 FIRST SUNDAY OF ADVENT YEAR CThere’s certainly excitement in the air whenever December comes round. The festive mood is evident as we make the crucial countdown to Christmas. Dusty and weathered old Christmas trees are taken out of their boxes, Christmas shopping lists are drawn up, leave forms are submitted early, holiday recipe books get taken off the shelf, train and bus tickets are bought for the long trip home. It’s no wonder why some people collapse from exhaustion during the holidays. Last week, a little boy proudly told me that he was busier than his Parish Priest. He boasted that he had no free evenings to spare because he was fully occupied with carolling practices. With a bruised ego and not wanting to lose to an 8 year old, I retorted, “What’s there to practise? Everyone knows their carols. Carolling practices are just another excuse to sing carols!” Despite my cynical grumblings, I must admit that I do have a soft spot for Christmas carols. And old time favourite is “Santa Claus is coming to town.” I especially love the part that goes, “He's making a list and checking it twice; Gonna find out who's naughty and nice.” Everyone dreams of being on the ‘nice’ list, but ‘naughty’ can be fun too.
It never occurred to me that the silly old carol had a certain eschatological undertone to it till I began humming the tune whilst preparing this Sunday’s homily. The word eschatological or eschatology comes from the Greek word Eschaton, which means ‘last,’ here referring to the Last Things (death, judgment, heaven and hell), or in common parlance, the end of the world. So, what has a silly happy carol, which no one takes seriously, got to do with a morbid and serious topic like the end of the world? What both the song and the end times have in common is that both speak of the coming of a certain important personage which heralds a time of reckoning. The significant event that marks the beginning of the end would be the Parousia, the coming of the Son of Man in glory. As the gospel tells us today, it isn’t Santa who’s coming to town. Sorry to disappoint some of you. It’s someone far better! Jesus Christ! And his list of naughty and nice has more serious implications than ensuring that you are guaranteed a present underneath your Christmas tree. In fact, it concerns our very salvation.
The million dollar question: What must we do, if we only had a little time left? Well, here’s a list to start with:
- Quit the job you’ve been thinking of leaving for the last few decades and tell your boss, to just “go to hell!”
- Sell your house, liquidate all assets, and buy a one way ticket around the globe.
- Go out in style – ride out in glory, with a certain heroic bravado (and whole lot of stupidity).
- Lie down and just wait for death to overtake you. As the Borgs in the Star Trek sci-fi series would announce before they forcefully assimilate other cultures, “Resistance is futile!” What’s the point of doing anything? It’s all going to end anyway.
- Tell the girl you’ve been secretly having a crush on for so long what you truly feel about her, even if it’s going to risk a slap on the face.
- Drink yourself silly, party all night and break every rule.
- Climb Mount Everest, go bungee-jumping, hike up Machu Pichu, swim with the Great White Sharks, do a Monty in public!
- Start stockpiling candles blessed by a priest to weather the three days of darkness – better safe than sorry.
- Or just scream at the top of your voice, “I can’t think ... I can’t think ... I can’t think!!!” while hyperventilating.
As you can see from the above list, people can be quite creative when reacting to the ‘end.’ Early Christians too reacted in different ways to news of the imminent coming of Christ: shock, anger, fear, weariness. Many were driven into a state of panic and terror. Some were so crippled by fear of the end times that they lost all interest in any activity. Others descended into wild debauchery and immorality, hoping to get a last fling before it was too late. Others neglected their duties and obligations to their families and communities because they believed that all their energy should be invested in preparing for the end. The advice offered by today’s readings is thankfully much more sober. In fact, sobriety together with vigilance, prayer and good behaviour are thrown into the End Times bucket list. These are jointly held up as virtues that need to be fostered by every Christian in preparation for the end.
In the second reading, we witness the earliest writings of the New Testament in the shape of St Paul’s First letter to the Thessalonians. The theme and content of Paul’s letter gives a clue of the sentiments of the early Christians who live twenty years after the death and resurrection of Christ. Many of them would have been hanging on to the promise that they will not see death until they had personally witnessed Christ’s Second Coming. Their faith would have been seriously shaken when their members began to succumb to death. Would the dead be disadvantaged? Were they believing in a lie? And so we find Paul attempting to strengthen these converts in their new faith. For Paul, an essential part of the Christian message was the Second Coming. Without that event, the story of salvation was incomplete. Although Paul believed that the Parousia was imminent, the preparation which he proposed was different from the options adopted by his audience. He taught them that Christians should always be concerned with pleasing God in their conduct. The ultimate goal for every Christian was a life of holiness, which meant not only freedom from sin but also love for everyone. In the gospel, we are told that holiness is attainable through vigilance and prayer.
