Pentecost Year A

What do we understand of Pentecost and what is its significance?

Its significance might not be that obvious considering that we are easily seduced by the spectacular. And what is more spectacular than the tongues of flames coming to rest on the Apostles. Our understanding of Pentecost is that the Spirit goes wherever He wants to. That is the impression we get because Vatican II has often been described as a breath of fresh air set against what was perceived as the rigidity of the pre-Vatican era. This sense of the Spirit being able to work without and beyond “confines” and “limitations”, appeals to our idea of freedom, which is commonly accepted as being able to do anything, anywhere and at anytime.

But, what if I propose to you that Pentecost is also as sober as the Sacrament we are celebrating today? It is through the power of the Holy Spirit that we are able to confect the bread into the Body of Christ. On the mountain Christ promised to be with His Church until the end of time. Thus, the Spirit is that promise kept which means the Spirit is “tied” to the Church. This being “tied” to the Church reveals a kind of “responsibility” quite antithetical/contrary to our concept of unlimited freedom. Through our ritual celebrations, the Holy Spirit guarantees that the liturgical actions of the Church are truly the actions of Christ Himself.

Christ on earth, through His Prophetic, Priestly and Kingly actions, exercised the authority of God the Father. He revealed Himself as the Truth, offered Himself as the Lamb who took away our sins and He conquered Death by taking away its eternal hold over us. He then sent His disciples out with the same authority He has received from His Father: “As the Father has sent me, so I am sending you”. This sending is through the Holy Spirit. This sending is empowering and therefore exciting. It gives us a sense of purpose. Granted that the world is so wrong, we yearn for the Spirit’s strength to change the world and to, cliché as it may sound, make the world a better place.

But, at the heart of this sending we encounter a contemplative spirit, Mary, who reveals to us the relationship between the Holy Spirit and the Church. She was there at Pentecost and it would not be heretical to say that she was not totally surprised by all that was taking place. Why? She herself had been overshadowed by the Holy Spirit at the moment of the Annunciation. Pentecost was to be another overshadowing. Thus, she who had given birth to the Body of Christ incarnate would now give birth to the Mystical Body of Christ, the Church. Thus, the Mother of Christ is also the Mother of the Church.

By the action of the Holy Spirit, Christ was incarnated through her and once again by the action of the Holy Spirit, the Church is incarnated through her. The birth of the Church took place in the Upper Room. Up there we note a distinct connexion between the Holy Spirit and Apostolic Authority. We hear this in the Gospel today: Those whose sins you forgive they are forgiven. Those whose sins you retain, they are retained. At Pentecost, what was visible in Christ has now passed into the Sacraments.

Your browser may not support display of this image. We can safely say that the heart of Pentecost beats with a Marian rhythm. Take a look at this icon of Christ’s Ascension. In the Orthodox tradition, Ascension and Pentecost are coalesced into one, and in its iconography, the Holy Spirit is not depicted because by His very nature the Holy Spirit is invisible. What you see is Christ is portrayed as enthroned in glory surrounded by the angels who are sending the Apostles out on missions. At the heart of the different missions stands the figure of Mary with her hands in the “orans” position. She prays for the Church.

If Pentecost is the beginning of the Church, then right at the beginning stands the model of one who is forever faithful: Mary. Even as we break into joyful noise, there is a stillness which commands us to pray. In an age which prizes “happening” and which celebrates a “can-do” spirit, we are led by Mary to a deeper appreciation of the relationship between prayer and the Church.

In summary, the significance of Pentecost is that we do not of ourselves make the Church and neither can we grant ourselves salvation. The contemplative spirit of Pentecost has Mary praying for the Church that through the Spirit, we become Church. Make us one body and one Spirit in Christ; a prayer echoed in all the Eucharistic Prayers and this one taken from EPIII. It is true that we cannot help but be overawed by the 3000 added to their number. And, just when we think that Pentecost primes us into action, Mary leads us back to prayer. Pentecost celebrates what the Spirit, through prayer, can do for us.

But, if this sounds lame, let me tell you it does because we breathe the air of self-help. Go to any bookshop and you will find a big section entitled: “Self-help”. We have come to believe more in our own strength than the strength of the Holy Spirit. However, if you desire to change the world, this desire must be founded on prayers rather than our capability because the Holy Spirit can do infinitely more than all our machinations can ever achieve. Let us pray: “Come Holy Spirit”.

7th Sunday of Easter Year A

This Sunday, some parts of the Catholic world are celebrating both Ascension and World Communications Sunday. For us, the 7th Sunday does feel like a straggling Sunday searching for a purpose. Perhaps, Communications Sunday is significant enough as it straddles two great events, Ascension and Pentecost, nourished as it were by the fertile soil of the first novena. Take note that 9 days after the Ascension, the Holy Spirit will descend upon the Apostles. Those 9 days marked the ancient Church’s first novena. What has communications to do with Pentecost? In recent weeks, Christ has been speaking of the coming Spirit as the Spirit of Truth. So, the Spirit who testifies to the Truth testifies to Christ. That is the link that makes Communications Sunday relevant: Communication is of the Truth.

