Sharing Our Bread!

(Homily 17^th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Yr. B)

     The readings of this Sunday are beaming with several themes and points for our reflection, however, adequate attention has to be taken in order not to be carried away by the miraculous multiplication in the first reading and in the gospel. Indeed, one of the major themes emanating from the readings is the bread that points symbolically to the Eucharist. More than that, we cannot remain only on the aspect of a miraculous and theological consideration of the “Bread” without adequate consideration of its anthropological implication. And as such, it is this anthropological implication of the Eucharist that opens the door to the second reading, for the miraculous multiplication and the sharing in the first reading and the gospel both point to the value of unity. Even though, the importance of the Eucharist cannot be undermined, but the Word of God of this Sunday is inviting us to pay more attention to the sharing of our bread, and this revitalizes the age long Christian call to unity. In all, the theme of unity as emergent in the second reading dovetails into that of the first reading and the Gospel: Bread-Eucharist. In a nutshell, the bread of one has to become the bread of all, and as such, the little boy of the gospel becomes for us, an exemplary figure.

     The first reading (2 Kgs. 4:42-44) from the second book of Kings is a prototype of the miraculous feedings in the gospels, especially in today’s narrative. It describes the generosity of one man from Baal-Shalishah, who gave Elisha 20 barley loaves. The prophet shared it among the hundred peoples. And upon a proper perusal, one notices a number of similarities between the passage of the first reading and that of the gospel thus: ●The provision of food to God’s people (man of God and the crowd), ●a specified amount of food, ●the objection of the food’s inadequacy, ●the man of God disregards the objection and commanded for the food to be distributed, ●the crowd ate to their fill and there was some left over. The responsorial psalm, especially in the second stanza connects the Old Testament reading and the Gospel, and once again the refrain further buttressed the common theme: “The Lord feeds us; he answers all our needs.”

     From this Sunday onward, for five Sundays in a row, we are going to listen to the gospel of John, the liturgy of the Church will abandon momentarily the gospel of Mark, which is the gospel of this liturgical year. We will be offered the opportunity to reflect precisely on the renowned sixth chapter, that presents Jesus as the “Bread of life”, through his words, immolation and the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist. The chapter begins with the miracle of the multiplication of bread and fish, which is not narrated with the same historical weight as in Mark (cf. 6:30-44). Rather St. John presents it as a sign that reveals the mystery of Christ. As we opined earlier the first reading serves as a background to the Gospel passage, we have seen a number of similarities in them. But however, in John there are further Christological and eschatological motifs, for instance the Eucharist and the messianic banquet. From the Eucharistic dimension, the gestures of Jesus are important: “took, gave thanks and distributed.” And from the Eschatological stand point, when the passage states that the multitude were filled, it is used elsewhere for messianic banquet. In the Johannine account, the feeding of the 5, 000 acquires several theological interpretations, therein Jesus is considered as the new Elijah, the feeding as a type of Eucharist and as a messianic banquet.

     Today in the Gospel (Jn. 6:1-15) we see another crowd, different from the crowd of the Gospel of last Sunday, even though this seems to be the continuation of last Sunday’s gospel. St. John tells us that this crowd followed Jesus because they have seen Jesus’ miracles of healing of the sick. Jesus went up to the hill, and he also discovered the crowd coming after Him. It was a solitary place and as such, it was obvious that there is no place to get food for that great number. But Jesus in His sensibility was the first to put the question to Philip “where can we buy enough food to feed all these people”? But that was to test Philip, because Jesus knew already what to do. Philip expressed that two hundred silver coins will not be sufficient to feed the crowd.  At this point Andrew cuts in “there is a boy with five loaves and two fish, but they will not be enough for this crowd”. This evangelical sensibility of Andrew is to be appreciated, this means to have a heart that sees. But in the reactions and responses of these two apostles it becomes glaring that in that circumstance it was humanly impossible to resolve the problem of feeding the crowd. And at this point, Jesus entered into action, he came into play, where human effort cannot arrive, Divine Providence does. Jesus commanded to make them sit down. Then, he made them to sit down, they were about 5,000 (without counting children and women), he collected the five loaves and two fish from the boy, gave thanks to God and distributed them to the people.