Holiness and vigilance seems to be worlds apart since the latter implies some form of belligerency. Now, you may think that I’m beginning to sound like a Christian fundamentalist who constantly sees the world as divided into two irreconcilable spheres – Christians and others. But the qualities of sobriety and vigilance are specifically pointing to such a reality, that we are at war with evil, something that many have grown accustomed to, and others refuse to mention, since it is believed that such words like ‘evil’ should be banish to the Dark Ages together with other words like ‘heresy’, ‘error’, ‘sin’ and ‘hell.’ It is precisely to correct this erroneous form of thinking that our Holy Father, Pope Benedict had said that the members of the Church on earth are aptly described as "ecclesia militans," the Church militant, since it is "necessary to enter into battle with evil." He recognised that although the term "ecclesia militans" is "somewhat out of fashion," it is nevertheless true, in that "it bears truth in itself." Evil is seen in many forms of violence but according to him, also "masked with goodness and precisely this way destroying the moral foundations of society."
So what does it mean to be vigilant and watchful? I find great inspiration from this explanation taken from one of the works of Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman: “This then is to watch: to be detached from what is present, and to live in what is unseen; to live in the thought of Christ as he came once, and as he will come again; to desire his second coming, from our affectionate and grateful remembrance of his first.”
And so we Christians should never fear the End Times. On the contrary, we should look forward, joyfully welcome, and indeed desire the day when Jesus comes back to rule his creation and restore what once was pronounced “Good”. We as Christians long for the day when all things are made new again, when there will be no more sorrow, when there will be no more tears, pain, and suffering. We are an eschatological people awaiting the day when God sets things right again. After the storm of destruction, suffering, and death, we will see “the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory,” and we will know for sure that “our liberation is near at hand.”
You may be familiar with this oft quoted phrase, “We are an Easter People and Alleluia is our Song” which comes from one of my favourite theologians and Fathers of the Church, St Augustine. This is so because the resurrection of Jesus Christ is the centrepiece of our Catholic faith. But today’s readings also remind us that “We are an Eschatological People and Maranatha is our Song.” (Maranatha, Aramaic: "O Lord, Come!") My thoughts go back to a dramatic scene in the second instalment of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, the Two Towers. At the final moment when the Battle of Helm’s Deep seemed lost, with the good guys, the humans facing imminent and total annihilation, surrounded by a formidable army that outnumbered them, numerous enemy orcs with only murder and destruction on their minds, the defenses of the fortress breached, when all hope seemed abandoned, one of the chief protagonists, the valiant Aragorn remembered a promise made to him by a close friend and ally, the wizard Gandalf, "Look to my coming on the first light of the fifth day, at dawn look to the east." And sure enough, in the heat of battle, Aragorn looks up to the hills and sees Gandalf riding a white horse, framed by the rays of the morning sun which rises dramatically behind this Messianic like figure, as if on cue. And one can almost hear the strains of the orchestra playing and the choir singing:
So you better not pout, you better not cry,
Better not shout, I’m telling you why,
Jesus Christ is coming to town!POSTED BY REV MICHAEL CHUA AT 7.34 AM
 Look to the East
Found this delightful poem as I was browsing through the internet the other day. It’s aptly entitled ‘The Updated Mass’, referring here to the liturgical changes, or some would call it the liturgical upheaval, that took place after the Second Vatican Council. Here are the first two stanzas:
Latin’s gone
Peace is too
Singin’ and shoutin’
From every pew.
Altar’s turned round
Priest is too
Commentator’s yellin’
“Page Twenty-two!”
As the second stanza candidly notes, one of the most apparent changes was the ‘turning around’ or the re-orientation of the priest to face the people. For many, orientation could simply refer to the introductory briefing or training to acquaint a person new to the job, project, organisation or to a particular lifestyle (campus) ensuring that they are moving in the same direction (thus orientation) as the rest. Another popular notion of orientation today has to do with sexual preferences, namely one’s sexual orientation.
