Faith

Peter posed, Peter proposed and Christ disposed – Thursday, 19th Week in ordinary time – Matthew 18:21-19:1

Remember that chapter 18 of the Gospel of Mattew deals with issues in the community and is the fourth of Mattew’s discourses found in this Gospel. It is aptly called ‘community discourse’. Jesus has just addressed the issue of a sinful brother in the community and the way one ought to ‘carefront’ him and not comfort him. We are used to either confronting others harshly ( I am guilty of this) or we comfort them in their wrongdoing by avoiding even a discussion of the sinful behaviour at hand. ‘Carefrontation’ combines truth and love; for love without truth is sentimental and truth without love is cruel.

Now, Peter has a hypothetical situation or perhaps one that he was struggling with himself. What does one do with a member of the Church who sins against another member of the Church? How often should one forgive that member? Notice that the Gospel of Matthew is the only Gospel that uses the word ‘Church,’ which, from the Greek, translates as ‘ a calling out of.’ That is what a Church is, ‘people called out.’ Ironically we have become a people who are comfortable in!

Peter not only poses the question but proposes the answer. For the Jews, an errant community member needed to be forgiven thrice. Ironically, they did not offer the same courtesy to a Gentile because a Gentile was treated as ‘the enemy’ by virtue that they did not share the same religious beliefs. Ironically, much of this hate continues across the world today. We seem to have grown technologially but have not transforemd mentally.

Peter assumes that his generous offer to forgive seven times, four times more than what his Jewish brothers would have done, should have earned him a meritorious mention by Jesus. Peter’s jaw must have certainly dropped at the Lord’s answer. Seventy times seven was certainly not the answer he imagined. Peter must have thought that Our Lord had finally lost it. Sure, the Lord had said some rather challenging statements in the past but this was not challenging, this was outright ridiculous. Perhaps, it was Peter’s look of disbelief and horror that prompted the parable of the ‘unforgiving servant.’ (verse 18:23-19:1)

The parable has many little details that are of great interest. Sadly, these little details in the parable get overshadowed compared to the larger message of forgiveness that we have got accustomed to hearing or the teaching that this parable ought to bear upon us. So the question we need to ask at first is, how in God’s name did the servant of the King end up with a debt so high and even more how did the King permit such a debt to accumulate?

Ten thousand talents are no small amount.  One talent is equal to 5,475 denarii ( one dinar is a day’s labour) and the debt had stacked up to 54,750 denarii or about 150 years of labour. So how did the King slip up in overlooking the debt of his servant, or did he?

I want to flip this parable a bit. Nothing misses the eye of the King and I am explicitly referring not to the king in the parable but to Jesus our King. If our debt to Jesus has so greatly accumulated to 150 years of labour then it indicates that we have not been prudent with our life choices and so have had to overborrow mercy from Him. It is more than clear that borrowing has now become a habit, permitting a mounting debt to reach astronomical proportions, so much so that it can’t be paid. Ironically we borrow again.

The King on the other hand is fully aware of the debt owed and even more fully aware that the debt can’t be paid back to Him. His magnanimous heart has already figured this out and he knows that He will have to cancel the debt even though the threat of punishment is part of the deal. Yet he forgives and waves off the debt; an act of generosity unmatched by human kindness.

Now the question that remains is this; having been forgiven much, should we also not forgive as much or should it still be a measured ‘seven times?’

Peter, got the point, and hopefully we have too!

Spread the love ♥
       
Continue Reading
Faith

A four-step trial? Wednesday, 19th week in ordinary time – Matthew 18:15-20

We are now in the fourth of the five great discourses of Matthew. Chapter 18 is the community discourse addressed to Peter and the disciples and broadly deals with community relations. Since we celebrated the Solemnity of the Assumption of Our Blessed Mother yesterday, verses 1-15 of this text were omitted. So we need to look at these verses first to understand clearly the text of today.

Chapter 18 opens with the disciples asking Jesus who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. The entire pericope must now be seen based on this question and not through a modern-day application of issues or our interpretation.

