skip to main |
skip to sidebar
There is a connexion between politics and heaven, between our engagement with this world and our eternal destiny.
If life is a training ground for the afterlife, then political involvement is not contrary to who we are as Christians. The word politics is derived from the Greek word for “city”, the “polis”. Thus, politics makes us all citizens of both the City of Man and the City of God. Hence, the art or science or skills of social manoeuvring runs through our blood and all the way to heaven. It just means we are active in the world as good citizens and we participate in transforming the society of which we belong to one so that it can reflect the city of heaven.
In today’s Gospel, we catch a glimpse of the sad truth of politics, the type which makes people shy away. Jesus’ encounter with the Pharisees and the Herodians reflects the saying that politics is “dirty”. In this scenario, the Pharisees simply hate the Romans because they are foreign occupiers. No religious purist wants to be lorded over by pagans or unbelievers. Just like this country where race is such an important marker that it is next to impossible to fathom a person from a minority race ever becoming the PM. Secondly, the Herodians, as their name suggests, are whom people would label as collaborators since Herod was a puppet of the Roman powers. Again, just like this country. A person from the majority race mixing with those of the minority race runs the risk of being labelled as a traitor.
These two groups occupy opposite poles of the political spectrum, one abhorring the Romans and the other complicit in facilitating the foreign occupation of the Holy Land. But because they both wanted to set Jesus up, they were willing to collaborate. The familiar quote that “Politics makes strange bedfellows” rings true here. Ironically though, the Pharisees and the Herodians used the controversial subject matter which divided them in the first place. Regarding taxation, the Pharisees were opposed to it whereas the Herodians were supportive of it. Should one pay taxes or not?
Jesus not only managed to evade their trap but He also exposed the Pharisees hypocrisy by asking for a non-kosher or non-halal instrument of exchange: the currency issued by the authority they dislike. Moreover, the coin provided would have changed hands many times over before reaching the ritually pure Pharisee. It is like touching money that went through the hands of a pork-seller or in our case, or a syariah-compliant government taxing a casino or alcohol sellers.
Politics may be dirty but a remark of St Teresa of Avila is helpful. She said that “Money may be the devil’s excreta but it is certainly a good fertiliser”. Here, Jesus did not condemn money per se but used it as a teaching moment to help us situate where we are in relation to the world and to God. His response cut through the messiness of politics.
We are in the world but not of the world. This is an important distinction. What unites these two worlds is the word holy. All the more we should strenuously be part of the political process in order to sanctify our temporal realm. Called to holiness, we infuse the world with our sanctity. However, being in this world is not a naive accommodation because of its fallen nature. As such we are in the world but not of the world.
Why?
Right after creation, some angels led by Satan and overcame by pride, turned against God. These beings forgot their place in the order of creation and had no desire to acknowledge God’s sovereignty. Satan and his minions have been striving to disrupt created order as they did with Adam and Eve. In the case of the Gospels, even though they are beautiful chronicles of our redemption, they can also be read as accounts of Satan’s attempt to obstruct our salvation. Unwittingly, both Pharisees and Herodians, became pawns of Satan, in their united attempt to trap Jesus.
Christ’s instruction to give to Caesar what belongs to him and to God what belongs to Him prioritises how a Christian is to engage the world. In fact, when Christ referred to the image of the coin, even though, it bore the imprint of Caesar, it was a powerful reminder of Whose image we all have been created under: God’s image. Politics, as in every order of created reality, bears the scourge of fallen nature. However, to run away from politics is not the solution. Instead, our participation in the political process will always be a struggle to sanctify the world so that it can resemble the final destination that we have been invited to.
Can we change the world? Yes, we can and we should. In this endeavour we are in line with the “Globalists” who want to make the world a better place. But we are not globalists because we do not mistake the city of man for the City of God. Whatever we do, we recognise this world for what it is—fallen, redeemed but still a temporal and passing realm. Whereas the other world is eternal. Thus, we do within our power all we can to render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to Him.
