4th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year B 2021

A day in the life of Jesus will be spread over the next three Sundays beginning today. We begin at Capernaum where He taught in the synagogue as well as dealt with an unclean spirit. Both in the task of teaching and exercise of exorcism, His authority was visibly displayed. For Mark, there is a clear distinction between the authority of Jesus and of the Scribes. For the Evangelist, Jesus’ authority did not come from without but from Himself. He needed no external validation, and it is this that the people resonated with.

What lessons can we draw from the authority of Jesus?

Firstly, given the world we live in today, our attention is naturally inclined toward Jesus as the trustworthy teacher. More than ever, where integrity is in deficit, we look for leaders who are both sincere in speech and authentic in action. Consider the approach to the Covid pandemic in this country. Many, if not all of the initiatives to control the contagion are coming from the exigencies of political survival rather than the well-bring of the country and the citizens in the fullest economic, social, and religious sense. If anything, we are left with a cynical distaste for the crippling crisis we are caught in.

Therefore, a teacher or any leader for the matter of speaking, like Jesus would be fresh air and for us, a welcome change from this putrid political haze we are forced to breathe in. But, even as we yearn for true teachers, genuine ones, we may fail to make the connexion between the truth that liberates ignorance and the truth that sets free a demoniac.

What often escapes our consciousness is how pervasive demonic presence is. Again, we are directed to the type of activity we know of in movies like “The Exorcist”—the kind that is ghastly, grotesque, and gruesome with the scrapping, the snapping, and the snarling. In a way, such notions are restrictive and as such, we are hemmed in. Scientific that we are, we tend to shift “demonic possession” to a corner, a place where we can deal with—being that it belongs to the realm of the fantastic or the perceptibly unreal, scientifically speaking. So, on the one hand, we are entertained by the supernatural horror genre but in another way, it is isolated so that it does not affect us when we return to the “real” world.

“The Screwtape Letters” by C.S. Lewis might just disabuse us of these ghostly images that come from our present rendition of evil. According to Lewis, Screwtape, the name of the senior Devil, is cultured. He even admires history and likes philosophy. Quite different from what we read in today’s Gospel. If we imagine the encounter between Jesus and the Devil, through our supernatural horror movie mode, we can possibly hear the hoarse growling of the Devil “I know who you are: the Holy One of God”. Then we see the Devil throw the man into a convulsion before departing. So, what is more dramatic?

But consider one of the advices given by Screwtape to Wormwood, his diabolically inexperienced nephew. “Courtship is the time for sowing those seeds which grow up ten years later into domestic hatred”. Nothing dramatic about the advice. But how many couples have we known who during courtship could not live with each other but soon after detests even the shadow of the other? Of course, we do not think of this as the Devil’s work but instead explains it away as a pathology; we think in terms of neurosis, psychosis. In other words, sick in the head is nothing more than being sick in the head.

We no longer think of the Kingdom as the establishment of Christ’s rule over all of creation, visible and invisible. Instead, we think of it in rather material terms like the liberation of man from his economic or social captivity. As Charles Baudelaire, a French literary figures, in an article in Le Figaro (1864) apparently said, “… (L)a plus belle des ruses du Diable est de vous persuader qu’il n’existe pas!” More or less, it is translated as “the cleverest ruse of the Devil is to persuade you he does not exist”. And he has convincingly led us into believing that he is not there. Consider what Screwtape says, “the safest road to Hell is the gradual one—the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turning, without milestones, without signposts”.

The separation or blacking out, in other words, the lack of consciousness on our part of the Devil’s reality dichotomises our world view in such a way that we fail to see that the education that lifts us up and out of our ignorance is surely the same liberating force that freed the man from the oppression of the Devil. The authority of Jesus works the same in both the situations in today’s Gospel. It is to our peril that we forget that the Devil is hard at work in his opposition to the establishment of the Kingdom of Christ.

It may not be fashionable to “blame” the Devil and neither should we. There is a difference between a medical disorder and an oppression. The truth is many of us may unwittingly be under the rule of the Devil. We may not be drooling or contorted but our fears or prejudices can be as shackling as a demonic possession. Yes, we should not see the Devil where he not, but neither should we ignore him where he is. The point is a mental condition can also mask a preternatural reality. Even as we assess it psychologically, we also need to discern it spiritually.

