17th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year B 2024

We are reminded of the Solemnity of Corpus Christi again. We continue with last week’s theme of God’s care as both the 1st Reading and the Gospel illustrate His generosity. Elisha managed to feed 100 men with 20 barley loaves. The same miracle repeated in the Gospel is infinitely more than what Elisha had supplied. The Psalm acknowledges that God’s providence is always in the right place and at the right time. Both Elisha and Jesus started with nothing. Someone happened to have barley loaves in the instance of Elisha and bread and fish in the case of Jesus. With nothing but the magnanimity of the unknown man from Baal-shalishah and boy from the crowd, the two miracles displayed God’s benevolence.

All miracles of abundance before the advent of the Gospel prefigure Christ’s gift of the Eucharist. In fact our Gospel is taken from John and there the language of the Passover is clearly an echo of the Mass that we celebrate. Furthermore, beyond the Eucharist, this miracle is also a foreshadowing of the Messianic Banquet of heaven.

God is lavishly generous evidenced by having enough to eat and 12 baskets full of left-over. As the Psalm extols God’s providence in sustaining creation at all times, the challenge is for us to imitate God’s generosity.

In the 2nd Reading St Paul speaks of generosity in the manner of living. Be kind and be gentle as we are united in the one bread forming one body. This generosity is summed up in the Eucharist. In John’s Gospel, the Multiplication of Loaves and Fish replaces the Last Supper. In place of the Institution Narrative, Jesus washes the feet of His disciples suggesting that the observe of the Eucharistic coin is service. Generosity is not restricted to the parting of material wealth. Just like Bread that is broken, our thanksgiving is lived through a generous attitude of pouring out one’s life in the imitation of Christ.

What can hem in our desire to be generous like God is the fear of inadequacy, that is, the idea of “not enough”. The following observation sounds like a criticism but it is not. In fact, it is to highlight who we truly were that can help us to cultivate the attitude of generosity. Remember that during the pandemic, white flags were flown and the immediate reaction was an outpouring of kindness? We were more willing to give in the midst of crisis. Now that we have returned to normalcy, it feels like we are a bit shyer in sharing.

When we operate with a mentality of not enough, we shy away from sharing and tend towards selfishness. Think for a moment this statement: God is generous. In His infinite wisdom, could the Lord be less omniscient than He is? Has He created a world which is incapable of feeding itself? Or are we accustomed to the mantra that the world is overpopulated and that there is not enough resources to support a ballooning population? Is there not enough to go around or could it be more that we are unaccustomed to generosity.

We do not live in a world which is incapable of feeding the hungry. That is a fact. This sounds like a socialist or communist chant but it is not. Instead, it is a rather sad reflection of how little trust we have in God’s providence. It explains why we operate with a mindset that is possessive which makes it hard to see others as brothers and sisters. According to the Catechism, CCC2404 "In his use of things, man should regard the external goods he legitimately owns not merely as exclusive to himself but common to others also, in the sense that they can benefit others as well as himself." In other words, ownership, even though it is legitimately owned, is also stewardship. We are stewards of God’s Providence for we have been tasked to generate prosperity to benefit others.

This might sound like a familiar tune from the Gospel of Prosperity used to psych or rouse the congregation into giving but it is not. Catholics do not tithe but the truth is that each Sunday’s collection is part and parcel of that generosity to assist the Church in carrying out the mission entrusted to her—to evangelise and to make all nations disciples of the one Lord and God.

The most generous gift or service we have is not money. It is ourselves. Priests and religious are called to a life which gives of themselves entirely to the Lord. Those of us who are called to marriage give of ourselves to our spouses. Parents give of themselves to the care of their children. And children should reciprocate. We often think of generosity in material terms and the question associated with being generous is “how much”. However, which is easier to accomplish? To hear someone who is down and out, moaning and groaning about his or her misfortunes? Sitting with your grandmother who is repeating stories of her past? Or. To give RM50 to a charitable cause? I vaguely remember the story of a small boy whose father was always busy. So the child asked the father the cost of an hour of his time. He tried to pay the father for that hour to spend with him. Generosity is an ability to let ourselves be taken away, to be burn off like a candle and that makes parting with material wealth even more meaningful.