This ties in with today being Mission Sunday. It is true that preaching to tired believers is infinitely more difficult than to non-believers. Take a look at Europe’s tired Christians on the way to being de-Christianised. In a way our mission in a multi-religious society is cut out for us. Cyrus in the 1st Reading teaches us that God continues to work in the world, no matter how rough the political terrain is or how “dirty” politics comes across to us. It is precisely in such troubled situations that we recognise that the ultimate Saviour is the Lord Himself. Our weekly adoration expresses this recognition. The knowledge that God is always in control gives the Christian his or her encouragement to continue to labour in this world. In the end, while we render to Caesar our due, it is to ultimately to Him that we must render an account of our lives here on earth.
From handling disputes and conflicts, this Sunday we enter into the arena of forgiveness. The 1st Reading taken from Ecclesiasticus is truly a pointer for us. It is almost like a precursor to the Lord’s Prayer where forgiveness cannot be a one-way street. If we yearn forgiveness, we must also be forgiving.
The Gospel sets up the scenario for us to consider how forgiveness operates. Peter is curious about how often one has to forgive and suggested a quantity which to most people would come across as generous. The response of Jesus was profoundly qualitative in the sense that the King’s generosity in forgiving the servant’s debt and the servant’s inability to forgive his fellow servant had no comparison. A disciple is called to forgive immensely.
This is our challenge. Forgiveness is not easy and many people struggle with it. A good example is the case of infidelity or adultery. For example, how can a husband forgive his cheating wife? Let me just say that this question sounds odd, skirting, as it were, on the thin ice of misogynistic patriarchy. Statistics might just reveal that men do most of the cheating. Still the question remains how a man or a woman forgive his or her spouse for infidelity.
Why do we struggle with it? Why are we not able to forgive? Perhaps the answer is revealed through the popularity of a genre of movies like the Equaliser or the Punisher. Denzel Washington has never acted in a sequel except this franchise in which he is depicted as a man who rights the wrongs. It is a tell-tale sign, no doubt. Why? Our justice system is perverted.
Recently Rowan Atkinson, whom many are more familiar with the character of Mr Bean, spoke on the topic of “free speech”. He admitted that he, being a personality, can get away with murder in whatever he says because the law, in general, will not touch him. However, he raised concern on behalf of those who might not enjoy the protection, not of the law, but of the court of popularity. When you are rich or famous, the rules do not apply.
We have two-tier system of justice. The usual sense is that only the rich will enjoy the benefits of this type of justice system. Lack of access to proper justice tends to make the yearning for closure so much more acute.
True justice can be better understood if we look at the phenomenon of revenge. Those who seek revenge are presumably looking to right a wrong which has not been made right under the law. In the case where the victim who had been denied justice now exacts his or her revenge, the question is how long will the satisfaction of getting even last? Schadenfreude, an experience we all are familiar with, is a German composite word that is made up of damage and joy. It describes taking pleasure in the misfortune of others, most especially of one’s enemy. Like someone you hate has met with an accident, you cannot escape the sneaking thought inside that goes, “serves him right”. But we all know that once the initial exuberance felt that a misfortune has befallen an enemy dies off, we are left with the same feeling of dissatisfaction.
The deeper root of our struggle is possibly due to the loss of faith in the Resurrection. We do not trust that God can take care of us, if not in this life, then in the next. Faith in God cannot be confounded meaning that God will never let us down. He is the Father of the poor, the widow and the orphans. He is the protector the oppressed and in His might mercy will see to it that we receive the justice we need and the mercy we deserve.
Trust in God allows the will to forgive. To forgive is a matter of the will and not a description of our emotion. It is the desire to forgive and not a feeling that one has forgiven. The fact is that forgiveness does not guarantee a good feeling which many erroneously would equate “forgetting” as a quality associated with forgiveness. In reality, even though one has forgiven and years have passed, sometimes, we can be reminded of an incident and are overcome by visceral feelings surrounding an old emotional trauma. It is just an feeling and it does not mean that we have not forgiven.
The ability to let go must be hinged on a reality which we hold on to. It is the idea that perfect satisfaction for our pain comes from God alone. He alone can heal our broken hearted. Marcus Aurelius, the Stoic Roman Emperor said that the best revenge is to be unlike your enemy rings true. We might believe that exacting an eye for an eye or a tooth for a tooth will salve the raw wound or fill the aching void in our hearts when in actual fact, it is only temporary until we recognise that only in God will our pain be healed.