So, what is the significance of orientation to Christians? Few people know that the etymology of the word comes from Christians. The word “orientation” itself means facing East (Latin ‘oriens’). Church buildings, traditionally, have been oriented ie. traditionally built to face the rising sun, thus literally ‘facing East.’ The Christians were not the first to have a specific orientation. Synagogue worship was oriented toward Jerusalem, the place of the Temple. Christians, however, chose to face East (thus Ad Orientem). The choice of direction was not merely a matter of preference for a particular compass point. Christians imagine themselves looking toward Christ, whose future coming in glory is aptly symbolised by the brilliance of the rising sun. According to Tertullian the Christians of his time were often mistaken as worshippers of the sun as it was their practice to turn to the east when praying. According to St. Gregory of Nyssa, the Orient contained man's original home, the earthly paradise. St. Thomas Aquinas, speaking for the Middle Ages, adds that Our Lord lived His earthly life in the East, and that from the East He shall come to judge mankind.
The profound symbolism of direction is lost to most of us today. The reason for this lost of sacral orientation among Catholics was the result of certain changes made to the liturgy since Vatican II. The priest, who was humorously described as having his back to the congregation whilst facing the wall, experienced a 180 degree re-orientation with new changes introduced to the liturgy. As opposed toAd Orientem (facing East) or Ad Deum (facing God), his normative position (by convention rather than by legislation) had become Versus Populum, or facing the people. I’m not going to go into a discussion on whether this radical re-orientation was actually sanctioned by the Second Vatican Council or even by the liturgical documents. Suffice to say, that this new orientation of facing people had various effects on both the priest and the congregation and their understanding of the Mass, some of which were adverse.
One of the reasons cited for the change of orientation was to remove or least reduce the distance between the priest and the congregation. Facing the wall, it was argued, exuded aloofness. To the critics of Ad Orientem, the priest by ‘turning his back on the people’ was simply ignoring them. Turning to the people restored his humanity and solidarity with the rest of the hoi poloi. Affability, accessibility, and approachability became key pointers in accessing the performance of the clergy. The recovery of his humanity led to a certain kind of democratisation of the liturgy; where everyone was now seen as celebrants. Politically correct terms, which were more reflective of the socio-political world, replaced sacred roles – the priest was no longer a celebrant, but president. The priest was thus reduced to that of a presiding functionary of a communal meal. What this seem to have done is to throw off balance the entire understanding of sacred liturgy. The primary characteristic of the Mass in both Latin and Eastern liturgical traditions have always been the Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross. The essential link between the Sacrifice of the Cross and the Sacrifice of the Mass was eventually forgotten, as the celebration took on exclusively the character of a ritualised meal.
Thus, the shift has had a number of unforeseen and largely negative effects. What is wrong in all this, and that which leads to this skewed vision, is the core understanding of the focus of the liturgy has come to rest on man and not upon God. Liturgical anthropology replaced liturgical theology as the point of reference. The priests had to rely on a charismatic personality to entertain the audience, liturgies had to be subjected to creative innovations to avoid boredom, communion rails had to be removed to close the distance between the nave and the apse, sacred music and ancient Gregorian chants were replaced by folksy ditties and catchy pop tunes with banal lyrics. Eventually the mass gave the appearance that the priest and the people were engaged in a conversation about God, rather than the worship of God.
In today’s great Solemnity of Christ the King, which marks the end of the Liturgical Year and also symbolically points to the climax and conclusion of human history, we are reminded once again of man’s ultimate purpose – man’s chief end is to glorify God and to acclaim him as Lord and King. Thus this celebration provides the needed orientation, not just for today but everyday. We are asked to turn our hearts and minds to the East, to Christ our King, who is the central figure of history – He is “the Alpha and the Omega”. It is according to this sense that we are invited to turn our hearts to the Lord during the celebration of the Mass, as the introductory dialogue to the Preface reminds us.Sursum corda “Lift up your hearts,” exhorts the priest, and all respond: Habemus ad Dominum “We lift them up unto the Lord.” We note how our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI constantly reminds us that in worship we are meant to focus on God, to give God the glory, not to glorify ourselves. He criticised a self-centred over-emphasis on ourselves that has damaged the quality of worship. “The turning of the priest toward the people,” according to him”, has turned the community into a self-enclosed circle. In its outward form, it no longer opens out on what lies ahead and above, but is locked into itself.” When the liturgical community turns in on itself, it ends up worshiping itself.
