30th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year C 2025

We explored a few themes in the last couple of Sundays beginning with faith, perseverance in prayer and today the Gospel shines a spotlight on the attitude we should have when we pray.

Last Sunday’s Gospel, a contrast was made between a just God and a biased judge. God cannot be compared with the unfair judge simply because He listens to the prayers of all and no one is excluded. However, the 1st Reading makes an important qualification. While He is omni-audient or all-hearing, He is also sensitive to the cry of the poor, the widow or the orphan.

In other words, there is a soft spot in God’s compassion. It is reflected in the Gospel today. Two men prayed. One belonged to an elite class. The other belonged to a despised category. The Pharisee should be the expert in prayer whilst the tax collector barely worthy or deserving to stand before the Lord.

Interestingly the Pharisee’s behaviour may be interpreted from the perspective of familiarity rather than of pride. It would be too easy to dismiss his behaviour as pride and in a way, the dismissal may lend us, the present-day readers, an opportunity to vilify him. It flows with the current trend of virtue-signalling.

What is virtue-signalling? Generally, it is to point out the deficiency of a person or a class of persons in order to make us appear or feel good. Even though the Pharisee himself may have been virtue-signalling, closer to reality is a proverb, attributed to the Chinese, which says that “makers of idols rarely believe in them”. It was not pride which kept the Pharisee apart. Rather it could be a contempt born from over-familiarity. 

We all know what it is like to take things for granted especially when we are so familiar with a setting. A good example is observable within the context of sacred spaces. How often is it that we have little or no reverence or respect for the tabernacle in our Churches? Remember Moses’ first encounter with God, the Lord reminded him that the ground he stood on is sacred. Imagine someone who enters the sanctuary day in and day out. Ordinarily, when we are in front of people, we sort of make a bow or we genuflect etc but when no one is looking, it is so easy to forget that the Blessed Sacrament is reserved and business is carried out automatically, almost mechanically without second thoughts. Over-familiarity can have this effect on anyone. The Pharisee thought that as one “set apart specially for God” he was close to God and thus privileged.

The tax collector stood at a distance where he recognised his unworthiness which from the perspective of humility, presents him as a paragon of virtue. We resonate with this kind of meekness. But in truth, we do not exactly want to be that humble because in an age that needs to be noticed to be relevant, we have a nagging fear that we might be overlooked.

In the context of being the “bad guy”, nobody wants to be the Pharisee. Individuals are not alone because corporations too are rushing to identify with the “Tax Collector”. He is the only “worthy” actor in a game of who scores higher in the competition for adulation and admiration, that is, to be held up as a model of virtue or righteousness. The comparison and contrast between the Pharisee and Tax Collector could be an occasion of identification that leads to pride. “I am not like that”. While the contrast between the Pharisee and Tax Collector may be a form of virtue signalling but closer to the truth is that both the Pharisee and the Tax Collector may be alive in us.

Thus, the classifications of Pharisee or Tax Collector bring no advantage because it is the attitude that counts. These categories may have connotations associated with them but they are neutral in themselves. Neither one is about good nor bad. Rather it is the attitude that determines one’s standing before God. It does not truly matter for there may be Pharisees who are as humble as the Tax Collector and there may be Tax Collectors who are prouder than a Pharisee.

The attitude that accompanies our prayers is what concerns the Lord. The proud might struggle with humility but the reverse is also true in the sense that it is easy for a Tax Collector to become a Pharisee. For example, a poor person becoming rich may at times forget or even try to erase his or her past destitution. The point is this, the categories of rich or poor, good or bad, Pharisee or Tax Collector are not our focus. Attitude is.

When conversing with a person, we can sense how much a person is receptive to reality or to alternative points of view. When a person is full of himself or herself, whether a Pharisee or Tax Collector, it is next to impossible to get through to him or her. Likewise with regard to our prayers. We often think of prayers unanswered as if it were a God-problem. Meaning? When our prayers are unanswered we may leave with a disappointing sense that God had been deaf because He has not fulfilled our prayers. It appears that God does not deliver.

The Tax Collector who stood a distance away was heard by God because he was not full of himself. In fact, he felt his unworthiness very acutely. Sometimes God cannot or will not give us what we desire not because He is miserly but because we are too full of ourselves. When a person is full of himself or herself, nothing can penetrate, not even God. God’s silence could be due to our attitude which, in prayer, plays a crucial role in our relationship with Him. It is a reminder of how we ought to humble ourselves when we come before the Lord.