Forgiveness is possible because it frees us from heavy burden of anger and hate weighing down our shoulders. We can be so blinded by rage that we fail to realise that the target of our hatred is sleeping soundly at night. No, forgiveness does not mean we pretend that there was no hurt. Instead we acknowledge that hurt but make a conscious decision that that hurt will no longer control our imagination and power our behaviour.
One of the best ways to forgive is to seek blessing upon our enemy. Quite the opposite of Schadenfreude. Blessing our enemy actually frees the heart because hatred and blessing do not go together. Pray for them and ask the Lord to bless them because they need it. The Germans also gave us another composite word: Freudenfreude which means brother’s joy, that is, the enjoyment of another person’s success. Perhaps this is the test. True freedom to forgive comes when we are able to rejoice that our enemy has done well. To forgive is to trust and say “You, O Lord, are a better judge than I can ever be”.
Through Peter’s profession faith in Jesus as the Christ, we catch a glimpse of its consequence. The confession led to Peter’s designation as the foundation whereupon Christ will build His Church. However, last week we see how even Peter was not immune to having the wrong idea of what a Messiah should be. In other words, Jesus had to remind Peter and the Apostles that the Cross, with its attendant realities, is part and parcel of Christian discipleship.
Today we cross from having personal faith to its full flowering in the community. Even though faith requires personal commitment, its impact is communitarian. This is where it becomes tricky.
Firstly, for any society to function, there must be consensus as simple as keeping to the left when driving. What happens when someone does not follow the basic rule of law? According to the 2nd Reading, charity (or love) towards another is the fulfilment of the law. To keep the law, we have to be charitable. In the Gospel, this love or charity is expressed through private fraternal correction. We only ask for witnesses if a person were reluctant to change. In the 1st Reading, the focus is on the responsibility of leaders to care for the salvation of souls. Therefore, the Church is involved when we encounter stubbornness.
These days people chafe at the idea of the Church interfering with their personal autonomy when it comes to how they ought to live their faith. This rejection of ecclesial authority is expressed as “spirituality yes” and “religion no”. It means a person has an interior spiritual life but does not want to be associated with organised religion. In other words, faith is reduced to a personal expression without any social connexion.
Such a notion fails to realise that at the heart of religion is relationship. This translates as any functioning relationship that is worthwhile must have rules and regulations. The saying “No man is an island” expresses this profound reality that man has been created for society and therefore the community has a hold on his behaviour.
Many would consider the community’s demands as irksome and constraining because nobody likes to be told what to do. Moreover, the loss of confidence in leadership and in institutions has created a moral crisis, be it in the political, economic or ecclesial sphere. In the case of the Church, her voice is weakened when “preachers” do not walk the talk.
What should we do when the world refuses to listen or be corrected?
We can rule out the Gospel of Niceness. The attempt to be agreeable, pleasant and uncomplicated does not close the credibility gap since it fails to represent who Christ truly is and what He really teaches. The Church has a duty to proclaim Christ and what it means to follow Him. The keys handed to Peter gives the Church power to bind and to loose. Through the exercise of this power, the Church has the authority to absolve sins, to pronounce doctrinal judgements and to discipline her sons and daughters. If we are overly sensitive, any correction will always sound like judgement or even scolding. But to teach, discipline and correct are acts of mercy.
Thus, to be faithful to Christ, the duty of the Church is to speak the truth in an age of disbelief. To do this the Pope suggests more conversation. Through the synodal process, Pope Francis has proposed that the Church enters into a conversation with the world. In this conversation the most important person present is the Holy Spirit. He is promised by Christ to Peter and with Peter’s successors to the Church. There are many issues pressing upon us. Migrants, climate change and identity politics are major concerns. We could focus on these pressing issues and then force the conversation to move in the direction of how the Church should change to accommodate us. But that is not the Synod nor is it the synodal process.
Instead, our conversation should always search for where the Holy Spirit is leading the Church and it may not be what we like or want. Why? The Church is not just the Church now. She is the Church from the time of Christ until now. While change is necessary, it must always be in consonant with the deposit of faith that we have received.
This is not always easy to hear or accept especially for those who have entrenched positions. The ability to speak truth demands that Bishops be brave and so too the priests who assist them. If laying down one’s life is the ultimate martyrdom, then leaders of the Church should never be afraid to speak what needs to be spoken no matter how unpleasant that may sound.
