Monday of the Fifteenth Week in Ordinary Time
(Genesis 28:10-22a; Matthew 9:18-26)
As Americans celebrate the Fourth of July, many may find Jacob’s declaration of the place where he slept to be “an abode of God” as characteristic of the United States. Like the Lord’s prediction of Jacob’s descendants, Americans are numerous. Although its extent is easily exaggerated, the United States has been a blessing to Europe during and after World War II and to many developing countries today.
The term “American exceptionalism” has been invented to explain how the United States has reached greatness. Separated from other powers by the vast Atlantic, the country was incubated without the constant threat of war. Equally important, the country did not have a history of feudalism that separated rich from poor as a matter of necessity. Now that slavery and its vestiges have been overcome, it is truly a land of opportunity for everyone. Belief in God and religious freedom has also played a significant part in America’s achievement. The idea of a “Creator” grounds the concept of human rights in the “Declaration of Independence.” More importantly even, Lincoln and other patriots have turned to God as an unerring judge who rewards the nation for its virtue and punishes it for its vice.
However much Americans like to compare its blessings with that of God to Jacob, they should note a critical difference. God’s benediction on Jacob is a solemn oath that He will never retract. Israel, not the country but the people, will endure forever. No such promise has been made to the United States as a country or a people. If the country is to continue to flourish, it must strive to be a blessing for others, to pursue virtue at all costs, and, as much as its freedom of religion will allow, to retain its belief in God.
Friday, July 1, 2011
Solemnity of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus
(Deuteronomy 7:6-11; I John 4:7-16; Matthew 11:25-30)
With all the attention given to long-distance learning we might think that human teachers are becoming obsolete. But, of course, this is not the case. As much as computers abet instruction, students often need physical contact with a person to learn. They have questions that computers cannot understand and difficulties that only human intuition can ascertain.
In the gospel today Matthew presents Jesus as the “teacher of the ages.” Jesus’ meekness will not reject anyone. He never says one thing then does another but instructs by example. The yoke that he lays on apprentices – the lessons they are to follow – is not onerous because he supplies the strength to bear it. It is simply that they love another as he loves all.
The heart of Jesus, pierced and aflame, symbolizes all the richness of this gospel nugget. Its ardor reaches all people without exception. Its vulnerability knows the trials of the weak who in some manner include everyone. It invites each of us to enter its chambers where we might be renewed for the journey heavenward.
(Deuteronomy 7:6-11; I John 4:7-16; Matthew 11:25-30)
With all the attention given to long-distance learning we might think that human teachers are becoming obsolete. But, of course, this is not the case. As much as computers abet instruction, students often need physical contact with a person to learn. They have questions that computers cannot understand and difficulties that only human intuition can ascertain.
In the gospel today Matthew presents Jesus as the “teacher of the ages.” Jesus’ meekness will not reject anyone. He never says one thing then does another but instructs by example. The yoke that he lays on apprentices – the lessons they are to follow – is not onerous because he supplies the strength to bear it. It is simply that they love another as he loves all.
The heart of Jesus, pierced and aflame, symbolizes all the richness of this gospel nugget. Its ardor reaches all people without exception. Its vulnerability knows the trials of the weak who in some manner include everyone. It invites each of us to enter its chambers where we might be renewed for the journey heavenward.
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Thursday of the Thirteenth Week in Ordinary Time
(Genesis 22:1b-19; Matthew 9:1-8)
As it is easier to say, “May God bless you,” than to give your money to a poor man, it is easier to say, “Your sins are forgiven,” than to say, “Arise and walk.” But “May God bless you” would be a blasphemy if one says it from miserliness which brings us to the critical issue in this passage. Is Jesus blaspheming as the scribes accuse him, at least to themselves, when he speaks of forgiveness of the paralytic’s sin? Apparently he is not because Jesus proves that he is God-like by revealing the thoughts of the men.