This Sunday’s challenge as posed by the Readings and the Gospel invites us to a greater generosity like God is. If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then the best we can imitate God is to be generous. For it is in gratitude that we are human and in generosity, we are divine.

18th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A 2020

The overarching theme for this Sunday is generosity. God is provident as we hear it in the first reading. However, in the Gospel, we begin with the withdrawal of a very human Jesus, possibly to grieve over the death of His cousin, John the Baptist. And yet, He did not hesitate for a second when pressing needs called upon Him. He fed the hungry whereas His disciples thought that sending the crowd away to fend for themselves was a better option. But, the particular miracle continues with the idea of generosity. It feels like Holy Thursday or a Corpus Christi as the multiplication of the loaves and fish prefigures the Sacrament of the Eucharist. The Institution Narrative is an echo of Him taking the bread, blessing and breaking before giving it to His disciples to distribute amongst the people. In letting His disciples apportion the food, He also foreshadows the priesthood of the ordained in the ministry of feeding His flock with the Bread and Wine of eternal life.

The twelve basketful of leftover shows that God is lavishly generous. In order to appreciate His generosity, we need to understand it within the context of the miracles performed by Christ. Each one is a Messianic sign of the Kingdom of God because each one describes how things will be when Christ rules in our world and in our hearts. Miracles verify the truth of His preaching which, according to the Catechism, “are accompanied by mighty works and wonders and signs” (CCC547). In other words, His miracles—the lame walk, the blind see, the dead are brought back to life and today, the hungry are fed—inaugurate His Kingdom in which men are liberated from slavery to sin so as to live in the freedom of God’s children.

The operative word is liberation. Unfortunately, we generally stop at God’s generosity. Our entitled ears are incapable of grasping the full extent of Christ’s Kingship of our hearts and of our world. Sure, we love a God who is benevolent and providential. More so, we prefer a God who can bend to our will. When we want a pliable God, we will never be able to appreciate the 3rd Luminous mystery where Jesus proclaims the Kingdom of God..

What is this Kingdom?

Taking our cue from the miracle of the multiplication, Pedro Arrupe, a recent general of the Society of Jesus commented that the Holy Eucharist is not complete as long as people still go hungry in the world. Again, our selective hearing perceives this as a physico-logistical or socio-economical problem. Inequality or injustice prevents the just distribution of food in the world. Actionable people that we are, we want to immediately jump into righting what is wrong. So, we have food distribution programmes—like the one conducted by the Office of Human Development. We aid the poor with provision and groceries. But, even where social justice is not an issue, we do not realise how our exercise of freedom has an impact on hunger. When we consume, we want as many options or alternatives as possible because we associate freedom with the availability of choices. Say, a loaf of bread. Simply put, the baker has to bake X loaves different types of bread (wholegrain, white, brown etc) just so that one can exercise the freedom to choose. A person who walks into a bakery will not buy all the available choices. He generally buys a loaf of bread. At the end of the day, excess bread is discarded. Built into our freedom is the sin of wastage. Think of one of our festivities, like the upcoming Mooncake festival and you get the picture. All the assorted permutations of novelties—Musang King mooncake, with lotus seed paste, with/without egg-yolk etc. When the festivity is over, unsold food has to be disposed of.

There are systemic inequalities in our political and economic systems. Both the programme of equitable distribution of food and the exercise of freedom highlight a challenge with regard to the establishment of the Kingdom of Christ. We often forget that a central element that hinders the Kingdom’s foundation is personal sin. In healing people from sickness and forgiving their sins, Jesus was freeing them for the Kingdom. When we are slaves to sin, human bondage is the result. Personal sin, and not only systemic inequality, be it political, social, economic etc, is a major cause of human misery.