The moral we can learn here is that the Pharisee’s identity or sense of self was not shaped by who he truly is before God. In fact, he took pains to paint himself as not being an extortionist or an adulterer, as if that was enough. In a way, it is reminiscent of Adam’s postlapsarian experience. After God found them out, Adam blamed Eve for his sin. In other words, he defined himself as one whose sin was caused by Eve rather than accept the responsibility for his caving in to temptation. The Tax Collector stood before God accepting his sinfulness. That is the attitude we may want to possess when we come before God. We are nothing, not because we despise ourselves but because we are sinners who need God’s mercy. If we can stand before God, it is only because He has, as the 2nd Eucharistic Prayer reminds us, “held us worthy to be in His presence and minister to Him”.

29th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year C 2025

There are 33 or 34 Sundays in Ordinary Time and the section of the Roman Missal that provides the Sunday’s Collect etc is thin and the sense that we are approaching the final Sundays of the year is when the book mark has few pages left. The theme of faith in God was covered by the 27th Sunday. Then gratitude for what God has done was taken up by the 28th Sunday. We continue to reflect on the attitudes that we bring to prayer in both the 29th and 30th Sundays.

What it means to pray is the point for today. The first imagery of prayer is Moses. Joshua was fighting against Amalek and as long as Moses lifted up his hands, the Israelite army gained the upper hand. Imagine an exhausted Moses with hands heavy from exhaustion and Aaron and Hur supporting prompting up his arms on both sides in order for Joshua to secure Israel’s victory. It is a compelling image which is, in a manner of speaking, repeated in the Gospel. The point is not to confuse the judge with a miserly God but to note the persistence of the widow. In praying persistently, the widow managed to change the mind of the unjust judge. Since God is not unjust, how much more would He listen to us if we were persistent in our praying.

Another word for persistence is regularity. Our idea of a life to the full is possibly governed by a certain notion of carefreeness. It exudes a spontaneity and vivacity suggesting that we are best when life has the least minimum rules that constraint. But the greatest freedom is not found in the absence of constraints but rather the ability to live a regular life. Regularity gives us a sense of order and stability. Ask any child who has to live with caprice. He or she will be unable to put down roots and later in life will struggle with commitment.

The Camino from which I have just returned from is the Northern route that more or less follows the coast of northern Spain. Fruitfulness notwithstanding, I did not like the passage for one reason. The section which we took to Santiago had a number of alternatives. Often enough the choices were between easy and hard. Weakened by Original Sin, human nature tends toward the lazy option. I would have preferred it if I had no choice but to walk because there was the only option available. It would have actually simplified life by reducing the temptation to embrace the path of least resistance.

The Catholic sensibility is marked by an appreciation of order expressed through rhythmic regularity. How does one describe a good Catholic spirituality? Daily prayer that keeps to a consistent schedule. Regular Weekly Mass attendance. Frequent Confession. These form good Catholic habits that will carry us along when times are rough and tough. A good illustration is driving. If you maintain a regular habit, you will soon find your habit in a way protecting you from making rash judgements and movements in your driving. For example, you are less likely to change lanes impulsively.

A regular and disciplined approach in our faith helps us to progress in our virtue and holiness. Prayer is central to this pursuit of holiness. Persistent prayer means that God is not our last resort but our first option. The journey of humanity, seen after Adam and Eve expulsion, observed in the escaping Israelites, has been marked by the struggle to put God first. We were created in the image and likeness of God but our perverted nature wants God to be shaped in our image and likeness. This we read in how soon after they had crossed the Red Sea, the Israelites already wanted a more accessible God when they fashioned the golden calf to worship.

God is faithful in our desire and effort to make His will sovereign in our lives. The idea of God’s faithfulness is a bit tricky for some of us. Somehow there is a sneaky feeling that our present understanding of God’s faithfulness is heavily entwined with materialism. He is our divine ATM, so to speak because we do say that God is providence and He provides for our material needs as He did with the manna given to the escaping Israelites.

Yet Christ hanging on the Cross is our example of what it means that God’s will be sovereign in our lives. Even as life drained out of Jesus, momentarily, He cried out at what He felt to be God’s abandonment. But in the end, He still signalled His commitment to the Father by breathing His last: It is accomplished.