Then why, we need ask, does God have to test Abraham by telling him to sacrifice his son if He already knows his heart? It sounds like an impertinent question. After all, who are we to critique God’s actions? But the command to destroy one’s son seems so out of character with what we believe God to be like that we are compelled to question God’s motive or be left forever thinking that God is as capricious as a cocky kid with pocket full of firecrackers.
Tests serve more purpose than giving the tester a means for evaluation. Tests enable students to learn about themselves as well as their subject matter. In this test Abraham learns that God does demand full allegiance from His people and that God will not hurt them on a whim. He also learns of how much he cherishes Isaac by the pain it causes him inwardly to reach the brink of destruction. God further teaches us of His love for us. After all, God did not spare His Son from carrying out the mission of our redemption even though He knew that it would end in His Son’s sacrifice which is not that different from what Abraham was about to do to Isaac.
(Genesis 22:1b-19; Matthew 9:1-8)
As it is easier to say, “May God bless you,” than to give your money to a poor man, it is easier to say, “Your sins are forgiven,” than to say, “Arise and walk.” But “May God bless you” would be a blasphemy if one says it from miserliness which brings us to the critical issue in this passage. Is Jesus blaspheming as the scribes accuse him, at least to themselves, when he speaks of forgiveness of the paralytic’s sin? Apparently he is not because Jesus proves that he is God-like by revealing the thoughts of the men.
Then why, we need ask, does God have to test Abraham by telling him to sacrifice his son if He already knows his heart? It sounds like an impertinent question. After all, who are we to critique God’s actions? But the command to destroy one’s son seems so out of character with what we believe God to be like that we are compelled to question God’s motive or be left forever thinking that God is as capricious as a cocky kid with pocket full of firecrackers.
Tests serve more purpose than giving the tester a means for evaluation. Tests enable students to learn about themselves as well as their subject matter. In this test Abraham learns that God does demand full allegiance from His people and that God will not hurt them on a whim. He also learns of how much he cherishes Isaac by the pain it causes him inwardly to reach the brink of destruction. God further teaches us of His love for us. After all, God did not spare His Son from carrying out the mission of our redemption even though He knew that it would end in His Son’s sacrifice which is not that different from what Abraham was about to do to Isaac.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
The Solemnity of Saint Peter and Saint Paul, apostles
(Acts 12:1-11; II Timothy 4:6-8.17-18; Matthew 16:13-19)
The “yin yang” principle in Eastern philosophy explains how apparently opposite forces are interconnected and interdependent so that each gives rise to the other in turn. The most common example of the principle would be a male and female coupling to form other males and females. In Tao iconography Yin is pictured as a black tadpole with a white eye and yang as a white tadpole with a white eye. Yin is thus characterized by coldness, darkness, softness, expansiveness, and passiveness such as found in the earth, the night and, of course, women. Yang, on the other hand, is characterized by speed, hardness, and light and is associated with fire, the sun, and men. Yin yang can be used to explain today’s feast.
Peter and Paul are arguably the most prominent Christian saints. Each one’s martyrdom certainly merits a separate feast day. But the Church has chosen to celebrate them together not because they died together (they didn’t) or even on the same day of the year although no reliable historical records give the days of their martyrdoms. The Church seems to celebrate both saints’ martyrdoms on the same day because they represent how very different backgrounds, mentalities, and temperaments – a yin yang – came together to bring a vibrant community. We could call Paul the yin force whose reflectivity and diffusion opened new worlds to Christianity. Meanwhile Peter’s focused attention and gift for preaching make him more a yang figure. Together they brought about a universal Church by going to other lands and by having the homeland accept the idea of foreign members.
Today is a holiday in Rome, but most likely we will only have time to offer a prayer of thanks for these greatest of apostles. They brought us to know Jesus and provided us sterling examples - warts and all - of following in his way.