Thus, the key to a better world, a society more reflective of God’s Kingdom, is not just systemic but profoundly personal. Physical hunger has a spiritual cause. Perhaps Greta Thunberg was right when she railed against our environmental excesses by making a personal choice of travelling less especially in air travel. But because we lean towards heavily towards science, we may be tempted to solve the problem of personal sin technically. Social engineering is a good example of a technical solution. However, what we fail to recognise is that no matter how good we are technically, our solution will be thwarted personally. The goodness of a system can be destroyed by personal sin. “Repent and believe the Gospel” indicates that the beginning of the Kingdom is found in the forgiveness of sins and conversion. Personal conversion makes possible the future coming of the Kingdom.

Thus, God may be generous, but His providence is not indulgent. He loves us undoubtedly as we hear in the 2nd Reading. “Nothing can come between us and the love that God has for us” means that God’s love is ever so faithful. Whilst that may be true, we often place obstacles in the path of His love for us. Thus, God’s providence is an invitation to enter into personal conversion. The realisation of God’s Kingdom must always begin with the human heart. There the battle for the soul is fought. In this, we take comfort that God will never give up on us. Neither should we.

2nd Sunday in Ordinary Time Year C

Today’s Gospel completes a series of the epiphanies of God’s glory beginning with the birth of Christ at Bethlehem, followed by the visit of the Magi from the East, and right after the Baptism of Christ in the Jordan, we witness the first miracle which launches Christ’s public ministry. What can we say about the glory of Christ changing water into wine?

Firstly, there is a sense of progression. In the preceding 3 epiphanies, the angels broadcasted the birth of the Messiah to the Shepherds in the hills, the Magi announced His birth to the waiting world and at the baptism in the Jordan, the Holy Spirit testified to Christ Himself. But, at Cana, the glory of Christ is manifested by none other than Himself. Secondly, we encounter a promise fulfilled. In the 1st Reading, we hear a message of hope. God has not forgotten his spouse Jerusalem. There is a promise that after the Exile, God and His people will be like newlyweds again. “Like a young man marrying a virgin, so will the one who built you wed you”. This promise is fulfilled at Cana. The wine of the Old Law has run out and when water was transformed into wine, we witness the start of the new dispensation. The six jars of water for ceremonial ablution have become the waters of baptism and forgiveness. Thirdly, further ahead, we will witness even more. Later, at the Last Supper, wine will be changed into blood which is a symbol of the Eucharist.

Thus, there is progress in the Lord. But, more than progress, promise and fulfilment, we see how the relationship between God and Man is brought to a higher level. It starts with Mary. John’s Gospel presents a Mary of divine purpose. Christ, in calling Mary “Woman”, harkened back to Genesis as He recognised His mother to be the new Eve: the new mother of the living. This recognition was confirmed when at the foot of the Cross, the Son gave us to His mother as He commanded, “Woman this is your son”. Mary inaugurated the reign of Christ which He accomplished at Calvary by making Mary the mother of all creation made new by His obedience to the Father.

Thus, the changing of water into wine is more than merely a miracle. It has implications on how we are to understand deeper and conceive better the mystery of the Church and what it means to live the 2nd Reading.

Firstly, the mystery of the Church is the mystery of the relationship between God and Man. How is this so? This relationship between God and Man can be described in various ways and one of them is through marriage. The Church is called the Bride of Christ as the theme today “the Church’s Bridegroom” is a reference to Christ. In this divine union, the Bride is forever faithful to the Bridegroom. Therefore, the Church must be ever attentive to the voice of the Bridegroom.

Secondly, this is how the 2nd Reading is to be lived out. At times, the Church (who is the Bride) is also called the Body of Christ. It is in this context that there are many gifts given to the Body in order for the Body to function more effectively. “There are all sorts of service to be done, but always to the same Lord”. All gifts are given so that the Body can obey the Head and the Bride can be attentive to Her Bridegroom.