This question asked by the disciples is a bit of an oddity. You won’t be asking this question when twice before this; in rapid succession (Matthew 16:21-23 and 17:22-23) Jesus has declared his passion, death and resurrection.  Perhaps what was bogging the minds of the disciples was the primacy of Peter, for Jesus in Chapter 16: 16- 19 had declared him to be ‘the rock’ and now the others wanted to know where they stood on the charts of power.

Jesus places a child in their presence as an answer to their question. They were driven by the desire to be given status and Jesus clearly demands that they change their mindset. Using a double negative he insists they will never enter the kingdom of heaven if they are driven by such earthly titles and honours.

The community discourse was thus meant to be a guidepost to the leaders of the Church. It was their duty to ensure that their very behaviour would shine ‘like a light’ for the rest of the community and not scandalize the little ones. These little ones were not to be despised but to be protected and defended from the forces of evil within and without.

With this larger framework, we now look at the text of today. This text (15-20) has often been seen as some sort of a handbook for resolving matters rather than what it was meant to be; concern for others. In its context, this text is sandwiched between the parable of the lost sheep and the mandate to forgive seventy times seven. If you are surrounded by the message of love, it is improbable that the core of your learning turns out to be rotten. This text is cushioned with love. If the shepherd left the ninety-nine sheep in search of the one lost would he bring him back only to put him on trial?

The point of this text in dealing with a sinful brother is not to haul him over the coals but to restore a wounded relationship. Matthew is asking his community to settle matters of dispute by tapping into the resources of the community and not to seek recourse in some external judicial kangaroo court. However, the disputes taken to the community are not meant to be trivial matters but those grave in nature and that gravity was highlighted by the word ‘sinful’.

A community of believers is not insulated from disagreements. The words of Jesus seem to indicate a hypothetical situation highlighted by the word IF, which is repeated five times in the text. But this hypothetical situation is more than just a hypothesis for we know that sparks fly when people live in a community. The Lord, mindful of such possible conflicts, wanted them to be addressed, for conflicts that are not addressed only fester.

Having said that, this is not a four-step trial with the sole desire to get to point four, which is the expulsion of the member. That sadly is the goal for many Christians who hide behind the letter of this text forgetting the spirit of it entirely. The point of the text is to win a member back.

The sensitivity in this text oozes over. The member in question is ‘sinful’, there is a grievous wound caused due to the action of the person. Individual sins of a member hurt the community at large. There is no sin, no matter how personal, that does not injure the community. The Confiteor or the I confess is said as a public admittance of our individual sins and while it does not sacramentally absolve us of our sins it is an appropriate way to prepare ourselves to celebrate the sacred mysteries, admitting our sins which wound the body of Christ.

Hence the sin of a sinful brother needs to be dealt with and done so sensitively. The temptation would be to gloss over the sin, after all addressing such a matter is embarrassing for all. All the same, it must be ‘pointed out’ and be done privately or ‘alone’ to avoid embarrassing the person thus allowing the member to begin with a clean slate.

But then again, the perception of sinfulness may have not permeated into the consciousness of the errant member and in that case may warrant the intervention of a few more members. The idea is not to call in the cavalry and browbeat the person. Jesus is emphatic, these are witnesses to fraternal correction and not lawyers for the prosecution. Should even this fail, then the ‘church’ or the assembly should intervene and if all fails then the brother or sister should be treated like an outsider for, they choose not to live as members of this community. In all this, the sole aim is to win the member over and not conduct a trial with a battery of church lawyers baying for someone’s blood.

Matthew is the only Gospel that uses the word Church. (Ecclesia, meaning a calling out or an assembly) In this text, you will find the word used thrice. It is to this Church, that is granted the gift of ‘binding and loosening,’ a gift that was given to St Peter in Chapter 16:19. This is incredible power and with great power comes great responsibility.

The text must therefore always be seen as a responsibility that is thrust on the shoulders of the Church to make every effort to heal the wounds of division. Jesus will back this text with his response to Peter’s question; you MUST forgive seventy times seven.