     Behold, one of the lessons emanating from this passage is the fact that this miracle reveals Jesus identity. Probably, the crowd remembered a similar miracle in the Old Testament and said “This is indeed the prophet who is to come into the world”, the promised Messiah. After the miracle the people recognized Jesus as the Messiah who is to come, not from a spiritual point of view, instead from a political point of view. But Jesus is not a political Saviour or one who has come to solve all their economic and physiological needs and problems. Little wonder, they wanted to make Him King by force. On seeing the miracle, they wanted to crown him King, they thought immediately of taking advantage of the whole situation, they desired for an immediate material gain, but Jesus didn’t allow himself to be conditioned by the desires, expectations and the apparent acclamation of the crowd. His major mission rather is to liberate humanity from the slavery of sin and from the power of darkness. This indeed, should serve as an example to our modern day prophets and preachers.

     This miracle is a prelude or an anticipation of the great miracle that Jesus will accomplish at the last Supper. The actions that he accomplishes here are the same he will accomplish in the cenacle during the institution of the Eucharist: “took the bread, gave thanks and distributed them”. The multiplication of bread and fish here is the anticipation of the Eucharistic bread. This miracle manifests God’s providence to his people, where man cannot arrive, God’s providence and omnipotence can, as it is revealed in Christ. Many a times we are troubled because of the many problems and hardships that torment us, sometimes we wonder if we can come out of them, rather we need to have trust in God and to wait for His help in patience. The two episodes in the two readings confirm an age long biblical truth that what is impossible to man, is possible to God (cf. Gen. 18:14; Jer. 32:17; Mt. 19:26; Lk. 1:37; Mk. 10:27).

     Be that as it may, the presence and reference to the boy with five loaves and two fish is revelative of the fact that in our journey of faith, in our encounter with God and in the reception of God’s blessings and favour, God does not substitute man, rather he uses him as an instrument, (the boy with the five loaves and two fish) God needs our collaboration to help us. For this St. Augustine opined: “God who made us without our help will not save us without our help”. On the other hand, the willingness and promptness of the boy in putting into action the words of Jesus he just heard with immediacy, cannot but propel us to become more generous and willing to share what we have, no matter how little. This episode calls our attention to the rediscovery of the value and task of solidarity with our brothers in need, for Jesus used the bread and fish of the little boy. He could have performed the miracle single-handedly, but he wants our cooperation, he wants a brother to help a brother.

     The second reading (Eph. 4:1-6) is taken from the second part of St. Paul’s letter to the Ephesians. The letter to the Ephesians could be divided into two parts, the first part: chapter 1-3 deal with doctrinal issues, chapter 4-6 are parenetical, that is, and they contain ethical exhortations. As such, the passage of today’s reading is the beginning of the parenesis. While the first part sets forth the theme of the unity of the Jews and Gentiles in the one body, the parenesis begins with an exhortation to unity. And that notwithstanding, the exhortation to unity points back to the theological foundation of that appeal. In that bid, the “ought” is based on the present reality, on the “is”. The Apostle affirms that there is one body, one spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all. Therein, the imperative to unity rests on the indicative, and as such, unity is both a gift and a task.

     St. Paul delineated some comportments “worthy” of the Christian vocation by listing a number of virtues that every disciple of Christ and every community of faith have to practice, and they are: lowliness and meekness, patience, forbearing one another in love and the task “to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (v.3). As a matter of fact, St. Paul derives the exhortation of the conduct of life worthy of the Christian vocation from his doctrine on the church, as a mystical body of Christ. The Church according to St. Paul is “one body” of which Christ is the Head, and the believers in Him are the members, and it is animated and vivified by one vital principle: The Holy Spirit. He gives it a theological undertone thus: “one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all” (v.6). Indeed from the foregoing, we see the reasons why Christians have to live in the unity of the Spirit, and in peace (cf. Eph. 2:14-17), for by means of his blood, Christ has “broken down the barrier which used to keep them apart” (Eph. 2:14) and “through Him, then, we both in the one Spirit have free access to the Father” (Eph. 2:18).

     Drawing the issue further, since the first reading and the gospel talked about the Eucharist in a latent and symbolic manner, and upon reflection on the second reading revolving around the theme of unity, we cannot but recognize the Eucharist as the sacrament of unity. Thus Eucharist and unity are the thread that runs through all the readings of today. Truly, we can show adequate understanding of the meaning of the Eucharist when we do away with our selfishness (like the little boy of the Gospel) and embrace unity and solidarity, for it is by sharing our own bread that we can become authentic sharers in the “bread of life” and in that eternal banquet. May God help us to become more generous and sensitive to the needs of others! May the Eucharistic Bread we share enliven the values of love and unity amongst us!! Amen!!!

