Forgiveness Without Borders!

 (Homily 24^th Sunday in Ordinary Time Yr-A)

     The readings of today center on the necessity of forgiveness in our rapport with God and with our brothers and sisters. The call and emphasis on forgiveness is grounded upon the fact that we are recipients of God’s mercy, and that we live under the forgiveness of God. The word “forgiveness” abounds in the readings of this Sunday. First of all, it talked about the forgiveness that God gives: “And the servant’s Master felt so sorry for him that he let him go and cancelled the debt” (Mt. 18:27). Interestingly, the first reading talks of fraternal forgiveness, as a necessary condition for divine forgiveness: “pardon your neighbor any wrongs done to you, and when you pray, your sins will be forgiven” (Sir. 28:2). Thirdly, the evangelist talks about forgiveness without limits: “Then Peter went up to him and said, Lord, how often I must forgive my brother if he wrongs me? As often as seven times? Jesus answered, Not seven, I tell you, but seventy-seven times” (Mt. 18:21-22). Thus, we may well affirm that the measure of forgiveness is to forgive without measure. Above all, St. Paul in the second reading presents the motive of forgiveness, which is nothing but our belongingness to the Lord, for this he says: “For none of us lives for himself…while we are alive, we are living for the Lord” (Rm. 14:7-8). Indeed, forgiveness makes the impossible possible, it transcends the human logic. It is the life of heaven on earth. 

     The teaching of the first reading (Sir. 27:30-28-7) on the theme of forgiveness is close to the New Testament’s parlance on forgiveness. In this passage the sacred author not only placed the forgiveness of one’s neighbour as a necessary condition for God’s forgiveness, but he equally led bare the human condition of createdness: “remember the end of your life, and cease from enmity”. This is a reminder that we are pilgrims on earth and as such hatred and enmity are obstacles in our journey to the Promised Land. In synthesis, the central message of this passage is that it is in pardoning that we are pardoned. With the various questions the author raised on the reason we have to forgive others he led us to true introspection. Just like the Psalmist we cannot but say: “If you O Lord should mark our guilt who would survive (Ps. 130:3). Elsewhere, the Psalmist entered into a spiritual bargain with God, for he does not want to be only a recipient of God’s forgiveness he wanted to be a teacher too (object and subject): “Give me back the joy of your salvation; sustain in me a generous spirit. I shall teach the wicked your paths, and sinners will return to you” (Ps. 51:12-13).

     In the Gospel passage (Mt. 18:21-35) on the parable of the unforgiving servant, which is only found in the Gospel of Mathew, we see the typical phrase of St. Mathew: “My heavenly Father” (v. 35). At the heart of the parable is the rebuke of the refusal to show mercy on the part of those who have received mercy from God. The radicality of the moral of the Gospel is measured on the word pardon or forgiveness. It is a divine invitation that surpassed and overcome the famous lex talionis (law of retaliation) of the Old Testament: “Anyone who injures a neighbor shall receive the same in return, broken limb for broken limb, eye for eye, and tooth for tooth. As the injury inflicted, so will be the injury suffered” (Lv. 24:19-20). But Jesus brought about a revolution with his novelty on forgiveness. “You have heard how it was said: Eye for eye and tooth for tooth. But I say this to you: offer no resistance to the wicked. On the contrary, if anyone hits you on the right cheek, offer him the other as well” (Mt. 5:38-39). The Gospels are full of stories of the forgiving attitude of Jesus: on the cross (Lk. 23:34); to the penitent thief (Lk. 23:43). Peter, having seen Jesus forgive others, and having experienced it in his own life, asks if there can be any limit to forgiveness. Jesus gives an answer to emphasize God's total love for his people. Jesus narrated the parable of the two debtors not just to illustrate the modalities of forgiveness, but instead to affirm its urgency and necessity. Therein we have three contexts: the master and the servant, the servant and his fellow servant, and again, the master and the servant. The master cancelled the debts of that servant, the debt of ten thousand talents. This reveals the enormity of man’s debt before God. Then what has man to give God in return? We have to show forgiveness to others as we have experienced it from God. For this the master said: “Were you not bound, then, to have pity on your fellow-servant just as I have pity on you? (v. 33). I think this is the pivot of this passage. We are to pardon or forgive because we have been forgiven by God.

     Furthermore, in that passage Jesus teaches us in concrete terms, that we are all debtors before God, and this debt exceeds all the human possibility of payment. It is a debt we cannot pay. I remember the popular lyrics by Ellis J. Crum:

He paid a debt He did not owe

I owed a debt I could not pay

I needed someone to wash my sins away

And now I sing a brand new song

Amazing Grace

Christ Jesus paid a debt that I could never pay.

In God there is always space for pardon, acceptance and re-acceptance, and that is how he pays our impossible debt. Jesus gives us wonderful example of forgiveness in and with the figure of the Master in the Parable. And Jesus Christ is in person, the concrete expression of that parabolic Master, He says “Father, forgive them; they do not know what they are doing” (Lk. 23:34). The most grievous debt of man before God is that of sin, the spiritual and moral retrogression and stagnancy before God’s designs and abandonment of God. God out of justice can leave man in his sinful actions, but He does not; rather He approaches man with mercy and forgiveness instead of justice. As in that parable, He “felt so sorry for him that he let him go and cancelled the debt” (Mt. 18:27).          However, in the parlance of God, pardon begets pardon, the one who has experienced pardon from God, is called to carry out this divine gesture. Here, the person becomes an object and a subject of God’s forgiveness; in the measure he or she is able to give to others what he has received from God. In the passage of today’s Gospel more than any other place, man is called to be a collaborator and a dispenser of Divine Mercy and forgiveness. To pardon those that offended us and to receive pardon from the ones we have offended is the attitude that God expects from us. Interestingly, if God calls us to become subjects of his forgiveness and mercy, it suffices to say that the Church has to be a house of Pardon and a house of Mercy. The Church is the house and the instrument of God’s Mercy, and the sacrament of reconciliation is an existential experience of it.

     Again, what we are called to embrace is a generous pardon, without limits and measures, remember the word of God says “seventy times seven”. It therefore, has to be a pardon that has its inspiration from the pardon received from God. For this, the parabolic master asked: “Were you not bound, then, to have pity on your fellow-servant just as I had pity on you?” (Mt. 18:33). As we read in the first reading, it is pardon or forgiveness that God wanted as a condition for us to be pardoned, “pardon your neighbor any wrongs done to you, and when you pray, your sins will be forgiven” (Sir. 28:2). The pardon or forgiveness we are talking about here has to be motivated by the filial sentiment that a Christian does not belong to himself, rather he belongs to the Lord. For this we have to hearken to the voice of St. Paul in the second reading, to know how to pardon from the heart (Rom. 14: 5-9). As such, it is a pardon that endures in time, leaving out every form of rancor, retaliation and resentment. For “if anyone nurses anger against another, can one then demand compassion from the Lord?” (Sir. 28:3).