Spread the love ♥
       
Continue Reading
Faith

Go fish – Memorial of St Maximilian Kolbe – Matthew 17:22-27

The text of today is the second ‘passion, death and resurrection’ (PDR) prediction of Jesus. We read the first of these in Matthew 16:21. In the Gospel of Mark there are three such PDR predictions each of them followed by a teaching on discipleship. The Gospel of Matthew has just one teaching on discipleship attached to the PDR prediction and our text of today, which begins with a PDR prediction,has an incident in the life of Jesus that takes place in Capernaum.

Verse 23 tells us that the disciples, on hearing Christ’s prediction of his passion, death and resurrection were ‘greatly distressed.’ They were perhaps distressed because this was the second time in quick succession that Our Lord had spoken of his death. They were perhaps distressed because they felt helpless. Earlier, Peter tried to ‘rebuke him’ (Mark. 8:34 and Matthew 16:22) for expressing such thoughts. The word rebuke has its roots

from the Old French ‘rebuchier,’ meaning “to hack down,” or “beat back.” A rebuke, then, is meant to be critical and to chide another. In today’s terms, a rebuke is a verbal smackdown! Peter who now thought himself as the guardian of the keys to the kingdom gave Jesus a verbal smack-down only to be called Satan in return. Now, for the second time, Jesus talks of his suffering, death and resurrection. This time reality has begun to set in and the disciples were ‘greatly distressed.’

The text of today finds Jesus in Capernaum. Jesus is back in his de-facto headquarters. This is the village of Peter’s mother-in-law and Peter would certainly be a known figure, even more due to his association with Jesus. It is no wonder then that Peter is accosted by the temple tax collectors with a question that rather seems to throw aspersions on the religiosity of Jesus. Were they insinuating that Jesus was a bad Jewish Rabbi? Perhaps they were attempting to prove Jesus’ disloyalty to the temple or His violation of the Law? The question asked could have been one that sought clarification but was designed more to embarrass Jesus. “Does your teacher NOT pay the temple tax?”

So, what then was this temple tax and even more what were these temple tax collectors doing so far in the North, away from Jerusalem? By Jewish religious law, as commanded in the Bible itself (Exodus 30:13; 38:25) Moses instituted a half-shekel sanctuary tax to help fund the Tabernacle (Exodus 30:12-13). Every male Jew over the age of 20 had to give an annual contribution of “half a shekel”. However, this tax was only collected when Israel performed a national census.

In time, the Jewish priests connected with Herod’s temple, instituted another tax, a voluntary tax for the temple which was fixed at half a shekel for each male over the age of 20. The priests cleverly patterned it after the temple tax as mandated by Moses in the Old Testament. According to the Talmud, the temple tax was to be collected during any one of the Jewish festivals, namely the Passover, Pentecost, or the feast of the Tabernacles. This Temple tax was not enforceable under Roman law, so they couldn’t make it compulsory. However, the priests considered it a sin if you didn’t pay it. So, you can call it a temple guilt tax with pressure to pay it. So strong was this pressure that one can only suspect that temple tax collectors were probably going door to door to collect the tax and had landed as far as Capernaum.

Scripture tells us that when Peter was asked if Jesus paid the tax, he said that he does. Perhaps as the evidence shows us, he did pay the tax but not this year. Why do I say this? We are told that finally, Jesus instructs Peter to cast a line and take from the mouth of a fish a coin enough to pay for both of them. Peter was caught in a difficult situation, perhaps not sure if Jesus had paid the tax or not and to avoid embarrassment affirmed that Jesus did pay the temple tax. Poor Peter, he must have felt caught between a rock and a hard place.

When Peter came into the house where Jesus was, the Lord asked him, “From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes—from their children or others?” Peter replied that kings collect from others because the children are exempt. Jesus’ point was that, since the temple was His Father’s house, Jesus was exempt. Why should the Son of God pay a tax to His own Father?