Our parish of Our Lady of Lourdes, has within the short period of a week, been transformed into a Mecca of a sort. The allegedly miraculous images that first appeared on two window panels of the Sime Darby Medical Centre, now relocated in the Chapel at the back of the Church, seems to be drawing in pilgrims. As much as this may be a sign of growing piety and devotion among the faithful, no one could possibly deny that Our Blessed Mother would never intend to take the limelight away from her Son. Her Son remains the King of the Universe and the focus of our attention, our worship and certainly our orientation. She tells us as she did in Cana, “Do whatever he asks you to do”. She lived her life for her Son and never wavered in this orientation, even at the moment of crucifixion. In that sense, Mary becomes the perfect model for the correct orientation in life as well as in worship. She never allowed herself to be consumed by her sorrow and self-pity. Even when she was invited by Jesus to establish the new family of the Church together with the Beloved Disciple, she was not trapped by the self-enclosed circle of this new bonding, forgetting that her Son was its very foundation. At all times, her orientation was fixed on Jesus, and that was her salvation. It would be no surprise that she calls Christians throughout the ages to imitate her and do likewise. She points them to her Son.
Today, we encounter her Son most perfectly in the liturgy. Our Pope invites us to see the glory of Christ Priest and Victim in the liturgy. The Pope proposes to direct us away from ourselves and back to God by focusing on the altar, the great sign of Christ among us. In two of his books dedicated to his theological insights on the liturgy, ‘Feast of Faith’ and ‘The Spirit of the Liturgy,’ he argued that the altar is not a setting to display a man, namely the Pope, the bishop or the priest. Rather, during the action of the liturgy, the altar itself should draw us around Jesus Christ crucified and risen. One of the ways in which we can sufficiently visualise this new orientation is not by changing the position of the altar or the celebrant. The Pope recognises the psychological upheaval and damage this would have on many. The Pope, however, proposed placing a crucifix at the centre of the Altar. “Where a direct common turning toward the east is not possible, the cross can serve as the interior ‘east’ of faith,” he writes. The central placement of the Crucifix is deliberate so that all may concretely face and look upon Lord, in such a way as to orient also their prayer and hearts.
Critics of this new practice have often argued that the crucifix eclipses the celebrant and forms a barrier or obstruction. In answer to this allegation, the Pope clarifies: “Let it not be said, moreover, that the image of our Lord crucified obstructs the sight of the faithful from that of the priest, for they are not to look to the celebrant at that point in the liturgy! They are to turn their gaze towards the Lord! In like manner, the presider of the celebration should also be able to turn towards the Lord. The crucifix does not obstruct our view; rather it expands our horizon to see the world of God; the crucifix brings us to meditate on the mystery; it introduces us to the heavens from where the only light capable of making sense of life on this earth comes. Our sight, in truth, would be blinded and obstructed were our eyes to remain fixed on those things that display only man and his works.”
So as we come to the end of this Liturgical Year and on the eve of the new one, let us orientate our hearts and minds to Him. We look for the first rays of light piercing the veil of darkness, sin and destruction. In the words of Gandalf in the Lord of the Rings, “at dawn look to the East.” Let us behold the beauty of our King, our Lord, and our Saviour, revealed and not concealed by the cross. Thus an additional last stanza to the poem would be fitting.
No turning of altars
Priest need not too
But the Beauty of the Cross
Will reveal what is True.
Post note
We have already begun a project to restore our sanctuary to its original beauty and glory. Thus, you would be seeing me celebrating mass on a mobile altar with a wooden panel as a backdrop for the next three weeks. I believe that many of you are excited to cast your eyes on the new altar, the reredosand the tabernacle. Some may be questioning our actions and the parish priorities. You see, part of the making of this visible orientation to Christ the King in an external manner which matches the interior disposition, is to restore beauty to the liturgy through music and art. In divine worship, we see the glory that the apostles beheld in Jesus Christ. According to Our Pope, “Beauty, then is not mere decoration, but rather an essential element of the liturgical action, since it is an attribute of God himself and his revelation.”
He calls us by his word and example to set aside the banal. To use what is beautiful, be it old or new: the best vessels, fine vestments, good design and architecture, gracious ceremonial, excellent music. This is not mere aestheticism because is derived from the God who is Beauty personified.