That, in a nutshell, defines the essence of communication.

But, as usual, we are a forgetful people. [1] We seem to have forgotten the primary aim of communication.

For some of us, communication is basically a measure of its medium. Let me explain. We have heard it said that the “medium is the message” and in a sense this is true because we are engrossed or captivated by the technologies of our communication. Remember those heady days when a gangster or a nouveau riche would sit in a hawker’s place publicly parading the precursor of the present mobile phones, an act symbolising that he has arrived. Today, our preoccupation is to reduce the size of our communication devices. Have you watched Star Trek? We look forward to the day when a touch of the badge would be enough to let us communicate. As you can see, we have always been fascinated with how we can communicate better. But, we are by no means unique.

Let me tell a little about the Mediæval Ages. Do not be fooled by what historians term as the Dark Ages. Despite its name, it gave birth to the university system. In those “Dark” times, it seemed that theologians were speculating as to how many angels can dance on top of a pinhead. [2]

We are no different. We somehow equate “more” with “better” as evidenced by our preoccupation with the number of terabytes we can compress onto our solid-state drive. We started with kilobytes, to mega, to giga and now terabytes. [I am sure there must be some bytes I know not of]. We continually chase a faster speed for our computer processors. We are obsessed with effective methods of communication and you would be surprised that this obsession with speed and space is fuelled no less by an industry our taboo-ridden culture is too shy to acknowledge. According to an American social critic, “Great art is always flanked by its dark sisters, blasphemy and pornography”. [3] Pornography, in large proportion, has determined the speed of our communicative technologies.

Between the aim of communication and its means, we will always be side-tracked by media’s ability to promise us instant gratification. You are having steam-boat in Cameron Highlands and immediately your circle of Facebook friends can see you savouring the fish-balls or blanching the fresh pickings of vegetables direct from the ambient farms. The immediacy we want of our experiences expresses what the Holy Father in his message says: entering cyberspace can be a sign of authentic search for personal encounters with others. The impetus for immediacy draws attention to our desires to encounter and to be encountered, to know and to be known, to accept and to be accepted and finally to love and to be loved. Sadly, we also know that the effects of immediacy often do not lead to genuine encounter. The many means often do not facilitate the aim.

Communications Sunday reminds us that nothing is more personal than an encounter with Christ Himself. In fact, the Gospel today, a preface to Pentecost next week, speaks of the hour when the Father will glorify the Son and the Son will glorify the Father by giving eternal life to those entrusted to Him. What is eternal life? To know the one, true God and Jesus Christ Whom the Father has sent. All throughout her history, the Church stands as that beacon emitting and transmitting this message of eternal salvation inviting all men and women to this personal encounter with Christ the Saviour of the world. All media of communication must be harnessed for this purpose.

Let me bring in last week’s second reading which comes from the 2nd Letter of St Peter. He provides us with the motivation as to why Christians ought to embrace the technologies available. He says: “Always have your answer ready for people who ask you the reason for the hope that you all have”. The different media of communication, apart from merely communicating and bringing us together, serves this one purpose—that we always be ready to give the reason for our hope in Christ.

In conclusion, in our search to connect with one another through the different media of communication, let us not forget that their sole aim is to convey the truth. Truth is not baring it all; it is not naked truth and certainly not the same as “Wikileaks”. Instead, truth is the person of Jesus Christ Who is our very life and He is our mission in the world. These 9 days we pray because we need the strength of the Holy Spirit to continue to emit and to transmit the message of the eternal salvation of Jesus Christ, the Lord.

FOOTNOTES:
[1] Now you know why the Mass is also referred to as a memorial; a memorial that is more than merely remembering.
[2] A trite question which effectively dismisses the contributions of the Schoolmen to the advancement of Western civilisation.
[3] Camille Paglia in Sexual Personae.

Ascension Thursday Year A

I am happy that Ascension is still celebrated on a Thursday and not on a Sunday. After all, it is not called Ascension Thursday for nothing. Later, you will know why I am happy. The first reading took off as the Gospel concluded, giving us a picturesque description of the post-Ascension scene. On a mountain, we are told, that as the Lord was lifted up, they looked on until a cloud took Him from their sight. Even then, they continued staring into the sky.