Jesus uses the question about the temple tax to teach a lesson, a lesson for us even today. Christians are free, but they must sometimes relinquish their rights to uphold their witness and not cause others to stumble. True freedom is not serving ourselves but others.

Yet Jesus pays the tax to ‘not offend’ the tax collectors. Jesus was no stranger to ‘offending people’, remember how he tore into the Pharisees and overturned the desks of the money changers in the temple? So, what was so different this time? I believe Jesus paid the tax simply because Peter had already given his word that Jesus had paid his temple tax and the Lord did not want to embarass Peter with this ‘lie’. So, Jesus told Peter to go fishing and to open the mouth of the first fish he caught because he would find a coin that would pay the temple tax for both Christ and Peter.

By making the tax payment in such an extraordinary way, Jesus reinforced that this was not a tax he was obligated to pay. If so, there would have been enough money in the mouth of the fish to pay the temple tax for all the disciples.

Spread the love ♥
       
Continue Reading
Faith

The fate of our faith – Saturday, 18th Week in ordinary time – Matthew 17:14-20

Beware when gentle Jesus meek and mild gets all riled up. There is frustration in the words of Jesus and he does not hold back. We are familiar with the anger of Jesus. We know, how in the temple, he made a whip and kicked tables over. In this case, his words are enough to make you want to make run for cover and hide. The twelve get a public dressing down with words that would make any disciple squirm. “ You faithless and perverse generation, how much longer must I be with you? How much longer must I put up with you?” (17:17)

Jesus has more than equipped the twelve with every skill they would need for ministry. He has lectured them long and hard on the ethics of Christian living in chapters five through seven, in what has come to be called the Sermon on the Mount. He has performed ten miracles in chapters eight and nine and shown them that he is not only master of the word(teacher) but also master of the deed(healer). In chapter ten he gave his apostles the authority to preach and perform the very miracles he did. In chapters eleven and twelve, he taught them not to be intimidated by rejection. In chapter thirteen he instructed them on the kingdom of Heaven and over chapters fourteen to sixteen he has prepared them for his impending rejection, death and suffering. Yet, they who were given the power to raise the dead, now can not even exorcise an epileptic boy who is possesed by a demon and Jesus was more than just frustrated. Our Lord is so angry that he calls these future saints (not Judas) faithless, perverse and tells them in no uncertain terms that he was ‘fed up with them.’

Having been reprimanded publicaly, the apostles come to Jesus privately. (verse 19) While one might feel compelled to frown upon the failures of the apostles, I am touched by their humility. They come to him privately, embarassed that they have failed the Lord. They come seeking understanding for their failing. This is how we too should approach the Lord in our failings.

The very same Jesus who was all rilled up, sets his annoyance aside to teach once more. Patience is a virtue and Our Lord is once again patient with his errant apostles. But now he chooses to teach them. ‘Why could you not cast the demon out? It is because of your little faith,’ retorts Jesus. This statement should have stung the apostles because in the past Our Lord has praised the ‘great faith’ of a Syro-Phonecian woman and the ‘great faith’ of the centurion who said “I am not worthy to have you under my roof but say but the word.”

Faith is not a given! faith needs daily nurturing. The amazing gifts of healing that Jesus had given his twelve have failed them because they did not nurture the gift of faith from which flows the ability to perform these great miracles. Perhaps they were overwhelmed with work pressure, perhaps too busy to pray or even worse did not make their prayer life a priority. Clearly they were out of touch and that became evident when the father of the boy said, “I brought him to your disciples but they could not cure him.”

At the heart of it all is not the amount of faith that we have but the kind of faith that we ought to have. Jesus sets the bar very high when he speaks of faith that can move mountains. Looking at this text carefully, Jesus seems to say that we do not even have faith that matches the size of a mustard seed, for that would be enough, were we in need of moving a mountain.

I can not write this reflection without admitting to my own lack of faith. Sadly, as I write this text I feel compelled to tell myself that perhaps when Jesus told us we can move a mountain with faith the size of a mustard seed, he meant it as a metaphor. But If I do that, If I console myself with my own interpretations of scripture, then I make Christ a liar and that would be blasphemy. So I must look at my faith meter in prayer and be confronted by the Lord himself before I share his truth with the world.