(Fr. Vitus M.C. Unegbu, SC)

Like Sheep without a Shepherd!

(Homily 16^th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Yr. B)

                 The word of God this Sunday presents the gestures of the Good Shepherd as opposed to those of the wicked shepherds, who usurp the things meant for the sheep, especially as emanating from the first reading and the gospel. On a more practical terms, the epistle reading calls our consideration to what ought to be the outcome of the work and presence of the Good Shepherd in our midst, among members of the flock, and that is unity. For the Good Shepherd gathers his sheep together, in order to fend for them, he does not take care of them in division or separation. Be that as it may, this gesture of the Good Shepherd, places the theme of unity at an important position in today’s reflection. For we are not to talk or merely think about what the Good Shepherd does, but essentially we are to meditate on the outcome of the gestures of the Good Shepherd in our midst.

                  The first reading (Jer. 23:1-6) presents the political situation of the Israelites at a particular historical period. And therein, we see King Zedekiah who failed in his role as a leader. He listened to wrong advice and rebelled against the King of Babylon and thus he brought ruin on his people. For Nebuchadnezzar sent his armies against Jerusalem and reduced it to nothing. It was during this period and in this context that Jeremiah was called to be a prophet. Today’s first reading starts with God’s words addressed to the political leaders who were corrupt. And the prophet compares them to shepherds who lead their flocks to destruction. Jeremiah writes towards the end of the reign of Zedekiah, before the final captivity. Jeremiah did a sort of evaluation of the recent reigns and condemned the last Kings of Judah, he categorized them as Shepherds who misgoverned their flock. The fascinating point is that the denunciation of Jeremiah ends with the promise of a righteous Branch from the house of David, and that righteous branch will be the Messiah. Thus, the Prophet assures the people that God will not abandon them, he will take care of them and lead them back to their land. That He will raise from the house of David a wise King. And this prophecy was fulfilled beyond people’s expectation through Jesus, whose Kingdom is not of this world.

     In the Gospel (Mk. 6:30-34) periscope St. Mark focuses attention on the theme of shepherding, but with a mild tonality. In the passage, verses 30-33 serve as a link between the mission of the disciples and the feeding of the multitude, verse 34 opens a new periscope, the feeding of the multitude. While verse 32 introduces an important theme of Mark that is the teaching given in secret to the 12, even though the fulfilment of this is delayed until Chapter 8 (Caesarea Philippi). Mark often emphasizes on the teachings of Jesus without revealing the contents of his teaching.

     With respect to last Sunday’s gospel, in today’s gospel the attention is shifted from the missionary experience of the Apostles to that of shepherding. The apostles returned from their mission and they gathered around Jesus for evaluation and to recount to Him all that they have accomplished, “all they had done and taught”. And after listening to them empathically Jesus said to them: “come aside by yourselves to a deserted place and rest a while” (v.31). Jesus felt in their shoes and understood that they needed some moments to be alone with Him and to also rest. This supposed to serve for them as a moment of spiritual and physical revitalization. Spiritual because it was going to be a moment of intimate reunion with the Master and physical because it is also a time to regain strength after the fatigue of the first missionary experience. Then the gospel of Mark recounts that “they departed to a deserted place in the boat by themselves”, far from the multitude, the multitude traced them and even arrived there before them. As a result, the attempt of Jesus and the apostles to depart from the multitude was in vain. But upon seeing them Jesus was moved with compassion for them, because they were like sheep without shepherd. This indeed, could be termed the hit track of this passage. Jesus didn’t shun this attitude of the multitude, rather He seized the opportunity to nourish them with His words. Truly, the Good Shepherd feeds his sheep not only with mere food but also with the living Word of God.

     A thorough reflection on this gospel narrative reveals that the drama of this passage revolves around three major characters: the apostles, Jesus and the multitude.

●The Apostles: they were conscious of the need to go from the Master and also to return to Him. This reminds us of the need for a constant contact with Jesus. The apostles recognized their need of Him. Those of us that are preachers of the Word, how often do we make this dual movement, from him and back to Him? We can’t do without Him, really the author of the letter to the Hebrews captured it vividly well when he made the spiritual clarion call thus: “Let us keep our eyes fixed on Jesus, who leads us in our faith and brings it to perfection” (Heb. 12:2). How often do we go to Him to tell Him ALL THI NGS as they did? Remember a servant is not greater than His Master.