Was their sight blocked by the clouds of mystery or interrupted by the appearance of two men in white as reported by Luke or was there something else they saw? They were transfixed for they saw heaven and no less. Mt 6:21 or Lk 12:34 tell us this: “Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also”. So, in the case of the Ascension, where Christ the head has gone to, you can be sure that the Church His Body is there also. On the mountain, the Apostles were momentarily transported into heaven. Hence, the Ascension was not simply the act of Christ returning to from whence He had come. In the Ascension we actually catch a glimpse of heaven, much like Peter, James and John lingering on Mount Tabor after they caught sight of Christ brilliance at the Transfiguration.

This glimpse of heaven succinctly sketched in the second reading is echoed in our liturgy for the Ascension: Christ, the mediator between God and man, judge of the world and Lord of all, has passed beyond our sight, not to abandon us but to be our hope. Christ is the beginning, the head of the Church; where He has gone, we hope to follow.

But, unlike the Apostles, we are not completely convinced that we should follow. Our line of vision is blocked not by the clouds of mystery or by angels appearing. Instead, our vision is blurred because we have mistaken earth for heaven. What was originally intended to be a pit-stop has become for us the final destination. We have been so beguiled by the world that we no longer give a second thought to heaven and what is disturbing is for most of us that is not unusual. In the field of socio-politico-economic planning, we speak of strategic long-term planning but our long-term is not long enough.

Have you watched the movie 2012? Notice how a symbol of life hereafter, the Dome of St Peter’s Basilica was dramatically destroyed as it ploughed into a Piazza packed with praying pilgrims, sending a clear message that belief in the afterlife was basically futile. Furthermore, observe how the crack on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel occurred right at the spot where God the Father’s finger touches Adam’s and giving him life. The crack effectively severed the link between the Creator and the creature, rendering the promise of everlasting presence that Christ made on the mountain null and void. Thus, we are reduced to a materialist existence. Our obsession with the prolongation not the preservation of life is symptomatic of a materialist [1] philosophy.

This obsession with prolonging life is manifested through a preoccupation we have with safety. In the aftermath of the recent landslide we are naturally caught up by the mindless and unnecessary loss of lives. Our discussions centre on, amongst many issues, the need for proper building codes or regulations—where and how to build. If you see a construction site, you would probably know what I am speaking about. There would be numerous signs reminding workers about safety together with the necessary barricades, harnesses and helmets. And of course, these are needed to indemnify the builders or contractors should any mishaps occur on-site.

This preoccupation with precaution which is symptomatic of a materialist world cuts across every facet of our live. For example, parents with a single offspring will take every precaution for their child to be safe. And let me clarify that I am not against the taking of precaution. Taking proper steps to be safe is commendable because it is the expression of the instinct to preserve life.

But, do you know that many of us worry about safety but we do not give ample thoughts to salvation? It seems that we want to be safe but we do not really care that we be saved. This is what I meant when I said that we have mistaken a pit-stop for the final destination. Our concern for safety is actually an expression of our desire for salvation but we are beguiled into thinking that safety is the be all and end all of our concerns. Even if we do not say it, we are actually implying that beyond safety, there is only a void—nothingness. Preservation of life is one thing. Obsessive prolongation of life is just an indication of a materialist mentality.

Now you know why I am happy that Ascension is celebrated today. It is a little inconvenient. You would have to set aside time, rush from work, break your daily routine. What the exercise does is that it takes us away from all that we deem to be important materially so that we can catch a glimpse of what is also important immaterially—heaven.

If Ascension is a reminder of our salvation, a reminder that our home is in heaven, then it is also a reminder of what God does for us. Moving it to a Sunday merely proposes that salvation can “wait” and we are “masters” of our destiny and salvation, so much so that we can leave God to a time when we have the time to attend to Him. It is convenience at its worst. So, despite its materialist overtone, the movie 2012 teaches us a valuable lesson: the time for salvation waits for no one. Do not be caught unawares. As Shakespeare quotes of Julius Caesar, set honour in one eye and death in the other, Ascension invites us live life to the fullest but always with one eye set on heaven.

FOOTNOTE:
[1] I have deliberately not used the word “materialistic” because I am simply making an observation rather than a “judgement”. We are materialist by nature because we are incarnated spirits. The word does not in any way denigrate worldly concerns. However, rich or poor, everyone’s struggle is to be non materialistic.

5th Sunday of Easter Year A

This Sunday our Lord seems to be rubbish talking—something we are familiar with. Amongst the Chinese, when a person begins to talk about his or her death, the usual response is “Don’t talk rubbish”. But, the context of Christ’s speech is just before the Passion and so it is more than just morbid chatter. There are always implications for being a Christian—his faith will be tested and he will be rejected by the world. In any test of faith, people do get lost especially when things go drastically wrong. Today, Christ tells His disciples not to lose hope or be discouraged but instead to know that in Him, they can be sure of salvation because He is the Way, the Truth and the Life. There is no mistaking the absolute claim in what the Lord says. He is not just any way to follow. He is not simply a truth amongst many to believe in. Instead, He is the only source of salvation and as the 2nd Reading asserts: He is the precious cornerstone.