By contrast, as anyone can see, a feature of the hermeneutic of discontinuity or rupture is a tendency towards ugliness, or at least promoting a modernist aesthetic, often dull, cold or minimalist - ugly churches, vestments, vessels etc, and all bereft of mystery. Functionality dictates! But the God we worship and praise is beautiful, to be worshiped in the beauty of holiness, worshiped “in spirit and in truth”. As Fyodor Dostoyevsky once claimed, “Beauty will save the world.” That is why Catholic liturgy in all its forms, simple or solemn, Eastern or Western, captures something of the glory and beauty of God. And it is the beauty of the Divine Liturgy, the source and summit of Christian life, which will save the world!POSTED BY REV MICHAEL CHUA AT 6:46 PM
 What is the Official position of the Catholic Church on apparitions?
The Catholic Church makes a distinction between public and private revelation. In the case of public revelation, the Church definitely teaches that the entire deposit of faith (all that is necessary for salvation) is to be found in the twin pillars of revelation, Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, which comes from the same source, the Word of God, Jesus Christ. There can be no further revelation that can add to or alter the above.
Any other ‘revelation’ if determined authentic is to be regarded as private. According to St Thomas Aquinas, God continues to reveal Himself to individuals "not indeed for the declaration of any new doctrine of faith, but for the direction of human acts" (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II-II q174 a6 reply 3). Private revelation cannot improve upon, correct or entirely supplant Public Revelation. Apparitions are to be regarded under the category of private rather than public revelation.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches:
66 "The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ." Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.
67 Throughout the ages, there have been so-called "private" revelations, some of which have been recognised by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ's definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church.
Christian faith cannot accept "revelations" that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfilment, as is the case in certain non-Christian religions and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such "revelations."
How do we determine whether an apparition is authentic?
On February 25, 1978, the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) issued "Norms of the Congregation for Proceeding in Judging Alleged Apparitions and Revelations."
According to the norms, investigation can be done by the following
1. The diocesan bishop on his own initiative or at the request of the faithful.
2. The national conference of bishops.
3. The Apostolic See (Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith).
The process will involve 3 steps
1. Initially, to judge the facts according to positive (moral certainty, qualities of the subject, conformity with doctrines, healthy devotion) and negative criteria (glaring error as to facts, doctrinal error, pursuit of monetary gain, gravely immoral acts, psychological disorders) .
2. Then, if this examination appears favourable, to allow certain public demonstrations of devotion, while continuing to investigate the facts with extreme prudence (which is equivalent to the formula: “for the moment, nothing is opposed to it”).
3. Finally, after a certain time, and in the light of experience, (starting from a particular study of the spiritual fruits generated by the new devotion), to give a judgment on the authenticity of the supernatural character, if the case requires this.
What is the status of the alleged image of the Blessed Virgin Mary which has appeared on a glass panel of the Sime Darby Medical Centre (formerly Subang Jaya Medical Centre)?
This alleged apparition has not received official approval from the local ordinary, the Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur, or from the Apostolic See.
The Archbishop has instructed that the glass panel be respectfully placed in a place conducive for prayer in the Church of Our Lady of Lourdes, Klang, pending further investigation to determine its authenticity.
This is not to be interpreted as a tacit approval or recommendation by the church authorities that the image is worthy of private or public veneration.
What is the responsibility of the faithful?
Today there are a myriad of alleged private revelations and apparitions vying for the attention of the faithful. None has been definitively judged by the Holy See, some have been approved by local authority (e.g. Akita, Cuapa, Betania), others have been found lacking in supernaturality (e.g. Medjugorje, Garabandal), some few have been condemned (e.g. Necedah, Bayside) and finally, the vast majority have received no attention from Church authorities whatsoever.
The first responsibility of the faithful is to remain firmly established in the faith, in the sacraments and in communion with the Pope and bishops. Any Catholic who gives their primary attention to alleged private revelation at the expense of Sacred Scripture, the teaching of the Church (especially the Catechism), sacramental practice, prayer and fidelity to Church authority is off course.
The second responsibility is to have regard, in the first place, for those private revelations and apparitions approved by the Church (e.g. Lourdes, Fatima). Within a balanced practice of the faith the edifying content of approved private revelations can be a motive for deeper piety and fidelity to the Gospel.