     Forgiveness in the human eyes and logic is scandalous, because it requires conversion from the one who suffered the pain and not from the one who committed it. Notwithstanding, we must admit that forgiveness drains the poison and heals the wounds that rancor and hatred create in the human heart, it brings peace. It creates new hearts and new minds. We need to forgive and ask for forgiveness, for we hurt others and others hurt us. Forgiveness is necessary to maintain a healthy relationship and sincere love, be it, in the family, in the Church, in the work or business places and in our society at large. When forgiveness is sincere, it renews and becomes a factor for growth in love. Jesus himself observed this in the house of Simon: “There was once a creditor who had two men in his debt; one owed him five hundred denarii, the other fifty. They were unable to pay, so he let them both off. Which of them will love him more? Simon answered, the one who was let off more, I suppose” (Lk.7:41-43).

     Humanly speaking, sometimes we find out that pardon or forgiveness is indeed tasking, difficult, and to some even impossible, for at times you hear expressions like: “over my dead body”, “I will never”. Of course, there is no gainsaying the fact that pardoning sincerely from the heart is sometimes very difficult, but not impossible. Once again, as we have seen in the readings of today, pardon is repeated like a refrain, as a condition to receive God’s pardon. And each time I or we pray the Lord’s Prayer, it reminds me of this evangelical truth. The Gospel with that parable of the two servant-debtors exemplified this. To the question of Peter: how many times will my brother offend me, seven times? In the parlance of Peter (the human parlance) seven times is already much. But Jesus responded No; I tell you seventy times seven, which entails forgiving always. For a true Christian there should be no limit, no measure and no condition to pardon or forgiveness. To forgive does not necessary mean to forget. One can pardon, but does not succeed in removing it from his or her memory. To forget or to cancel a wrong received from one’s memory is not within our power. But to forgive, Yes! To bear grudges, Yes! Because they depend on our will. To pardon, also does not mean keeping quiet to injustice and overlooking wicked and evil actions, we have to continue to fight for justice.

     On the other hand, one can argue that if we pardon in order to be pardoned by God, then we pardon because of our own interest, even though one may say that it is an egoistic interest. But this type of question springs from the human logic. But the most profound motive is found in the responsorial psalm: “He (God) forgives all your offences, cures all your diseases. He redeems your life from the abyss, crowns you with faithful love and tenderness… He (God) does not treat us as our sins deserve, nor repay us as befits our offences. As the height of heaven above the earth, so strong is his faithful love for those who fear him. As the distance of east from west, so far from us does he put our faults” (Ps. 103:2-4; 10-12). This instead should be the real profound reason and interest for pardon and mercy, the imitation of our heavenly Father, for this St. Mathew says “Be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Mt. 5:48). And St. Luke treading the same line of Mathew admonished, “Be compassionate just as your Father is compassionate” (Lk. 6:36). The Beatitudes equally resonates the fact: “Blessed are the merciful, they shall have mercy shown them” (Mt.5:7). In the words of St. Augustine, we pardon in order to imitate the goodness and the mercy of God, to imitate his divine benevolence and comprehension, being conscious of the fact that like us, our brothers who offend us or err are poor, miserable, conditioned by many human factors and limitations. Secondly, in the parlance of St. Paul, the motive of this pardon is our belongingness to the Lord: “For none of us lives for himself…while we are alive, we are living for the Lord” (Rm. 14:7-8).

     The virtue and value of forgiveness were so much important and necessary in the preaching of Jesus that he presented a case where reconciliation and forgiveness worth more than our sacrifices or offerings: “If you are bringing your offering to the alter and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your offering there before the altar, go and be reconciled with your brother first, and then come back and present your offering” (Mt. 5:23-24). We must admit that forgiveness is a hard virtue to gain and maintain, and the difficulty can be felt in the question of Peter: “How many times must I forgive?” Forgiveness is not merely a question of how often or how many times, rather it reflects God's unending readiness to pardon us. There are no limits to His forgiveness. Today, as we hear these words of Jesus, we are like those who are bringing their offerings to the altar, to us therefore, the words of Jesus resounds and re-echoes: “go and be reconciled”. May these words accompany us as we go back home this morning and may Jesus give us the grace to be able to practice it. Lord Jesus enlighten our minds and enlarge our hearts, give us a big and a generous heart, that is ready to forgive always, in imitation of You, the manifestation of the Father’s Merciful Love. Amen!

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

Brotherly Correction: A Show Of Love, Not Self-Righteousness!

 (Homily 23^rd Sunday in Ordinary Time Yr-A)

     The message of this Sunday presents two gems of fraternal correction and love within the context of a community or at the interpersonal level. The three readings above all else, are concerned with the obligations those within the believing community owe to each other. In that bid, we see that the first reading and the Gospel passage lay emphasis on fraternal correction, although from different dimensions. We may say that the first reading is about fraternal correction from the outside, while the Gospel is from the inside. In the first reading, fraternal correction from the outside, it is a member of the community (Ezekiel) who corrects the faults of others, which has nothing to do with him, it is part of the prophetic calling as commissioned by God. Then, the other dimension of correction as seen in the Gospel, from the inside, springs up as the result of the interpersonal or faith relationships and rapport between two persons and as such, has to lead to reciprocal forgiveness. As a matter of fact, brotherly or fraternal correction is a product of love, springing up from the quest for reconciliation and union. In the second reading, St. Paul addressing the Christians of Rome, affirms vigorously that “love is the fullness of the law”. Be that as it may, it is love that sets in motion the correction, forgiveness and reconciliation demanded by the other two readings.

     Our first reading (Ez. 33:7-9) emanates from a chapter in which Prophet Ezekiel sets down the prophetic responsibilities, as he envisaged after the restoration from the exilic experience. And in doing this he employed the use of images, and one of the images that he used to define the role of a prophet is that of a Watchman. Contextually, this was a familiar figure in the defense system of the Palestinians, at that time, there watchmen were posted on the hills against foreign invaders. A closer look at the chapter reveals that (vs.1-6) is a parable, while (vs. 7-9) as we read today is a sort of application of it in the prophetic role. Ezekiel preached as a prisoner in the territory of enemies and as such, he could warn that the real enemy is the enemy within and not the one outside. The enemy within is the real threat to life, and that enemy is sin, the abandonment of God. For this, using the image of a watchman or sentry he spells out duty of the sentry taking example from the figure of a watchman in the defense system of his people. A watchman stands apart on a tower and from there he notices everything and makes effort to understand the meaning of every movement around him, in order to identify signs of danger for his community. Similarly, the Christian community today must stand out as a sentry, thus she must be concerned about others and the dangers that threaten them and it is from this consideration we understand better the link between the first reading and the Gospel.

     Be that as it may, the prophet’s choice of the image of a watchman is in line with the Gospel which speaks of fraternal love, a task of a watchman. This image entails therefore that a prophet is commissioned by God to give brotherly correction to the people. For the word of God says “You, son of man, I have appointed watchman for the house of Israel; when you hear me say anything, you shall warn them for me” (Ez. 33:7). On the other hand, he was also warned by God not to shy away from preaching and announcing the truth “if I tell the wicked man that he shall surely die, and you do not speak out to dissuade the wicked man from his way, he shall die for his guilt, but I will hold you responsible for his death” (Ez. 33:8). 