Prayer, apart from asking from God, expressing our contrition, thanksgiving and praising Him is to further our commitment to follow God. Somehow God’s will is quite boring because our sense of fulfilment is shaped by the notion of how life to the full is often portrayed. Everywhere we are bombarded by imageries of plenty, of freedom and of pleasures. Doing God’s will or taking up one’s cross sounds like drudgery or even enslavement. Thus modernity offers “freedom” whereas God’s will binds and is mostly forbidding—cannot do this or cannot do that. There is no prize for guessing which we would choose.

St Paul urged Timothy to remain faithful to God’s word because sacred scripture provides the wisdom necessary for salvation. The ultimate prize to be won by our prayers is not what we ask for but what God has intended for us. That is a life which is far from material fulfilment. Submitting to God’s will is not enslavement but for Him to give us what we most need and that is our salvation.

In conclusion, prayer is the foundation of our relationship with God. It remains the surest connexion we have with God but ironically it is the first thing that we will sacrifice when faced with a wall of “busyness” and we give in to the noble reason of greater good we feel we can achieve through our frenetic activity. We give excuses that we can always pray later when in fact later, we sleep. Keep the prayer, keep the rules and later the rules will protect you and the prayers sustain you.

28th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year C 2025

With faith comes gratitude. With entitlement comes a pound of flesh. Today’s 1st Reading and Gospel give us pause to reflect on the attitude that we may want to embrace. Last Sunday’s focus was on faith. Appropriately, this Sunday, we turn to gratitude.

The background of both the 1st Reading and the Gospel is exclusion. Naaman and the Lepers are excluded from polite society. Interestingly, no matter how much of an advance we have made in society or as a civilisation, one thing for sure is that sinful humanity will find a way to segregate or to exclude. This exclusion may not even be wilful. For example, in our rush towards digitalisation, those born recently are frequently classified as digital natives. But the elderly have become digital orphans and excluded from the ever and fast-changing electronic landscape. How many of our elderly or the digital illiterates have been scammed?

The point is that exclusion is something we have to watch out for. Perhaps what Jesus remarked might be useful to remember: “The poor you will always have with you”. The Camino has confirmed this existential truth. We can all start out the same but we will never end the same. We can provide for an equality in opportunity but we can never force an equality of outcome without injustice to the natural order of things. There will be people who will be excluded, not wilfully but by the sheer truth that an equal outcome cannot be enforced. Now, in the case of those who have been left out, their salvation is in God. It makes sense that God is called the Father of orphans, widows and the poor simply because nature is simply unfair.

Thus, Naaman and the Lepers were able to see that blessings were not their entitlement. Rather they were gifted to them. When one has received a gift, one becomes a person of thanksgiving. Naaman found the true God and decided that he would now worship the God from Whom he had received the gift of healing. The Samaritan Leper came back to thank Jesus and praise God. 

Gratitude is a response of faith. In other words, it is faith in action. We give thanks to God for His bountiful love shown towards us. Perhaps it makes sense to look at Laudato si from this perspective. It is not so much this overarching fear of the destruction of the environment that spurs us into action. Rather we begin to take care of the world because God has gifted it to us. It is our gratitude toward the Lord’s kindness that we begin to look at the world differently.

What might prevent this gratitude is the attitude of entitlement. Without denying the pain that people can go through or suffer from, take the example of a child. Every child is really a gift from God. In this sense than, abortion is spitting in the face of God who desires to give. Childlessness on the other hand, painful as it is, is not a curse from God. We do not know why some can bear, some cannot. It could be due to the quirkiness of nature combined with our lifestyles. Suffice to say that from the natural point of view, not every married couple will succeed in bearing children. There is pain involved and this is not to deny that.

However, we take the example of a child who died. It is always tragic as any death before time is. Yet, it is a matter of faith and gratitude that one gives thanks to God for that life, no matter how brief it may have been. Everyone who comes into our lives and has made a difference is a gift. It has never been an entitlement. Rather, it is a privilege.

How often is it that we become angry with God or are disappointed by God for not giving us what we ask for. Along the Camino on a very wet day as I was walking, someone scrawled on the white line at the edge of the road, God is love. It was so random and in the rain, I was thinking what that meant. Does God’s love for me means I get everything I want? What if I do not get what I want, would God still be love?