Finally, there are many other private revelations that have not received Church approval. The Second Vatican Council urges us to discern the Spirit in the case of such extraordinary graces [Lumen gentium 12], which means being neither gullible or incredulous, but subjecting them to all relevant theological and human tests of credibility. (Adapted from an online article by Colin B. Donovan, STL)
POSTED BY REV MICHAEL CHUA AT 6:20 PM
 TOTAL LOVING, TOTAL GIVING
Every preacher has his favourite text. Today’s gospel story may be a personal favourite for some especially when they wish to whip up the congregation for a better collection. You may be interested to note that most Catholic priests are often embarrassed to talk about money matters or make pitches to solicit funds. In this sense, all of us, both preacher and congregation share something in common. Money is the last thing preachers want to preach about, and the last thing parishioners want to hear about. The easiest way for a priest to lose his popularity is when he’s constantly on his parishioners’ backs for what’s buried deep down in their wallets. So, when an opportunity like this to preach about generous giving arises, one which comes only once in every three years, make the best of it! And nothing works better than a guilt trip using a poor old lady who’s lost her husband as the exemplar par excellence of generosity. My personal experience is that the guilt lasts only one Sunday.
The problem with such irresponsible use of Bible verses to justify one’s agenda is that people often catch on to the strategy after several attempts. The parishioners sitting in the pews, who have grown tired with this over-used tactic, may often develop their own penchant for choosing another text from the same gospel as a counter-attack. At the beginning of the gospel, Jesus warns the people: “Beware of scribes, who like to walk around in long robes”, be greeted with honour in public, have the best places reserved at dinners and who are notorious for swallowing up the possessions of poor widows. Here are respected religious leaders by day but unapologetic thieves at night. Sounds painfully familiar … Sigh. I can see parishioners gleefully looking at me as I reluctantly read those lines. Ouch! Touché!
Before we deal with the story, let’s just take a little detour to unravel the terminology used. Just in case you may be wondering why her contribution was described as a ‘mite’, most commonly understood as a microscopic parasitic pest that is usually invisible to the eye; the word is actually derived from the old English word for small copper coins. It’s found in the King James English Version of the Bible. But perhaps, this misunderstanding may also be insightful. When the volunteers who are responsible for counting the Church collection sieve through the money that’s thrown into the collection bag every Sunday, attention naturally veers toward the larger currencies rather than the common one ringgit notes. Coins often receive little attention or earn the greatest disdain – like mites they are ignored at best, and despised at worst. But Jesus does notice the widow’s gift and in fact makes her an example for the others.
Most of us, most of the time, hear the widow’s mite story and think it means something like this: "See, it’s not how much you give that matters, it’s the spirit with which you give it that counts. Quality is much better than quantity." This justifies being cheap. But most of us miss an important point here; Jesus did not say that the widow gave all she could afford; Jesus said she gave all she had. “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. For all of them have contributed out of their abundance, but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, all she had to live on.” It is much easier to give out of our abundance without seriously affecting our standard of living. What Jesus points to in the widow is another thing entirely; her total commitment of everything she has, all her resources, “all she had to live on,” to the Kingdom of God.
So how should we understand Jesus’ point? The hermeneutic key to understanding today’s passage is found in last week’s passage where we heard Jesus pronounced the two-fold mandate on love, love of God and love of neighbour, as the greatest in scriptures’ sizable arsenal. The widow is cited as an exemplary model of discipleship precisely because she realises that same commandment through the giving of the two coins. There is no coincidence in the number here – two coins to match the two-fold commandment. According to traditional Catholic interpretation by the Fathers of the Church, the two coins represent the two great loves. There is no limit in the widow’s love, neither is there a limit in her giving. Total loving means total giving. Our giving, therefore, becomes irrefutable evidence of the extent of our love. Sweet words promising love are empty unless accompanied by the act of giving.
The same theme of discipleship which demands a totality rather than a partiality of commitment to the way of Christ is found throughout the gospel. We see it in the call of the first disciples who left everything to follow him. It is found in the challenge presented to the rich young man and the disciples to deny one’s self, sell every possession and to take up one’s cross to follow Christ. We see it in Christ’s elucidation of the Great Commandment to love God and neighbour. And finally, we see it in this example of the poor widow and her two ‘mites.’ But finally, all these examples of total giving or radical loving points to the primordial archetype – Christ’s self-giving on the cross for the salvation of many.