    The passage of today’s Gospel (Mt. 18:15-20) is taken from the context of Mathew’s discourse on the Church. Interestingly, at the beginning of that 18^th chapter of his Gospel, St. Mathew presents the response of Jesus to his disciples’ interrogation on who is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven? (Mt. 18:1) and concludes with the theme of fraternal correction introduced with the parable of the lost sheep (Mt. 18:12-14). It is important to note that “lost” or disorientation here evokes going out of the track, which is a characteristic of sin; thus, the lost sheep is a sinful member of the Christian community. To him or her we owe fraternal love and correction, not as an expression of superiority, but as sign of love for one’s neighbor as the book of Leviticus reminds us: “You will not harbor hatred for your brother. You will reprove your fellow-countryman firmly and thus avoid burdening yourself with a sin. You will not exact vengeance on, or bear any sort of grudge against, the members of your race, but will love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev. 19:17-18). This quotation indicates the quality of fraternal correction in the community of brothers. It is not simply about reproaching, revealing the errors or sins of the other, rather, it is about being the “brother’s keeper”. St. Mathew indicates two practical ways of practicing mutual love and healing wounds in the community, and among brothers: fraternal correction and common prayer.

     ●Fraternal Correction: Jesus says “if your brother does something, go and have it out with him alone, between your two selves”. Thus, it takes place in private. The rule of Jesus is also valid in the family, between friends and in an atmosphere of work. “If your brother”, it could be if your wife, if your husband, if your son, if your daughter, if your employer, if your fellow worker, if your friend or if your fellow Christian does something wrong. In that bid, the “something wrong” may not be just an error against an individual, it could be against the community, something grave that can compromise the common good and welfare. And in such case, it is a disservice to keep silent; it is necessary to correct the brother or sister that errs. Fraternal correction is a true act of fraternal love. Although Jesus invites us to correct our brother who errs, it is not by any way an excuse or occasion to go in search of the sins or errors of others or to expose the defects of others in the public. However, the Gospel gives suggestions of the graduality and steps of and for correction: 1) It has to be done in private, with discretion in order to avoid defamation: “if he listens to you, you have won back your brother” (v.16). Here, Mathew used the verb “to win/gain” which indicates that truly your brother is a treasure. But if he does not listen… 2) The correction has to be repeated before one or two witnesses always in private. 3) If after the presence of witnesses he does not listen, then the case has to be entrusted to the Church or community. 4) And if he fails to listen to the community, he cannot be recognized as a brother in the faith, but as a “pagan” or a “publican”, as such, he is no longer in communion with the community.

     Here, we have a paramount question to grapple with: what does Jesus mean by a publican or a pagan? Or even better, is a publican or a pagan here, someone to be excluded and isolated? NO! Jesus’ praxis has to be a rule for us here, towards him or her you have to do as Jesus did, who sits and eats with the publicans (Mt. 9:10; Mk. 2:13-17), in order to announce the Good News of God’s tenderness. Jesus gave them gifts, as in the episode with the Samaritan woman (Jn. 4:5-26), He called them and made them his disciples, remember the story of Mathew the tax collector (Mt. 10:3; Lk. 5:27). Remember also, the centurion whose servant was paralyzed (Mt. 8:5-13), with compassion Jesus healed the Gentile’s servant. That’s how Jesus treated pagans and publicans, we have to do the same. Forgiveness actually in Jesus’ parlance has no limit, indeed, forgiving your brother or sister, gaining him back is an act of eternity that is insinuated in an instant, in time. Forgiveness does not consist in a burst of emotion, but it is a decision. It does not come about as a sudden event, rather it is a journey. However, we have to practice this rule, not only in extreme cases, but also in our daily experiences of being together and co-existing. For this, the prophet reminds us in the first reading that we are “watchmen”, “Sentry” to each other. In all, it is necessary to note that fraternal correction has to be done with and in love, not with arrogance and disrespect or as a show of self-righteousness. Fraternal correction has to spring from the desire to do good to one’s brother or sister and bring him or her back to the community, not as a result of jealousy and hatred, with the desire to dominate and humiliate. The brother at the receiving end has to appreciate and welcome the courage of the brother, with humility, serenity and gratitude, instead of feeling offended, humiliated or wounded. If authentically practiced, fraternal correction can be a veritable way or medium of regenerating dialogue, trust and reciprocal love.

     ●Common Prayer: This is another way of practicing mutual love. A community of Christ’s faithful, as such, an assembly convoked by the same Voice, God Himself, cannot but gather together to put their voices together in response to the Greater Voice that calls. For in this gathering of the faithful for this purpose, faith is transformed into prayer. And for this prayer said or offered in the communion of brothers, Christ promises an extraordinary assurance “if two of you on earth agree to ask anything at all, it will be granted to you by my Father in Heaven” (v.19). He goes on to give reason for that: “for where two or three meet in my name, I am there among them” (v.20). A deeper reflection on the words of Jesus above reveals that his emphasis is not just on community prayer, but on a prayer offered in communion of mind and heart. It is a prayer of a reconciled community that lives in harmony and acceptance of each other.

     Furthermore, in today’s Gospel, we see the appearance of the word “ekklesia”, and this is the only place it appeared in Mathew’s Gospel, and Mathew’s tradition identified it with the word Church, ecclesial community. But in actual fact, when we talk about the Church, what do we mean? Indeed, what readily comes to mind is the concept of community. Church as a community of the faithful, Body of Christ etc., another expression is that of “communion”, the Church as a communion of brothers in faith, and this indicates a strong bond that unites believers in Christ, and as such their vocation is that of sharing and participation in the life of the Church. Still on the concept of Church, I would like to link it to the concept of “assembly”, which in Hebrew is connected with the word “qahal”, it comes from a root word “convoked” and it indicates a voice (that calls or convokes). This entails that the Church is an assembly convoked or called together by a voice (God himself).

     In today’s Gospel the phrase of evangelical empowerment is repeated: “binding and loosing”. In the original form, this tradition was obviously a saying of the Risen Lord, empowering his apostles. However, as it occurs in our passage today, by combining it to the concern for fraternal correction, Mathew’s tradition converted it to a Church rule, or better, rule for the ecclesial community. “In truth I tell you whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven” (v.18). Here, once again we take a leaf from Jesus’ praxis, we have to lose as Jesus loosed Lazarus from death (Jn. 11: 43-44), and Zacheaus from sin (Lk. 19:1-10), and whatever you bind, as He binds man and woman of every race and color to Himself.

     Furthermore, the concluding sentence of the Gospel is indeed worth reflecting on, as we have gathered today, Jesus says: “In truth I tell you once again, if two of you on earth agree to ask anything at all, it will be granted to you by my Father in heaven. For where two or three meet in my name, I am there among them” (vv.19-20). Now we are gathered in his name, He is therefore here in our midst. We also know that He will be with us in a special way through the Eucharistic consecration which will transform bread to His Body. However, this is not the presence we are talking about, but of another presence that we are experiencing here already, for the very fact that we have gathered in His name, to speak of Him, to the Father. In each one of us, Jesus makes himself present to the other. This is another presence we have to recognize and make it a reality in our daily life. So, if the Master is here and it is He who speaks to us, we have to assume a profound listening attitude before His words. Today, He speaks to us of fraternal correction, that is, how and what to do to win back a brother. The verb “to win” a brother here entails that he is a gain and a treasure and therefore the act of wining is an act of investing in the bond of fraternity and freedom.

