May we, in today's Eucharistic celebration, obtain the graces to live out our Baptismal commitments, thereby fulfill the obligations of the covenant relationship with God so as to be united with Him at the end of our lives. Happy Sunday!
DOCTRINE AND FAITH
(2 Maccabees 7,1-2.9-14; 2 Thessalonians 2,16-3,5; Luke 20,27-38: 32nd Sunday of the Year C, 2019)
In the first reading, 2 Maccabees 7,1-2.9-14, the deaths of these brothers are described in grisly/gruesome details. The reasons given for their murders leaves no doubt they are martyrs, faithful Israelites who died for their faith. Israel had strict dietary restrictions, which they traced back to the promulgation of the law given to Moses. They were forbidden from eating meat of animals that did not have cloven hoofs nor chew their cud (cf. Lev 11,7). Since pigs did not fit into this category, they were considered unclean animals and were forbidden as food. Fidelity to these laws, along with circumcision and the observance of the Sabbath, became an identifying characteristic of the Jews. Their rejection was considered apostasy. This is the issue treated in today’s reading. The king is demanding renunciation of their allegiance to God. Through one of the brothers who acts as spokesperson, the family refuses. The few words these brothers spoke constitute acts of faith. That was why they were put to death. As gruesome as the details of the martyrdom may be, the real point of this narrative is the faith in resurrection these brothers profess. Early Israel believed that justice would be accomplished in this life, either during the days of those directly involved or in the days of their descendants. The idea of individual reward or punishment became a major issue only after the experience of the Exile (cf. Ezek 18,1-32). Even then the people believed such justice would be served in this lifetime. This reading reflects the shift that took place in Israel's thinking around the time of the Maccabean revolt (ca. 167 B.C.). It was precisely, because of the martyrdom of the righteous that the theodicy (the vindication of divine providence in view of the existence of evil), the justice of God, became an issue. How could a righteous God allow the faithful to suffer injustices? Although, the Hebrew worldview and language did not provide the possibility to develop a concept of an afterlife, Hellenism did. The answer to the dilemma was sought in the idea of a life after this life. In this passage we find the beginnings of such faith. The words of the three brothers reflect various aspects or stages in the development of this concept. The first brother asserts that God, who is really the ruler of this world, regardless of what circumstances might suggest, will raise the faithful up to live again. The second is willing to be stripped of his tongue and his hands because he believes that his body will share in the resurrection. The third insists that only the righteous will be raised to life. These declarations reveal only a hint of the resurrection faith we have come to know. Its development will come in the future. However, it does provide an answer to the question of theodicy and is a form of encouragement for those who must face a similar ordeal.
The 2nd reading for this Sunday, 2 Thessalonians 2,16-3,5, is a composite. It includes a wish-prayer of encouragement for the Thessalonians (2,16-17), a request of the Thessalonians for prayer on Paul’s behalf (3,1-2), a prayer for encouragement (vv. 3-4), and a final benediction (v, 5). Paul's prayer for the Thessalonians is twofold. He prays for encouragement and strength. The first is an interior attitude; the second is the power needed for the external manifestation of that inner disposition. Having prayed for them, Paul now asks that they pray for him. However, the content of the prayer he requests is, significantly, different. He is not concerned with his own needs but with the progress of the gospel he preaches. He uses a dynamic image to describe this progress, that of a runner. It is not that the runner brings the gospel. Rather, Paul envisions the gospel itself as moving swiftly throughout the world and bringing glory (honour). In other words, Paul prays that the gospel be heard and respected, should move unimpeded wherever it goes. He appeals to the experience of the Thessalonians themselves. As he compliments them, thus strengthening them in their faith, he suggests that they are an example of the way the word of God can take root in the minds and hearts of people and transform their lives. This kind of compliment can go a long way in encouraging them. The second concern for which Paul would have them pray is his own deliverance from opposition. Here, he is less concerned with the consequences of the persecution in his own life than with how this may set up obstacles for the progress of the gospel. The faithless to whom he alludes are not identified. This is probably a very general reference to those who know about the good news but have closed their minds and hearts, who have even tried to undermine it. Paul does not doubt the goodwill of these Christians, but he knows from personal experience the weaknesses of human nature. For this reason he places his trust in the faithfulness of the Lord. It is Christ who will strengthen the believers; it is Christ who will be their protection against the forces of evil; it is Christ who will keep them on the path of righteousness, which they presently travel. To this end he pronounces a blessing. It is the love of God that will ground them in their faith; and the example of Christ’s endurance will enable them to persevere in their commitment. This is the essence of the prayer for which Paul prays.