Christ came into this world to free us from the bondage of sin, and make us capable once again of love. Love requires freedom, as asine qua non condition. Without freedom, there is no love. And that is why someone who lives a life of sin cannot truly love. He is selfish and overly protective of his own wealth but indifferent to the needs of others. And so the challenge for total self-giving is the challenge to embrace conversion and penance, to free ourselves of the fetters of sin. Christ challenges souls to give up what is self-centred and self-oriented, and to lose oneself by giving oneself freely and without reserve to God and to others — even to the very point of death itself. This radical call to self-giving sacrifice is exactly the antitype of what the modern world cherishes. Modern man loves comfort and pleasure. He loves always having his own way- to do what he wants, how he wants, when we wants it. He treasures the visible things of the world above the treasures of heaven, which he cannot see.
Finally, at root, this story is not so much about giving and generosity as it is about trust in God. The total giving of the widow’s mite was an act of faith, faith in God to supply her needs. She trusted in God to take care of her, even if she put in everything she had, all she had to live on. For God had promised to do just that, and God is faithful to his promises. The stories about the widows in both readings and their generosity are not so much about finances as they are about the relationship of trust we are called upon to have with God. Trusting Him with everything, our welfare, our future, and even our lives.
Today God calls us to quit hedging our bets, to stop holding back. He calls us toward making a complete and total commitment of ourselves to Christ and the Kingdom of God. In fact, it may now appear that giving more at a Sunday collection may be easier by comparison. The Gospel for us today is that we can make that leap, that commitment, with full confidence in God’s promise to provide our every need, now and forever more. So give, not because you feel the sting of shame and guilt. When the sting subsides, the giving stops too. Give not because you wish to make an investment that promises returns. Yes, there will be returns, but not the kind that you imagine. We invest ultimately for heaven and not for the temporary pleasures and riches of this earth. But give, because you wish to go beyond a mere profession of love. Love is realised in action and especially in the act of total self-giving. The cheap have only feeble love or none at all to show. Give because you trust in God. Because you believe that in giving your all, you will receive so much more. In fact, you will receive the greatest treasures of all, eternal life and the joys of heaven!
POSTED BY REV MICHAEL CHUA AT 6:21 AM
 Love - And Do What You Will
In the 4th century, St. Augustine offered advice that looks like something one would find in Playboy or Cosmopolitan: "Love – and do what you will." Sounds like a rallying cry for mayhem and debauchery. To be fair, it sounds more refine in the original Latin, “Dilige et quod vis fac”. (Ok, I may be wrong) Our initial reaction may be one of shock because the quote does seem to be more at home with the libertine period now popularly known as the hippie era, where you would find many advocates of the sexual revolution chanting the slogan associated with the anti-Vietnam war sentiments of the 60s and 70s, “Make Love! Not War!” It was the age of ‘free love’. Anarchy and love do seem to hit it off right from the start.
The ‘Free Love’ movement’s initial goal was to separate the state from sexual matters such as marriage, birth control, and adultery. The movement saw marriage as a form of social bondage. According to this concept, all free unions of adults are legitimate and no one has the right to interfere or impose any moral restraint on matters of the heart, even if it involved promiscuous lifestyles, swapping partners, same-sex relationships, etc. It claimed that such issues were the concern of the parties involved, and no one else. In other words, morality is a private matter. The movement sought freedom from state regulation and church interference in personal relationships. Love and the law were seen as irreconcilable opposite ends of the spectrum and one should never try to make them unwilling bed partners. It is interesting to note that the arguments used by the ‘Free Love’ movement have not become passé with the demise of the hippie era. Today, the same arguments in favour of or against have been resurrected in the run-up to the present presidential elections in the U.S.A.
Did St Augustine, one the greatest doctors of the Church, actually give his stamp of approval to free love? To argue that he did would be really stretching it, given the fact that Augustine had personally turned his back on such a free lifestyle which he had prior to his conversion to Christianity. He lived with a woman in concubinage for many years and even had a child out of wedlock. In his early years, he followed his father to frequent brothels. He finally saw the error of his ways when he came to discover the true love of his life, the Beauty ever ancient, Christ Himself. Here is a more extended quote from the great homily on the First Letter of St John: “The deeds of men are only discerned by the root of charity. For many things may be done that have a good appearance, and yet proceed not from the root of charity… Once for all, then, a short precept is given thee: Love, and do what thou wilt: whether thou hold thy peace, through love hold thy peace; whether thou cry out, through love cry out; whether thou correct, through love correct; … let the root of love be within, of this root can nothing spring but what is good.” (Homily VII, paragraph 8) The context clarifies the meaning of the quote: love should never be an excuse to justify any action, all and sundry, or a license to live immorally. On the contrary, St Augustine was insisting that love must be the foundation of every action and decision. If love was truly the basis of our actions, then we would not risk sinning.