     In the second reading (Rm. 13:8-10) St. Paul proposes the unique possible way for overcoming every eventual conflict between obedience and resistance, “The only thing you should owe to anyone is love for one another, for to love the other person is to fulfill the law” (v.8). This is equally valid in the fraternal correction between brothers. He went on to enlist some vices that wound true fraternal love: adultery, killing, stealing and covetousness. In the words of St. Augustine: “If you keep silent, keep silent by love: if you speak, speak by love; if you correct, correct by love; if you pardon, pardon by love; let love be rooted in you, and from the root nothing but good can grow. Love and do what you will”. Love is all!

     Above all else, the readings of today confront us with important prospects for our spiritual welfare: the need for a sense of individual responsibility in the journey of conversion. And the need for the consciousness that reconciliation with one another and with God is not entirely an individual concern, even though it concerns each individual, however, it takes place in and through the Christian community. My brothers and sisters, the clarion call by the psalmist as regards adherence to God’s word finds a fitting place in the context of today’s readings: “if today you hear his voice, harden not your hearts”, and this voice here as it is suggestive of today’s message can come from your brother, sister, neighbor or the community. In all, the Ever-Present God continues to call us to heal the wounds hatred and division have created in our hearts and communities. May He heal our wounds so that we can heal the wounds of others. Amen!

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

Take Up Your Cross!

(Homily 22^nd Sunday in Ordinary Time Yr-A)

     The message of this Sunday centers on the themes of divine will and call, a call to a religiosity of sacrifice orchestrated with the examples of Jeremiah’s prophetic passion, Jesus’ invitation to renunciation and cross and Paul’s admonition for a living sacrifice. As we see in the readings, the will of God was the supreme norm for prophet Jeremiah, for Jesus, and ought to be for every Christian. Here, the will of God is the divine plan for the salvation of man, which requires the human collaboration. And this plan, being divine has a logic that is different from human logic; sometimes it can even appear contradictory and hostile. Indeed, prophet Jeremiah experienced this, he was a peaceful and calm man, but God called him to a vocation opposed to his natural inclinations: he has to shout “violence and ruin”. The ‘passion’ of Jeremiah as he recounts in his ‘confession’ is the most sincere expression of his fidelity to the mysterious plan of God for the salvation of mankind. In his experience we see the synchronization of self-realization and self-abnegation, cross and love, faith and living sacrifice.

     In the first reading (Jer. 20:7-9) Jeremiah shares his prophetic ordeals, a sort of a dramatic confession before God. The people corrupted temple worship, priests were performing pagan rites. God told Jeremiah to condemn their wickedness. Then the prophet took an earthen jar, went to the city gates and smashed the jar. Then he announced to them that like the jar, Jerusalem will be smashed, for the people have become so corrupt. God sent him to announce “violence and destruction”, a period of suffering and trial, to a people that listens only to prophets that tell them what they want to hear, announcing to them previsions of peace and security. They say within themselves that they have the temple of the Lord. In this situation and with people of this frame of mind, a prophet who truly speaks in the name of God is an object of derision and mockery. To speak in the name of God becomes a heartbreaking and lacerating adventure. Upon hearing his words and seeing his actions, the priests felt criticized, so they arrested him, beat and threw him into jail. As he sat in the jail, the prophet felt betrayed by God. In his words: “For me, Yahweh’s word has been the cause of insult and derision all day long” (v.8). He arrived at the point of saying to himself: “I will not think about him, I will not speak in his name any more…I could not do it” (v.9). In his personal experience, Jeremiah felt a sort of rebellion inside him, because the Word of God “seemed to be a fire burning in my heart, imprisoned in my bones” (v.9). He felt reluctant to speak the word of God, because if he does, he will be reproached by the people. For he prophesied violence and ruin for the evil deeds of the people. He was tempted not to speak the word of God, but on the other hand, he acknowledged: “the effort to restrain it wearied me, I could not do it”.

     Jeremiah faced the temptation of escaping from the exigencies of the prophetic mission, the temptation of not to speak again in the Lord’s name. But the prophet declares that he could not, because God has a kind of seduced him. God’s word entered in him and in his bones like a devouring fire that the prophet could not contend. Thus, he will not keep silence. So, he was confronted between fear of the reproaches of the people and the supremacy of God’s will, and upon consideration of the supremacy of God’s will he chose to speak the word of God irrespective of what the outcome might be. He carried his prophetic cross. Extrapolating from Jeremiah’s experience, passion and confession, we can say that of all the Old Testament prophets, he is the one closest to the New Testament conception of what is meant to be a bearer of God’s Word. His ordeal and passion serve as a prelude to Jesus’ invitation to renunciation and carrying of cross in the Gospel narrative.

     Today’s Gospel (Mt. 16:21-27) is a continuation of last Sunday’s Gospel about Peter’s profession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah and the Son of God. Jesus wanted to make it clear to his disciples the meaning of his messianic mission according to the design of God: “to go to Jerusalem and suffer grievously at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the scribes, and to be put to death and to be raised up on the third day” (Mt. 16:21). Here, Jesus announces for the first time what is the will of God for him, for Jesus started manifesting to his disciples that he has to go to Jerusalem, to suffer and die. However, we see Peter in that episode, probably moved by the desire of being a protagonist, wanted to distance that (the passion and cross) from Jesus’ way. But Jesus knows the will of his Father, and he cannot allow someone to interfere in their relationship. He has ardent passion for the will of God, that he called Peter “Satan” (from Rock to Satan), because he is like the devil who wants to thwart the will of God and distance Him from the divine plan. The devil tried to use the compassion of Peter to thwart the mission of Jesus. It is still green in our minds the episode of the Gospel of last Sunday, where Jesus called Peter the rock of faith. But today, Peter gives in to ideas from below, to worldly ideas; and Jesus tells him: “Get behind me, Satan”. It does appear Peter’s aim was for Jesus to lower the standards and give people what will please them and they will become Jesus’ followers. After rebuking Peter he told his disciples to take up their crosses and follow him. Indeed, the discipleship of Christ entails following the Lamb wherever He goes (cf. Rev14:4).

     This passage presents the programmatic statements and invitation of Jesus to his sequela, “If anyone wants to be a follower of mine, let him renounce himself and take up his cross and follow me…Anyone who wants to save his life will lose it…What, then, will anyone gain by winning the whole world and forfeiting his life? (vv. 24-26). Jesus in his invitation does not propel anyone or impose His sequela on people, He says: “If anyone”. There is no imposition; rather it is a personal choice. Jesus gives conditions for following him: renouncing oneself (to renounce oneself does not mean to throw away one’s talents and capacities, rather it entails the understanding that the world does not revolve around us, is a call to move out from the idolatry of “I”, from one’s ego). The second condition is to take up one’s cross and follow Him, many a times we tend to make use of this quotation wrongly, just to portray suffering patiently, to accept the crosses of life, but Jesus did not say “bear” the cross, rather he says “take” “carry”, as such, a disciple is not asked to suffer passively, but actively. The Gospel ends with a divine logic: loosing and finding, that has existential, spiritual and eschatological imports.

