Faith

Pester or Persevere? Thursday, 27th week in ordinary time – Lk 11:5-13

Today we focus on the second and third part of three part structure on the teaching on prayer (11:1-13). In response to the disciples request to pray Jesus teaches them the Lord’s Prayer or what some have also called the ‘disciples prayer.’

After having received the prayer the disciples now listen to a parable on prayer and a saying on prayer. The parable is based on the social customs that enshrined the laws of hospitality. As in India, this social custom was regarded with great respect among the people of Jesus. Atithi Devo Bhava   अतिथिदेवो भव which translates from Sanskrit as ‘the guest is equivalent to God’ is taken from an ancient Hindu scripture which became part of the “code of conduct” for Hindu society. Similarly, the respect for a stranger or guest was ingrained in Jewish society as their code of conduct.

The parable is often misunderstood as the need to be ‘persistent in prayer’. Like the friend who stands at the door of his neighbour at midnight, asking for bread for another who has visited him in the dead of night, so too must we ‘persist with God’ as thought pestering him would give us what we want.  This makes God a bit of a snooty hard to get by chap rather than the Father of the prayer that Jesus just taught them.

The cause of this misunderstanding lies in the NRSV (New Revised Standard Version’s) translation of the Greek word “anaideia” which has been translated as PERSISTENCE. ‘Anaideia’ really translates as ‘shamelessness’ or better still ‘a boldness which comes from familiarity’. The Father of the Lord ’s Prayer  to whom we ask for daily bread, is the Father to whom we shamelessly ask for all our needs (ask and it will be given) and we do so boldly like a child who is ‘familiar’ with the Father.

Spread the love ♥
21      
21
Shares
Continue Reading
Faith

And we called God, Father! Wednesday, 27th Week in ordinary time – Lk 11:1-4

Values are not taught, they are caught and if prayer is a value then the only way to reiterate it as a value is to live it by example. In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus does precisely that. It would do well to read the texts mentioned in Luke3:21, 5:16, 6:12, 9:18, 9:28, 10:21-22, 11:1, 22:41-4, 23:46. You will observe that in the Gospel of Luke Jesus is constantly at prayer and the disciples have observed the Master.

To have one’s own distinctive form of prayer was the mark of a religious community and so the disciples seeing Jesus in prayer desire to be taught to pray as John taught his disciples to pray. In response Jesus gives the disciples a prayer, a parable on prayer and a few sayings on prayer ( read 11:1-13) of which today’s Gospel forms the first part.

The prayer given by Jesus has come to be known as the Lord’s Prayer though it can also be called the disciples prayer considering that the disciples asked to be taught how to pray ad it was given to them. This prayer is also found in the Gospel of Matthew but in a much longer format. In the Gospel of Matthew it is Jesus who is instructing His disciples about prayer. He does not want them to pray like the hypocrites and so he gives them a pattern of prayer. In the Gospel of Luke, the prayer is given as a response to a request, “Lord teach us to pray.”

Spread the love ♥
       
Continue Reading
Faith

The Martha in me – Thursday, 17th week in ordinary time – Lk 10:38-42

I grew up thinking that Jesus wanted me to be always at his feet; after all Mary seems to have walked away with the praise, “she has chosen the better part.” But being a chef by profession made me unhappy with the response of Jesus; labouring over a hot grill is no easy task and if both had to sit at Jesus’ feet then who would feed the Lord?  

So I am not going to focus this reflection on the ‘apparent’ praise of Mary but to critique the Martha in us. To merely assume that this is a case of one better than the other would do a great injustice to the role that Martha played. After all, both prayer and good works are essential to Christian life.

So let’s look at the narrative as it appears. Jesus enters the house of Martha who welcomed Him, we are not told that Mary joined in the invitation but only that she chose to sit at Jesus’ feet. There are several breaches of Jewish protocol here. We are not told if the disciples are in the house with Jesus which makes His presence alone with two women an issue and even more since Martha and Mary are not His relatives. We are then told a woman desires to serve Jesus which would never be the case in a Jewish household. Finally, a woman sits at His feet as He teaches. She assumes the posture of a student learning at the feet of a rabbi, a role traditionally reserved for men.

