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 adequate 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 feeding 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 multitudes 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. 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 patiently. 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 (for instance, 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. Jesus wants us to offer the little that we have for the good of others.  He could have performed the miracle single-handedly, but he wants our cooperation, he wants a brother to help a brother. Do not just count your blessings but share them!

     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 and they contain ethical exhortations. As such, the passage of today’s reading is the beginning of the parenesis (advice or instruction). 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. However, 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 Chigozie, SC)

Like Sheep without a Shepherd!

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

                 The word of God this Sunday centers on the familiar scriptural themes of sheep and Shepherd. It 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 feign 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. Jeremiah uses the metaphor of the sheep and shepherd. The historical period that Jeremiah was called to prophesy was a period in the history of Israel, when both religious and political leaders were soaked in corruption and injustices. There were indeed, moral and religious crises (people abandoned the worship of the true God, for the worship of foreign gods). 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. 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 and shepherds who were corrupt: “Woe to the shepherds who lose and scatter the sheep of my pasture” (v. 1). Therefore, the prophet compares them to shepherds who lead their flocks to destruction. The high point of this passage is where God takes the matter upon Himself: “But for the remnant of my flock I myself shall gather from all the countries where I have driven them, and bring them back to their folds; they will be fruitful and increase in numbers” (v. 3). God Himself will come as Shepherd to lead his people. But the question is: How is God going to do this? 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. 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. On the other hand, 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 emphasized on the teachings of Jesus without revealing the contents of his teaching. Through the gesture of Jesus in this passage we see the fulfilment of the promise of God in the prophecy of Jeremiah in the first reading, God says I myself will shepherd my people, and here Jesus himself teaches and cares for his people.

     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 was 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. It is therefore pertinent to ask: 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). Jesus as the Chief Shepherd always walks in front of us to lead us, He walks alongside and among us to accompany us, He walks with us to encourage us, He equally walks behind us to see those that are weak, broken or sick. He does not only walk in front or among us, He is equally behind us to care for those that are wounded. 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 insensitive 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, Jesus 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. Jesus is indeed the Chief 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, however, in the midst of all those human negative tendencies, we are called to show that the love of God can break down walls of hatred, division, fighting and inordinate self-seeking. What is the barrier that divides us today? Why do we see each other as enemies? How do we forget so easily that “He made us, we belong to Him, we are 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, today by means of the metaphors employed by the sacred authors on sheep and shepherding, we have been reminded overtly that we will be effective shepherds, wherever we find ourselves, if and only if, we allow ourselves to be led by the Good Shepherd, listening to his voice and following his way. Only true disciples can be true shepherds; only if we have learned to become a disciple can we be faithful to our baptismal calling to leadership. May we therefore pray imploring the aid of the Chief Good Shepherd to mend our brokenness, to come to our aid when we are weighed down, confused and have no one to go to!!!

(Fr. Vitus Chigozie, 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. In the Church’s mission what counts is not merely the apparent success or failure, but the Church’s fidelity to the Gospel message. In the first reading, Amos was not that successful at Bethel and in the Gospel passage, 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. In the New Testament, Jesus Christ sends his twelve apostles for the first apostolic mission. Jesus in the Mission to spread the Good News calls us to become nomads of His love message, nomads of the Good News. At the heart of today’s Gospel is the glaring fact that if you are baptized (you are a priest, prophet and king) you are called to bring God’s word to others. But are ready for this prophetic mandate? On this, St. Peter has these encouraging words for us: “Always have your answer ready for people who ask you the reason for the hope that you have” (1Pt. 3:15). 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. This passage places before us two contrasting conceptions of religion, one represented by Amaziah, the priest of Bethel and the other represented by the prophet Amos. Amaziah understood religion in “civil” terms, as a means to promote loyalty to the status quo. He thought that his function was to prophesy easy things. Contrarily, Amos was called by God, even though he was an outsider, to denounce the government for its injustice and inhuman politics. 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, and 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 lives.

     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 exteriority 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 anti-conformism. 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 imbedded 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 become 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 today’s 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 lives.

►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. You too are to do same!

     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 conviction, 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 Chigozie, SC)

"Dies Natalies" of A Legend and Missionary of Charity! (Don Mimi)

11th July, 2011 Don Mimi returns to the House of the Father!