     Jesus tells us to renounce ourselves, to learn how to lose, to lose even our life. Jesus proposes to us apparent alienation from oneself, in a society where the supreme value is personal realization. In a society where work, occupation, culture, promotion, social emancipation and all are seen in function to self-realization, the invitation of Christ to self-renunciation sounds like a contradiction to the philosophy of the world. The contemporary man wants to win, and not to lose, not even to talk of losing his life. The obsession to domination and self-worth are in reality mortal obstacles to the true and authentic realization of the human person. The renunciation that Jesus requires, in reality is our ultimate self-realization and our true recovery; losing ourselves is the only way to find ourselves: for who loses his life will find it.    

     What in reality is Jesus asking us to renounce? He is not asking us to renounce our authentic human possibilities and values, but the sick part of us, the part that is in enmity with God, of the old man, the egoistic man, dominated by cupidity and concupiscence, who is not capable of loving anyone but oneself, and even this, in a wrong way. It was in this sense that St. Paul said that “All who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified self with all its passions and its desires” (Gal. 5:24). The renunciation of Jesus therefore, entails the crucifixion of the old creature in order to give way to the new, of the old man in order to give way to the emergence of the new man, created in the image of God, called for eternal life, a free man in Christ. Another important question we have to ask ourselves is this: renunciation for who and for what? It is for one’s sake for the love of God, because of the choice we make, the choice of God in place of our “I” and Ego, because of the hope the Lord offers us beyond death. When Jesus invites us to carry our cross and follow him, he is not inviting us to do something strange and unknown to Him, rather He is inviting us to follow his footsteps. In the present Gospel passage, we see that Jesus spoke about the cross of his disciples, after he must have finished talking about his passion, death and resurrection (cf. v.21). Indeed, the dying and rising of Jesus, is the foundation and model of the losing and finding of oneself, of dying in order to live.

     Be that as it may, we are therefore called today to proclaim to you the severe words of the cross, words that discomfort and perturb. To renounce oneself certainly is not an evangelic word or phrase that the people of our time love to hear. It is easier to speak of the Christ who invites us to fight against injustice in the world, than the Christ who invites us to carry our cross. In this situation, our temptation as heralds of the Good News is not different from that of Jeremiah and Jonah: the apparent unappreciated duty of announcing to the people of our time the words that they do not want to hear. However, we cannot remain silent, in fact, we have to be ashamed of ourselves any day we stop speaking with courage and audacity like St. Paul that what we preach is the Christ and the crucified Christ (1Cor.1:23).

     In the second reading (Rm. 12:1-2) St. Paul admonished the Christians of Rome, that the real and authentic cult consists in offering oneself as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God. In this chapter, St. Paul presents the Christian ethics as “oun” ethics, that is “therefore ethics”, as such, the Christian ethics is a response to what God has done in Christ. It is indeed, the ethics of response, which does not involve meticulous observance of the code of law, rather a renewed mind and non-conformity to the world. For him, the true Christian cult and worship is to be seen in ethical behavior not in the cultus, in the renewal and transformation of minds. In all, we are called to renew our minds, which is a responsibility for the “new men” in Christ, those who make effort not to conform themselves to the mentality of this present world (Rm. 12:2).

     Jeremiah, Jesus and Paul manifest to us today, the necessity and importance of knowing the will of God, and consequently adhering to it with one’s heart and conviction. And from the knowledge and love of the divine will one has to pass to life (its existential dimension). They want us to appropriate the value of readiness in doing God’s will with all the sufferings, difficulties and trials that come with it. Little wonder, Jesus made it clear: “if anyone wants to be a follower of mine, let him renounce himself and take up his cross and follow me” (Mt.16:24). In all ramifications, the readings of today invite us to frown at a type of pick and choose religiosity, where we build up our religion with the parts of the Good News that appeal to us, where the parts of the Gospel that secure the logic of our comfort zones become indestructible. Today, Jeremiah, Jesus and Paul are telling us to accept the Good News in full, and not in parts. We really need to allow the Word of God to challenge us out of the complacency with a comfortable and a conformist religiosity. Jesus is hitting us hard, just as He did to Peter, He is inviting us, not by force, to do away with our double standards and quest for “cheap grace” (that is salvation at a slashed price without personal involvement in sacrifice). Lord Jesus help us to be ready to lose ourselves in order to find ourselves for eternal life! Amen!

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

Who Is Jesus For You?

(Homily 21^st Sunday in Ordinary Time Yr-A)

     The overriding theme that permeates the readings of this day is the unveiling of Jesus’ identity, as the Messiah, Son of God and the symbolism of authority exemplified in the keys  given to Eliakim and to Peter and the change of his name etc. Drawing the issue further, the call and election of Eliakim in the first reading, the Christological confession of Peter and the change of his name, portray in a fascinating manner the workings of God and throw more light on the symbolism of authority and the image of the Messiah. The question of the identity of Jesus is one of the enigma that the Gospel, especially that of Mathew, sets out to unravel to his Jewish readers. In some episodes, questions concerning his identity have been raised: who is this Man? But in the episode of today’s Gospel Jesus himself takes the initiative of asking: who do people say I am? And you, who do you say I am? Even though no human mental assent is able to grasp fully who Jesus is, just as St. Paul observed while talking about God’s wisdom and knowledge in the second reading, but Peter was enabled from above. Today therefore, we reckon with one of the most emblematic and at the same time interesting question in the Scriptures and in Christianity: Who is Jesus? Who do people say he is? Who do you say he is? This question, that is both christological and existential in nature, will serve as our leading star in today’s reflection. Thus, we are going to concentrate on the two questions of Jesus: Who do peopel say I am? And Who do you say I am? He is the Living One, so he is still capable and he continues to interrogate us till today: Who do you say I am?

     In the first reading (Isaiah 22:19-23) we can see the tension between power and authority as exemplified in the personalities of Shebna and Eliakim. From the previous verses we understand that Shebna was a master of the household of the king but he had no right (Is. 22:16). Hence he could have assumed power by force not by authority. On account of this, he became overbearing, arrogant and self-conceited. In fact, he became a disgrace to the master’s house (Is. 22:18). As a result of his style of leadership and arrogance, God designed his replacement with Eliakim. The name ‘Eliakim’ means “my God will raise up”. By implication God raised up His own servant for the house of the king, one on whom He invested authority to become not just a servant but a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. Furthermore, he is also given the keys (v.22) to the house of David and that means entrances and exits are under him. In ancient times, keys represent authority. So to be given the keys of a place means to be given authority over that place. The keys that Eliakim received symbolized authority, which entails that he was second to the king, he could act as the Prime minister. An active mind would really wonder why God had to concern himself with the administration of the household of the King. The answer to this can be seen written large in the event that took place at Caesarea Philippi shown in the Gospel. This passage is connected with the Gospel, especially with reference to Christ acclamation: concerning Peter: “Tu es Petrus”. So we can say that the event of Eliakim’s elevation prefigured that of Peter. St. Paul was very clear on the fact that all authority comes from God (cf. Rm. 13:1), those in authority should also be conscious and respectful of the fact that their positions are God-given and should thus carry out their activities with total fear of God and commitment to service.