The absolute claim of Christ also makes this Sunday almost a sin to some people for whom the only Gospel they subscribe to is called the “Gospel” of Relativism. Furthermore, there are not a few schooled in the Philosophy of Sincerity—meaning that it is enough that one lives sincerely [1]—who might consider this declaration to be really arrogant. An absolute claim is a scandal of exclusivity. In an inclusive world, how dare we impose our standard on others?

In light of an inclusive convention that upholds tolerance, the question of how we dare to impose on others seems like a fair enough question to ask but what remains to be asked is if Christ’s absolute claim were inconsistent with who we are as human being? Here, we detect a certain inconsistency in the way our inclusive world is organised. On the one hand, we have come to accept tolerance [meaning acceptance and no judgement] as the most appropriate manner of human interaction. On the other hand, we categorically exclude certain actions from the same canon of tolerance. At best, what we have is an irregular form of tolerance which actually speaks volumes of our inconsistency and which is also part of the difficulty we find ourselves in. Either we arbitrarily choose certain standards to apply which is nothing but caprice, random, anarchy or, we instinctively recognise certain limits we need to adhere too. By the very fact that we seem to exclude certain behaviours from the canon/rule of [tolerance] acceptability—sexual harassment and child abuse are two good examples—that means we implicitly accept certain standards. If we can hold to such moral standards, then there is truth to be known.

But, the reality is we are afraid or we cowed by the political correctness of tolerance to hold no more than personal opinions as the standard for engagement. If one should step beyond the boundaries of personal opinion, “selective” tolerance will consider that to be oppressive. A good example is Christ’s claim which Christians accept to be an absolute that is applicable to everyone. And that is irony of tolerance. Tolerance is not so tolerant after all.

The implication of accepting truth to be no more than mere opinion would be a descent into some form of oppressive “isms”, not just relativism or subjectivism. Pope Benedict says something to this effect that to dismiss truth as unattainable is destructive. When we are incapable of truth, it follows that we are also incapable of ethical values because there would be no standard to measure. Convenience or contingency are measures of our lack of standard as we are often reduced to the lowest common denominator. For example, when human life is no longer a measure of the sacred, then euthanasia is not far off. When we are held together by the lowest common denominator, then, it is power, meaning who holds more power rules as in the case of dictatorship or it is simply the majority who rules as in the case of so-called democracy. Marxism, Nazism and Racism, to name a few, are children of the tyranny of dictatorship or the mob of the majority.

More than ever, today, Christianity must propose the Truth as applicable to everyone because mankind is capable of truth. We are capable of knowing what truth is or better still knowing Who Truth is—Jesus Christ. In this world, scarred by the abuse of power, either by the few or the majority, the manner of our proposal is defined to be the person of Jesus Christ. As Christ stood before Pilate, when faced with the Truth, Pilate continued to pose the question: Veritas, quid est veritas? It was as if Pilate expected “truth” to be expressed through coercion or might. But, Truth who is Christ is revealed in peace and proposed through persuasion not power and conviction, not coercion. This is where we come in. Truth is the Person of Jesus Christ and the Church’s sole duty is to proclaim Him and His mission—Son of God and Saviour of the World. The power of Truth lies not in legions but in the witness of our lives to convince others of who He is: Our Lord and Saviour.

Finally, rejection is not something new to Christianity. Relativism may be tyrannical but it is no more than an expression of “rejection”. And not only that, for Christianity is also rejected by a “tolerant” world for making an absolute claim of salvation. Therefore, Christians must always expect “misunderstanding”. The Protestant pastors in Penang may have prayed in this manner: “Lord, let your reign come upon this country”, the way we pray the Lord’s Prayer: “Thy Will be done on earth as it is in heaven”. It was not about taking over the country. The negative reaction was an expression of rejection as part and parcel of Christianity. Therefore faith has to be tested but Christians must hold on to faith in Christ because He is the only Way [2], the Truth and the Life.

FOOTNOTES:
[1] Good intention is not really a sufficient barometer of truth. For example, I can sincerely kill someone. Our predicament is when we are unable to approximate truth, we have to settle for “goodwill or sincerity”. Is it any wonder why in terms of religions, we are now reduced to seeking ways to collaborate in the many so-called “ethical” endeavours? It is ironical that we cannot know “truth” and yet we somehow “know” that there are “good things” to be done.
[2] We all have this instinctive GPS device that is part of who we are and yet it is a device that does not impede our freedom. How many of you use a GPS device? I have mine tuned to an Englishman who sounds nothing like an Englishman. Often enough I would not take the route proposed and when I deviate from it, “Daniel” would get into this irritating mode “recalculating”. The way put forward by Jesus is not a vacuum. He is the way. We can choose to ignore Him or choose to follow Him. That is where the analogy between Christ’s way and the GPS ends. Christ’s way is not an alternative way. Christ is not just one of the ways. He is the Way and if at all we choose to stick with the irritating voice of “Daniel”, it is this: the voice is our conscience telling us to return to the Way, return to Christ. As the 2nd Reading so right says: set yourselves close to him so that you too, the holy priesthood that offers the spiritual sacrifices which Jesus Christ has made acceptable to God, may be living stones making a spiritual house. A house and a home are two different things. Perhaps our journey in life is to come to a realisation that no matter how comfortable this world may be, it is still a house. We instinctively long for our home for that is where we belong and home is not located in this world. Home is not where the heart is either. Home is where Christ is.