●Jesus: Jesus proved himself to be the “princeps pastorum”, as St. Peter called Him, “the Chief Shepherd” (1Pt. 5:4). Jesus in His quality as the Chief Shepherd cares for both the multitude and His future shepherds. Jesus in this gospel appears like an ideal Bishop, who finds time to be with His clergy, without of course forgetting the rest of his flock (these are the two fundamental moments of Jesus’ pastoral activity). He is ever ready to leave everything to go and meet His flock, especially the stranded and those without orientation. He is a compassionate Shepherd, a compassionate God! He is not insensible and indifferent to human plight. In all, in the gospel we see the two distinguishing qualities of Jesus: Compassion (to the multitude) and Tenderness (to the apostles who just returned from their first missionary exploit).

●The Multitude: who went in search of Jesus and his apostles. This crowd did not follow them because they were fed with bread, as it was the case in the gospel of John (6: 26), they did not come for selfish interest. Rather because they had no one to go to or to take care of them. So they went to Jesus, and He gave them hope. When we are disoriented and confused where do we go? Whom do we run to? The multitude of today’s gospel teaches us to go to the Chief Shepherd, who is ever ready to attend to us, even ever ready to forget the already programmed rest with his apostles in order to attend to the need of the rest of His flock. Therefore, we can say that the Good Shepherd goes in search of the sheep, likewise, a good sheep also has to go in search of the Shepherd. This indeed, remains a vital lesson for both pastors (priests) and the lay faithful.

     In the concluding part of the gospel, Christ teaches his flock through his word, “for they were like sheep without a Shepherd”. This gesture for St. Mark is an essential function of the Shepherd. In the responsorial psalm, the Good Shepherd also prepares a banquet for his flock (as in stanza 3). Thus, this points to the twofold manifestation of the Good Shepherd, He nourishes his flock not only with his Words, but He equally prepares a banquet for them. A Shepherd who has human welfare at heart.

     The second reading (Eph. 2:13-18) is a presentation of the unity wrought by Jesus through His Words and Events. Jesus broke down all barriers that kept people apart, he united the people by destroying the law of division between the Israelites and pagans. He reconciled them with God, and with each other. Are you reconciled with God and with your neighbour? As Christians we are called to live and witness this unity and peace among us. Sometimes we are divided among ourselves, in all, we are called to show that the love of God can break down these walls. What is the barrier that divides us today? Why do we see each other as enemy? How do we forget so easily that “He made us, we belong to Him, his people, the Sheep of His flock” (Ps. 100:3). Indeed, the consciousness of the beginning of our existence from Him, the awareness that we belong to Him and that we are part of one sheepfold ought to propel us to embrace the value of universal fraternity. It ought to create unity amongst us, for we cannot belong to the same sheepfold and yet live in disharmony.

     Above all, our reflection on shepherds was provoked by the words of prophet Jeremiah in the first reading, and it started rather with a threatening tone against shepherds who lead the flock to ruin, and for that, God promised an Upright King and Shepherd that will emerge from the house of David. And this promise was fulfilled in the person of Jesus, the Chief Shepherd, who not only came to take care of the flock but also to ensure that the members of the flock are one and to reconcile them with the Father, with each other and with themselves. May our uniting force spring from our love of the Good Shepherd, who nourishes us physically and spiritually. May He the Good Shepherd continue to come to our aid when we are weighed, confused and have no one to go to! Amen!!!

(Fr. Vitus M.C. Unegbu, SC)

Nomads of The Good News!

(Homily 15^th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Yr. B)

     The first reading and the gospel are suggestive of the theme on mission, and in particular the gospel brings down the discourse to the mission of the Church. And in the Church’s mission what counts is not merely the apparent success or failure, but the church’s fidelty to the gospel message. Amos was not that successful at Bethel and the 12 were warned of a possible rejection. In the Old Testament, God was sending his prophets to the people of Israel, this was the case of Amos. And in the New Testament, Jesus Christ sends his twelve apostles for the first apostolic mission. Jesus in the Mission to spread the Good News call us to become nomads of His love message, nomads of the Good News. Similarly, St. Paul treads the same line in the second reading and reminds us of our election before creation, and our primordial mission “to be holy and blameless before Him”. Interestingly, while the first reading talks about the prophetic mission, and the gospel talks about the apostolic mission and thus the mission of the church, the second reading instead tailors down the theme of mission to the personal level.