     The Gospel of today (Mt.16:13-20) opens up around an unusual location: the district of Caesarea Philippi which then was a Roman city. One significant thing about the area is that the city is surrounded by rocks with Mount Hermon towering with a prominent peak. Our Lord chose this location to ask his disciples one of the most significant questions: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?” The variety of answers showed the different ways people conceived our Lord Jesus Christ. For some said he was John the Baptist (the forerunner of the Messiah), some said Elijah, others said Jeremiah or one of the prophets. It is good to note that the people they likened our Lord Jesus Christ with were people of high reputation. The episode that Mathew narrated here is also seen in Mark and Luke, although with different specifications. Mathew situated the prediction of the passion, Peter’s protest and Jesus’ rebuke in a separate episode, that followed the confession. In our present passage, Jesus proclaims Peter blessed and gives him the name: Petrus, the Rock, followed by a series of promises (the building of the Church on the foundation of Peter, and the assurance that the powers of hell shall not prevail against the Church). It is only Mathew that is profound in his account: “You are the Christ”. In Mark we see only a recognition of Jesus as Messiah (Mk. 8:29) and not necessarily as the Son of God. And both Mark and Luke do not say anything about the promise to Peter (Lk. 9:20).

     The question of the divine identity latently and in a positive formulation started in the Old Testament when Moses and the Israelites sang the Song of victory: “Yahweh, who is like you, majestic in sanctity, who is like you among the holy ones, fearsome of deed, worker of wonders? (Ex. 15:11). And in the New Testament the question of Jesus’ identity arises in different contexts. In the Gospel of Mathew the disciples asked: What kind of man is this, that even the winds  and the sea obey him?” (Mt. 8:27). In a similar episode, the disciples asked: “who can this be? Even the wind and the sea obey him” (Mk. 4:41). In the Lukan narrative, they exclaimed: “Who can this be, that gives orders even to winds and waves and they obey him?” (Lk. 8:25). Furthermore, there are many affirmations about the identity of Jesus in the Bible. St. Paul identified him as “the image of the invisible God” (Col. 1:15). Mark captioned the beginning of his Gospel thus: “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, Son of God” (Mk.1:1), he is the Son of God. And the centurion affirmed:  “Truly, this man is the Son of God” (Mk.15:39). On the other hand, who does Christ say He is? He says: “It is I, the first and the Last, I am the Living One. I was dead but look I am alive forever and ever” (Rev. 1:17-18). In the Gospel of John we see Jesus’ series of I am: “I am the bread of life” (6:51) “I am the Good Shepherd” (10:14) etc.

     In the first question: “who do people say I am?”, here ‘people’ refers to men and women outside, those who have heard about him or seen him, but did not adhere to Him. So, was Jesus worried about what people think or say of him? No! He wants to know what people think of him, and they think that he is a prophet, which is true, but he is more than a prophet. The question only helps us to find out what people say of him and then propels us to rediscover what we think and say of Him too. Little wonder, his second question. But situating the question into our own context: who do the people of our time say he is? The responses are many. Who do atheists say he is? Who do people of other religions say he is? And eventually who do you say he is? For some people in our day and age, Jesus is their protector so apart from protection Jesus does not exist. For others He is their provider so when there is no issue of provision Jesus ceases to exist. When God told Moses in Exodus that His name is I AM…. It was more or less an open check. So one can fill as many things as what one desires from God. It is not surprising that there are still those who respond like the people of that time, that he is a prophet, while some see him as a superman. But he is more than a prophet and a superman. At the second moment, Jesus turned to his disciples and said: “but you who do you say I am? He started with “but”, to indicate that their own answer has to be different. And “you” indicates his disciples and apostles, those who have followed and known him closely, those who have listened to his words and seen his prodigious works. It could be noted that in the first question they could answer in one accord, but in the second, it becomes personalized and Peter spoke up: “You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God”. The name Christ is from the Greek  word “Christos” meaning the Anointed one and it is equivalent to the Hebrew “Messiah” which means Saviour. Peter’s response unlike that of the people reveals the centrality of his person and mission. Today we still need to answer the question personally and individually. However, as we can see, between the two answers there exists a gap. If for the first to answer they had to look around, to what people say, the opinion of others. Now in the second they have to look deep within themselves, the answer comes from the inner recesses of man, as he listens to the voice of God that speaks, because “it is not flesh and blood that revealed it to you”. I will find the answer to this question within my heart, and not in some Theological treatise or any Christological verbalizing. Jesus does not require an exact answer or a perfect response; instead He wants a sincere response and our involvement.

     Indeed, Peter’s answer was correct: "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God." Come to think of it, it is interesting to note that Peter could give such a convincing answer, and later on, he would deny and desert the Christ. Of a truth, most of us can identify with Peter. He knew who Christ is up in his head, but then it has not yet arrived in his heart. As a matter of fact, knowing who Jesus is, is not faith, because even Satan does. It is only when our knowledge passes into action that it becomes faith. Notwithstanding, Jesus commends Peter, for his answer, and he affirms that it is the Father who has revealed the truth to him. He then confirmed Peter as the one on whom he would build his Church. Then, Jesus poured out trust and promises on Peter. Jesus changes the name of Simon, as in the bible when one receives a new name it is accompanied by a new mission: he called him Kefa. However, the true rock is Jesus himself, the ideal Rock is God Himself (cf. Ps. 18:2; Ps. 144:1), but Kefa stands for a building stone that forms part of the building. Not only that, there is also a need for a sign that renders the Corner stone visible and that will be Peter and his successors (Apostolic succession). In this passage Jesus installs the petrine ministry. Christ promised Peter: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven”, as we earlier opined, keys represent authority. He told Peter two significant things: “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven”. As evident in this passage, when God calls a person He gives him or her a new name, which many a times is revelative of a new mission. Receiving a new name means a change of status, we remember when Jacob’s name was changed to Israel, Abram to Abraham and Simon to Peter (Kefa). Have you recognized the name God has given you, do you know who you are called to be (some are called to be like eagles while they remain fouls that cannot fly), may be not out of their own making. May your God given name and mission manifest in your life!

     Today what is important to Jesus is not what people say, but what we, you say, who is Christ for you? Who is he in your life? It is not enough to parade ourselves as Christians or to claim to believe in the divinity of Christ, we have to give testimony to it. I remember Paul Claudel in his book: “The Humble Father”, a Hebrew blind girl asked her Christian friend, “you that see, what do you see, what do you use the light for? This we have to ask ourselves equally today. You that believe in Christ, who is He for you? Jesus needs our response, we cannot invent answers or responses, rather we need to identify him through our personal encounter and experience with Him. In fact, till today, we continue to proclaim our faith in Him as the Christ and the Son of God, we profess it continually in the Creed of the Church. Through her teachings and prayers, the Church continues to respect this faith: Jesus is not only a man, or a prophet, He is more than a prophet, He is God-with-us. We need to internalize this Peter’s profession of faith and make it ours, else it becomes insignificant. Interestingly, at the end of the episode Mathew reported that: “He gave the disciples strict orders not to say to anyone that he was the Christ” (v.20). This of course, is no longer the case today. Then, it was necessary that the apostles maintain the “messianic secret”, because the people have not been prepared to receive the message. Contrarily, today Jesus orders us to tell all that He is the Christ, especially to the people who continue to ask: who is Jesus of Nazareth? We have a mandate of professing our faith in Him and making Him known.

