7th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A 2023

In a few days we will be entering Lent. As it is, we are still within the ambit of the Sermon on the Mount. We had the Beatitudes, the Law and now we venture further onto the path of perfection. As Jesus Himself said, “I have come to fulfil the Law”. To fulfil the Law is to embrace its spirit and to live it to the fullest expression possible.

It makes sense since the 1st Reading lays the foundation for our behaviour to resemble the God who is holy. Holiness is not measured by being “better than thou” but to reflect who God truly is—holy. In the 2nd Reading, Paul places our holy behaviour within the context of the “Temple” meaning that our body has been sanctified which elevates it into the new temple where God’s Spirit resides. In the Gospel, Jesus invites His disciples further into the way of perfection and there appears to be a movement from the Old Testament to the New Testament in which being holy is expressed through action. From resembling God who is Holy to imitating the Father who is perfect.

To flow from who we are to how we should behave, Jesus places our behaviour in the context of loving one’s enemies. What should characterise our relationship or lack of with our enemies? If we follow Jesus, the jump from “lex talionis” to offering no resistance is indeed a giant leap. To say the least, such an ideal is next to impossible.

Why do we find it hard to love our enemies? A noble gesture such as to forgive our enemies is rendered unappealing when there is a confusion in our use of language. In the past, good was basically good. If we were to follow what it means to be good, as portrayed in movies, we catch glimpses of goodness like Julie Andrews in the Sound of Music. Goodness is wholesome and it is the same description we find too in our hagiographies. What has happened is an inversion of values in which the good needs to be seen through the optics of bad. For example, it is not good enough to merely state something is good. Instead, “badass” is now the new good. If not badass, then perhaps we hear a foodie describing a gastronomic preparation as “sinfully good”. If not sinfully good, “wicked” just means good. Maybe the kind of goodness epitomised by Julie Andrews is too pure or unattainable and simple saying that a dish is good is too boring and does not seem adequate.

Words like badass, wicked or sinfully good make it hard to grasp what being noble and magnanimous should entail. Instead it makes it easier to embrace the ethos of the anti-hero. An anti-hero is a person with questionable character and whose moral compass does not point to the North. Anti-heroes fascinate us because they resemble us with all their faults. If the definition of a hero is someone who strives to be and to do good, then the normative and accepted behaviour for a hero is the moral congruence between means and ends. The goal is achieved through moral means. Whereas for anti-heroes, it does not matter if the road taken is immoral. Whatever means is acceptable as long as the goal is achieved. This type of moral fluidity justifies uninspiring behaviour.

On one level, this problematic is really a symptom that we no longer believe that heaven is worth our sacrificing or dying for. On another level, it does not matter if one should be good because everyone deserves heaven. Anti-heroism validates our mediocrity in not striving for a life of noble excellence.

The path of perfection proposed by Jesus requires a striving on our part and a commitment. To love our enemy is hard enough but to do good to those who hate us is indeed a painful calling. In order to transcend our natural repulsion towards our enemy, we must begin with heroic virtues. In our daily life, it is as simple as denial of ourselves through fasting. It is as simple as focusing on God through regular praying. It is as simple as caring for others who are less fortunate than we are. These may be small and inconsequential actions, but daily practice of them prepares the soul for the more profound action of self-sacrifice even of our lives.

Together with heroic virtues, we need a clearer vision of the good. It is true that life is incredibly messy but the acknowledgement of this reality is not its canonisation. Just because life is confusing is not an excuse for acedia, inaction or inertia. In fact, the messiness of life is a powerful reminder that an alternative vision is possible. For that, we have to overcome a phobia we have, which is to commit ourselves to a higher vision of good, of heaven and of God.

There is good to defend. There is a heaven to aim for. And there is God to believe in. In a realm without God, we will always be looking for justice in this world but never finding it. Or we will never be satisfied. We will be condemned in an elusive search for the perfect justice, thus making the love of enemies much more difficult, let alone praying for them. Without God as guarantor, we will hesitate because if we do good and if there is no heaven, then all the good we have done would have been wasted. If we are not convinced that there is a heaven where justice can be finally rendered, then loving one’s enemy will be an uphill climb, and it will never be a part of what means to be a Christian.