4th Sunday of Easter Year A

It’s a thematic Sunday again—Vocation Sunday—time to speak about priestly or religious vocations. Coincidentally, yesterday 14th May was also the Feast St Matthias, Apostle. I would like to speak on two topics. Firstly, the manner of Matthias’ election may shed light on why the Catholic priesthood is the way it is today and secondly, the Gospel presents us with an image of the priesthood we do not fully appreciate.

Recently a bishop in Australia was removed. The issues surrounding his removal centred on the bishop’s position that the time has come for women’s ordination, ordination of married priests and on recognising the validity of Anglican, Lutheran and Uniting Church orders.

Why is the Church so insistent that women cannot be ordained, never mind married priest or recognising the validity of Protestant “orders”? Listen to a passage from the Acts of the Apostles concerning Matthias’ election and you might just catch a glimpse of where the Church is coming from.

“One day Peter stood up to speak to the brothers—there were about a hundred and twenty persons in the congregation: Brothers, the passage of scripture has to be fulfilled in which the Holy Spirit, speaking through David, foretells the fate of Judas”.

The passage has two considerations. First consideration is the context and second is Peter’s speech. The context is important. After the Ascension, Peter and the 10 returned to Jerusalem and there, they were together with the women and Mary the Mother of Jesus. When the time came for choosing a replacement for Judas, Peter, disregarding the context, spoke in this manner. “Andres, adelphoi ” which is translated as “Men, brothers”.

This is sometimes lost in politically-correct translations. “Friends”, for example, is a vast difference from “Men, brothers”. The literal translation gives us a glimpse into the mind of Christ. Peter seemed to have understood what Christ had intended and here, he faithfully echoed it. It does sound brazen to propose that Peter knew the mind of Christ, but, this is basically the Church’s position as evidenced by how Matthias was chosen. One may not agree with the Church’s position on women’s ordination but one can appreciate why the Church has been unable to move forward in this matter despite the fact that cultural, economical, political or social sentiments have made tremendous progress. Priestly vocation is not tied to any other considerations except what Christ has intended for His Church.

This is not an apologia for the Church’s position as much as offering a plausible explanation of why the Church behaves in this manner. She is being loyal to her Master’s intention for His Church. It also reflects the unity of Christology and Ecclesiology. How we understand Christ defines the Church and logically speaking, Christ the Head cannot be separated from the Church, His Body.

Poor Christology has implications for Ecclesiology. With regard to “priestly” vocations, the paucity of vocation is an infallible indicator of a Bishop’s heterodoxy meaning when a Bishop is not faithful to Church teaching, you can be sure that vocation to the priesthood in his diocese will drop. From there, it does not take long to find a correlation between the lack of priestly vocations and the abundance of the so-called “pastoral associates”. In many contexts, it usually revolves around nuns/lay people trying to play priest.

An increasing reliance on pastoral associates may help explain the lack of priestly vocation. Priestly vocation, like marital vocation, is a vocation to be and not really a vocation to do. When a priest is reduced to his function meaning that he is priest because of what he does, then we descend a slippery slope. The lack of priests can be pragmatically solved by “anyone can do the job”. It does not matter who—nuns, lay men or women, or any Protestant pastor—as long as the “job” gets done. But, a priest’s usefulness does not lie in his utility. Instead, his usefulness is very much to be alter Christus. Even if a priest does nothing, he is Christ present amongst his people. This is important.

This is a sense of priesthood that we have lost and this loss is two sides of a coin. Firstly, we have romanticised the image of the shepherd. Secondly, priests have forgotten that priesthood is about holiness.

Firstly, Catholics have romanticised the idea of the shepherd which runs counter to the two images presented in the Gospel. The shepherd is anything but “tender” and “compassionate”. If you look at the images of the Pharaohs they are presented as shepherds wielding on one hand, a shepherd’s crook and on the other, a whip. The idea of a shepherd is monarchical. In fact the king is often spoken of as a shepherd. In this context, listening becomes obedience. But, since we breathe the air of consensus and democracy, listening becomes a problem as many of us will obey only when the shepherd is reasonable. But, mostly, we listen and obey because we like the shepherd. In the end, the scenario is not the sheep who listens to the shepherd but the contrary. He is no longer the shepherd who commands but rather a hireling. Like some Protestant pastors who can be fired by their congregation. The shepherd says only what the congregation wants to hear.