Could we or would we ever give thanks to God for the little that we have? Like the mother whose baby died at 5 years old giving thanks to the Lord for the 5 years rather than for not having more than 5 years?

We have become so entitled that our gratitude is now part of our entitlement. Meaning? We thank God only because He has fulfilled our wishes. Otherwise we would never thank Him.

St Josephine Bakhita, a Canossian Sister who was abducted, abused and sold into slavery thanked her former abusers. She reflected, “if I were to meet those slave-traders that abducted me and those who tortured me, I would kneel down to them to kiss their hands, because, if it had not have been for them, I would not have become a Christian and religious woman”.

When we are entitled we will struggle to show gratitude. There will always never be enough for us to be thankful for. Profound gratitude is a radical orientation. Prayers should consists of asking, showing sorrow, giving thanks and praising. Most of the time we petition or we express sorrow. But the prayers to thank and to praise are frequently hinged on how much we can get. That is entitlement. To let go of that, we need to give thanks and to praise no matter what. It is not easy and it might take an entire lifetime to move from “my God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” to “Rejoice always, pray constantly, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you” (1 Thess 5:17-18). But like the Camino, no matter how hard the climb, the grace to be thankful is one step at a time. We will get to the summit of praise with the grace of God.

27th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year C 2025

Habakkuk is not an ancient prophet. He could be classified as a “modern” one. He saw the injustice that existed during his lifetime. We too can notice the inequalities glaring back at us. Like us, Habbakuk cried out to a God who is seemingly silent and uncaring. But the Lord reminds him to have faith in the future and to continue living. Today’s prophets who fight can end up dispirited if they do not have faith that God will make right the situation that calls out for righteousness.

We are movers and shakers. We cannot sit still. In a way, we are keen to change the world for the better. It is a good attitude to have. Yet it might also lead to discouragement and disillusionment. Movers and shakers are performance-driven and also production-centred. In other words, we thrive on measurable results and count on successes. We have been bred to succeed and when we do not succeed, the result can be anxiety and depression.

Given that the organisation of the world we have is complex and knowledge about the universe is also immense there is a tendency to organise life through specialisation. The ever-increasing specialisation of knowledge has led to increasing fragmentation of our experience. With specialisation, we know more of less.

Sounds gibberish but take a look at our medical faculties. A doctor-friend told me that given his mother’s medical condition, it was a good thing that he himself is a doctor because specialisation has made the specialist an expert but he or she is often hampered by the lack of multi—disciplinary experiences. It made a wholistic diagnostic of his mother’s condition difficult. Does this sound familiar? And have you known of a person who had to be hospitalised but the doctors were unable to diagnose the condition? As a result, the person was subjected to a whole battery of tests and passed on from one specialist to another specialist.

The result of our inability to grasp the bigger picture and to solve a problem can create a sense of despair especially when we are unable to control our destiny.

If we are not the masters of our destiny, then who is? This is where Habakkuk comes in. His vision leads us along the path of trust and discipleship. We let God take charge and we keep faith with Him. Though we may be tempted by the need for results, what is best is to trust and have faith that God will come through for us.

Take a look at the Gospel. There are two themes inter-related. The first is how faith can do great wonders. What is faith? Remember the saying, “give God the best and not the rest”. For many of us, faith kicks in when we are helpless. God seems to be our fail-safe option and faith tends to be more like “I can do it first” rather than God is at the heart of all there is.

Perhaps the 2nd theme of Jesus in the Gospel on servanthood might be helpful. It is not about humility in service per se. Rather it is leaving all in the hands of God. It is a kind of attitude which can only be described of as letting God be God. This is where we will struggle because we like beings in charge and we need to be in control. We are afraid of letting go.

It is quite natural because humanity has been created a little less than a god. When we see a wrong, when we encounter a problem, we would want to rectify the situation because our human intelligence makes us problem-solvers.

The Camino pilgrimage has taught me one thing which I am still learning. Every journey undertaken, I seemed to have things which I had packed but did not need at all. The redundancies or fail-safe were never needed. The extra set of clothings that might come in handy. This gadget or that instrument. The point of faith is that God will meet us at the moment when we need Him most. That is faith. I must say that I have yet to learnt fully the meaning of having faith in the Lord’s Providence. But like the Camino, it is a life-long process of learning to trust. Perhaps death is the final act of faith that each one has to make because we can only enter eternity when we have placed ourselves fully into the loving embrace of God.