Let us now examine the evidence in the narrative; is Jesus making a case for ‘prayer’ and not ‘work’ as many have come to assume? The key to this ‘misunderstanding’ is found in the description of Martha’s attitude to her work; she is DISTRACTED. The word distracted in Greek is periespato and has the connotation of being pulled or dragged in different directions. What is the cause of her ‘distraction’? Her sister Mary is not in the kitchen helping her prepare what could only be assumed to be a meal for the Master. Martha’s actions prevent her from being ‘present’ to Jesus through her work just as Mary was ‘present’ to Jesus as He spoke to her.

Spread the love ♥
16      
16
Shares
Continue Reading
Faith

From Who to Which, the parable of five questions – Monday, 27th week in ordinary time – Lk 10:25-37  

Life is all about asking the right questions and the lawyer certainly had a question with a hope attached to it; WHAT must I do to inherit eternal life? Jesus answered the lawyer’s question with two other question, “WHAT is written in the law?” and “WHAT do you read there?” Now we have three questions and no answer yet.

The lawyer in the parable is often made out to have malicious intent because the narrative tells us that he wished to “test” Jesus. I would like to suggest that we cut him some slack, for he also seems to be a respectful chap; he addressed Jesus as “teacher” and went on to answer the Lord’s question respectfully. 

While the lawyer wanted to ‘test’ the Lord, Jesus wanted to test the lawyers understands of the law and this lawyer certainly had more than just rudimentary knowledge; he had a remarkable understanding too. In response to Jesus’ double question he combines two teaching from the Old Testament, the Shema from the book of Deuteronomy and a teaching from Leviticus. “You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your being, with all your strength, and with all your mind, and your neighbour as yourself.” And Jesus is impressed! For the young man wanted to know what he must DO to enter into eternal life and his response is more than correct prompting Jesus to say, “DO this and you will live.”

But now there seems to be a problem.  The lawyer feels compelled to be justified by his belief of who really is a neighbour. One must understand that because the lawyer begins with another question WHO, it does not mean there is a dilemma in his mind. You see in the lawyer’s mind as in the mind of any Jew, their neighbour was any Jew, as long as he was a Jew! This is why scripture records this question not as one with a desire to know the answer but as one with the desire to be “justified.” He wanted Jesus to validate his belief and hence the fourth question, “WHO is my neighbour?”

Spread the love ♥
13      
13
Shares
Continue Reading
Faith

Can I divorce? Twenty-seventh Sunday in Ordinary Time – Mk 10:2-16

Jesus’ ministry shifts from the north to the area of Jerusalem in the south. This region was known as Perea. This was on the other side of Jordan from where He had been at Peter’s home in Capernaum. Jesus was to minister there until leaving for Jerusalem shortly before Passion. Scripture tells us that as was his custom, HE TAUGHT.

Once again the Pharisees come to trap Jesus with the hope to publicly discredit his ministry. The question and place chosen is so cleverly crafted that to the bystander this would seem like just an innocent query. But it was not, it was loaded and deadly.

The question concerned the “lawfulness for a man to divorce his wife.” There could be nothing more controversial that this question in Perea which was ruled by Herod Antipas. It was he who had imprisoned John the Baptist for his views on divorce and remarriage (6:17-18) for Herod had married Herodias, his brother’s wife. If Jesus spoke against divorce, it would make Him look bad to Herod.

The Pharisees no doubt hoped such a fate would befall Jesus.  But the issue of divorce  was also   a volatile one in first-century Judaism .There were two schools of thought, one allowing divorce for virtually any reason, the other denying divorce except on grounds of adultery (see note on Matt. 19:3). The Pharisees undoubtedly expected Jesus to take one side, in which case He would lose the support of the other faction. They hoped that the resulting loss of popularity would make it easier for them to destroy Him.

Spread the love ♥
19      
19
Shares
Continue Reading