A couple of weeks ago, I said, “It is easier to love the Pope”. It is not an attack of the Bishop. It merely reflects a reality. The Pope is far away but the Bishop is near and we “know” him etc. We often speak of doing God’s will but tie this desire to do God’s will with someone we “know” and we realise that “doing God’s will” means doing our own thing and expecting the shepherd to sanctify it. And this leads us to the image of the gate.

In Jerusalem, there is a gate called the Sheep-gate. It is a one-way street where the sheep are led to the slaughter. Shepherds lead their sheep to be sacrificed at the altar of holocaust. In the context of Jesus speaking in the Temple, He who became the victim now leads His people to freedom because this one-way street does not lead to a dead end but rather through the torn veil of the Holy of Holies, He leads His sheep to eternal life. Thus, all shepherds must lead because they are meant to lead. For us, it becomes a question of trusting the shepherd as we enter the gate. And I recognise the universal challenge today is that shepherds cannot be trusted. This brings us to the second side of the coin.

Secondly, priests themselves struggle with the issue of trustworthiness. Trustworthiness does not reside in capability or cleverness. Otherwise, that would mean that Christ can only work if a priest is capable or clever. Instead, trustworthiness is a state of holiness. Catholics instinctively trust a priest because they equate priests not with capability or intelligence but with holiness. A holy priest reflects Christ’s holiness. The Patron Saint for diocesan priests is St John Vianney—not someone famed for his cleverness but sought after from all over France for his holiness. This is the reason we pray so much for the Holy Father and the Bishops, for the fullness of priesthood resides in them and also their helpers, the priests. In an age of untrustworthiness, we ask God to give us more holy bishops and priests who will allow Christ to be more real through them. And we pray that they have the courage to lead because they are shepherds placed by Christ over His sheep.

3rd Sunday of Easter Year A

This Sunday I would like to speak on three interconnected topics. The first topic is pride but not of the sinful kind. By pride, I mean a sense of self-confidence and not, colloquially speaking, of the ‘action’ sort. Second topic revolves around the promise of Christ to be present to us and final topic centres on the Eucharist as the fulfilment of a promise.

Firstly, the gospel today is one which should give Catholics a sense of pride. Sadly, the contrary may be true. Many of us acknowledge our ignorance, meaning, we accept what we have often been told by others and sometimes, this charge of ignorance is echoed by some enlightened Catholics themselves that many Catholics do not know the bible. They may be a spectre of truth in such a statement but let us go beyond merely “knowing” the Bible. For example, let us venture beyond just an ability to quote biblical verses.

Catholics should humbly say, “We may not know the Bible the ‘restrictive and narrow’ way we are expected to but we certainly live and celebrate the Bible”. The Catholic Church is even more faithful to sacred scripture than accepted prejudice would allow. For Catholics, the Bible is not just a “book” but it is a part of what we know and accept to be a sacred and living tradition. Only a living tradition can guarantee and safeguard the handing over [paradosis] of God’s word in its entirety [1] which explains why the Eucharistic Prayer I is worded this way: “We offer them [“them” refers to the gifts of bread and wine] for Benedict, our Pope, for Murphy, our Bishop and for all who hold and teach the catholic faith that comes to us from the apostles”.

We live and celebrate sacred scripture and the description of the two disciples’ experience on the way to Emmaus is a perfect expression of how we do it. Their journey is a panorama of what we are doing right now. Simply put, their journey was the narrative (story) form of what we are ritualising. The narrative is a snapshot of the Eucharist. The part where Christ was elucidating the scripture passages about Himself corresponds to our Liturgy of the Word. The Liturgy of the Word, which includes the homily, is Christ speaking to you.

The four verbs where Christ took the bread, said the blessing, broke it and handed it to the disciples correspond to our offertory, the Eucharistic Prayer with the Institution Narrative, the Fractio Panis when the Agnus Dei is sung and finally the giving and receiving of Holy Communion. Now you know why the Mass is also called the “breaking of bread”—the disciples recognised Him at the breaking of bread. It is plausible to say that before the Gospels were written, and even before the 1st Letter of St Paul to the Thessalonians was written, the ritualised celebration of the Eucharist was already taking place and that this story of the two disciples on to Emmaus was a stylised story to convey the message that the Eucharist [breaking of bread] is really Christ’s presence which brings me to the 2nd topic.

