Wednesday of the Thirty-fourth Week in Ordinary Time
(Daniel 5:1-6.13-14.16-17.23-28; Luke 21:12-19)
In his autobiography Justice Clarence Thomas writes of the ordeal he underwent after being nominated to the Supreme Court. He says that a coalition of self-interest groups conspired with a group of senators to undermine his confirmation. Throughout the struggle Senator John Danforth, Thomas’ mentor and an ordained Episcopalian priest, counseled him to allow the “Holy Ghost” speak through him. Much like Jesus advises his followers to do in the gospel today, Thomas was to trust in the Lord to see him through the lies and calumnies that his detractors were raising.
For awhile Catholics in the United States did not have to worry about defending themselves against persecution. Earlier in the nation’s history a virulent anti-Catholicism festered in America. The Ku Klux Klan, for example, singled out Catholics as well as Blacks and Jews as America’s enemies. Then, for roughly the middle of the last century, a genuine toleration of religion thrived through most of the country. Everyone was encouraged to “attend the church or synagogue of your choice.” More recently, however, Christian beliefs and practices have been under severe scrutiny. Many, especially the sophisticated, cannot accept as genuine those who profess a religion which forbids extramarital sex and values human life as inviolable from conception to natural death. We are likely to have to defend our faith again if not our own lives.
As Jesus would tell us, the current secular atmosphere does not call us to prepare speeches in defense of our faith. But we should pray to God for enlightenment and also take advantages of opportunities to learn what the Church teaches. Fortunately, excellent resources are at hand. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, for example, is available on the Internet. We need not worry that our faith is unreasonable much less ridiculous. The truth is just the opposite. Although faith is a divine gift, it does not oppose rationality. Indeed, for twenty centuries Christian intellectuals have contributed immensely to world thought.
Homilette for Tuesday, November 24, 2009
St. Andrew Dung-Lac and companions, martyrs
(Daniel 2:31-45; Luke 21:5-11)
Scholars claim that Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream is not entirely accurate. Although there has been disagreement in the past about which empires the different parts of the statue’s body represent, today experts are convinced that the golden head is the empire of the Assyrian-Babylonians; the silver upper body, that of the Medes; the bronze lower body, the Persian Empire; and the iron and tile feet, Alexander’s Greek domain. The historical mistake in Daniel’s interpretation would be that the Persians, not the Medes, conquered Babylon.
Most likely the writer of the Book of the Prophet Daniel was using the popular Jewish understanding of events when he wrote in the second century before Christ. Obviously, this writer was not the prophet who lived in the time of Nebuchadnezzar, four centuries earlier. He was an interpreter of history seeing the great empires leading up to the recreation of Israel’s monarchy. This was “the stone hewn from the mountain...which broke in pieces the tile, iron, bronze, silver, and gold.”
Christians have taken Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream as realized in Jesus. He inaugurated another kind of kingdom that, we believe, will be eternal. It is a kingdom unlike all others because it does not claim rule over land nor does it tax people’s pocketbooks. Rather, it moves us interiorly to love God above all and neighbors as ourselves. We might add that it is the Kingdom for which St. Lung Dung-Lac and the other Vietnamese martyrs gave their lives.
(Daniel 2:31-45; Luke 21:5-11)
Scholars claim that Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream is not entirely accurate. Although there has been disagreement in the past about which empires the different parts of the statue’s body represent, today experts are convinced that the golden head is the empire of the Assyrian-Babylonians; the silver upper body, that of the Medes; the bronze lower body, the Persian Empire; and the iron and tile feet, Alexander’s Greek domain. The historical mistake in Daniel’s interpretation would be that the Persians, not the Medes, conquered Babylon.
Most likely the writer of the Book of the Prophet Daniel was using the popular Jewish understanding of events when he wrote in the second century before Christ. Obviously, this writer was not the prophet who lived in the time of Nebuchadnezzar, four centuries earlier. He was an interpreter of history seeing the great empires leading up to the recreation of Israel’s monarchy. This was “the stone hewn from the mountain...which broke in pieces the tile, iron, bronze, silver, and gold.”
Christians have taken Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream as realized in Jesus. He inaugurated another kind of kingdom that, we believe, will be eternal. It is a kingdom unlike all others because it does not claim rule over land nor does it tax people’s pocketbooks. Rather, it moves us interiorly to love God above all and neighbors as ourselves. We might add that it is the Kingdom for which St. Lung Dung-Lac and the other Vietnamese martyrs gave their lives.
Monday of the Thirty-fourth Week in Ordinary Time
(Daniel 1:1-6.8-20; Luke 21:1-4)
Dr. Andrew Weil is one of America’s most noted nutritionists. In one of his books he writes of the superiority of a vegetarian diet and the harmful effects of alcohol. Dr. Weil would probably find the first reading today, telling of the four young men who thrive on vegetables and water, significant. He might call it ancient corroboration of the best modern scientific research on diets.
However, the writer of the Book of the Prophet Daniel tells the story of Daniel, Hananhiah, Azariah, and Mishael with a different idea in mind than nutrition. He sees the boys’ thriving not because of their diet but in spite of it. He notes that they refuse the fare from the royal table because eating it would mean defiling the Law of Moses. These are pious lads who resist fine foods in order to carry out God’s commands.
Many Americans are thinking about food this week. Some cannot wait to taste the latest Thanksgiving appetizers. Others worry about standing their ground against the onslaught of calories from Thursday until Super Bowl Sunday. The four Jewish boys show America the most enlightened attitude toward food possible. It provides sustenance so that we might, in turn, give God thanks and praise.