We are not without a way out of this conundrum. Jesus Himself provided the means to overcoming this resistance. Through the heroic exercise of our virtues, we too can follow Him. As Jesus mentioned in the Gospel, to love our enemy and to do good, begin by lifting them up in prayer. Ask God not for punishment or even justice for them but for blessing upon them. Bless their souls with every conceivable blessing because they need it. Think of a person who does not deserve your forgiveness. As you continue blessing him or her, the anger in your heart will melt because it is impossible to bless a person and hold on to hatred at the same time. The act of blessing an enemy will yield a sense of peace and we dare to bless because we have a God whom we can trust. He guarantees that in the end, everything will work out according to His plans. The passage to perfection is not impossible to ascend because it is the same path that the Lord Himself walked. Our perfection comes through the imitation of Christ who was able to forgive even those who killed Him.

6th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A 2023

As a parish priest, one routinely conducts prenuptial enquiries for Catholics preparing to get married. More and more, Catholics are having difficulties finding spouses of the same faith. We have Mixed Marriages which describe the union between a baptised Catholic and baptised non-Catholic. By and large, many of our marriages consist of the type known as the Disparity of Cult or Worship, meaning that a baptised Catholic is marrying a non-baptised. In the process of the interview, I would often remark to the non-Catholic party that marrying a Catholic comes with an extra burden. The Catholic spouse is bound by the laws of the Church. This brings us into the heart of this week’s Gospel.

What roles do ecclesiastical laws play in the life of a Catholic? How do we appreciate them?

The background to the Gospel is a continuation of the Sermon on the Mount. We already have a framework for the Kingdom in the Beatitudes and now Jesus gives more meat to the way we interpret the Law. With regard to how we follow the Law, in the Book of Ecclesiasticus, Ben Sirach stressed the reality of human freewill. We do have a choice but having the ability to choose does not equate willy-nilly to doing what we want. Freedom has consequences.

Is it possible to hear that joy comes from following the laws of God? In the case of the Gospel, Jesus referred to the 10 Commandments, the set of rules we are familiar with. We hear Jesus excoriating the Pharisees and the Scribes, not because they keep the Law but because they would interpret it according to their whims and fancies. This is nothing new because we recognise the same inconsistency in those who legislate but exclude themselves from having to follow the same rules. As they say: “rules for thee but not for me”. Jesus was never against the Law but rather against a hypocrisy of imposing on others the burden that the lawgivers themselves cannot shoulder.

Given that we have a Bohemian inclination, we tend to regard laws as restrictions rather than as an encouragement towards greater freedom. Our mindset will determine how we perceive laws as a blessing or a burden. If our attitude towards laws is minimalist, then we will easily resent that we have been imposed upon. We chafe whenever our personal autonomy is curtailed.

Coming back to the example of marriage and the laws pertaining to the covenant, when asked what is most important in a marriage, the usual reply is love. When love is paramount, who is the Church impose? There is a rule for Catholics that children are to be baptised and brought up in the faith. The Catholic must declare that he or she will not defect and do what is necessary to ensure that children are brought up in the faith. The usual argument against this requirement: “Where is the freedom of an individual to choose his or her religion?”. Let the child grow up so that he or she can choose what to believe.

There is an inconsistency in the application of what we regard as an individual’s self-determination. Where is freedom to choose when it comes to schools or health regimen? Parents routinely choose the school for their children. When they are sick, for example, with dengue, no parent would ever say “Wait till the child turns 21 for him or her to decide to go hospital”. Immediately the baby is sent to the best hospital with no expenses spared. So much for the right to choose.

The laws of Christ in the Church are meant to foster freedom to be better children of God. Prohibition always sounds restrictive until we realise that negative formulations draw the boundaries where we should not transgress. We love our neighbours by not stealing their wives or property, by not slandering or killing them. The problem with positive laws is that we cannot legislate how to be good. We can only draw the boundaries of how we cannot be bad. Our attitude determines how we embrace God’s laws. A minimalist attitude means sticking to the bare minimum. But in love, there is no compulsion which makes obligation the lowest form of love. Which would you prefer? Having a rule that your child kisses you goodnight. Or the child spontaneously gives you a hug and a peck on the cheek every night?

It is true that laws need to be updated to accommodate changing situations, circumstances and pastoral demands. Should we relax the laws with regard to marriage and divorce? Should we be more flexible than viewing marriage as a covenant only between a man and a woman? Or should we just change the terms of reference for marriage to basically a bond between two loving persons? Some of the changes asked for by present society strike directly at the heart of who we are. Are we subject to the laws of nature or do we break away from the limits imposed by creation? These are some of our challenges. Some Church leaders may have caved in to the demands of relevance.