     The first reading (Am. 7:12-15) presents the disagreement between two figures: Amaziah (a chief priest of the temple in Bethel, who was also at the service of the King), and Amos (a simple prophet, rich in faith and courageous too). The disagreement took place in the locality of Bethel, in the northern Jewish kingdom. Amos comes from the Southern Kingdom. Even though he admired  riches and wellbeing in the north, but he was not seduced or carried away by those things, because in the midst of riches, wellbeing and economic breakthrough Amos was also able to see some other factors: injustice, prostitution and exploitation of the poor. He couldn’t keep quiet and watch injustice flourish. Prior to the arrival of Amos, Jeroboam II was the King, and he has brought his people to a high economic level (even though this was apparent, because the poor were continuously exploited). Apparently too, their religion seem to flourish, their shrines are always full of pilgrims, also the King was very religious, as he pays the priests. Even their religion that seemed to flourish was only limited to mere observance, it never transformed their lifes.

     On his arrival, Amos raised his voice against their misdeeds. Their apparent economic progress was fruit of the injustice meted out to the poor, while their so called religiosity was mere esteriority and inconsistency between what is preached and what is lived. Amos couldn’t tolerate nor allow himself to be silenced, he spoke up. For this, Amaziah the chief priest was terrified, he imagined what could be the reaction of the King if he comes to know of this. Then, he wanted to silence Amos. He denounced Amos to the King and then cautions him directly “Seer, go away to the land of Judah, and eat bread their and prophesy there, but never prophesy again at Bethel” (v.12). But the reply of Amos was very interesting, “I am not a prophet, nor do I belong to a prophetic brotherhood. I am merely a herdsman and dresser of sycamore-figs” (v.14). He was not intimidated by Amaziah with such words. Amos prophesied doom on the King who allowed injustice in his kingdom and few years later Jeroboam died. In the person of the chief priest, we see a religiosity that is a slave to power and as such was subject to compromization. He domesticated religion, and refused to see or to speak against evil. In the person of Amos instead we see an authentic religiosity, exercised in freedom and anticonformism. Where do we belong? To the group of Amos or the group of Amaziah? (those who stand for the truth, those that see evil and call it evil or those who shy away from denouncing evil, and as such they denounce good instead of evil as Amaziah did). Do our religious practices change our life and influence positively the life of those around us (Amos) or we use it to paper over the crack (Amaziah) and to become resistant to truth? Today, if we look around we see many men of God, and the number of churches continues to increase with unimaginable names. Yet, we still have to ask ourselves how many are in the line of Amos and how many in the line of Amaziah?

     The gospel pericope of Mark today (Mk. 6:7:13) narrates the episode of the mission ad gentes and intra gentes of the apostles. In his gospel, Mark is very much interested in the twelve. Even though they are sometimes presented in a negative way, of being blind and incapable of perceiving the mystery of Jesus and his mission (cf. Mk. 9:19). However, in this context they are presented in a positive light; for they were handed over the same message and mission as the Master himself. Upon proper perusal into this passage we see a number of particularities imbeded in the injunctions and instructions of Jesus. First, Jesus ordered his apostles to go in twos, not one, one. This indeed denotes that the first message that the apostles bring is togetherness, communion and love. Second, He ordered them not to take nothing for the journey except a staff. A staff to lean on when physically tired on the journey, and a friend to lean on when in need of communion. Third, he further ordered them to take no bread, no bag, no money, but to were sandals and not to put on two tunics, here is as if Jesus tells his apostles you will be nourished by your trust in God, who will provide for you, and trust in men, who will open their houses. Indeed, Jesus wants us to becomes nomads of his love, nomads of his Good News of Salvation. In the instructions of Jesus, I see what could be classified today as the rules for evangelists, indeed rules of authentic evangelism.

     St. Mark in his gospel not only reminds us of this episode, but he equally indicated the conditions to be a true prophet of God, free and without compromisation. Three are the conditions: ●Unconditional fidelity to God who calls and sends, to proclaim His Words even when it brings discomfort. ●Fidelity to man, because Jesus sends them to liberate man from the dominions of Satan and evil, to promote the dignity of man in its two manifestations of the corporal and the spiritual dimensions. ●Detachment from worldly things and self-abnegation, to confide not in human means but in the power of God. And upon adherence to this conditions, the closing verse of the passage says: “And they cast out many devils, and anointed many sick people with oil and cured them” (Mk.6:13).

     Drawing the issue further, still reflecting on todays readings we want to grapple with the questions of who, how and what, with reference to God’s call and mission.