Because the truth of God seems like an impossibility, it does not make the truth of God a lie.

Spread the love ♥
       
Continue Reading
Faith

Convenient Christianity – Friday, Memorial of St Clare- Matthew 16:24-28

Much of Christianity today, has been reduced to familiar and comforting Biblical verses. We seek verses in scripture that give us consolation rather than challenge us. It is wonderfully comforting to repeat Philippians 4:13 which says, “I can do all things in Christ who strengthens me.” or John 3:16,” God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.” Now imagine for a minute a Christian taking up today’s Biblical verse, “If anyone wants to become my followers, let them DENY THEMSELVES, TAKE UP THEIR CROSS and follow me.”

Our text of today needs a bit of context. Christ has offended the Pharisees and scribes who have come from Jerusalem to question him. (15:1) He then willfully strayed into ‘enemy territory,’ into the land of Phonecia, where he praised the ‘great faith of a foreigner (15:28). He fed the four thousand and when ‘tested’ by the Pharisees and Sadducees called them an “evil and adulterous generation.”(16:4) and warns the disciples against the “yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” (16:6) He then reveals himself at Caesaria Philippi as the Christ, the Son of the Living God. (15:16)

From now on Jesus will begin his journey to Jerusalem. Mathew 16:2 tells us that “from that time on, Jesus began to show his disciples that he MUST go to Jerusalem and undergo great suffering at the hands of the elders and chief priests and scribes and be killed and on the third day be raised from the dead.” But this truth was hard for Peter and perhaps the rest to accept. Peter attempts to dissuade the Lord and as a consequence faces his ire. To his shock, he is called satan for he has become a stumbling block with his mind set on human things.

It is in this context that Matthew 16:24 must be read. Jesus is heading to HIS cross but if we are to be his followers then the implication is clear as daylight. Yet we live in the shadows, unaccepting of the truth of Matthew 16:24.

It must be said and said emphatically; no one demands that we have to be followers of Christ. Baptism does welcome us into the fraternity of Christ but even satan chose to opt out of heaven. Don’t misunderstand my point; what I am stating is that a follower of Christ makes a choice. Jesus is clear, “IF any want to be my followers.” Following Christ is a free choice but if you accept it you must embrace the whole package. Too often, Christians have their basket of cherry-picked teachings of Christ. Such Christians must be called out for they are nothing but the agents of satan, who like their master ‘deceive’ others into their brand of convenient Christianity.

Discipleship demands the acceptance of the cross. The cross demands the denial of self. We live in a culture of ME, MYSELF and I and this unholy trinity is fed to us as the need for assertiveness. It is not assertiveness when we push others out of the way to insert ourselves. This is not assertiveness, it is aggressiveness; diabolically marketed by the world as a trade and tool of self-growth. The Christian is called to denial.

Discipleship demands the cross. The cross interestingly is not given or dumped on us. Christ says, “take up your cross” and in the Gospel of Luke he says “take up THE cross.” Christ does not give us ‘a’ cross but demands we carry THE cross. There is only one ‘the cross;’ it’s the one Jesus carried. He is not asking that we carry some of our human trivialities and console ourselves that we have shared in his suffering. For the community of Matthew who read this text, the writing was on the wall; Christ was asking them to die as he died on the cross. Discipleship demanded the sacrifice of one’s own life.

For us today, taking up ‘the cross’ has been reduced to a metaphor. We don’t expect to die on a cross. There is no doubt that each of us will die someday. The point is, are we willing to die today in the same manner that Our Lord died for us? There is no profit in heaven if we have gained great earthly honours, power or position. It does not matter how important or internationally recognised your surname is. It matters little if you are the Prime Minister or the longest-serving Pope. What matters is what we have done (16:28) how we have lived and how we have loved Christ.

Spread the love ♥
       
Continue Reading