St Augustine uses a metaphor derived from family life to further elucidate his point. He observes that if a person had to choose between being chastised and being treated affectionately, everyone would pick the latter. Nevertheless, suppose the punishment comes from a boy’s father and the caress comes from a kidnapper. “In that case,” he says, “it is Love which disciplines and iniquity which caresses.” Love does not necessarily mean that you make the other person feel good. First and foremost, it requires that your actions flow from a right relationship with that person and with God. If that is the case, says Augustine, “Love and do what you will.”
One of the most challenging expressions of love today is to correct someone else who has done wrong. No one enjoys being corrected – and few people enjoy correcting others. It requires tact, patience, prayer, courage, humility and perseverance. But St Augustine reminds us that the most important ingredient is love. Political correctness, however, has distorted our understanding of love. Our truncated notion of love is confined to kindly feelings and being nice. If I am ‘nice’ or benevolent toward others, it was interpreted as fulfilling the command of love. Don’t get me wrong. Kindly feelings are important and we should do everything we can to cultivate them. You can and you should develop affection for others, even those who seem unlovable. Nevertheless, as Augustine’s example illustrates, much more than benevolence is required. Love is not just about being nice and courteous. A kidnapper may feel kindly towards his victim, but no one can claim that he truly loves the child.
A distorted notion of love got us – and a lot of others – into trouble. We think that love demands us to withhold the truth. We think that being loving means learning how to tip toe around difficult issues and avoid contentious ones, like sin, salvation, and repentance. We started making a list of words to throw out of our vocabulary – first there was ‘hell’, then there was ‘sin’ and before you know it God got thrown out too! But real love involves a daily examination of conscience; not just warm mushy feelings, but the avoidance of sin and cultivation of positive habits. Ultimately, real love must be founded on Truth and in service of Truth. Love is never about selling a lie just to ensure that feelings are not hurt and relationships are not spoiled. Truth should never be sacrificed at the altar of good relations.
The problem with our modern times is that we have come to understand law and love as antithetical. Many believe that to follow the law is to be under a burden, to be compelled, to be constrained. To love, on the other hand, is to embrace the capacity to choose, to be creative, to be liberated. Moral and religious norms are seen as archaic and even anti-love. Many in our Church seems to have been affected by this same malaise in the last fifty years. Our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI made this observation in an interview with the Papal biographer, Peter Seewald when asked to comment on the lack of action taken against clergy sexual offenders in the past: “the prevailing mentality was that the Church must not be a Church of laws but, rather, a Church of love; she must not punish. Thus the awareness that punishment can be an act of love ceased to exist. This led to an odd darkening of the mind, even in very good people.” The Pope then proposed: “Today we have to learn all over again that love for the sinner and love for the person who has been harmed are correctly balanced if I punish the sinner in the form that is possible and appropriate.”
It is only when love is founded in the truth can love finally reveal its most profound meaning. Love is the other name we give to God, as St John so firmly affirmed in his first letter, “God is Love”. God is Truth and God is Love. In God, we see the harmony of his law and his love. God’s law is an expression of his love. That is why Jesus frames his greatest teaching in the form of a legal injunction – Love is a Commandment. Love is the Law and the law is love. There is no contradiction. The Law is a guide that helps man on the path of life to salvation, it is the means by which man is released from the slavery of selfishness and sin and introduced to true freedom and life. Our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI made this profound point during an Angelus catechesis. “For this reason, in the Bible, the Law is not seen as a burden, an overwhelming limitation, but as the Lord’s most precious gift, the testimony of his fatherly love, of his desire to be close to his people, to be their ally and write with his people a love story.” Love, and do what you will … because when love is true, there you will find God’s will, not just a feeble version of our own design, a sorry excuse for immorality.
Posted by Rev. Fr. Michael Chua
|
RSS Feed