Thursday, IX Week
(Mark 12)
In a classic philosophical debate Socrates holds that knowledge of what is right results in a desire to do it. Aristotle disagrees claiming that weakness of the will can interfere with doing what one knows to be good. Anyone who has ever been given the choice between chocolate fudge and an apple for dessert should agree with Aristotle. What would Jesus say?
In the gospel today Jesus makes a telling comment to the scribe who congratulates him on his choice of the greatest commandment. He says, “You are not far from the Kingdom of God.” One may interpret this statement as meaning that the scribe is not in the Kingdom because he does not profess faith in Jesus. Perhaps, but it is more likely that Jesus too recognizes the difference between knowing something as right and actually doing it. The scribe is not yet in the Kingdom because he only acknowledges the need to love God and neighbor. He still must humble himself to love.
Knowledge gets us started on the “good life.” It pinpoints what we should do, provides viable options, and assesses the risks of each alternative. But actually doing what is right – true morality – also requires will-power – the virtues of temperance, fortitude, and prudence. For example, young adults know the need for pre-marital abstinence from sexual intercourse to live chastely. But sitting alone with their partners on Saturday night, they require the virtues of the will to overcome being swamped by lustful desire.
THIS WILL BE THE LAST HOMILETTE UNTIL THE WEEK OF JUNE 24. I WILL BE AWAY FROM MY COMPUTER FOR THE INTERIM.
Showing posts with label Mark 12. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mark 12. Show all posts
Homilette for Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Wednesday, IX Week
(Mark 12)
Jesus reminds us in the gospel passages this week of a prize fighter or a pool sharpshooter. He takes on all who wish to challenge him and easily turns back their best efforts. Yesterday he outwitted the Pharisees who tried to trap him with a touchy question about taxes. Today he defends himself against the Sadducees who poke fun at his idea of the resurrection. Tomorrow he will respond insightfully to a sincere question about the greatest commandment.
Mark the Evangelist wants us to see Jesus’ mind and tongue as superior to those of any other. Of course, he sees Jesus’ virtue not ending with mental and oral prowess. A bit ahead in the gospel, Jesus suffers about the most gruesome death imaginable for the salvation of all. Mark presents Jesus as God’s beloved son whose blood brings about reconciliation between heaven and earth.
The argument which Jesus makes in today’s gospel fills out Mark’s picture of Jesus. What good would reconciliation of heaven and earth be if there were no resurrection of the dead? Too often in this world the good eat dirt while the unjust enjoy fine dining. In the resurrection of the dead we expect to find a reversal. Those who love God and neighbor now will have seats at the table of the eternal banquet. Meanwhile, those who present only their back sides to others now will find themselves smelling the aroma outside.
(Mark 12)
Jesus reminds us in the gospel passages this week of a prize fighter or a pool sharpshooter. He takes on all who wish to challenge him and easily turns back their best efforts. Yesterday he outwitted the Pharisees who tried to trap him with a touchy question about taxes. Today he defends himself against the Sadducees who poke fun at his idea of the resurrection. Tomorrow he will respond insightfully to a sincere question about the greatest commandment.
Mark the Evangelist wants us to see Jesus’ mind and tongue as superior to those of any other. Of course, he sees Jesus’ virtue not ending with mental and oral prowess. A bit ahead in the gospel, Jesus suffers about the most gruesome death imaginable for the salvation of all. Mark presents Jesus as God’s beloved son whose blood brings about reconciliation between heaven and earth.
The argument which Jesus makes in today’s gospel fills out Mark’s picture of Jesus. What good would reconciliation of heaven and earth be if there were no resurrection of the dead? Too often in this world the good eat dirt while the unjust enjoy fine dining. In the resurrection of the dead we expect to find a reversal. Those who love God and neighbor now will have seats at the table of the eternal banquet. Meanwhile, those who present only their back sides to others now will find themselves smelling the aroma outside.
Homilette for Monday, June 4, 2007
Monday, IX Week
(Mark 12)
Philosophers debate the existence of God by telling the story of two men who come to a clearing in the jungle where there are many beautiful flowers. One says that there must be a gardener who planted the flowers. The other disagrees. So they decide to experiment by waiting around to see if a gardener appears. After a couple of days without anyone coming to tend the garden, the man who proposed that a gardener planted the garden says that the gardener must be invisible.
God, for those who choose to believe in Him, is the “invisible gardener” who created the world and all its contents. Atheists will say “no” there is no “invisible gardener” but only an imaginary one existing in the minds of believers. In the gospel Jesus certainly accepts the proposition of an invisible gardener. The vineyard he mentions is like a garden, and God is the one who planted it. Therefore, God has a right to demand that the vineyard’s caretakers produce fruit for Him. Of course, generally we understand Jesus’ vineyard as the earth and the fruit which God expects as justice for all people. But we might see the earth as simply the environment. God wants us humans to care for it wisely. We must not pollute it, wantonly kill the creatures that inhabit it or wastefully deplete its resources. The Book of Genesis underlines this duty by telling us “God then took the man and settled him in the garden of Eden to cultivate and care for it” (Genesis 2:15).
Obviously, one does not have to believe that God is an imaginary gardener to care for the environment. But we who do so believe should be environmentalists. We might also question how people who argue that God is but an imaginary gardener would defend the universal need to care for the earth which is felt so strongly today.
(Mark 12)
Philosophers debate the existence of God by telling the story of two men who come to a clearing in the jungle where there are many beautiful flowers. One says that there must be a gardener who planted the flowers. The other disagrees. So they decide to experiment by waiting around to see if a gardener appears. After a couple of days without anyone coming to tend the garden, the man who proposed that a gardener planted the garden says that the gardener must be invisible.
God, for those who choose to believe in Him, is the “invisible gardener” who created the world and all its contents. Atheists will say “no” there is no “invisible gardener” but only an imaginary one existing in the minds of believers. In the gospel Jesus certainly accepts the proposition of an invisible gardener. The vineyard he mentions is like a garden, and God is the one who planted it. Therefore, God has a right to demand that the vineyard’s caretakers produce fruit for Him. Of course, generally we understand Jesus’ vineyard as the earth and the fruit which God expects as justice for all people. But we might see the earth as simply the environment. God wants us humans to care for it wisely. We must not pollute it, wantonly kill the creatures that inhabit it or wastefully deplete its resources. The Book of Genesis underlines this duty by telling us “God then took the man and settled him in the garden of Eden to cultivate and care for it” (Genesis 2:15).
Obviously, one does not have to believe that God is an imaginary gardener to care for the environment. But we who do so believe should be environmentalists. We might also question how people who argue that God is but an imaginary gardener would defend the universal need to care for the earth which is felt so strongly today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)