So, in summary, the Gospel reveals to us a facet of who we are. Our hearts long for and rejoice whenever we get a taste of authentic teaching or genuine instructions. However, the manner in which Christ exercised His authority over the unclean spirit invites us to recognise as well, especially in this “supernatural-anaemic” world, the subtle presence of the Devil who works quietly behind the scenes to destabilise the Kingdom that Christ has come to establish. For example, our current pandemic may come across as nothing more than a viral infection gone wild. Bear in mind the tremendous spiritual damages that it has engendered. For one, our natural fear of death is nothing short of phobic in proportion to the point that we readily sacrifice spiritual salvation in the name of physical preservation. It is this tail of the Devil that the Gospel is perhaps teaching us to acknowledge so that we can submit to Christ for He alone has the authority to free us from captivity, either from ignorance or from the reality of the oppression of the Devil.

31st Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A

It feels like a priest-bashing Sunday. But, we deserve it. The first reading issues an ominous warning against priests. Christ in the Gospel criticised the external focus on rituals and outward appearances of the scribes and Pharisees. He even prohibited calling anyone master, father and teacher. Catholics, according to Protestants, are certainly guilty of the unbiblical practice of calling priests “fathers”. Perhaps it is good to explore the Catholic priesthood, what it means that priests are called “fathers” and maybe learn a little more about the meaning of vocation.

I begin with a phenomenon. Have you noticed these days at traffic lights that motorcyclists will disregard the red light and proceed to cross it when they see no oncoming traffic? At that moment, we might just shake our heads and lament the breakdown in law and order. [1] But, apart from lawlessness, why would a motorcyclist jump the red light? Take note that in general, laws are enacted for order in society. So, we might just “jump the red light” when it is erected in the middle of nowhere, for example, in a paddy field. As we say, laws are meant for Man, that is, Sabbath is made for Man and not Man for Sabbath. But, take note that jumping the red light along Jalan Gasing into the Federal Highway is not an instance that Sabbath is made for Man.

Then, what reason could we adduce for the blatant disregard for laws? It arises from a mistaken notion of what authority is. A breakdown in society’s structures will take place when we confuse power with authority. Authority is a moral force. It is even captivating as we read in Lk 4:32, “His teaching made a deep impression on them because He spoke with authority”. Thus, the proper exercise of power will ultimately uplift and enhance people’s lives.

Power, unlike authority, could be an expression of naked aggression. Libya, under Gaddafi, was a good example. His power was basically authoritarian and it burdens people with fear. This was the criticism of Christ against the Pharisees and the scribes. They loaded unto others the burdens which they themselves did not want to carry.

Whenever an authority is morally bankrupt, it often has to resort to aggressive power to rule. When that happens, the exercise of power, the discharge of duty is achieved through fear. For example, whenever the religious police knock on our door, we cower in fear and sadly, our country is governed mostly through the exercise of power. Many of us are compliant not because we consent to be governed but because we are afraid of the state’s aggression.

In general, the extent of our descent into lawlessness is the measure of how we have mistaken power as authority. What has brought about this confusion?

In a particular liturgical celebration elsewhere, the 9-day novena crowd was big and the Holy Communion was brought out in a Tiffin carrier. [2] The merit of using a Tiffin carrier is not my concern here. Why? It was an issue of practicality because there were simply not enough ciboria for use to distribute Holy Communion. But, practicality has implications. Today, we seem to engage the world from a purely practical point of view; deemed necessary for survival. But, we forget that it does not take much to slide from being practical to being functional. When decisions are based on the criterion of practicality alone, we become functional. It is efficient and you might ask what is wrong with that.

Now, imagine a priest who is functional. It is good because he can accomplish a lot. But, if he is only functional, then, he will need space for his personal life. Space does not denote the rest that a priest needs. Christ needed rest and He was said to have escaped into the hills to pray and presumably to rest. What I mean by space is the separation or dichotomy between who a priest is and what he does. He has to create a division between his public and private life. This division between who a priest is and what he does has implication for the exercise of authority and power. [3]

We often use the words authority and power interchangeable. They are connected but they have different meanings. Authority speaks of the right to exercise power and it is the source of one’s power, whereas, power refers to actualisation of authority. In other words, authority is ontological because it refers to whom a person is. Power, on the other hand, is functional because refers to what a person does.