►In the Old testament WHO does God call, who does He send to mission as a prophet? He sends simple and common people, a classical example is Amos, a herdsman and a dresser of sycamore trees. In the New testament Jesus chooses and sends fishermen, simple and common people, there He calls all who are ready to make a space for God in their lifes.

►HOW did God send His prophets of old to Israel and how did Jesus send His apostles to the world? In the Old Testament the prophets were sent, only armed with the message from God. Jesus sent them disarmed, rather they are armed with the Word and Providence of God. Jesus accompanies his people with the power of His Spirit. Jesus told His apostles not to carry anything with them. Their major concern is the message they are sent to proclaim. Even though, it does appear that Jesus was more interested in the modality of the proclamation of the Good News, than in the contents.

►The question of WHAT has to do with the contents of the message. What message were they to proclaim in God’s name? In the Old testament the prophets, and in the context of today’s first reading Amos called back the attention of the people to fidelity to divine promises. While in the gospel the apostles are to preach about conversion. Conversion which means change of mentality and a return to God and the observance of His laws.

     In the two readings we see a common fate in stock for the prophets of God and for the Apostles of Christ. In the first reading, Amos was sent away and sent back to his place of origin, “Seer, go away to the land of Judah, and eat bread their and prophesy there, but never prophesy again at Bethel” (v.12). And in many occasions in the gospel Jesus told his apostles: “In the world you will have hardship, but be courageous; I have conquered the world” (Jn. 16:33), “You will be universally hated on account of my name” (Mt. 10:22a). But why this fate? It is simply because the prophets and the apostles have to speak ‘in the name of God’, not for human interests. They are to bring or disseminate a message that contradicts the spirit and the mentality of the world. Thus, it is a discomforting message for many! Yet, the prophets and the apostles are called to proclaim the message in and out of season.

     In all, the mission of the prophets, of the apostles, of Christ himself, has been entrusted to the Church, which comprises all the baptized, but in particular to the Pope, Bishops and priests. Therefore, predicated upon our baptism, God calls us all to proclaim the Good news, and we are called to do this with courage and convinction, without looking back. He calls us to be ready to bear the criticisms that may arise from the mission, or from the reactions that the mission may provoke or from the hostility that one can encounter. God’s prophetic mission and Jesus’ apostolic mission are missio ad gentes and missio intra gentes. A mission to the people and a mission to experience and live with and in the midst of the people. We as God’s children are sent by God to preach, not by mere words, but necessarily with our deeds.

     Above all,  St. Paul reminds us in the second reading (Eph. 1:3-14) that we first existed in God’s mind, because even before the foundation of the world He has already started lavishing His blessings on us. And St. Paul here reawakens in us the consciousness of our primordial mission, to be holy and blameless before God. In the words of Pope Francis we have to preach with words only when it is necessary. On the other hand, it reminded us of our filial dignity as sons and daughters in and through Christ, who redeemed us through his blood. Dear friends in Christ, let us pray and ask God, through His Son to continue to bless and protect all the ministers of the Good News. May they never be weighed down by criticisms, rejection and discrimination. May our lives become existential Good news, that others may emulate. For if we hear the words of truth and believe in Him, we also will be sealed with the promise of the Holy Spirit who is the Guarantee of our inheritance (Eph. 1:14).

(Fr. Vitus M.C. Unegbu, SC)

Where Did He Get That Power?

(Homily 14^th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Yr. B)

     One of the painstaking questions of the New Testament does not only revolve around the origin and person of Jesus Christ, but also around the source of His power and the mighty works that he accomplishes. And many a time, man’s incapacity to unravel the mystery behind this question has plunged him into hostility and incredulity towards his person, his works and teachings. Often, it is has been asked, “Who is he?  “What kind of man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey him” (Mt.8:27). “Who can this be? Even the wind and the sea obey him” (Mk.4:41). “Who can this be? That gives orders to winds and waves and they obey” (Lk. 8:25). But of all, the book of exodus captured the response and the personality and work of Jesus, with rather an affirmative question thus: “who is like the Lord” (Ex. 15:11). It is a question that presupposes admiration and acceptance, a question devoid of hostility and incredulity. However, in today’s gospel specifically, the question shifted from who is he? (to) where does his power come from? (Mk.6:2). They failed to understand that “in Him dwells the fullness of divinity” (Col.2:9), and yet he is the perfect man! And his kinsmen confronted with his power, listening to the marvels of his words, enjoying his teachings, seeing him there inside there synagogue, full of majesty, full of dignity, full of divinity, full of humanity and full of Spirit, they did not accept Him, in their unbelieving minds, it could not be him. He was really too much for them!