           This evening while going about my normal daily activity, it struck my mind that on the Memorial of St. Benedict Abbot is the dies natalies of a great and passionate son and follower of St. Luigi Guanella. I am talking about a legend of charity, a charismatic and an intellectual colossus of the life of the Founder and the history of the Congregation: Don Domenico Saginario, popularly known as Don Mimi. Personally, in my experience so far as a member of this noble Congregation, each time I think about the Confreres that worked assiduously for the growth and comprehension of the Charism and history of the Congregation, no doubt, Don Mimi readily comes to mind. I knew him, not by hear say, but I had moments of fraternal and spiritual encounters with him, that today have metamorphosed into real events in my spiritual life.

          Don Mimi was born on the 17^th of February 1930 at Pietrelcina in the province of Benevento, the natal city of Padre Pio. His parents were: Angelomarino and Filomena. He was baptized on the 28^th of December 1930, ten months after his birth. His was profoundly a catholic family. In fact, his family could be described as a guanellian family, because before him two of his brothers: Osvaldo and Oreste were priests of the Congregation, and again his sister: Giulietta was a member of our Srs’ Congregation. So, from that family we received four gifts for our male and female Congregations. Our beloved Mimi left his father’s house at the age of eleven to enter the seminary at Fara Novarese in 1941. He had his first religious profession on the 12^th of September 1949 and his perpetual profession on the 28^th of September 1954 at Barza. And as Providence would have it, he was ordained a priest on the 28^th of April 1957 in Rome.

          As a young priest, he served the Congregation in the areas of formation and teaching. He remained in the minor seminary in Rome till 1964, from 1964 to 1971 he was at the theological seminary in Chiavenna, form 1971 to 1986 he was at the theological seminary in Rome (where he became Superior and Rector in 1974). From 1972 he became part of the then Provincial Council as a councilor, and in July 1986 he was called to serve as a Provincial Superior of the Roman Province. During his years as a Provincial owing to his missionary zeal the Province opened new realities in India, Mexico and Philipine. Furthermore, the General Chapter of July 1993 elected him as a councilor and secretary general of the Congregation. After six year of service, he returned back to the Province as a Provincial Superior in May 2000. But after three years as a result of his advancing old age, he requested to leave the office and then went to the Community of St. Joseph in Rome, and in September 2004 he accepted the work of a Spiritual director in the theological seminary “Mons. Bacciarini” in Rome. His years in the Seminary were precious years for the seminarians. Again, in 2006 he accepted the responsibility of Extraordinary Delegate of India, to help in the passage of the Delegation to a Province. Afterwards, he came back to Rome and assumed once again the duty of a Spiritual Director. Behold to the surprise of all in 2008 at the age of 78 he made a request to go to mission in Philipine. Sequel to that, he was welcomed into the Province, precisely at the community of Quezon City in Manila, where he collaborated in the formation of the seminarians, and even served as a Novice Master for one year. It was from here that he received his heavenly call!

          It is ad rem to affirm that Don Mimi was known for his glittering eyes and contagious smiles, which revealed the hidden treasures of his heart. He served the Congregation in many capacities, as a preacher, a theology professor, a spiritual director, and animator, a speaker, a writer, a leader of the Province, a general secretary and a friend of the poor. He was described by Don Nino Minetti as “Uno studioso del Fondatore”.

        Don Mimi was the first Gunaellian priest I had as a Spiritual Director, and even till tomorrow I never regret knowing him and having him as a spiritual Father. Without ifs and buts, I remember him today with gratitude to God for his gifts of grace and gifts of nature, poured out for the better and in-depth comprehension of the charism and the history of the Founder and of the Congregation. Don Mimi you are one in a million! I had what I will describe as a golden opportunity to live with Don Mimi during my first year of theology in Rome, at our Theological Seminary, but above all, as my Spiritual Director. Till today, Don Mimi is one of my models as a priest. The memories with him are still fresh in my mind, especially his wonderful and soul-southing reflections and homilies. When Don Mimi preaches you cannot but feel “something” deep within you, his words and manner of preaching elevate the soul and help to increase in you the love for God and for the Congregation. Permit me to recall one episode that happened in one of my spiritual collogues with him, on that faithful day, at the end of my spiritual direction, he looked me directly on the face and asked: Vito hai bisogno di qualcosa? (Vitus do you need anything?). I responded anxiously no, but on a second thought I replied him: nothing, except that there is one book I needed to buy. Immediately he opened his drawer and gave me money for the book. Indeed, Don Mimi was very caring. For him the words of the Founder: “Give Bread and the Lord” were not ordinary words, they were for him a rule of life, something to be lived out. Don Mimi was not only caring, he was simple, down to earth, prayerful and in all, loving and lovable! In synthesis, he was a man of action and contemplation. A holy man indeed!