As the process of the Synod involves the Holy Spirit, the fruit of the process cannot be a Church torn apart by internal disagreement. If that be so, then the question arises as to where the Spirit is who unites rather that divides? Or which spirit are we following? A true Synod is a process of the Spirit shining on the truth of Christ through His Church.
In our conversations, what is important is that truth is not a possession we use to silence contrary positions. Instead, truth is a submissive posture because it is being obedient to the Spirit of Christ. The geography of human experiences and relationships is truly messy because everyone feels that he or she possesses the truth. But we might be able to grasp better the will of Christ if we recognise and accept that we are firstly, stewards and servants of truth rather than its masters. Whatever we say or do, we are at the service of truth.
In conclusion, as servants who build up the Body of Christ, the clear boundaries we put up is not because we are exclusive but because we are heading towards heaven. This coincides with the basic meaning of religion which is to tie, bind or align us with God. What unites us is not just love but caritas in veritate, that is, love in truth. We would like to believe that the driving force that binds humanity together is love. One would have heard of the slogan that “love is love” and love is all that matters. And while it is crucial that we solve the problems affecting humanity, it would be myopic to think that the greatest love and service we can show the world is the various solutions to our problems. In the midst
of making the world a better place, the mission remains to proclaim Christ to a
disbelieving world and one that is marked by the scandal of credibility deficit.
Despite these challenges, the task continues that we announce Christ, if not by
words, then by the eloquence of our deeds. The greatest love and service that we
owe to each other is truth; of who Jesus Christ is and of who we truly are.
From the Rock to Satan, from a steady stalwart to a stumbling stone, the fall from hero to zero came at the speed of light. Last week, He was Peter the man upon whom Christ staked His Church. This week, He is called a scandal which in Greek means a stumbling block.
What makes for Peter’s fall from grace? And there will be more occasions for him to stumble after this.
The notion of a Messiah is loaded with revolutionary ideals. Israel was an oppressed nation and as a people under One God, the reality of being ruled by pagan Romans who worshipped false gods was chafing or degradingly undignified, to say the least. Like for example to have a “Chinese or Indian” PM in a certain country. Hence, to consider Christ as a rebel leader opens up possibilities and Peter was not wrong in thinking about this. If Christ were to be the new Daniel, then Peter must have had an inkling about how Jesus should behave. Given the first of three predictions about the coming Passion that Jesus had to endure, Peter would have struggled to reconcile the concept of a leader with that of a servant. More than serving, this is a Leader who will lay down His life for His sheep. Indeed this was a paradox which Peter could not grasp.
But Peter is not alone in rejecting Christ as the Suffering Servant.
The mystery that all Disciples must come to terms with is the Cross. Good Friday comes before Easter Sunday. But the world is increasingly uncomfortable with even a fleeting shadow of the Cross. There is a stream of Christianity that preaches the Gospel of Prosperity which in a way rejects the Cross. This theology is not entirely unfounded because it flows from an Old Testament mentality which spoke little of the afterlife and focused more on this life. God blesses and He cannot be outdone in his generosity. Prosperity or material progress, which is a good, is the result of God’s blessing and it roughly follows a principle of tit for tat or reward and punishment. Blessing is God’s reward and mishap is God’s punishment. That was how Job’s friends conceived of his misfortunes.
This kind of Gospel is tempting. Be generous with God and He will bless you. However, the life of Christ stands against this kind of simple equation. He gave everything to His Father and yet He paid the price for our salvation with His Body crucified and His blood poured out.
Akin to the rejection of the Cross found in the Gospel of Prosperity is the idea of wellness in the Gospel of Therapy. The central tenet of a therapeutic religion is that people are supposed to be happy and feel good about themselves. In fact, God wants that of us, if we were to follow the definition of God as love. We have an entire supplement industry that promotes well-being to achieve wellness. There is a hunger for spirituality and relationship with God; a vacuum which wellness capitalises on. Wellness is endorsed as a holistic approach to healthy living, characterised by physical, mental and social well-being. We need to be well in order to live a more meaningful and beautiful life. The demand for therapeutic wholeness also tries to blot out discomfort or suffering.
Nobody likes to suffer. Perhaps we can understand from a human health perspective why Peter reacted the way he did to Jesus.