Circumstances shift as they often do. But the variation in the laws cannot be based on the principle that the “old” or the past is bad and the “new” or the latest is good. In terms of product branding and commerce, the latest is always the updated. In technological advances too. We perceive the new as always the better. However, in terms of laws that govern us, the referent cannot be the latest or the newest. Instead, change should always be in consonant with the Creator’s intention. If we accept that God is the Creator, then we must guide our change according to His logic of creation. Otherwise, we will be subject to the tyranny of the fashionable. Right now the fad is to change one’s gender according to one’s preference. Hailee Steinfeld, the actress in Pitch Perfect 2 suggested that it is OK if you wanna change the body that you came in. Anyone who argues that there is no logic of creation, that is, nature has no laws, must realise the shakiness of this position. The very fact that we decry “inhumane laws” is already a tacit recognition that laws must respect the bounds of nature, that is, what it means to be human.

To update our laws, listening to the Spirit is important. When individual freedom and self-expression are priority, then listening to God might be a bit more difficult. Adhering to God’s laws means recognising that His laws supersede our demands. Not everything which is possible within our capacity has the morality of permissibility. I have the capacity to kill does not mean I have a right to kill. I have the possibility of having sexual relationship does not mean I have the right to sleep with whoever I want.

When God set Adam and Eve in the Garden, He drew certain restrictions based on who they were. Man has been created for a life with God when translated must include obeying these restrictions. But when individual autonomy becomes the guiding principle of life, then appreciating God’s laws will be challenging. When God’s laws are perceived to limit our freedom, then it is God who needs to bow to our freedom. Indeed the rules of engagement have changed. Now we demand that God change His Laws or lower the bars so that we can go to heaven, instead of we changing so that He can let us into heaven.

5th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A 2023

Just so happened that 2nd Feb was World Day of Consecrated Life and there was a talk given which coincidentally centred on the Gospel verse of being light of the world and salt of the earth. Light and salt define the vocation of a Christian.

Last Sunday we covered the Beatitudes. Their sole aim, as we navigate through the treacheries of life, is to prepare us for eternity. This preparation does not take place in a vacuum. Instead, we are placed directly into the world to cooperate in the work of our salvation as well as to establish the Kingdom of Christ. The reminder of John the Evangelist that Christians are in the world but are not of the world sums up the attitude that Christians are to take with regard to their mission.

The call to be both light and salt is not to focus attention on us per se but rather to highlight our roles in illuminating the world and flavouring the earth. Yet, we are aware that these metaphors of light and salt might be a bit problematic today. There is too much artificial light in our environment. Light pollution has Man confused between light and darkness to the point that the clock revolves around a “permanent” day. Furthermore, our food is also loaded with salt that high blood pressure has become a major health issue for society. Our tastebuds have been unhealthily primed to crave for more and more enhanced flavours.

How then do we appreciate these metaphors?

Firstly, to explain the function of light, we might refer to the rite of baptism. Either the baptised adult or the god-parent of the baptised infant is given a candle lit from the Paschal torch. The exhortation given to the person who receive the light comes from the narrative of the Wise and Foolish Virgins. “May they keep the flame alive in their hearts. When the Lord comes, may they go out to meet Him with all the saints in the heavenly Kingdom”. The light is kept burning brightly through the consistency of our faith and action.

One of the best illustrators of what it means to be a light is our political scene. The present motto for public life, not just here in this country, but everywhere, is basically to “never get caught”. Once a scandal breaks out, the so-called honourable thing for someone caught is to resign.[1] If one probes further, the main inclination to be “honourable” is that this course of action is still coming from that space where there is supposedly a gap between a politician’s public behaviour and his private morality. There still remains a chasm because we still maintain that morality is merely an individual’s private business whereas his public personality is simply a façade. For that pretence to hold, one should never be caught.

One might be forgiven if one were to think that this so-called credibility criterion, that is, the honourable resignation is derived from a Christian ideal. It is not. This benchmark or yardstick of honourability ignores the painful truth of life after the Fall. Everyone is a sinner because no one is born immaculate. A true leader is not a person without a misstep. An authentic leader can also make mistakes because credibility and integrity, as important as they are, do not mean that we have never made mistakes. Mistakes or sins merely highlight the reality that we are saints in progress and that credibility and integrity represent our attempt to close the chasm between our profession and our personality. We ought to live privately as if we were public personalities.

And this brings us to how we as salt can enhance and flavour our community. The useless salt to be trampled underfoot after losing its purity is not a repudiation of our true selves but simply a reminder that while we are sinners, we are supposed to maintain our flavour through a regimen of personal purification. Each one is a work-in-progress.

