(Mark 8)
More chocolate is sold for Valentine’s Day than for any other day of the year. “Sweets for the sweet,” they say. In the United States Valentine’s Day has a definite romantic flavor, but this is not true all over. In Latin America, February 14 is Día de Amistad, Friendship Day. People celebrate the gift of friendship, which as the rose taught the Little Prince, makes a person special.
Could the gospel today be telling us that faith is a way of seeing people as special? We remember that faith is a new way of seeing. When Jesus puts spittle on the blind man’s eyes, the man begins to see people but only as walking trees. That’s a very imperfect faith as it misses most of the wonder of what it means to be human. When Jesus lays his hands on the man again, he sees perfectly. People, we may surmise, are no longer quiet and rigid like trees. No, they become communicative and lively. They are at least potential friends.
Faith, of course, is primarily a relationship with God. It sees God as one who cares for all His creatures, especially humankind. Our relationship with God then implies a positive regard of others, again especially of humans. As God’s concern, we want to know many and different kinds of people, to help them, and to love them. We want to treat them as special. We want them to be our friends.
Reflection for Tuesday, Feb. 13, 2007
In her syndicated column today, Kathleen Parker again touches America’s pulse. She cites a recent study, reported last week but lost in the hoopla over an astronaut’s romantic revenge, about pornography and adolescents. According to Ms. Parker, the report links an increasing nonchalance over children viewing pornography as adults indulge more in it. Parker is outraged as, indeed, anyone concerned about human development should be.
Many years ago a particularly insightful contributor to America, the Jesuit weekly magazine, wrote that this country will not give up the practice of abortion easily. He said that although logic points that way, people’s pleasure stands in the way. That’s an enormous obstacle for which many do not mind lying as Presidents as well as have teenagers have done. But can a majority of people be so soft-headed? Evidently, yes.
Once again, I am reminded of true freedom. People like to think of freedom as the absence of restraint. Doing whatever one wants is the declared wish of many. But such a meager hope cannot bring about true freedom, much less human fulfillment. Freedom is the perfection of one’s ability. A three year-old pounding piano keys is not playing freely. Arthur Rubenstein fingering one of Mozart’s concertos with eyes closed is. Freedom is not given by human decree; it materializes with guided effort. If children are to grow up to be free adults, they must be tutored in an environment where virtue prevails. Pornography will make them slaves of their passions, ready to lie for a bit of cheap satisfaction.
Many years ago a particularly insightful contributor to America, the Jesuit weekly magazine, wrote that this country will not give up the practice of abortion easily. He said that although logic points that way, people’s pleasure stands in the way. That’s an enormous obstacle for which many do not mind lying as Presidents as well as have teenagers have done. But can a majority of people be so soft-headed? Evidently, yes.
Once again, I am reminded of true freedom. People like to think of freedom as the absence of restraint. Doing whatever one wants is the declared wish of many. But such a meager hope cannot bring about true freedom, much less human fulfillment. Freedom is the perfection of one’s ability. A three year-old pounding piano keys is not playing freely. Arthur Rubenstein fingering one of Mozart’s concertos with eyes closed is. Freedom is not given by human decree; it materializes with guided effort. If children are to grow up to be free adults, they must be tutored in an environment where virtue prevails. Pornography will make them slaves of their passions, ready to lie for a bit of cheap satisfaction.
Homilette for Monday, Feb. 12, 2007
Nine score and eighteen years ago today Abraham Lincoln was born in Kentucky. He, of course, presided over our country when brother fought against brother – sometimes literally – in the great Civil War. Bravely he urged his country people of the northern states not to harbor resentment against their counterparts in the South. “With malice toward none, with charity for all,” he called for reparations to all who lost limb or love in the war.
Internecine conflict is the subject of the first reading today. Cain wants to kill his brother Abel out of resentment. God, who inspired Lincoln (or shall we say permeated him), asks Cain to restrain his hatred. He tells Cain to do what is right so that he might walk upright in society. Cain, however, refuses the advice. The result, of course, is catastrophe. Cain kills Abel and becomes a fugitive.
The urge to lash out at others -- be they brother, sister, friend, or a poor fellow who doesn’t do much right – can weigh on all of us. Still, we have not only the dictate of the Lord but the example of the greatest American leader to curb the impulse. “Malice toward none, charity toward all” is not political slogan. It is a divine directive.
Internecine conflict is the subject of the first reading today. Cain wants to kill his brother Abel out of resentment. God, who inspired Lincoln (or shall we say permeated him), asks Cain to restrain his hatred. He tells Cain to do what is right so that he might walk upright in society. Cain, however, refuses the advice. The result, of course, is catastrophe. Cain kills Abel and becomes a fugitive.
The urge to lash out at others -- be they brother, sister, friend, or a poor fellow who doesn’t do much right – can weigh on all of us. Still, we have not only the dictate of the Lord but the example of the greatest American leader to curb the impulse. “Malice toward none, charity toward all” is not political slogan. It is a divine directive.
