May God bestow on you the grace to always help the poor in our society. Happy Sunday! + John I. Okoye
DOCTRINE AND FAITH
(Amos 6, 1.4-7; 1 Tim 1, 6, 11-16; Luke 16, 19-31: 26th Sunday of the Year C 2016)
Prophet Amos condemned, in the first reading, not wealth itself but the complacency that often accompanies wealth. He attacks vehemently the confidence of salvation the leaders of Samaria and Judea reposed on the official places of worship (Mount Sion and Mount Garizim) while at the same time transgressing social justice. They were of the opinion that the mere ritual performance of rites without the attendant piety and conversion of heart would bring them nearer to God. The prophet was also distressed because these affluents entertained themselves with wantonness while the social structure of the northern kingdom of Israel disintegrated: They drink wine by the bowlful, and use the finest oil for anointing themselves, but about the ruin of Joseph they do not care at all. The profligacy of wealth in the face of social breakdown was evidence of their self-indulgence and complacency. The particular aspect of their lives that he censured was their habit of self-indulgence in feasts. Amos criticized not only their eating posture, but also their menu. Their diet of meat was a rarity in ancient Israel. The prophet’s condemnation could not have been more severe. He pronounced Woe upon the people. Only funeral dirges begin in this way. The use of such denunciation here denoted the degree of the prophet’s disdain. He believed that the degenerate nature of the wealthy indicated that real life had died in them and so a dirge was appropriate. However, their affluent lifestyle would be cut short, and in the ironic turn of events of those who always thought of themselves first would be the first to be deported into exile.
The parable which Jesus narrated in the gospel reading has two protagonists: the rich man and Lazarus. Jesus contrasted the lives of these two people. The wealth of the first man was seen in his manner of dressing, style and the quality of his meals. He lived in luxury every day, enjoyed sumptuous meals and a home that boasted of a large gate. By contrast, the poor man Lazarus, whose name is the Greek form of Eliezer (My God is my help) was destitute. He laid begging at the gate of the rich man, hoping for crumbs from his table. His condition was so debased that the scavenging dogs licked his sores.
At the death of both protagonists, there was reverse of fortunes. Lazarus was taken to a higher, honoured and blessed position, beside Abraham while the rich man descended into the place of torments. Why was Lazarus rewarded while the rich man punished? Was there merely a bias of poverty? The answer is found in the understanding of covenant responsibility. Both men were somehow associated with Abraham and, therefore, belong to the people of Israel. Abraham told the rich man that his brothers had Moses and the prophets, a reference to the religious tradition of his people. From this we can conclude that these two protagonists were bound together by the covenant, even though their social conditions were diametrically opposed to each other. This means that they had responsibilities toward each other, particularly the rich man towards the poor man. The story shows that he ignored these responsibilities. He was indifferent to the needs of the covenant brother who laid at his gate. The fact that he called the poor man by name when he asked Abraham to send him refreshing water indicated he was not ignorant of him. When he asked that Lazarus be sent to warn his brothers to change their way of life (metanoia), he was told that they had the same religious tradition he has had, a tradition that clearly charged the wealthy to meet the needs of the poor. If they were not attentive to that tradition, they would not heed a resurrected Lazarus. When he was alive and in a position to help Lazarus, he disregarded him. At this point in time that he was in need, he asked that Lazarus first comfort him, and then warn his brothers. Even in death the man was self -serving, still selfish.
The lesson of the parable is very clear. We are to fulfill our responsibilities toward our needy neighbours. Jesus teaches us, through the story of the good Samaritan, that anyone in need is our neighbour whom we must help. By the depiction of the general and last judgment in chapter 25 of Mathew’s gospel, Jesus teaches that whatever good we do or fail to do to our needy neighbour is done or not done to him. So in our lives as baptized Christians we are not to allow any separation between us and our needy and suffering neighbours, brothers and sisters. We need to meet them where they are, take care of them and take responsibility over them.
There is another important lesson, from the concluding part of the parable, emanating from the answer that Abraham gave to the rich man’s request that Lazarus should go and warn his brothers: If they will not listen either to Moses or to the prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone should rise from the dead. What does this boil down to? Even the most impressionable miracle will not convert a person if he is not attentive and docile to the word of God. What the miracle does is only to provide a surprising and admirable effect and nothing more and does not lead to conversion. In order to be converted and turn one’s mind and heart undivided toward the Lord, it is necessary to listen to the word of God in the Old and New Testaments. It is necessary to heed the word of Jesus who calls for conversion, particularly through this parable in which he urges us to show charity to any needy neighbour, eliminate spontaneously all traces of selfishness from our hearts and take care of people, especially the needy. Listening to the word of God should not awaken in us only emotional feelings but also lead us to concretely and effectively take responsibility of our suffering sisters and brothers. It is also to be borne in mind, as one of the lessons of today’s gospel reading, that it is on this side of life that we can effectively work out our salvation. After death, we would not be able to effect any change just as the rich in the gospel reading was incapable of achieving anything after death. As we have the opportunity now, let us earnestly use it so as to avoid any everlasting regrets in the future, beyond the grave. May we therefore in today’s Eucharistic celebration pray the good Lord to bestow on us all the graces we need to take care of our needy neighbours. Happy Sunday! +John I. Okoye.
(grafics by chukwubike)