Thirdly, if we return to the specifics of the Gospel, 6 stone jars mean literally 600 litres or bottles of wine; enough to send a hamlet to the moon. The public ministry of Christ is inaugurated through this overwhelming gesture of generosity on the part of God. It shows that God’s giving is never miserly. This gives us a way to look at our gifts and talents in relationship to one another. If the Church is poor, and here poverty is not measured monetarily, and if the community does not prosper, and here prosperity is not measured materially, it just means that we have not honoured God the best way we could, considering all we have is given by Him.

We are simply challenged because our sense of ownership is highly “individualised”. This partly explains the deterioration in the standard of public utilities. We may excuse the fact that it is “Malaysian” [1st-world infrastructure with 3rd-world mentality] but it goes deeper because the general trend throughout the world is a breaking down of “public” services and spaces. Why? Because, in a highly “individualised world”, we are accustomed to think that my gifts are mine. It may also explain why religious life is not attractive because religious life is premised on the assumption that one’s gifts and talents are received for the good of the whole.

Finally, given the context of the readings today is marriage, perhaps it is time for those who are married to think of their relationship not for themselves but for the community. Maybe as we enter 2010 and march toward the Jubilee Year 2011, it is time for married couples to renew their relationship. If your marriage is good, do not take it for granted. Make it better. For those whose marriage is in difficulties, when the wine of novelty and excitement run out, do not give up hope but seek necessary help. For those whose marriages have broken down irretrievably and they find themselves in the unenviable situation of separation or divorce, look for healing and forgiveness. To those who are in irregular relationships like a marriage outside Church or in a second marriage, try to rectify your situation. And finally, those who are getting married should take pains to prepare themselves for the sacrament which they will receive. It means conducting themselves in a manner which is chaste bearing in mind that the question asked at their wedding has to be answered in the “present” and not in the “past”. The question “Do you take N. to be your husband or wife” has to be answered with “I do” and not “I did”.

All these scenarios do not say that people cannot make mistakes. They are just reminders to us that mistakes do not define us but instead we learn from them. Marriage is necessary for the well-being of the community, namely the Church, because marital relationship is the most appropriate mirror of God’s undying love for us all and Christ faithfulness to the Church. The wealth of the Church is not to be found in gold. The wealth of the Church is you married couples. Your faithful love for each other is the joy of Holy Mother, the Church. In the past, we held in high esteem both religious and priestly life. That was possible only because the vitality of priestly and religious life was dependent on healthy family life.

Cana shows that God is abundantly generous and He gives us good things for the good of His Church. Let us be more responsive to His generosity.

32nd Sunday in Ordinary Time Year B

To some preachers, the readings are a bonanza because one can develop the theme of generosity and apply it to the congregation. “Give! Give until it hurts! If it does not hurt, then you have not been generous enough”. But, is there more to this “giving till it hurts” generosity for the congregation or parishioners? Yes, and both are found in the two widows of the 1st Reading and the Gospel. There are two lessons to be learnt even though both are centred on one theme: God in whom we trust.

In biblical times, even amongst the poor, there is probably a hierarchy and widows are placed right at the bottom of the social class. In a culture which places a great emphasis on honour, widows often have no one to defend their honour. The word “widow” itself can also mean, in Hebrew, one who is silent.

Thus, we might think that the Gospel is highlighting the generosity of a voiceless widow. It is, but, Christ is not so much praising the widow as He is lamenting how she has become poorer. Her worsened position must be seen in the context of who the Scribes are and what role they play in society. The Scribes are those who know the Law. If widows are at the bottom of the social hierarchy, then the scribes must belong to the upper stratum and this is confirmed by their preoccupation with honour. From their position, they have the authority to teach. That they love themselves too much is not the problem. The problem is Christ points to them as “men who swallow the property of widows”. Why? In giving all she has, the widow has further worsened her situation. Never mind that she trusts God. Her abandonment to God is actually a condemnation of those who have allowed her to be in such a situation. Thus, Christ is lamenting that the Scribes, whose teaching must have included the sacrifice of giving generously, has effectively reduced the woman to such dire straits. What they teach has further increased the depth of the widow’s penury or poverty.