Homilette for Thursday, Feb. 8, 2007
Mark 7
The Christmas 2004 tsunami took 200,000 lives. We have to ask ourselves, “How could God permit such a thing to happen?” We don’t mean to be irreverent. But it’s only logical: if God is in control and if God is good, He shouldn’t let such disasters take place. One theologian takes the logic a step farther. Knowing that God is the ultimate cause of everything, he asks, “Why does do such things?” In other words, this theologian would ask, “Why did God cause the deaths of so many people in the Christmas tsunami?” It’s a shocking but honest question.
Some of us might be equally shocked by Jesus’ remark to the Syrophoenician woman in the God. It seems so unlike Jesus – so un-Christian – for him to refer to non-Jews as dogs. Why would he say such a thing? Perhaps he’s just very tired? Or perhaps in the first century Jesus’ remark was not the insult it appears to be in our race-conscious society?
It’s hard to say what Jesus has in mind, but let us not try to defend the remark. Rather let us focus our attention on the woman’s faith-filled response and Jesus’ benevolent will. She is not stymied by the remark. Rather, in faith, she fires back. “Lord,” she says recognizing Jesus as at least her better, “even the dogs under the table eat the children’s scraps.” So she humbly persists to request the favor. Jesus, for his part, graciously consents. He knows that as God’s emissary, he cannot deny help to anyone who believe in him.
The Christmas 2004 tsunami took 200,000 lives. We have to ask ourselves, “How could God permit such a thing to happen?” We don’t mean to be irreverent. But it’s only logical: if God is in control and if God is good, He shouldn’t let such disasters take place. One theologian takes the logic a step farther. Knowing that God is the ultimate cause of everything, he asks, “Why does do such things?” In other words, this theologian would ask, “Why did God cause the deaths of so many people in the Christmas tsunami?” It’s a shocking but honest question.
Some of us might be equally shocked by Jesus’ remark to the Syrophoenician woman in the God. It seems so unlike Jesus – so un-Christian – for him to refer to non-Jews as dogs. Why would he say such a thing? Perhaps he’s just very tired? Or perhaps in the first century Jesus’ remark was not the insult it appears to be in our race-conscious society?
It’s hard to say what Jesus has in mind, but let us not try to defend the remark. Rather let us focus our attention on the woman’s faith-filled response and Jesus’ benevolent will. She is not stymied by the remark. Rather, in faith, she fires back. “Lord,” she says recognizing Jesus as at least her better, “even the dogs under the table eat the children’s scraps.” So she humbly persists to request the favor. Jesus, for his part, graciously consents. He knows that as God’s emissary, he cannot deny help to anyone who believe in him.
Homilette for Wednesday, February 7, 2007
(Mark 7)
There’s a story about Pope Pius X as a young priest ferreting out an unfaithful Catholic. He walked by the man’s home on Friday morning and smelled bacon frying. Since the young priest eventually became a saint, we will presume that he didn’t condemn the man outright. But it may be best that we no longer abstain from meat on Fridays, except in Lent, to minimize our judging other people.
This gospel today shows Jesus abrogating the dietary laws of the Jews, at least among his followers. The action is bold because the dietary laws distinguished Jews from their pork-eating neighbors. No doubt, the Jews prided themselves as being God’s people because they did not eat ham. Jesus followers, at least, would have to show themselves to be God’s newly chosen people in other ways. He presents the blueprint for their righteousness here. They will refrain from all evil thoughts and malicious actions.
But do Catholics really live better lives than other groups of people? Catholics seem to divorce as often as non-Catholics. Abortion is not unknown or even strictly uncommon among American Catholics. We probably attend church on Sunday more frequently than other churches. And it can be shown that children going to Catholic schools whose parents attend Mass on Sunday are less likely to use drugs and alcohol and to have sex in high school. But, unfortunately, Catholic education is not as available as it once was. In any case, we must continue to strive for the righteousness that Jesus preaches throughout the gospels. We do so not to see ourselves as better than others but to have God see us as His grateful children.
There’s a story about Pope Pius X as a young priest ferreting out an unfaithful Catholic. He walked by the man’s home on Friday morning and smelled bacon frying. Since the young priest eventually became a saint, we will presume that he didn’t condemn the man outright. But it may be best that we no longer abstain from meat on Fridays, except in Lent, to minimize our judging other people.
This gospel today shows Jesus abrogating the dietary laws of the Jews, at least among his followers. The action is bold because the dietary laws distinguished Jews from their pork-eating neighbors. No doubt, the Jews prided themselves as being God’s people because they did not eat ham. Jesus followers, at least, would have to show themselves to be God’s newly chosen people in other ways. He presents the blueprint for their righteousness here. They will refrain from all evil thoughts and malicious actions.
But do Catholics really live better lives than other groups of people? Catholics seem to divorce as often as non-Catholics. Abortion is not unknown or even strictly uncommon among American Catholics. We probably attend church on Sunday more frequently than other churches. And it can be shown that children going to Catholic schools whose parents attend Mass on Sunday are less likely to use drugs and alcohol and to have sex in high school. But, unfortunately, Catholic education is not as available as it once was. In any case, we must continue to strive for the righteousness that Jesus preaches throughout the gospels. We do so not to see ourselves as better than others but to have God see us as His grateful children.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)