Christ offered an alternative which in a way Job may have understood. Job’s friends felt that his misfortunes were signs of God’s displeasure though the answer that Job finally received from the Lord was ambiguous. In a way, the righteous Job prefigured Jesus. Like righteous and moral Job, Christ Himself was innocent and yet His would be a life marked by suffering and ultimately by His humiliating death on the Cross.
Even if we do not preach a Gospel of Prosperity, many of us are like Peter in rejecting the Cross. Somehow, we have embraced its fruit by believing that God should bless us because we have been good and we have come to believe that discipleship is incompatible with suffering.
Imagine your grandparents or great grandparents. Divorce was almost unheard of amongst that class of people. Was it because of taboo? Maybe. Perhaps our ancestors held a view which did not exclude suffering from their discipleship. On the day of their wedding, they made a promise to God that they would remain together through thick and thin, in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health. They accepted the suffering they had to endure, not that they deserved to endure it.
Given that we live with both prosperity as a right and wellness as a goal, it is unthinkable to propose to a person who believes that he or she has made a mistake, to stay in a marriage because we operate under the principle that suffering is something to be avoided at all costs. Again, this does not mean that a person deserves to suffer.
Both the Gospels of Prosperity and Wellness have as their goal, the attainment of heaven or whatever conditions are associated with heaven here on earth. Unfortunately, heaven cannot be located within this realm, no matter how much we try. Thus, we are left unfulfilled and in a way that explains why there is suffering.
Broadly speaking there are two types of suffering. Firstly, according to Buddha, the root of suffering is desire or ignorance. For example where there is lust, you would think that satisfying one’s lust would lead to fulfilment. The reality is that when there is unbridled lust, there is never enough “love”. In a way, some people will have to suffer not because they deserve it but because they need to purify their desires and wants. The second type of suffering which Jesus tried to school Peter and the rest of the Disciples arose from His mission to save souls. In Him, suffering is not incompatible with life. In fact, in Christ, innocent suffering has been raised to the dignity of redemption. Look at the recent saints who suffered bodily. Therese de Lisieux or Bernadette Soubirous. Both suffered painful deaths. Or think of Carlo Acutis who died from leukaemia at the age of 15. He taught us what it means to suffer. He offered his sufferings for Pope Benedict XVI and for the Church, saying "I offer all the suffering I will have to suffer for the Lord, for the Pope, and the Church”. We suffer because heaven is not meant to fit us. Instead, we are meant to fit into heaven which means we suffer as we die to selfishness and sin. However, there is always innocent suffering which means that we have been called to follow Christ closely like the saints mentioned above. Setting their eyes on heaven these saints endured profound suffering because they have faith that after their Calvary there is the Resurrection and Ascension. This beatific vision rests on the assurance that the end of this earthly journey is a hope which lives forever and a happiness that is complete in Christ Jesus our Lord.
The theme that runs through last and this Sunday is identity. In the previous Gospel, we see how Jesus’ importance cannot be restricted to the Jews alone because He is the Saviour of the world. As the Canaanite woman daringly asked Jesus for help, and given the manner of His response, we grasp an important lesson. In engaging with others, we must know who we are. Although identity requires a measure of self-definition, it is relational and is never done in a manner that closes us from others.
Today we get more of Jesus. In Matthew’s narrative, this is the turning point. So far the Lord has journeyed with His disciples, eating, drinking and sleeping in the open. Surely they must have been impressed and know who He is. But as if to test them after all these months of journeying together, with them experiencing Him performing miracle after miracle, He asked them about Himself. One would have thought that the disciples should already know that He is more than the son of Joseph. Their answers, not surprisingly, revealed a facet of human relationships and experiences. One can be with someone and yet not know who the person truly is. It was Simon who confessed again that Jesus is the anointed Son of God.
Today we hear Jesus calling Simon, Peter for the first time. Peter, the Rock, not Dwayne Johnson, will be the foundation that Christ will build His Church upon. Given the key to the Kingdom of Heaven, Peter will now play a central role, as head, of the early Christian community and will be the spokesman for the Church.
What has this to do with us today?
Through Peter’s confession, the Church is grounded in the faith of the Apostles. The Preface for Peter and Paul reads: “Peter, foremost in confessing the faith. Paul, its outstanding preacher. Peter, who established the early Church from the remnant of Israel. Paul, master and teacher of the Gentiles that God has called”. Our faith is inextricably linked to Peter’s confession and subsequently to his successors in the Church that Christ has founded.