     The first reading (Ez. 2:2-5) presents the theme of rejection and incredulity in the prophetic experience of Ezekiel. As a matter of fact, the choice of this reading must have been influenced by the gospel which presents Jesus as a prophet rejected by his own kinsmen. In a similar vein, Ezekiel was sent to his own people and was warned of the possibility of being rejected by them. In this passage, while entrusting Ezekiel the prophetic mission among the Israelites exiled in Babylon, God didn’t promise him success and prestige, rather he said to him “Son of man, I am sending you to the Israelites, to the rebels who have rebelled against me…because they are stubborn and obstinate children” (Ez. 2:3-4). (As an oversight, in this passage the title “son of man” simply means man, it is not a messianic title. It denotes a man, human bearer of the divine message). From the historical-spiritual standpoint, we can say that the history of Israel is a history of incredulity and infidelity before God. Incredulity before God and the prophets, “They and their ancestors have been in revolt against me up to the present day” (v.3). The major problem is that, the people of Israel failed to enter into the project of God. They found it difficult to remain faithful to Him, because their immediate interest is in contrast with God’s project, theirs was an experience of rise and fall. However, in the midst of this human infidelity, incredulity and obstinacy, the word of God re-assured us that God realizes his plan of salvation: “whether they listen or not, this tribe of rebels will know there is a prophet among them” (v.5). In all, God continues to send his messengers to the chosen people as a sign of his merciful love, for he is a faithful God, and what He says He will do, He does!

     Similarly, in the gospel of Mark (Mk. 6:1-6), the theme of incredulity is quite predominant. Jesus is now with a great fame as a miracle worker and a crowd puller. After his prodigious work in many towns and villages, Jesus turns to his people in Nazareth, but he was not favorably welcomed. In fact, in the Lukan account he was completely unsuccessful there, and almost lost his life (Lk. 4:28-29). John in the prologue affirmed “He came to his own, but they didn’t accept him” (Jn.1:11). Jesus himself, upon consideration of this hostility in his own town, voiced out thus: “a prophet is despised only in his own country, among his own relations and in his own house” (Mk.6:4). Therein, it is not the incredulity of the Scribes and the Pharisees, the eloquent adversaries of Jesus, but that of his kinsmen. In fact, the evangelist noted that as a result of their hostility and incredulity, “he could do no mighty works there, except that he laid his hands upon a few sick people and healed them” (v.5). And Jesus “marveled because of their unbelief” (v.6). They admired his teaching and power, yet they were unable to recognize who He really is, for in their eyes he was ‘too simple’ to be the Messiah. For us today, we are called not to remain admirers of Jesus and his gracious teachings. The fact remains that to believe in Jesus also entails the capacity to overcome the ‘scandal’ of his being God and man.

     As emanating from the passage of the gospel of Mark, it is comprehensible that the Jews were expecting the Messiah, but they were waiting for Him in their own way, in a way different from the design of God the Father. And within the framework of today’s reflection, we can’t but read again and appropriate the words of Prophet Isaiah: “for my thoughts are not your thoughts and your ways are not my ways, declares Yahweh. For as the heavens are as high above earth as my ways are above your ways, my thoughts above your thoughts” (Is. 55:8-9). They had an idea of salvation very much different from God’s plan and project on humanity. In their conception, the Messiah has to be a mysterious personage, from an unknown origin, extraordinary, powerful, victorious over his enemies and a restorer of Israel, even from political standpoint. But in the person of Jesus, the people of Nazareth, his people saw none of the above qualities in him. Instead, they saw him as a normal/common person, who they know very much of his background. But this unfortunately is a one-sided knowledge. They claim to know him very well, to be a son of the carpenter, the son of Mary. But they failed to recognize that he was like them but at the same time he supersedes them, not to talk of accepting and considering him as the Messiah and the Son of God.