Authority flows from who we are. And who are we? We are made in the image and likeness of God. The more we resemble that image, [4] the more authoritative we will be. Chfrist acted the way He did because He was perfectly the Son of God. Furthermore, authority is not only ontological. It is also derived, as Christ derived His by virtue of being Son; the Pharisees and scribes theirs by virtue of being spokesmen of God. Likewise, Christian authority is God-given as pointed out in both the 1st and 2nd readings. St Paul referred to his authority of acting and speaking in the name of God and the priests of Israel were criticised for their failure to listen to source of their authority who is God Himself.

From this perspective, Catholic priests are called “fathers” because they exercise their authority in the name of God the Father and not because they have power. With regard to authority, we instinctively give our consent to people who behave in an authoritative way and not in an authoritarian manner. As mentioned earlier, authority is captivating because it is persuasive whereas power is intoxicating because it can corrupt the person who has it as it oppresses those who have to bear with it. Look at the Pope. He is powerless but he is authoritative as young Catholics have noted at the recent World Youth Day.

Christ was not against the exercise of authority. In fact, He Himself said, “Do what they tell you and listen to what they say”. He was not against calling anyone father, master or teacher. He stood for credibility and against the abuse of power. Perhaps, we can better grasp that the crisis the Church faces today is a crisis of authority. It is a crisis of authority not only because priests have exerted undue power. Primarily, it is a crisis of authority because priests have become mere functionaries. When we function, we naturally turn to techniques (like the technique of how to be a better priest or a better father or mother or manager). We focus on how-how and capabilities. We are performers or we are personalities forgetting who we really are: in persona Christi.

The issue is not calling priests fathers. It is more fundamental. In our success-oriented and achievement obsessed society, we have come to define ourselves by what we can do rather than allow our identity to determine our behaviour. An analogy is a husband. He may function as husband by being protective and supportive financially. Just because he does the things necessary does not mean he a husband. Instead, he is husband and that is why he does all these things. Identity determines behaviour.

The crisis of authority reveals a deeper crisis of identity and not of function. A devastating effect of this crisis for the Church has been the decimation of religious brothers and sisters. As we define ourselves narrowly by what we do, brothers are defined by what they cannot do. They are not priests. Sisters are no better. Many sister congregations are named after Mary because she is the model of attentiveness to Christ. Therefore, sisters are primary called to this vocation before all else they are capable of undertaking. Forgetting who they are, they have removed their habits to try to blend in with lay people.

The Gospel today challenges all priests and most of all, bishops to rediscover the ontological foundation of their authority and prophetically exercise it through their magisterium, their governance and their worship. Their authority is best manifested through the triple ministry to teach, to shepherd and to sanctify. What is required is not a rehabilitation of authority as it is a rehabilitation of the exercise of it. And it requires that priests begin to live who they are and not just function according to what they are called to do.

FOOTNOTES:
[1] In general, there is a pervasive sense that the breakdown of law and order may also accounts for how scammers confidently swindle unsuspecting victims or how burglars brazenly break into homes to rob and steal.
[2] Originated from India, they are lunch boxes that come in 2 or 3 tiers and widely used in Malaysia in the 50s and 60s. In Bombay they are called “dabbawalas”. In today’s green world, tiffin carriers make environmental sense.
[3] The critique of Christ against the scribes and the Pharisees refers to this divide. They are public figures with private lives.
[4] We resemble the image by contemplating and imitating who God is. It may explain why Mother Theresa and her sisters usually spend enough time before the Blessed Sacrament so that they can learn to recognise God in others.

4th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year B

Mark’s Gospel continues with another revelation of the divinity of Christ. Demons possessing a man knew the true identity of Christ as they shouted: “We know you are the Holy One of God”. This Holy One of God made a deep impression as He taught with authority in the synagogue.