26th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year C 2025

We remain with Prophet Amos who showed concern for the reality of inequality and perhaps we may also grow in the awareness that wealth can desensitise by making us apathetic towards the poor. In a sense riches is both a blessing and a curse and by highlighting the truth that wealth has a corroding effect on our compassion and our concern for the welfare of the less fortunate. If we have grown jaded, then this is the Church’s way of leading us back to the right path.

The shrinking of the known world enabled by easy travel and also the ubiquity of media streaming has brought the reality of poverty right before us. Anyone with a modicum of humanity will definitely find this to be unacceptable and as such there is a pressing need to alleviate poverty. Social studies have raised our awareness of societal inequalities and one of the movements which has come about from this heightened awareness is Liberation Theology. It takes the perspective of action on behalf of the poor. However, its application may also create a dichotomy which in a way pits one section of society against another. Usually the contention is between the “haves” and the “have nots”.

There is a large-scale disparity which according to the Prophet is unacceptable to God and we are called to right this inequality. In fact, more and more we have become aware of how God takes the side of the poor. Therefore the question before us is how we can, for want of a better phraseology, make something wrong something right. Sadly though, more than the existence of inequality, there is also a tendency to interpret reality through a dualistic lens. For example, we tend to look at life from the perspective of black and white with the corollary that white is associated with good and black with bad. Somehow in this difficult journey towards the attainment of a just society, the process would generally involve some forms of vilification. The rich are regularly painted as bad and poor are good. The rich are cruel and the poor are angels.

Will a dualistic typology help or will it create or foment resentment. However, and let this be clear that this is not a get-out-of-gaol card for the rich to justify, legitimise or even sanctify ignorance or apathy. There are rich and well-meaning people who have been hurt by the poor. The cheating, the lying, the stealing etc. A domestic helper can steal as well. Having said this, could such a statement also be a form of vilification of the poor, meaning that, that the rich easily blame the poor and so get away with having to do the right thing.

Bear with me because we live in an age of “hyper-sensitivity” and “trigger-warning”. We are easily offended because we are victims.

Perhaps a good way to deepen our conscience is to look at the stereo-typical “dumb foreign maid” who steals or the “stupid alien“ who does not know to take our food order etc. Many of them are educated. They have dreams too. But they just have no opportunities in their countries. In the Gospel, Abraham was named but in other places he has been described as “my father is a wandering Aramean”. What does that mean?

Many of our fore-parents came from India and China and they settled here. Many of them would have been poor and they struggled and despite challenges they rose to prominence. They had dreams too when they left in search of better opportunities etc. They succeeded and we are enjoying the fruits of their labour.

With regard to the current batches of many migrants within our country, do they not have dreams? Are not entitled to a better life or success?

The question is, would they want to come if they had a choice? Are they begging for punishment? Perhaps, the next time we are irritated by the stupidity of a poor person it might be good to remember that if given a choice, would the person serving us like to be in a position to be subservient or humiliated?

The idea of a better society is enticing and possibly we think that we need to make systemic changes. But systems can only compel our behaviour through the threats of coercion. Our focus on providing the mechanisms to engender change must take into consider the slow growth in conscience. In order to become more sensitive to societal inequality, growing a conscience is good start by becoming more aware of the plight of the poor. It is an awareness that arises from an acceptance that God has not intended injustice to be the status quo. That there is the poor is a result of sin but it does not belong to the active will of God.

The problem for many of us is that the richer we are the more we are in danger of blindness to inequality. On the other hand, there is no guarantee that even if we were to treat people well, they will not turn around to stab us in the back. The point is, we need to be responsible for our just behaviour. Take a look at Joseph’s behaviour when he found out that Mary was pregnant. There will be people who will cheat or betray us. And they can be rich or poor. But their unjust behaviour is no excuse for us not to live a righteous life.

Ultimately, we uphold and embrace a righteous life because it is pleasing to God and it is not dependent on whether others are living it. That the rich should be caring for the poor, there is no doubt. The parable of Dives and Lazarus tends to make us judge the rich as bad actors and Lazarus as the good protagonist. And that does not help us grow a better conscience. What might be more helpful is to be more conscious whether we be rich or poor, there are inequalities which need to be made right. Everyone is responsible through living righteously before the Lord.