(Daniel 1:1-6.8-20; Luke 21:1-4)
Dr. Andrew Weil is one of America’s most noted nutritionists. In one of his books he writes of the superiority of a vegetarian diet and the harmful effects of alcohol. Dr. Weil would probably find the first reading today, telling of the four young men who thrive on vegetables and water, significant. He might call it ancient corroboration of the best modern scientific research on diets.
However, the writer of the Book of the Prophet Daniel tells the story of Daniel, Hananhiah, Azariah, and Mishael with a different idea in mind than nutrition. He sees the boys’ thriving not because of their diet but in spite of it. He notes that they refuse the fare from the royal table because eating it would mean defiling the Law of Moses. These are pious lads who resist fine foods in order to carry out God’s commands.
Many Americans are thinking about food this week. Some cannot wait to taste the latest Thanksgiving appetizers. Others worry about standing their ground against the onslaught of calories from Thursday until Super Bowl Sunday. The four Jewish boys show America the most enlightened attitude toward food possible. It provides sustenance so that we might, in turn, give God thanks and praise.
Homilette for Friday, November 20, 2009
Friday of the Thirty-third Week in Ordinary Time
(I Maccabees 4:36-37.52-59, Lucas 19:45-48)
The first reading today describes the origins of the Jewish feast of Hanukkah. Many see this feast as the Jewish Christmas because it is celebrated around the same time of year and is especially mindful of children. However, its significance to Jews seems as thin as a pencil in comparison to the meaning of Jesus’ birth to Christians.
As we have heard for the last week, the Maccabees clan resisted the reforms of the Seleucid (Syrian) king Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The king tried to impose pagan customs on the people to the extent of desecrating the Temple with an altar to Zeus. After eight years of outrage, Mattathias Maccabeus and his sons had enough. They rallied faithful Jews behind them to oust the occupiers. In the passage today Mattathias’ son Judas leads the rededication of the Temple and declares an annual celebration which Jews observe today as Hanukkah.
In the gospel we find Jesus performing a vaguely similar cleansing of the Temple. The situation, of course, is very different but it is the same zeal for the holy that impels Jesus to drive out the vendors. Both readings remind us of the centrality of a consecrated place to worship. We might praise God anywhere and should pray wherever we find ourselves. But formerly the Temple and now the synagogue for Jews and the church for Christians have a unique importance. They are the designated places of encounter with God hallowed by the prayers of forbearers in many cases for ages.
(I Maccabees 4:36-37.52-59, Lucas 19:45-48)
The first reading today describes the origins of the Jewish feast of Hanukkah. Many see this feast as the Jewish Christmas because it is celebrated around the same time of year and is especially mindful of children. However, its significance to Jews seems as thin as a pencil in comparison to the meaning of Jesus’ birth to Christians.
As we have heard for the last week, the Maccabees clan resisted the reforms of the Seleucid (Syrian) king Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The king tried to impose pagan customs on the people to the extent of desecrating the Temple with an altar to Zeus. After eight years of outrage, Mattathias Maccabeus and his sons had enough. They rallied faithful Jews behind them to oust the occupiers. In the passage today Mattathias’ son Judas leads the rededication of the Temple and declares an annual celebration which Jews observe today as Hanukkah.
In the gospel we find Jesus performing a vaguely similar cleansing of the Temple. The situation, of course, is very different but it is the same zeal for the holy that impels Jesus to drive out the vendors. Both readings remind us of the centrality of a consecrated place to worship. We might praise God anywhere and should pray wherever we find ourselves. But formerly the Temple and now the synagogue for Jews and the church for Christians have a unique importance. They are the designated places of encounter with God hallowed by the prayers of forbearers in many cases for ages.
Homilette for Thursday, November 19, 2009
Thursday of the Thirty-third Week in Ordinary Time
(I Maccabees 215-29; Lucas 19:41-44)
A proverb says, “The old man who will not cry is a fool.” Everyone should come to tears as she or he realizes that life is often tragic because people fail to learn its most important lesson. This is that we are to give glory to God by caring for one another. Too often we humans take life as a game in which we are to gather as much prestige and gain as much prosperity for ourselves as possible.
In the passion account of Luke’s gospel, Jesus tells the women of Jerusalem that they are not to weep for him but for their children. In today’s passage he does exactly this. Jerusalem refuses to learn life’s lesson taught in the Law, reiterated by the prophets, and confirmed by Jesus himself. Its inhabitants would rather retain its values of wealth and honor. Although Jesus is hardly an old man, in his day at thirty-three years he has already entered middle age. In any case he shows himself as wiser than the ages with his tears.
Should we cry at what we see around us? There is, for sure, enough egotism about to make even children weep. After we shed our tears we should resolve to live lives worthy of the gospel. That is, we should amend our ways by placing the good of others alongside our own and by praying that God turn the situation around.
(I Maccabees 215-29; Lucas 19:41-44)
A proverb says, “The old man who will not cry is a fool.” Everyone should come to tears as she or he realizes that life is often tragic because people fail to learn its most important lesson. This is that we are to give glory to God by caring for one another. Too often we humans take life as a game in which we are to gather as much prestige and gain as much prosperity for ourselves as possible.
In the passion account of Luke’s gospel, Jesus tells the women of Jerusalem that they are not to weep for him but for their children. In today’s passage he does exactly this. Jerusalem refuses to learn life’s lesson taught in the Law, reiterated by the prophets, and confirmed by Jesus himself. Its inhabitants would rather retain its values of wealth and honor. Although Jesus is hardly an old man, in his day at thirty-three years he has already entered middle age. In any case he shows himself as wiser than the ages with his tears.
Should we cry at what we see around us? There is, for sure, enough egotism about to make even children weep. After we shed our tears we should resolve to live lives worthy of the gospel. That is, we should amend our ways by placing the good of others alongside our own and by praying that God turn the situation around.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)