Peter’s confession highlights the central role that he and his successors will play in the Church engaging the world at large. The question that Christ asked of Peter, resounds throughout history. That moment did not just end in time as if the question was asked there and then. Jesus continues to ask this question at every age and every turn of the century. “Who do people say I am?”. The answer must come unequivocally from the Church, notably through Peter’s successors: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Hence, we cannot ignore this question of who Jesus is if we are to be His Church. But this is on the larger scale, that is, it is the big picture about who Jesus is and who Peter is for the Church. The question that Jesus posed to the disciples may be ecclesial but it is also personal and it has implications for an issue that will increasingly affect us.
The question of one’s identity has come to the fore these days. Central to a person’s well-being is self-definition but it is not a stand-alone issue as it appears for many today. In these days of identity confusion, a person identifies himself or herself in a manner which requires society to come to terms with whatever a person calls himself or herself. It may come across as respecting a person’s right but it is not. Identity does not revolve around one’s own self-definition because who we are is always in relation to others. This means that there are truths which cannot be changed according to fads or fancies. It cannot be that the world must kowtow to my “truth” as if I alone define it.
Truth about who I am plays a central role in my identity and therefore self-expression. It means that if I know who I am, then I should be able to act accordingly. Apart from acting, identity also gives us a sense of belonging. For example, given an identity, one’s story does not get buried and one’s experiences are not lost or forgotten. Reality TV which we are all accustomed to is not just a form of personal story telling but it actually reinforces the need for “identification”. Yet, despite this drive to be special or unique, we also long to be a part of something bigger than who we are.
The sad result of identity as self-expression is not unity because the basis of identity politics is not really inclusion but rather a demand that one should be respected just because one has these experiences or that one belongs to a self-defined group. I define myself as this and if you do not accept this definition, then you are a prejudiced bigot, a racist or a fascist. It makes for difficult conversation because there is a reduction of who a person is to details such a race or ethnicity, gender or gender expression and sex or sexual orientation. It is very easy to fall into this kind of victim-trap. In Portugal, at Porto, a group of us experienced a truly bad service in a restaurant. Very quickly some of us concluded that the waiters were racist. Such labels like sexists, racists, fascists are not far from our lips these days.
The challenge arises when “feelings” are regarded as sacred. Then the assumption is that people will not be able to handle truth or reality. Thus we embark on this sad journey of trying to make sure that people are not offended. Operating at the back of our mind is the command to love and that if someone were offended, the guilt will set in that we have failed to love as we should have. The Apostle Paul told the Ephesians that we should speak the truth in love which means dispensing or shying away with the truth is never an act of love or charity. We should state the truth without pride, rancour, arrogance and condemnation. It is easier said than done but the demands to be charitable cannot overwhelm our responsibility to bear witness to the truth.
Actually, the greatest truth of our identity lies in how closely related we are to God. To navigate the confusion of who we are, JPII used to say that the truth of who we are is best illustrated by the knowledge of who God is. We are not reducible to our identity like skin colour or sexual orientation. Who we are is to be the image of the God who created us through Jesus Christ. Thus, the clearest picture or image of the Father is Jesus Christ the Son and anything else, a miracle worker, a guru, a liberator, a healer, a rebel are merely descriptions of what He can do. In today’s Gospel, only when Simon realised the truth about Jesus and acknowledged Him to be the Christ that he himself was able to come to fullness of truth about himself as the Rock. In an era where society is trying to know itself, the best knowledge of ourselves has to come from personally knowing Jesus Christ as the Son of God, the one who has saved us and to grow in His love and image. Today, the concern of identity politics is perhaps the best impetus for the evangelising mission of the Church. To know ourselves better, get to know Christ the Lord. To know ourselves best, proclaim Christ as the Saviour of mankind.
Last week as they battled the stormy sea, Jesus walked into the midst of their struggles to remind them that He would never be far from or ever desert them. Today we explore the far-reaching consequences of Jesus being with us.