     The second reading (Rm. 11:33-36) presents the mysterious ways God intervenes in the history of humanity, the way he leads us to discover the identity of Jesus. Upon seeing this Paul exclaimed “how rich are the depths of God, how deep his wisdom and knowledge”. In this passage, we see the wonderful doxology that succeeds Paul’s discussion of the place of Israel in the history of salvation. Beginning from the ninth chapter to the eleventh chapter of his letter to the Romans, St. Paul tried to reflect and theologize about the ways and workings of God in salvation history. However, he accepted his inadequacy before the profundity of God’s wisdom: “How rich are the depths of God-how deep his wisdom and knowledge and how impossible to penetrate his motives or understand his methods”. Indeed, the peak of his consideration is that no one can know the mind of God. No matter how hard we try, our knowledge of God remains inadequate, and any claim to know him in toto demeans His omnipotence. Today therefore, Paul not only presents to us the greatness of the wisdom of God, but also His sovereignty over all creation. It is in knowing him that we can appreciate his greatness.

     Extrapolating from the Gospel passage, we may well affirm that by his answer, Peter made a personal commitment to Christ. And Jesus said, “Blessed are you, Peter”. He called Peter the rock of faith and appointed him the cornerstone of the Church, and gave him the keys of the kingdom. But it might interest you to know that Peter did not always act as good as he talked and here lies the challenge of the Christian faith and its proclamation. Peter was human as we are, so he had his weaknesses and fragility as well. But no doubt, Peter loved Jesus. Irrespective of his frailties and doubts, each time Peter failed, he picked himself up. We are like Peter, although in different degrees, that is why we need the sacrament of reconciliation. Conscious of our own frail conditions, let us ask the Messiah, the Son of God in our midst to make of us small rocks for the edification of His Church and a new humanity. Amen!

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

What Great Faith Can Do!

 (Homily 20^th Sunday in Ordinary Time Yr-A)

     A closer and profound reflection on the word of God this Sunday reveals that the recurrent themes are that of faith and the universal call to salvation, the kingdom of God is proposed to all, without discrimination. If we have a throwback on last Sunday's Gospel, we see Peter, a man of little faith. Contrarily, at the heart of today's Gospel is a woman of great faith. Peter was an insider, but today we reckon with an outsider. Indeed, experience brings to our consideration that it is often the case that faith is not found where it is expected and many a times, it is found in abundance where it is least expected. No doubt, we can be taken aback at the faith of some and the lack of faith of some others. Many contemporaries of Jesus might have been surprised and even offended seeing the godless foreigners streaming into the house of God. Behold, it is upon such consciousness that Isaiah in the first reading (Is. 56:1.6-7) prophesized about the openness and inclusiveness of God’s temple to all. And in the Gospel, Jesus went against all odds to reach-out to the pagan woman (Mt. 15:21-28). While Paul in the second reading (Rm. 11:13-15.29-32) was surprised and disappointed that his own race, the people of God, rejected the Gospel, while the Gentiles embraced it. Above all else, the readings of this Sunday implicitly warn us of the danger of pre-judging, categorizing, and segregating others. God works in marvelous ways according to His will and timing. But many a times our own attitude is best reflected in the behaviour of the disciples in today's Gospel: the readiness to categorize others, for they wanted Jesus to send her away as quickly as possible. However, contrary to their request, Jesus reached out to the woman. Her supplication of “Kyrie eleison” did not go unanswered, because in and through Jesus, the Father was showing mercy to all mankind as St. Paul envisioned in the second reading.       

     In the first reading (Is. 56:1.6-7) we see an adequate emphasis on the universalistic dimension of salvation, as opposed to the exclusivist mentality of the Jews, according which salvation and the Kingdom of God were reserved privileges for them. But contrarily, God through the words of prophet Isaiah in this passage establishes the universal and in-discriminatory nature of his salvation and Kingdom. God is a God for all and his salvation is boundless. As prophet Isaiah affirmed: “As for foreigners who adhere to Yahweh to serve him, to love Yahweh’s name and become his servants, all who observe the Sabbath, not profaning it, and cling to my covenant” (v.6) and in subsequent verse God through the mouth of his prophet declared: “for my house will be called a house of prayer for all peoples” (v.7). This passage brings us to the context of the Israelites before Christ. Here the distinction is clear, at one end, the Jews, the chosen people, at the other side, all the other peoples. Humanity was divided in Jews and Gentiles. The temptation of the first to close themselves and consider others impure was strong. But however, there was an open door, and that is the fact that “foreigners can adhere to Yahweh to serve him”. In line with the theme of universality of God’s salvation and Kingdom, the Psalmist in the responsorial psalm proclaims the universal dominion of Yahweh on all peoples: “The earth will acknowledge your ways and all nations your power to save” (Ps. 67:2) and he invites all the peoples to recognize the Lord and be united in his praise: “Let the nations praise you, God, let all the nations praise you”.    Still in this passage we can make a second consideration, if we paid attention, we must have noticed that one of the conditions given by God in order to be considered no longer strangers in His house, but pleasing to his sight is the injunction: “all who observe the Sabbath and not profaning it” (v.6c). And we see this injunction emphatically in the third commandment “Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy”. For us Christians the Sabbath is Sunday. But today the sense and meaning of this prescription is gradually being relegated. For many Sunday has become a day of leisure and fun, if not for profanation and sin, emptied of its religious content. For those who clamour for their liberty to do what they like, the command and prescription of God is not a threat to our freedom.   

     In the Gospel (Mt. 15:21-28) of today Jesus goes outside the territory of Israel, he went to the side of commercial cities like Tyre and Sidon, a pagan territory. And in this location, he meets with a woman of this place, who implored him, shouting: “have mercy on me Lord, my daughter is tormented by a devil”. In Mathew’s narrative the earthly activity of Jesus remains limited to inhabited regions of Israel. However, the evangelist Mathew expanded Jesus’ sojourn even into Gentile territory, where the incident with the Canaanite woman took place. This episode was equally narrated by Mark (7:24-30). On responding to his disciples who asked Him to ‘give the woman what she wants’, He answered them: “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (v.24), somehow reinstating the perspective of (Mt. 10:5b-6), when he was sending his disciples he told them not to go to pagan territory, nor Samaritan town, but to go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. We may ask, why did Jesus issue such a directive? Did Jesus not come to bring salvation to all? God’s program was that salvation was to be announced first to the people of Israel. Even though it was to be preached to them first, it is not to remain or stop there. However, the woman’s great faith moved Him to perform the healing. The attitude of the disciples who asked Jesus to send the woman away is similar to their reaction to the crowds at the occasion of the multiplication of bread (Mt. 14:15), and this is the particularity of Mathew. For our evangelist Mathew this episode looks forward to the faith of the pagans (the Gentiles) and as a matter of fact, this episode is similar to Jesus’ encounter with the centurion (Mt. 8:1-13); whereas for Mark this encounter is an exception to Jesus’ healing ministry. Indeed, the account of Mathew is more detailed and he used occasion of this episode to underline his theological perspective of universal salvation.