His authority in word (teaching in the synagogue) and deed (driving out the demons) signals the beginning of the Messianic age where Satan’s reign is being curtailed. This exercise of authority is set within the context of service. Christ’s authority is always in the service of the Kingdom. We know this for sure when later in Mark’s Gospel two of the disciples asked for positions of power only to be met by Christ re-directing their passion or their desire to service. “The rulers of the world lord it over the people. But you rule by serving”.

This Sunday we ask what it means for Christians to speak and to act with authority.

We answer the question by first talking about acting with authority. We are familiar with “actions” that must be part of our discipleship. Jesus is the primary example of action on behalf of the poor, the widow and the orphaned. Today, He drove out the evil spirits. In the area of action, without a doubt, we excel. In a sense, we are an authority in the area of advocacy or action on behalf of the poor. No doubt we can do better but still, look at the many agencies of charity that is borne of Christian action. In fact, one of the comments heard post 2004 Tsunami was that many Christian aid agencies were the first to mobilise assistance to a region which was predominant of another religion. Our actions on behalf of God’s people cut across religious lines. But, charitable actions are not the preserve of Christians.

While we may excel at charity, what we may have failed to do is to make a stronger connexion between our conscience and our charity. If you like, it is not enough to be charitable because, as stated above, charity is not the preserve of Christian discipleship. What is required is that we speak with authority. This is where we might head into some difficulty.

It is not easy to speak with authority. In general, those in authority have abused their position of power. We experience doctors who are somewhat careless with their diagnosis or police rigging evidence to make a case. In this country, what is glaringly apparent are the ways many politicians have blatantly enriched themselves through the abuse of their authority. Failure of those in authority has turned the public to suspicion of authority in general.

The point is, many a times we dare not speak “with authority” because we have fractured consciences. This is evident as we tend to say, “Who am I to judge?” The attitude may be noble. But beyond this nobility what we actually encounter is a fear that we might not be “good” enough to judge. In some cases, we have taken the challenge of Jesus personally: “Let he who has no sin cast the first stone”. Again that might be noble, but, unfortunately, this may also mean that in most cases we have actually used our personal standard of morality as the criterion for judgement. It means that, “if I am not holy or good, I keep my mouth shut”. It is as if I, or what I am capable of, were the standard of morality.

When personal morality becomes the measure for our interaction, what is observable is a breakdown in civil and rational society because we fear someone who will say, “Who are you to judge me”. Just observe our “modern” neighbourhoods turning “polite”. Just as long as we are polite, that is acceptable. The fact is we are afraid. What happens is that truth becomes trapped in personality or rather truth becomes something which in its essence cannot be truly communicated in a rational manner. At a personal level, truth is about me—what I think or what I feel. And at the level of society, we know this to be happening when groups begin to lobby or take entrenched positions. When we begin to protect our personal interest or the interest of the group, race, religion or culture, then truth is the casualty. We can’t begin to approximate at truth when we are protecting our interest.

Today, as Christ spoke with authority, it is an invitation to return to morality. Morality is not just about doing things but rather a position of the heart. In the 2nd Reading, St Paul spoke of freedom from worry in the context of marriage. But the freedom he was referring to was really a freedom that arose from devotion to the Lord’s affairs. What is the Lord’s affair if it is not living up to the standards of God? Morality is a position of the human heart with regard to God. When there is a unity between God and the religious person, what follows is the freedom of authority. This is the basis for our discipleship.

What is definitely a challenge is for us to live up to a standard of personal responsibility that is beyond just the self. Credibility and consistency are necessary so that we can speak with authority. It is an authority that does not assert that God is on our side but rather proclaims that we are on God’s side; that we are devoted to God’s affairs. Otherwise, we will continue to act at best, with limited authority or at worst, on our own authority. What happens with limited authority is that we will begin to use fear or intimidation to bolster our already weakened authority. I am sure I don’t need to spell out where one can encounter this form of authority

We have no respect for that kind of authority. Thus, what is needed is the authority that comes with the freedom to stand before God with a conscience that is clear. It is not easy but neither is it impossible. We will fail but that is no reason to give up. We ask God because He is the source of that authority for both our speech and our action. We rely on His grace to narrow the gap between our word and our action. That is the pathway to authority of word and action.