In the encounters with the Pharisees or the Scribes, Jesus has never condemned the dietary laws per se. Instead He was criticising the assumption that mere ritual purity equates to being at right with God. A ritually clean person is not the same as an upright person. The laws governing ritual purity provide the backdrop to appreciate the context and the content of the dialogue between the Canaanite woman and Jesus. While it may rattle our polite sensitivity, we need to looking beyond rudeness or even exclusion to understand why this conversation had to take place. Last week, we hear Peter making the confession that Christ is the Son of God. Today this excluded woman also confesses the true identity of Jesus. She is the one who gives us the “Kyrie, eleison”. Lord have mercy.
Matthew’s audience is the Jewish people but through this meeting between Jesus and the woman, the boundary is extended beyond the limits of Judaism. In fact, the 1st Reading confirms that no longer will ethnicity determine one’s affiliation. Instead, those who attach themselves to the Lord will be called His sons and daughters. St Paul calls himself an apostle of the pagans for good reason. He is sent to those outside Judaism in order to inspire those chosen to remember their original blessing and perhaps to be more careful with their inheritance as God’s chosen people.
Today’s encounter shows us that salvation did indeed come from the Jews but it is not limited to them. The universal salvation of Christ is extended to the entire world but the reality of religious pluralism makes the statement that Jesus Christ is the Saviour of the world a challenge to navigate. The current respect for diversity may have forced theologians to relativise salvation in the sense that it is possible to claim that Jesus saves us but maybe only within the confines of Christianity.
There is indeed a task ahead. If Christ’s salvation is restricted to Christians, then the Church is no longer the instrument of salvation. If Jesus Christ were not the Saviour of the world, then effectively, the Church suffers from an identity crisis. She exists solely to proclaim that salvation comes from Christ alone and if she is prevented from her mission or not needed for that, then the temptation is to make herself relevant to the world and the world’s powers that be. She was not born to transform the world. She was not instituted to make the world a better place even though changing the world is important. A changed world is the fruit of conversion, that is, it is a by-product of being converted to the salvation of Jesus Christ. A good example would be the hospital system which the Church gave to the world. Hospitality grew out of Matthew 25: “Whatever you do to the least of my brothers, you did it to me”. Yet, that should never be confused as the “goal” of the Church.
Jesus is the Saviour for which the Church exists to proclaim. Otherwise, it does not make sense that there is a Church. This mission today in the face of diversity must therefore emulate the humility of the Canaanite woman. In the face of these great religions, the Church can copy the example of the same woman in her spirit of humility by respecting what others believe in. What the Church can never settle for is anything less than the central truth of salvation clearly affirmed by Peter: "There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).
In a sense, diversity and the requirement of inclusivity makes the scope of evangelisation almost impossible. One of the phenomena observed during the WYD pilgrimage was how slogans were worn proudly proclaiming our faith in Jesus Christ. The context is important as many of the countries once known to be Christian lands are now filled with empty Churches where people are nominally Christians or not at all. The locals might see us wearing those tee-shirts but detect no difference in our behaviour. Although the WYD did have a positive impact on the economy of Lisbon, the sad reality was that unwittingly some pilgrims by their behaviour, may have contributed to people turning away from Christ. It is an effect attributed to Mahatma Gandhi: I like your Christ but not your Christianity.
An expression like Gandhi’s scepticism stops us in our tracks and challenges us to match our behaviour with our proclamation. More than ever, our actions must speak louder so that other may recognise in them that Jesus is truly the Saviour and Lord of our lives. To propose Christ to the world, He must be our beginning, our life and guide, our hope and our end. The two great Sacraments, namely the Eucharist and Confession, are means to forge our lives according to this purpose of professing Jesus as Lord and Saviour.
The universality of Jesus as the Saviour of the world is not limited by the scope of our proclamation. Just because we do not proclaim Him it does not imply that He is not the Saviour. He is and He will always be. However, the universal reception of Jesus as Saviour of the world can be hampered by our inability to live the joy of salvation which He has won for us. In other words, He is Saviour no matter what. But He is not received as Saviour because we have not been received as Christians (like Gandhi rejecting us) or more likely, we have not been convincing enough in witnessing to the joy of His salvation. There is a world hungering for Christ and His Gospel. The challenge we face is to embrace fully the joy of salvation and be radiantly alive with the light of the Gospel.