The gospel reading, Luke 20,27-38, depicts Jesus in a theological contest with the Saduccees. They were a religio-political party that claimed to be descendants of Zadok, high priest at the time of David (cf. 2 Sam 8, 17). Although, originally they may have all been priests, such was probably not the case by the time of Jesus. They seem to have been a conservative, aristocratic group who cooperated with the Romans and enjoyed a certain amount of privilege as a result. Theologically, they only accepted what was actually written in the Bible as authentic. They were not like the Pharisees, who also revered the collection of oral traditions that grew out of interpretation of the written tradition. Thus they would not have believed in the resurrection or the existence of angels or demons, concepts treated in this gospel. In their attempt to disprove the possibility of resurrection, they resorted to ridicule, thereby demonstrating what they considered to be the foolishness of such belief. If a man died without leaving an heir, the ancient law made provisions for the continuation of his name and the inheritance of his property. His brother was to take the widow to wife in order that an heir be born for the dead man (cf. Deut 25,5-10). This is the custom referred to by the Saduccees. From this point of view their question points out the folly of the resurrection faith. In response, Jesus first draws a line of distinction between this age and the age to come. The age to come will not be like this age. Now, procreation is way through which life continues from one generation to another. In the next age, the conditions will be radically different and so will be the existence within it. There will be no death; all will be spiritual beings, like the angels. As children of God, they will have a share in the very nature of God. Jesus then employs a traditional Jewish method of argument. He refers to the narrative of Moses' encounter with God at the burning bush (cf. Exod 3,1-6). There, God claims to be the God of the chief male ancestors of the Jewish nation. The text has God say I am, not I was. The implication is that God is still the God of these ancestors. Therefore, the God of the Israelites is a God of the living, not of the dead. This means that, somehow, the ancestors are still alive. The very phrase offers an explanation of how this might be the case. They were all joined to God through the covenant. Jesus' interpretation claims that death does not sever the union the covenant forges. Unless they choose to terminate their covenant relationship, they continue to be united to God, even after death.
The readings of this Sunday invite us to look, briefly, at the question of resurrection and the character of the life we are to live in anticipation of or in fidelity to it. Both the readings from Maccabees and the passage from the gospel speak of resurrection. The first is a testimony of faith, the second demonstrates a measure of scorn that accompanies unbelief. Belief in resurrection is not the same as conviction of the immortality of the soul. The latter is based on the makeup of the human person; the former rests on God’s fidelity. The doctrine of resurrection is grounded in the concept of covenant, which claims that God has established a relationship with human beings. The issue is whether this relationship is severed by death. Is death powerful enough to break the ties that bind us in covenant, or is it God's desire that the covenant endure? The later traditions of the Bible, the place where this issue is addressed, clearly state that God's desire to be united with us is stronger than death. Since God is a God of the living, we believe our continued union with Him must unfold in some kind of life. The Sadducees insisted on understanding the next life as if it were merely a continuation of the present one. This was their error, the error Jesus corrected without reverting to the sarcasm they had employed. He does not say what this future life will be like. He simply states that it will be different. The social systems, the gender relationships, and the method of assuring the continuation of humankind will be radically transformed. If the future that awaits us is that of the resurrection, how are we to live until it dawns? Actually, it has already dawned at Christ’s resurrection. This is the eschatological hope in which we live by the grace given us from God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Our future is already present; therefore, we are called to live lives that have been radically transformed. However, the future has not yet completely dawned, and so we find ourselves living both in this age and in the age to come. Thus we live proleptically; we live future lives, but we live them in the present (in anticipation). As difficult as this may be, we have the eternal encouragement of Christ. We have the promise that the Lord will strengthen us and guard us. We have the instruction of our religious tradition that directs our minds and hearts. When we live lives of the future, we truly enable that future to dawn in the present. May we pray, in today’s Eucharistic celebration, for the graces to live out our baptismal commitments and thereby fulfil the obligations of the covenantal relationship with God which we entered into at our Baptism. +John I. Okoye
The readings of this Sunday invite us to look, briefly, at the question of resurrection and the character of the life we are to live in anticipation of or in fidelity to it. Both the readings from Maccabees and the passage from the gospel speak of resurrection. The first is a testimony of faith, the second demonstrates a measure of scorn that accompanies unbelief. Belief in resurrection is not the same as conviction of the immortality of the soul. The latter is based on the makeup of the human person; the former rests on God’s fidelity. The doctrine of resurrection is grounded in the concept of covenant, which claims that God has established a relationship with human beings. The issue is whether this relationship is severed by death. Is death powerful enough to break the ties that bind us in covenant, or is it God's desire that the covenant endure? The later traditions of the Bible, the place where this issue is addressed, clearly state that God's desire to be united with us is stronger than death. Since God is a God of the living, we believe our continued union with Him must unfold in some kind of life. The Sadducees insisted on understanding the next life as if it were merely a continuation of the present one. This was their error, the error Jesus corrected without reverting to the sarcasm they had employed. He does not say what this future life will be like. He simply states that it will be different. The social systems, the gender relationships, and the method of assuring the continuation of humankind will be radically transformed. If the future that awaits us is that of the resurrection, how are we to live until it dawns? Actually, it has already dawned at Christ’s resurrection. This is the eschatological hope in which we live by the grace given us from God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Our future is already present; therefore, we are called to live lives that have been radically transformed. However, the future has not yet completely dawned, and so we find ourselves living both in this age and in the age to come. Thus we live proleptically; we live future lives, but we live them in the present (in anticipation). As difficult as this may be, we have the eternal encouragement of Christ. We have the promise that the Lord will strengthen us and guard us. We have the instruction of our religious tradition that directs our minds and hearts. When we live lives of the future, we truly enable that future to dawn in the present. May we pray, in today’s Eucharistic celebration, for the graces to live out our baptismal commitments and thereby fulfil the obligations of the covenantal relationship with God which we entered into at our Baptism. +John I. Okoye
(graphics by Charles)
No comments:
Post a Comment