view the many banquets and feasts in the Scriptures as an image of the Kingdom of God, Saint Augustine and company comment that the parable is hope-filled: all are invited to the banquet and some at the festival might even be somewhat unsavory. The point is that nobody came to the banquet as a result of her or his initiative. No one ‘earned’ a place or a seat at the banquet. All were invited as pure gift hence equality among all the guests be they rich or poor, good or bad. All are equal in the eyes of the Inviter. But for the Fathers, especially Saints Augustine and Gregory the Great, the universal invitation is not without a requirement. Both view the banquet as the Church and Baptism as the ‘door’ through which the invitation to the Church is opened. However, the baptized must be clothed in the garment of love. Since a wedding is a joining, the garment expressive of that joining must reflect the essence of that union – love. Saint Augustine further comments that this love is none other than the sacrificial love of Jesus Christ Himself. That love – the wedding garment – must be worn by the baptized 24/7/365.

With these insights it is possible to conclude that the wedding garment speaks of a reality deeper than our good or bad actions. The wedding garment speaks of an underlying attitude or manner of life that is sacrificial in nature. This is especially needed in our culture of moral relevance and goodness. How many times do we hear, ‘Oh, well, you know … she or he (or me, of course!) is a good person.’ An exceptionally vague concept of goodness has become the epitome of life and it is a goodness that is often self-defined. The Christian is not called to goodness but holiness. Our thinking, speaking and acting must go beyond a vague, self or societal construct of convenient goodness. The wedding garment – especially for the baptized and those who consider themselves good – is the challenge to think, to speak and to act sacrificially: the essence of love lived Personally by Jesus Christ Who died that we might enjoy the festivities of the Banquet His Father summons us to in the Holy Spirit.

ALTERNATIVE OPENING PRAYER

Father in heaven,
the hand of Your loving kindness
powerfully yet gently guides all the moments of our day.
Go before us in our pilgrimage of life,
anticipate our needs and prevent our falling.
Send Your Spirit to unite us in faith,
that sharing in Your service,
we may rejoice in Your presence.
We ask this through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Sunday the Twenty-seventh

ANTIPHON

If You O Lord, laid bare our guilt, who could endure it? But You are forgiving, God of Israel (Psalm 129: 3-4).

RESPONSORIAL PSALM

The vineyard of the Lord is the house of Israel (Isaiah 5:7a and Psalm 80).

SCRIPTURE EXCERPT

“Therefore, I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people that will produce its fruit. (Matthew 21:43).”

REFLECTION

Gospel life flows once again from a vineyard. For three weeks now Jesus’ teaching regarding Kingdom Living has been anchored in vineyard living. A couple of weeks ago, I discussed the work involved in transforming arid, rocky and sandy land into a fruitful vineyard. When completed, the vineyard becomes a place “set-apart” or “different” that has its own rhythm of life to help make a bountiful harvest a reality. We also learned a few weeks ago that a vineyard can be instrumental in the local economy as it is a place of employment. That point is underscored this week as we learn the landowner not only planted a vineyard but also dug a winepress and built a tower. In other words, this is no ordinary vineyard: many operations happen within the hedge of this vineyard not the least of which is employment.

As was the practice in Ancient Near East, landowners might have a few vineyards and lease them to trusted employees to manage in his absence, as reported in this Sunday’s parable. Those employed are exactly that: employees, not the landowner. One might make the case that the workers, driven by a horrific attitude of entitlement, lost their identity as employees and attempted to appropriate to themselves that which was not theirs from the start. In the end, they lost more than they could even imagine.

As Jesus addressed this parable to “the chief priests and the elders of the people” He was reviewing salvation history for them. The workers in the vineyard (and image of the Israelites) rejected all who had been sent in the name of God calling them to repentance, conversion and covenant living. In the end, many would reject Jesus Himself. Sadly this parable has had an unfortunate history in Jewish-Christian relationships. Throughout the centuries, a good number of Christians have held that this parable ‘sanctions’ a view that Israel has lost her identity as The Chosen People and a new people, namely Christians, are the successors to The Chosen People. Such a position misses the point that Jesus addressed this to a limited number of people, “the chief priests and the elders of the people.” Yet more than that, when we lapse into divisive thinking, speaking and acting we become blind to our own areas of weakness and sin. It is so easy and comfortable to point out other people’s shortcomings than to admit our own and work on them.

For Jesus’ followers Kingdom living as He defines and lives it is the only permissible life path. Embracing that path demands changes not only on the levels of thinking, speaking and acting but also a changes of attitude, what Sacred Scripture terms a “change of the heart.” The ongoing attitude adjustment, so vital in being numbered as a disciple of Jesus, frees one from taking on a false identity. When our attitude is that of Christ’s (last Sunday’s proclamation from Philippians) we see and accept ourselves for who we are: disciples, people in need of learning. We do not dictate how the Kingdom is lived, that was the problem with the vineyard employees. We do not take what is not ours, as the vineyard employees did. Kingdom living, a living that is different and set-apart requires a humility of heart that at the opening and closing of each day and all time in between we live dependent on every word from The Word and act immediately on The Word’s prompting.

ALTERNATIVE OPENING PRAYER

Father in heaven,
the hand of Your loving kindness
powerfully yet gently guides all the moments of our day.
Go before us in our pilgrimage of life,
anticipate our needs and prevent our falling.
Send Your Spirit to unite us in faith,
that sharing in Your service,
we may rejoice in Your presence.
We ask this through Christ our Lord. Amen.