Do you remember the last scene at the Mount of Olive in Matthew’s Gospel, before Christ ascended? The Lord gave a command but He also made a promise. The command was to go and baptise all the nations in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. And the promise was that He would be with them till the end of time. He has kept His promise through Apostolic Succession. It is perhaps stating the obvious but Apostolic Succession is not apostolic ancestry or nostalgia in the sense that we are trying to trace back the lineage of succession. It is not a static act of looking backward. Rather, it is forward looking because Apostolic Succession provides the possibility for the Eucharist to be celebrated. Apostolic Succession is dynamically alive and in practice at this very moment even as I am speaking to you.

Imagine if all the priests were killed, nobody here would dare walk up to say to the congregation, “Let me celebrate Mass for you”. We instinctively know that a priest’s power to confect the Eucharist is derived from a power which is transmitted by Apostolic Succession through the laying on of hands. Through Apostolic Succession, each time we celebrate the Eucharist, the bread and wine is transubstantiated into the Body and Blood of Christ. Transubstantiation is a technical word but it describes the result that when we receive Holy Communion we eat of the same substance Who walked 2000 years ago. It is the same Body but only in different modes. That is why we call the Blessed Sacrament the True Presence and this brings me to my final point.

There is a connexion here between the Two Disciples and the Eucharist which we might miss in this post-Easter celebration. What is it? The Eucharist is a source of strength when we most want to give up. In life, there are always reasons to give up. At a time when we feel most abandoned, Christ is there. Look at the two disciples. In Luke’s theological perspective, Christ was always heading towards Jerusalem—the city symbolised God’s plan of salvation. We are told that He resolutely set his face for Jerusalem. The two disciples were so blinded by their despair that they abandoned the place where salvation was to be found. Christ entered their desolation to draw them out through the Liturgy of the Word and He sustained and strengthened them with the breaking of bread. Often we give up because we cannot see, feel, hear and sense God but Christ walking with the two disciples has shown us that He is never far from our despair. He has never given up on us even when we have give up on Him.

So, at the moment of our greatest sorrows, the Eucharist should be the first place to go to, not the last. Here, at the breaking of bread, He keeps His promise to be with us till the end of time.

In summary, the Road to Emmaus may feel like any other post-Resurrection appearances but its impact is far-reaching. It shows how sacred scripture is steeped into the very life and practice of the Church [2]. So, if you are proud to be a Catholic, may this deepened awareness now inspire you to live even more faithfully your vocation. It would be the best expression of your pride and your gratitude for Christ’s continued presence in your life.

FOOTNOTES:
[1] The Petrine ministry is an important cornerstone in this process of handing over. It stands as guarantor for continuity.
[2] Let me give illustrate how “present” Christ is to us and how unaware we may be of it. There was a time when Catholics upon meeting the Bishop would ask to kiss the ring of the Bishop. Nowadays, when a Catholic asks the Bishop for permission to kiss his ring, apparently, some Bishops would reply: “The ring is in my back pocket”. It illustrates the confusion many priests and some bishops have of their priesthood. They have confused their “priesthood” with the Priesthood of Christ. Catholics venerate the person of the bishop or the priest not because they are “holy” but because they represent the Priesthood of Christ. Last week I mentioned the principle of “ex opere operato”. It is a principle which shows the extent and power of Christ’s presence. His presence can never be constrained by human frailty. When a priest is ordained, his palms are anointed and if he fell sick and required the Sacrament of Anointing, he would never be anointed on the palms. Instead, the anointing is at the back of the hands. According to Bishop Fulton Sheen, this is on account of his anointing for Holy Orders. See ]. This custom reveals how powerful the anointing at ordination is… that no matter how sinful a priest or a bishop may be, it can never take away the power of Christ to confect the Eucharist. Christ’s promise to be present to us can never be thwarted by human weakness. Furthermore, do you know a priest who is laicised, meaning that he has returned to lay state, can still grant absolution of sins in danger of death? The confusion especially amongst priests to shy away from the Priesthood of Christ, citing always that they are unworthy is perhaps a reason why we have lost the sense of Christ’s True Presence. By citing their “unworthiness” they are saying that Christ’s power is tagged onto their holiness. That would be “ex opere operantis”.

2nd Sunday of Easter Year A

This Sunday is special for the Parish but not because it is Mercy Sunday. In the first reading you hear the echo of what we have been trying to flesh out in the last two years. About two years ago, at the soft launch of the Jubilee Year, we chose Acts 2:42 for our theme: The whole community remained faithful to the teaching of the Apostles, to the brotherhood, to the breaking of bread and to the prayers. This Sunday could have been the culmination of our Jubilee celebration.

Today is also dedicated to St. Thomas who is forever stigmatised as the Doubter. What is Thomas’ connexion to the first reading? In particular, how is he relevant to our Jubilee celebration?

Or, is he merely the once-a-year lecture we deserve to get for our lack of faith?