          It was on the 11^th of July, 2011 at the age of 81 that our beloved Don Mimi breathed his last on earth. Even at his advanced age, he was still an active and passionate missionary of Charity in Philipine, in our community at Quazon city. On that memorable day, Don Mimi had his coffee break around 3:30 pm, hale and hearty, and at 6. 00 pm when the confreres did not see him at evening prayer, they went to check on him, they knocked anxiously at his door, but he was not answering, then they were propelled to force the door open, only to find him collapsed on the floor, he was rushed to the hospital, but all to no avail. Behold, that was the end. He went back to God whom he so much loved and talked about. Unfortunately, our Great Don Mimi left few months to the canonization of the Founder. He so much desired celebrating the canonization of the Founder, but he joined in the celebration from heaven. He was and still remains a great gift to the Church and to our Guanellian family at large. He has left for us many virtues and values to imitate and appropriate: his availability for missions, his love and passion for the Founder and the Congregation, his love for the poor, his love for the Word of God and his capacity of synthesis between words and actions etc.

          Above all, in the context of tomorrow’s Gospel, permit me to say that Don Mimi was like a good seed, a good and fertile soil and an indefatigable sower of the Good News. We have to cherish his memory and legacies visible today in the many writings on the Founder and on the history of the Congregation, the testimonies of his holy and exemplary life, which he left behind. Don Mimi each time I remember how you worked tirelessly with Don Nino Minetti for the what we have today as the Constitutions of the Congregation, each time I remember your warm and soul-lifting homilies, each time I stumble over some of your writings here in the Study Centre, what readily comes to my mind is that Don Mimi lives on. Yes, you are still present with us. Yours is not a memory to be jettisoned with ease.

Rest on ardent preacher of the Word!

Rest on Great Theologian!

Rest on Great Leader, Animator and Orator!

Rest on great Missionary of Charity!

Rest on Holy Man of Charity!!!

 

Fr. Vitus Unegbu, SC

From the Guanellian Study Centre

Ibadan, Nigeria

 

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. Uncountable times, 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 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). Interestingly, in the Old Testament, the book of Exodus captured the response and the work of God in a similar but, rather 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! Here lies the ‘scandal’! 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! Jesus is indeed too great!

     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), it was not going to be an easy task. God made him a prophet to his own people. (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 and incredulity before the prophets. In the words of the prophet: “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. A point worthy of note is that God sent him to speak His words not his own words, “I am sending you to them, to say, “Lord Yahweh says this” (v.4). Today we have many self-acclaimed prophets who speak their own words and what the people desires to hear. 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 works in many towns and villages, Jesus turns to his people in Nazareth, but he was not favorably welcomed. In fact, in the Lucan 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, his miracles and 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. 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 born 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! 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 hierarchy of the 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. At the heart of today’s message is the underlying truth that when faith is absent, miracles are far-fetched.

     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, our readings today featured three prophets (Ezekiel, Jesus and Paul) who were rejected and scorned by their own people for the message they brought. First, Ezekiel is among his own Jewish exiles, taken off by the Babylonians into captivity. Second, we see Jesus with his own people, in his hometown, accompanied by his disciples, rejected by his kinsmen. Third, we see Paul defending himself and his ministry against those who doubt his authenticity and his persecutions and constraints, for the sake of Christ. These prophetic voices are met by obstinate people. The message they bear has its origins in God, not man. What unites them is the fact that they were all bearers of the divine message and they did not allow the voice of hostility to overshadow their voices. What is it today that is overshadowing your prophetic voice? 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 Chigozie, SC)