Thus, it is a heresy to believe that one has to be perfect before daring to stand up or to open one’s mouth. Since no one is conceived sinless, except Jesus and Mary, waiting for a perfect world-class person before one starts to speak or serve might take forever. The sad reality is when everyone is waiting for everyone to be ethically upright, the general standard in morality drops. Why? Instead of morality being right or wrong independent of the person uttering it, we have reduced the measure or standard of right and wrong to our credibility. As long as I am not credible, I have no right to state what is objective wrong. To give an example: As long as I have killed I lose the right to assert that killing is wrong. I would be a hypocrite and have no “standing” to advise anyone regarding the immorality of killing. In this case, even the devil can state the truth proving that credibility whilst crucial is not the standard of morality but the action itself has a morality that commands both the holy and the hypocrite. Thus, our task, if we were to use a business term, is to be a value-added person in the community.

It does not mean being perfect persons. Despite our brokenness, we are still disciples cooperating with grace for our salvation and as well as participating in Christ’s programme of building up His Kingdom. Sometimes Catholics are led to think that being light and salt is a mission within the Church. But that is not the focus of our Christian call.

The vocation of a Christian is out there. There is a world waiting to be shaped into Christ’s Kingdom. It would be safe and comforting to limit our engagement to Church activities etc. Whereas the Kingdom that is waiting for our participation is where we live, in our Tamans and condos, where we play, in our pitches and stadia, where we mingle, in our malls and our food courts, where we study, in our schools and universities, where we work, in our offices and factories. These are the areas where the Beatitudes are to be embraced and the Kingdom to be established.

It is indeed a Herculean task. We crave the security of familiarity because it is easier and comforting. When we are out there, we need to be on our toes, like driving courteously on our roads and byways, especially if you have a rosary dangling from your rear-view mirror. We are all failures, one and all, from popes to priests, from married to monastic, from parishioners to prisoners. Everyone is a failure. Everyone is a sinner. Our credibility does not come from managing our public bearing and our private behaviour as if they were separated. Instead our credibility must come from the perspective of conversion because every sinner has a future and every saint has a past. By walking our talk, we are transformed or “Christified” through the alignment of both our public and private personae. We grow as committed Christians, faithful images of Christ to light the world brighter and to enrich the earth better.



_____

[1] The point of resignation has no connexion to forgiveness because the issue is not about making a mistake as suggested by the adage, “to err is human and to forgive divine”.

4th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A 2023

As He immersed into public life, Jesus presented a picture of what the People of God should be like and plotted the moral and spiritual chart for arriving there. In fact, the grand scheme of God’s people can be gleaned from both the 1st and 2nd Readings. According to the Prophet Zephaniah, from the remnant of Israel, God will form a people humble and lowly. This will be a people of integrity. Prosperity will no longer be a sign of God’s blessings. Instead, those who trust in God will be blessed by Him. Furthermore, St Paul reminded the Corinthians that God’s choice of them was not based on any merit of theirs. All throughout history, the Lord has routinely chosen the weak in order to shame the strong. His power shines through the powerless.

It is with this that we come to the Gospel. The Beatitudes are the magna carta for the shaping or the forming of the people that Jesus wants for His Kingdom. But a blue-print is never without its context and this is important for our appreciation of the Beatitudes. At the start of Jesus’ public ministry, the people were inspired by His preaching and impressed by His actions until He began to challenge their orthodoxies—whether their beliefs, convictions or ideas. In general, people are not contextless or tabulæ rasæ, meaning that they are not blank slates but they have notions of who they are and how things are supposed to be. The problem begins when worldviews are fossilised or codified and nobody likes to be told that what they have held on to dearly is wrong. It unsettles them. They react.

In the face of opposition, proclaiming any alternative worldview can be challenging. The radically bold pronouncement of the Beatitudes unsettled the audience then as they do us today. Even more so today. For example, the Declaration of Independence of the United States which lays down the principle that every individual has the right to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness feels tame in contrast to our aspirations. Note that the Declaration sprang from a background in which the quest for “personal” fulfilment or happiness was set within a religious framework, that is, a nation under God. Today, the objective standards are personal and individualistic and they are framed as the rights to good health, great wealth, personal prestige. These are usually grouped under the umbrella of a “good life”. Never mind the fact that a “good life” is more of a moral imperative than a description of an easy and comfortable life. Life is good and a good life are two different realities.