Calling him “Doubting Thomas” has been the tradition since the beginning of the Church. The Gospel seemed to be a convenient record of his lack of faith. But, ask where Thomas was when Christ appeared? A good question, no? Why was he not present? Someone speculated that he went out to buy bread because the others were too chickened out to do anything. But, could his absence be a commentary of the state of the brotherhood/community and the relationships found therein?

Note the contrast between the first reading and the Gospel.

The first reading describes the epitome or the quintessence of how Christians are supposed to be. It paints a picture of the perfect community. In our post-Easter celebration, this image is presented to us as an ideal to emulate or imitate.

Unfortunately, we breathe the less rarefied air of the Gospel. It is closer to our reality—our experience of community is often less than perfect. In a sense, Thomas’ doubt was not with Christ’s Resurrection. Thomas did not doubt the Resurrection as much as he doubted Christ’s ability to work through imperfection. How could he believe the testimony of this group of weaklings; men cowering behind closed doors and chief amongst them, a man who denied Christ three times? Could Christ be present through such a leadership and would Christ want to be present in such a community?

So, Thomas could have abandoned the brotherhood out of despair. His experience may mirror some of ours. In fact, towards our brothers and sisters we often express a lack of faith. We find it harder to believe people we know “too” well—precisely the phenomenon that Christ Himself faced: “A prophet is not accepted in his own country” or as Nathaniel under the fig tree said: “What good can come from Nazareth”?

In the post-Resurrection narrative, Thomas is pivotal to balancing the tension between an ideal to achieve and the reality we struggle with. Thus, his return one week later is decisive in our desire to live out an essential aspect of our Jubilee theme, namely, of brotherhood.

The Gospel tells us that there were two apparitions and a week separated the two events. Could Christ not have shown Himself to Thomas personally within the week? He could have but He did not. Instead, He waited for Thomas to find a way home to the brotherhood.

What can we learn from this “returning” within the context of our Jubilee celebration?

Firstly, the brotherhood, in other words, the BEC/community, the parish and the Church, is the locus where the Risen Christ is to be encountered. The brotherhood was central to Christ’s Resurrection apparition and it still is. In the context of the brotherhood, the disparity between what we accept to be the ideal with what we experience to be the reality results in a bewilderment exemplified in this question: “How can he behave like that?” This leads us to the second point.

We often labour under the mistaken notion that knowledge is virtue. How many relationships have been broken because we expect knowledge to be translated into action? I have witnessed this especially in marriages. Couples sink into despair from this failure of expectation. The truth remains that knowing is frequently not translated into appropriate behaviour. A good example took place right last week after the announcement about the uncharitable driver. A car still attempted to run David down as he was trying to direct traffic. Translate this knowledge-virtue divide into the political arena and you understand why this country is choking in cynicism. The point is: Conversion from knowledge to virtue is a lifelong process. For us Catholics, as long as there is conversion, there is always Confession.

Thirdly, ex opera operato is an important principle to remember when we deal with the painful reality of sinfulness in the brotherhood. Christ’s power works independently of the “sanctity” of the minister. That is the basis for saying that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist or how sins are truly forgiven at Confession and Anointing even when the minister celebrating these sacraments is unworthy. This power of the Risen Christ cannot be constrained or restrained by human frailty and He is infinitely more powerful than we dare trust Him to be.

But, like the recently concluded wedding of the decade, we want things to be “perfect”, which in itself, is not a bad thing because the desire for perfection is a subset of the quest for excellence. Couples want their marriage to be perfect. We desire that [perfection] of our family, our friends, our community, our parish, our priests and our Bishops too, do we not? In the context of Thomas’ doubt, this desire for perfection is not a reflexion of the drive for excellence but rather it is symptomatic of a lack of belief. Why? Our drive for perfection is fuelled by this assumption: If perfection is not accomplished here and now, it may never be. That is a subtle denial of the Resurrection.

Perhaps, you appreciate how Thomas’ return to the brotherhood is essential to the encounter with the Risen Christ because Christ the Head, is never far from His Body, the Church; Christ the Bridegroom, is never separated from His Bride, the Church. In fact, the words spoken by the Risen Christ on the first day and one week later point in the direction of the brotherhood because the brotherhood is a sacramental witness of Christ’s presence in the world. He greeted them twice with the Jewish greeting of peace and ultimately that peace is linked to the Beatitudes. We always think of the Beatitudes in terms of the Sermon on the Mount or the Plains depending on which Gospel you read but here Christ proclaims: Blessed are those who do not see but believe.

In our run-up to the Jubilee celebration on 3rd Dec, St Thomas’ return to the brotherhood is relevant because it was to him in the brotherhood that Christ proclaimed the Beatitudes. May our blessedness be the grace to see, to accept and to love the Risen Lord in the brokenness and the sinfulness and imperfection of our brotherhood, family, BEC and the Church.