     Be that as it may, they found it difficult to believe that he is the One sent by God, the promised Messiah. As such, they marveled over the wisdom and the profundity of the words with which he explained the Scriptures in the Synagogue, and for his fame as a healer and miracle worker and thus they questioned: “where did the man get all this? What is this wisdom that has been granted him, and these miracles that are worked through him?” (v.2). But unfortunately, they couldn’t go beyond this. The striking point is the fact that God has chosen a different way to realize his project of salvation of the world. He desired that His Son, will become man, will be borne by a woman, live, suffer and die like every other man. God therefore chose the way of weakness and fragility, and not that of power; he chose the way of poverty and not that of richness; he chose the way of humiliation and death on the cross and not that of success and glory. This indeed is the parlance and logic of God, that some of the Jews and even men and women of our time have failed to understand and welcome. In that bid, therefore, St. Mark intends to tell us that Jesus was not merely a successful miracle worker tout court. Even his miraculous works and prodigies led to his rejection and death.

    What a contrasting story, the countrymen of Jesus failed to recognize Him as the Messiah, basically because of our humanity that he assumed (in order to save mankind), just because he looked like and was one of them, they claim to know him all! Ridiculous indeed that the very instrument for the salvation of mankind became for the same man, the reason for the repudiation of the Savior. Even today it is not surprising to see those scandalized of Jesus, those who find it difficult to believe in his divinity, upon too much concentration on his humanity. The mystery of incarnation of the Son of God remains always, in all times a great motive of and for scandal. Indeed, what scandalizes man is not the hierarchical divine affirmation of the existence of a superior reality, but the surprising proclamation that such a reality has entered into time and history, that the divine is united with the human. Be that as it may, the incredulity of the people of Nazareth is a representation of the incredulity that has accompanied this great mystery in the history of man, for more than over two thousand years ago. However, from the ecclesial point of view, we may well affirm that the humanity of Christ today can be likened to the Church, which Christ has wanted as a community of salvation, and drawing the issue further, the humanity of Jesus can equally be the persons Christ has called to lead his church (Pope, Bishops and Priests) with their limits and defects. Again, from the anthropological standpoint, the humanity of Jesus can be the suffering humanity, those abandoned and rejected.

     Notwithstanding all these, today Jesus invites us to go beyond mere appearance, and to really see in Him the Son of God, not just the Son of Mary, to recognize his divine origin, not only his earthly birth. What is required of us is a firm trust in God, to believe truly that His grace is sufficient for us. Our lack of trust and incredulity can be an obstacle for the realization of God’s project, remember Jesus didn’t perform any miracle in his home town because of their incredulity.

     Again, the second reading (2Cor. 12:7-10) offers us a plausible interpretative key to understanding the divine gestures, the way of overcoming the ‘scandal’ that is provoked by the humanity of Jesus, especially from the point of view of his fragility. Historically, this passage was written at the pick of Paul’s controversy over the false apostles who sort to undermine his influence among the Corinthians. St. Paul in his own way had the experience of this scandal. From one point he is a convert, drawn by Christ, he had extraordinary mystic experiences (vv.1-6), however, on the other hand, he encountered incomprehension and hostility, internally and externally, he talked about the “thorn in his flesh”. This indeed is not temptations to carnal pleasures as some have interpreted it. In fact, while some have interpreted the thorn of flesh to be a chronic ailment, others interpreted it better to be a sort of a chronic depression. This is to be understood only as an afflicting presence that the apostle himself prayed the Lord three times that it might depart and verse 10 could throw more light to this. He prayed three times to God to be liberated from it, but the Lord answered him “My grace is enough for you: for power is at full stretch in weakness” (v.9). Indeed, human fragility becomes a privileged place that the power of God is manifested. St. Paul understood this, and entered into the logic of God, to the point that he later boasted of his weaknesses, “and that is why I am glad of weaknesses, insults, constraints, persecutions and distress for Christ’s sake. For it is when I am weak that I am strong” (v.10). We can equally arrive at this conviction of faith. In the moment of our fragility and humanness, that is the great moment to entrust ourselves to God, we can draw strength from the word of God: “No, God chose those who by human standards are fools to shame the wise; he chose those who by human standards are weak to shame the strong, those who by human standards are common and contemptible-indeed those who count for nothing-to reduce to nothing all those that do count for something” (1Cor. 1:27-28). St. Paul truly, in this passage charted a way for us on how to deal with depression and weakness, in such a manner that it drives a Christian to use it positively, by reliance and trust on God’s grace, from which he finds strength in weakness.

     Above all else, beloved in Christ, we pray for the manifestation of Christ’s power and miracle in our lives, may our weaknesses not stand as a stumbling block in our encounter with Christ, so that His grace will be made manifest in us and we may be able to recognize Him truly as the Savior of mankind! Amen!!

(Fr. Vitus M.C. Unegbu, SC)