     At the centre of the Gospel narrative is the Cannanite woman, who approached Jesus, pleading for a miracle for the daughter, but what she could get was an apparent indifference from Jesus. However, impressed by her faith, Jesus hearkened to her supplications. Jesus pulled down the walls of hatred and discrimination existing between the Jews and the Gentiles. What matters henceforth is no longer belongingness to a particular race, but faith in Him: “Woman, your faith is great”. What matters is faith, not observance of the law, faith that breaks barriers and renders little dogs guests. Truly, the unusual, incomprehensible attitude and comportment of Jesus is thought provoking, he does not say a word to her. He ignored her, and even the apostles were embarrassed by the shouts of the woman, and they implored Jesus: “Hear her, see how she is shouting following us”. Yet to the apostles Jesus responded with some dints of rejection thus: “I was only sent for the lost sheep of the house of Israel” Invariably, Jesus declares that his mission is first of all to the people of Israel, and afterwards he will go beyond the borders of Israel, and to the whole world. This passage raises some interrogations, for instance: what does Jesus intend when He said: “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (v.24). Certainly, it is not the fact that he doesn’t feel sent to all peoples, rather that He will reach all peoples through faith and conversion of the Israel. God was fulfilling his promises made to the descendants of Abraham, so that the promises He was going to make to all the peoples will be credible.

     The woman came closer to Jesus and with insistence, she continued her supplication, she prostrates before Jesus: “My Lord, help me”. Yet Jesus responded once again with rejection: “It is not fair to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs” (that is bread for the chosen people). The woman all the same does not give up, she is even contented with the pieces of bread that falls from the table, as she responded, “It is true Lord, but also the dogs can eat the piece that fall from the table of the master”. At that moment, Jesus could no longer put any resistance (in fact, I would say he could no longer continue his pretence), he had to give up, and accomplish a miracle in the pagan territory. And he exclaimed: “woman, indeed your faith is great! Let it be done unto you as you desire! And from that moment her daughter was healed”.

      Then, we have to ask ourselves the reason why Jesus delayed in hearkening to the words of the woman, what was behind the unusual indifferent attitude of Jesus? Why was he apparently indifferent to the pleading of the poor woman? May be to affirm categorically his fidelity to the mission for which the Father sent him, which has to do in primis with the chosen people and later to others. May be! St. Augustine in his commentary on this episode affirms that Jesus delayed in granting the woman’s supplications in order to increase in her the desire, in order to make her faith and hope more fervent and profound. This is also possible. St. John Chrysostom, on his part posits that Jesus delayed in order to uplift or “upgrade” the faith of the woman. This hypothesis is equally possible. There is another consideration, that Jesus delayed in reaching out to the woman in order to gradually draw the attention of his disciples to the ways and workings of God and the need for a great faith in God.

     From the existential and practical standpoints, the virtues of this woman are being proposed to us as an example and model, of a fervent and great faith:

·         As a wonderful example of faith in Christ, her trust in him never wavered, she never gave up, even when Jesus used denigrating words on her.

·         As a stupendous model of perseverance in prayer: she knocks, insists, implores without giving up hope or getting discouraged because of Jesus’ resistance.

·         As a great example of humility, she does not rebel because she was ignored and less considered by Jesus, instead she was contented with the pieces like a dog.

We are therefore invited today to admire and imitate the good examples and virtues of this woman: her faith and immense trust in Jesus, her insistent prayer, perseverance and heroic humility. Many a times, we equally experience what could be defined as “the silence of God”, the apparent resistance by God to grant us the graces we hold to be necessary for our good. Sometimes, even, we experience the opposite of what we hope and ask for in prayer. In such situations, our mistake generally is the temptation or tendency to get discouraged, of desisting or even to rebel against God instead of insisting in prayer. The silence of God or the delay in granting our supplications does not mean that He does not listen to our supplications. May be, the Lord wants to test us because he is preparing a greater thing for us. Certainly, he will give us a reward if we persevere in prayer and continue to have trust in him. Let us learn how to say: Lord, I ask you this grace, however let your will be done, help me to do your will. You know too well what is for my good. I trust in you!

     This Gospel passage reminds us of the episode when the disciples reported to Jesus that there are those “who were casting out demons without” but are not his followers, they wanted Him to stop them, but Jesus responded them: “who is not against us, is with us” (Mk.9:38). This is apparently contrary to what He said elsewhere in another circumstance: “who is not with me is against me, and who does not gather with me scatters” (Lk.11:23). In reality, the two responses or sentences can be integrated, if we see it from the perspective that at one He was referring to His disciples and at the other, He was referring to outsiders. We can’t but remember the words of Peter to the first pagan welcomed to the Christian community: “I now really understand, he said, that God has no favourites, but anybody of any nationality who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him” (Acts 10:34-35). It is evident in the episode of the Gospel and in the Pauline epistle that it is no longer belongingness to a race or a nation that gives guarantee for salvation, but faith in Christ, which is implicitly possible for all.

     In the passage of the second reading (Rm. 11:13-15.29-32), the concept of the universal call to salvation, or the will of God for all to be saved, assumed a paradoxical consideration, for God as St. Paul writes “has subjected all to disobedience, in order to show mercy to all” (v. 32). For the Romans prior to the coming of Christ were disobedient (pagans), but after the disobedience of the Jews that did not welcome Christ, the Romans were shown mercy and the kingdom of God was opened to them. And even for the Jews that did not welcome the gift of God, St. Paul expresses an optimism in the hope that they too will be converted, for he says that “the gift and the call of God are irrevocable” (v.15). Unfortunately, one can decide to resist the divine call and invitation. This passage prospects us to a situation that is quite different. Now the election and salvation has passed to the Gentiles. So what is the attitude they should have before the Jews? There should not be any discrimination or racism. The Jews remain the chosen people, their incredulity served providentially for the opening of salvation to all peoples. There should be no boast whatsoever, before them by the new chosen people. Paul leaves a glimmer of hope: the Jews one day will receive mercy. Attention however, for what happened to the Israelites could happen to us.

    In all, therefore, the overriding message emanating from the readings of this Sunday is that there should not be barriers between peoples. No one is a stranger before God. Thus, the readings remind us that we cannot possess God for ourselves, that God can never be the exclusive property of a particular group or set of people. God cannot be conditioned by human ideas, inclinations and prejudices, He is always greater and bigger than our ideas of Him and He cannot in anyway be contained in our often narrow views of Him. God declared: “I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy” (Ex. 33:19). Thus, in concrete terms, the word of God today invites us to reflect on the attitude we should have towards those around us who are not Christians. For those of us who tend to be God’s Chief Justice or deputy Jesus, we are invited to imbibe the inclusive attitude of Jesus, and abandon our own exclusive and judgmental attitudes. We are called to show forth in our lives the inclusiveness of God. May God help us to close the barriers of hatred and prejudices in our life. Amen!

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