In fact, the programme outlined by Jesus to be numbered as His people has, in many extreme cases, led to the deprivation of life. To be fair, to be blessed or happy in the way that Jesus enumerated in the Beatitudes, is not a condemnation of our natural aspiration. Why? Creation is God’s endowment for man to enjoy. God did not give grudgingly. However, everything has a place in God’s creation. What has happened is the inversion of our perspective. From blessings as gifts, we have come to view material wealth, prosperity and health, as our entitlement. We deserve them and God owes them to us.

This sense of entitlement makes the Beatitudes hard to embrace. Blessed are the poor in spirit. Blessed are those who mourn. Blessed are you who are abused, persecuted and have all kinds of calumny spoken against you. Are you kidding? Every statement runs counter to our native appetite. It may not be that accurate to speak of this inclination as natural but more precise to view our faculty of passion from a perspective that it has been damaged by sin.

The priority of life is not so much to be successful as it is to live a good life, that is, a moral life of excellence and virtue. The goal in life is not to live forever. It is to live in a manner that dares to lay down one’s life for a greater value or better still for a person who is worth dying for. It sounds alien but it is not because a father or mother will give his or her life for his or her child. It is part of our constitution or make-up. The grace is to convert that dying from “egoistic” to “altruistic”, from selfish to self-effacing. It is within this magnanimous framework that the Beatitudes make sense.

We are living in troubled times. When a society becomes decadent, it will begin to close in on itself. Luxury, or the good life, instead of it being a consolation along the pilgrimage of life, will soon become a value in itself. We are fatter and lazier. Lost in the clutches of hedonism, we cannot see beyond the here and now. As a result, whatever aspirations we may have, they have to be fulfilled. Otherwise, life becomes meaningless.

The good thing is that society is not entirely lost. It still retains a semblance of right and wrong even though its sense of morality is misguided. It appears that our desire for the good is influenced by a therapeutic moralistic deism. Within such a belief, the primary mark of society is to feel good. Goodness is measured by feeling more than any other values.

The aim of life is to be and not to feel good because we have been created for an eternity that cannot be satisfied temporally. In other words, eternity cannot find its fulfilment in the temporal. The knowledge that we have the possibility of everlasting life is both a consolation as well as a compensation for sorrow. It makes the unrequited yearnings of the heart bearable. Take a movie like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon starring both Chow Yun Fatt and Michelle Yeoh. Whatever “sexual attraction” they had for each other was never fulfilled. When our notion of life is restricted to the temporal, these two characters would basically be lost souls because of their “unfulfilment” but if our vision is more eternal, whatever cannot be resolved in this lifetime, there is an eternity for the final resolution. For example, “adultery” can be excused by claiming that “you have married wrong person”. Consider a man who has a wrong wife, already three children but who chose to uphold the vows of his marriage. Stupid in the eyes of the world for not giving in to the excuse to cheat on the wife. But in the eyes of God, a man of integrity.

The spirituality of the Beatitudes is based on this principle and that means that the troubles we encounter in this world, even though they can be overwhelming, they do not indicate a permanency. No matter how tested we are by circumstances, they do not define who we are.

This realisation makes the Beatitudes a bit more comprehensible even though it is not entirely palatable. The question we need to ask ourselves is what sort of philosophy of life should we hold on to? The answer can be helped if we consider this scenario and that is this: when we have gained everything, what is next. The richest or the most successful person in the world will have arrived at the pinnacle and there they must ask the question of what the next is. Is there anything more?

In summary, the Beatitudes prepare us for eternity. They help us to see a realm beyond this world. There the values are different from this world of incompleteness and inadequacy. Whatever we experience here will never satisfy us completely. Whatever we achieve here will never fulfil us fully. Sadly, the response is more hoarding and accumulating, be it wealth or even health. The drive or passion we have was never intended “solely” for this life. The fatal mistake is to consider what we find in this world to be the final satisfaction or fulfilment. Whereas, in eternity, what the world prizes will no longer be what attracts us. Instead, we shall live the Beatitudes with a kind of peace and integrity that the world cannot give. In conclusion, the Beatitudes only make sense when we realise that whatever we are on earth or have in this world is only a stepping stone to the next. The Beatitudes are less commandments and more invitation from the Heart of Christ to seek the values of the eternal Kingdom through a life of excellence, well-lived in this passing world as a preparation for the next. We hold on despite our losses here because of the promised gain of heaven. Blessed are you for trusting that God will never be outdone.