As such, the widow in the Gospel challenges us on two counts. First, you would think that we have come a long and enlightened way. But, when you read of personalities (who have to remain nameless) and their making a show of their "noble largesse", we know that the phenomenon of shameless parading is still alive. In the context of this benevolence, what is worse is that much of the wealth has been ill-gotten in the first place. But, that is not the point. What is more important is to become more aware of how our actions affect the poor. That is the challenge of the Gospel’s widow. By what we do or what we do not do, have the poor become poorer? This is the part where we begin to be more aware of what we do with what we have. Parading our “generosity” is not enough. Nowhere does Christ condemn the wealthy for being wealthy. Wealth may be God’s choicest blessing but for those who do not know how to use it, it becomes a curse.

Thus, the widow in the Gospel teaches us, that apart from generous giving and trust in God, those of us who are more blessed need to be aware of what the true nature of blessing is. The blessing of having more is never for oneself. What we do with what we have is also an act of trust in and a response to God’s providence and this allows us to take a look at the widow of the 1st Reading.

First, consider her “double” silence. She is not just a widow but a “foreign” widow with a child to support. As such, she is doubly disadvantaged. Her encounter with Elijah teaches us that no matter how disadvantaged, one can still be generous. In a way our widow in the 1st Reading is like the widow in the Gospel because objectively by giving everything she has, she has also worsened her situation—"we shall eat and die". But unlike the widow in the Gospel, the situation is made different by her subjective response. We are never impoverished if we begin to share what we have. Thus, the difference between the two widows teaches us that we may be made poor objectively but our response to an objective situation must always be subjective, that is, personal.

Whilst the widow in the Gospel is made poorer by her objective situation, the widow of Elijah by her subjective response has freed herself to receive God’s providence. This is where we are challenged in our giving. There will be a lot of times where we will not be in control. The political landscape shows that injustice abounds in the country. The environment is not cooperating with us as we experience floods in the East Coast. We are told that the economy is improving but a neighbouring country known for its corruption is now even more transparent than we are and drawing foreign direct investment. All these factors may come together to restrict our freedom or narrow the scope of our action, like the widow in the Gospel. But the widow in the 1st Reading illustrates that freedom, no matter how restricted, is never so that we cannot be generous. That generosity comes only when we believe that God will provide. Otherwise we remain always in the territory of giving from our abundance or from our surplus and not from what we need. In short, we give what we do not need. Let me stress that there is nothing to be ashamed of even though many of us are like that. It is a natural response to any situation of lack or want. The parish is like that too. I tell other parish priests not to come to our parish for their fund-raising believing that there is only this much of generosity and we cannot spare. It actually betrays a lack of trust in people and more so in God.

That is why true generosity is a gift of the Holy Spirit for it is a heroic virtue. Any preacher who sets about asking people to give until it hurts may work on the sentiments of people who are shamed into giving—like telling the congregation that the "Proddies" give 10% and by our calculation Catholics on average give less than 1%. But, in the face of God’s Providence, to be shamed into giving would be a slap in the face of God whom we can trust. We give not because we are shamed. We give because God can be trusted for He is the giver of all things good. The 2nd Reading is our confirmation. If God can give His Son who sacrificed Himself to do away with our sins, what would God not give since He has paid the price for our salvation, with no less than the blood of His Son?

Generosity is a companion of freedom. When one gives freely, the result can only be freedom on our part—a freedom that no wealth or money could ever buy. The path to this freedom is to desire this faith and generosity to trust in God. We pray for that freedom to be generous.