I am exhausted and I need God. That might just be the sentiments of Jesus. Last Sunday He fed the crowds. This Sunday He sent the Disciples ahead of Him as He sought refuge in prayer and communion with His Father. The combination of these two Sundays’ Gospels provides a vista for us to appreciate how we can serve the poor and to recognise Jesus. When confronted with the crowd, the Apostles were definitely overwhelmed by the immensity of the people gathered and how they should feed the crowds. Their solution was to send the people away. The miracle that Jesus could feed the thousands has remained a conundrum for those whose minds are restricted by the parameters of “scientism”.
Today Jesus took time off and dispatched the Disciples ahead of him—a journey over the lake that should not have posed any problem except that they struggled against the squalls and the surfs. Yet, these did not really bother them until the appearance of Jesus for they did not recognise Him. The usual response to the unknown was trepidation and fear.
What can we learn from this scenario.
Firstly, trials and tribulations belong to life and we should not expect anything less. Secondly, God on our side is no guarantee that there will be no tumults or turmoil in life. In actual fact, with God on our side, storms are exactly what we will face. The expectation that God should spare us from troubles begs the question of what sort of God we believe in and worship.
The youths from South Johore have just returned from their pilgrimage to the World Youth Day. They endured burning heat almost all the days they were there. However, no major untoward situation happened there in Portugal. As they say, all is well that ends well. But a pilgrimage is supposed to be a reflexion of life’s journey. Again, one can glean two senses of this mirroring. First, as a journey, a pilgrimage has an end. The goal is Jesus Christ Himself and thus the destination for life is to be in heaven with Jesus Christ. Second, it is also an imitation of life especially its messiness. This is where our experiences meet the Gospel.
The path that leads to our final destination is fraught with challenges and difficulties. The definition that heaven is a state of perfect happiness or joy can easily lull us into thinking that sacred and holy journeys should be free of trials and tribulations especially when we have the Lord on our side.
This illusion was shattered by our experience at the end on Friday. We had departed Lisbon almost in a manner which reminded us of our arrival. The passport control took a long time because there were so few officers on duty. The aircraft closed its door as our last pilgrim entered and from then until Abu Dhabi and Kuala Lumpur, the two flights were plainly unremarkable and uninteresting. We had a 7-hour layover in KUL before continuing to Johor Bahru.
In the evening, one of ours was denied boarding. The luggage was offloaded from KLIA to Senai. Then at Senai, another pilgrim only realised that the passport was left in the seat pocket after disembarkation. Thankfully, both the problems were resolved. The one left behind was reunited with the family a day later whereas the passport was found by Malaysia Airlines a day after at exactly where the pilgrim sat inflight the evening prior.
These two incidents merely highlight that one can come home from a spiritual experience feeling on top of the world and almost invincible when in reality the end of the pilgrimage is where one’s faith is tested. God grants us moments of consolation to give us the strength to endure our desolation because life will always take unexpected turns. During such moments, we can be gripped by the immediacy of whatever we are experiencing without realising that the Lord is near. Elijah needed to step back from the wind, the earthquake and the fire, to find God in the gentle breeze. While the others were terrified of the crashing waves and blowing winds, Peter needed to hear Christ’s voice for him to get out of the boat. He faltered only because he allowed the storm to come between him and the Lord.
Peter’s experience is a perfect mirror for so many of us. Perhaps this is inevitable because we value our ability to solve problems and not be a burden to others. When in trouble we feel the need to rely on our strength like the many times the young pilgrims refused help instead of accepting it from others. Perhaps it is an unavoidable flaw that stems from our self-help and self-made psychology.
As such, the highlight of the WYD is the pilgrimage and vigil. The walk and wait teach us that every pilgrimage has an end and the vicissitudes encountered along the way prepare us to face the trials of life so that we may not lose sight of the true North Pole, that is to be with Christ in heaven. The Gospel reminds us through Peter that we will always be able to walk on water, meaning that we can overcome life’s tempests only if we focus on Jesus who is always coming to us.
While we acquire the strength to persevere, the post-multiplication of loaves and fish experience of Jesus also reveals that connexion with the Father is basis for our perseverance. We need the Father’s strength so that we can focus on Christ and in Him see and serve our brothers and sisters. The ability to connect with Father and be sensitive to Him helps us to better love Jesus in the poor we meet along the way.