(Acts 12:1-11; II Timothy 4:6-8.17-18; Matthew 16:13-19)
The “yin yang” principle in Eastern philosophy explains how apparently opposite forces are interconnected and interdependent so that each gives rise to the other in turn. The most common example of the principle would be a male and female coupling to form other males and females. In Tao iconography Yin is pictured as a black tadpole with a white eye and yang as a white tadpole with a white eye. Yin is thus characterized by coldness, darkness, softness, expansiveness, and passiveness such as found in the earth, the night and, of course, women. Yang, on the other hand, is characterized by speed, hardness, and light and is associated with fire, the sun, and men. Yin yang can be used to explain today’s feast.
Peter and Paul are arguably the most prominent Christian saints. Each one’s martyrdom certainly merits a separate feast day. But the Church has chosen to celebrate them together not because they died together (they didn’t) or even on the same day of the year although no reliable historical records give the days of their martyrdoms. The Church seems to celebrate both saints’ martyrdoms on the same day because they represent how very different backgrounds, mentalities, and temperaments – a yin yang – came together to bring a vibrant community. We could call Paul the yin force whose reflectivity and diffusion opened new worlds to Christianity. Meanwhile Peter’s focused attention and gift for preaching make him more a yang figure. Together they brought about a universal Church by going to other lands and by having the homeland accept the idea of foreign members.
Today is a holiday in Rome, but most likely we will only have time to offer a prayer of thanks for these greatest of apostles. They brought us to know Jesus and provided us sterling examples - warts and all - of following in his way.
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Saint Irenaeus, bishop and martyr
(Genesis 19:15-29; Matthew 8:23-27)
It may seem like the lesson of Sodom is one of disgust with homosexual behavior. Remembering the context of the story, we realize that the angels warn Lot to flee the city before God annihilates it out of outrage from the townsmen’s attempt to violate Lot’s guests. But as often happens in Genesis, the wisdom is more profound than what first meets the eye.
When the three strangers visited Abraham in the country, he welcomed them like kings. He gave them water to refresh their skin and a feast to recover inner forces. Now in the city of Sodom, Lot similarly treats two of the same travelers, but his neighbors threaten them. Indeed, the men of Sodom move to rape the travelers as apparently is their custom. Lot in a rather foolish effort to protect his guests offers the men his virgin daughters, but the Sodomites spurn the women.
The men of Sodom, like those of Babel earlier in Genesis, demonstrate the corruption of city-life. City dwellers collaborate to advance their knowledge, but in their progress they leave a righteous way of life. Their learning makes them consider themselves as independent of God’s authority. Not feeling accountable to anyone, they try to take advantage of the defenseless. Their quest for ever more adventure leads the men of Sodom to despise women in favor of other men. There is no antidote for such barbarity. God must destroy them completely. Although it is a hard lesson, city dwellers must develop a righteous fear of God to temper their advancement in knowledge.
(Genesis 19:15-29; Matthew 8:23-27)
It may seem like the lesson of Sodom is one of disgust with homosexual behavior. Remembering the context of the story, we realize that the angels warn Lot to flee the city before God annihilates it out of outrage from the townsmen’s attempt to violate Lot’s guests. But as often happens in Genesis, the wisdom is more profound than what first meets the eye.
When the three strangers visited Abraham in the country, he welcomed them like kings. He gave them water to refresh their skin and a feast to recover inner forces. Now in the city of Sodom, Lot similarly treats two of the same travelers, but his neighbors threaten them. Indeed, the men of Sodom move to rape the travelers as apparently is their custom. Lot in a rather foolish effort to protect his guests offers the men his virgin daughters, but the Sodomites spurn the women.
The men of Sodom, like those of Babel earlier in Genesis, demonstrate the corruption of city-life. City dwellers collaborate to advance their knowledge, but in their progress they leave a righteous way of life. Their learning makes them consider themselves as independent of God’s authority. Not feeling accountable to anyone, they try to take advantage of the defenseless. Their quest for ever more adventure leads the men of Sodom to despise women in favor of other men. There is no antidote for such barbarity. God must destroy them completely. Although it is a hard lesson, city dwellers must develop a righteous fear of God to temper their advancement in knowledge.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)