30th Sunday of Ordinary Time (A)

 

Thirtieth Sunday of Ordinary Time (A) [Mt 22:34-40]

29.10.2023

The Greatest Commandment

Readings: (1) Ex 22:20-26 (2) 1 Thess 1:5-10

1.  Theme in brief

Inter-relation between love of God and neighbour

2.  Focus Statement  

If our love and worship of God is genuine, it must be authenticated by our service to the needy.

3.  Explanation of the text

According to this gospel text, a lawyer from Pharisees asks a question with a hostile intention; that is, to test Jesus (22:34-35). He wants to know which commandment among so many in the Law of Moses is the greatest (2:36). Probably the lawyer wants to know whether all the statutes of the Law (totalling 613 as per Jewish tradition) are equally important for Jesus, or whether some are more important and some less. Or by using the word “greatest” probably the lawyer wants to know the summary of the whole Law or its central law.

Though the lawyer asks about only one (the greatest) commandment, Jesus gives two without being asked. Actually both of the commandments cited by Jesus are already found in the OT. First one is found in Deuteronomy 6:5 which says: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might,” and the second one in Leviticus 19:18, which says: “You shall love your neighbour as yourself.” What is special about Jesus’ teaching is that he links together or combines these two widely scattered commandments in two different Books of the OT and makes both of them the greatest. He does this by saying that the second (that is, loving one’s neighbour as oneself) is like the first (22:39) or equal to the first in importance. In other words, he regards the second as of the same value or rank as the first.  Thus, he gives both the commandments a new and radical meaning. By doing this, he emphasizes the relatedness of these two commandments, and wants to tell his questioner that he cannot practise real love of God without loving his neighbours.

Jesus teaches that both commandments are not exclusive of or unrelated to each other. What he means is that one cannot love God exclusively without showing that love to one’s neighbours. Thus, he gives a social slant to one’s religious or spiritual duty to love God. At the end he states that these two commandments are like the threads on which both the Law and the prophets (that is, the entire OT) hang (22:40). In other words, the whole Law rests on these two pillars. Whereas the Jewish Rabbis used to say that the whole world hangs on the Law, Jesus says that the Law itself hangs on love of God authenticated by deeds of mercy done to the needy. The two commandments not only summarize all other laws but also provide the key for interpreting and understanding the meaning of all other laws.

Jesus’ combination of two commandments indicates that there is no hierarchy (that is, higher and lower rank) among two types of love: of God and love of neighbour. What is new in it is his redefinition of what love of God is – it not only means devotion to and worship of God but also service to one’s neighbour done out of love for God. According to him the greatest commandments, though two, are in fact one – to love God by loving our neighbours. In Luke’s gospel Jesus explains that our “neighbour” (Lk 10:25-37) could be anybody in need or is suffering.

Some even say that there are three commandments in this text: (1) to love God; (2) to love our neighbours; and (3) to love oneself. But the fact is, love of self in this context is presumed as natural and we are commanded to love our neighbours just as we love ourselves naturally. Self-love does not need a commandment.

4.  Application to life                     

Ever since Jesus combined or linked together the two OT commandments to love God with all our heart, soul and mind, and to love our neighbour as we love ourselves, various ways of understanding this teaching have emerged. These twin commandments are among those most misunderstood by many interpreters and preachers throughout Christian history. Which is the greatest commandment: to love God or to love neighbour? For the Jews (and for many Christians even today) love of God is more important and superior to love of neighbour, since it is mentioned as the greatest and first commandment by Jesus himself (22:38). But many Christians forget that according to Jesus, love of neighbour is also the greatest commandment, because he says that the second one is like or of the same rank as love of God. Some say that both love of God and neighbours are two separate commandments and mean different things. They say that love of God includes praising, thanking, worshipping, adoring and offering oneself to God, or faithfully fulfilling one’s religious/spiritual duties. This, they say, is our first duty. According to them, love of neighbour includes whatever service we render to others. But it comes in the second place after fulfilling our duties towards God. There seems to be no basis for this argument in the present gospel text, since the word ‘first’ in this context, as explained above, does not imply first in rank, but only first in a list. Moreover, Jesus says that the second is exactly like the first (22:39).

By combining two widely scattered statement of the OT, Jesus means to say that loving God with one’s heart, soul and mind, includes doing good, serving, caring and showing genuine concern for the welfare of our neighbours just as we do all these things to ourselves naturally. In our world, especially in the minds of the youth, love is equated with physical attraction between a boy (man) and a girl (woman) and is associated with intense feelings or emotion and natural attraction. But the whole of NT gives a special connotation to the word “love” (agape).  According to it, love is neither strictly emotional nor passive. It is not simply a happy feeling of friendliness or good will towards somebody. How can we look at the face of an enemy and have feelings of attraction? If we go by natural attraction, it is impossible to love such a person. Whereas natural attraction happens without our control or will, loving our enemy (that is, doing good to him/her) cannot happen without a decision of the mind, or making a conscious choice and acting upon it.

Love of neighbour is an active response to our experience of God’s love – a response shown in concrete actions, such as doing good to others, rendering service, showing compassion, performing deeds of mercy and doing self-sacrifice for the needy. It means doing these things even if we don’t have a good feeling or affection towards them as we have towards our friends and family members. In other words, it means primarily love of concern for the needy (Lk 6:32-33; 6:35), whether we have good feeling or natural attraction towards them or not. If we have, it is well and good; if we do not have also we are called to do good to anyone who is in need (Lk 10:29-37). Thus Christian love goes far beyond love of friendship or beyond our kinship circle, which is limited to a few persons. We return God’s love by loving our neighbour in whom he is encountered.

There is nothing wrong in the traditional understanding of what love of God means – praying, worshipping and adoring God or being faithful to one’s duties towards God. In addition, Jesus gives a new understanding of what love of God means by taking it far beyond its traditional understanding. He wants to tell those who try to seek God in prayer, fasting, renunciation, ritual worship, etc., they cannot find him if they have no concern for the welfare of others, or if they are not bothered to do good to the needy. Many of us are satisfied only by attending church on Sundays and going through some traditional prayers. But we do not allow our faith or religious practices to influence our behaviour in such a way that it overflows into genuine love for neighbours, especially the suffering and the needy. Actually, religious practices become meaningless if they do not lead us to show concern for human needs. If people claim to be Christians only for social identity and are concerned only with their own personal salvation, their claim becomes nothing but hollow.

There are people who do a lot of social service but do not believe in God or any Supreme Being. They call it humanitarian work or service to humanity. Sometimes practising Christians, including some priests and religious in the Catholic Church, are tempted to do social work purely for humanitarian motives. They are tempted to get immersed in material welfare and give God only a little corner. In his love commandment, Jesus combines spirituality with social concern. Actually, our social service is not purely humanitarian, but has its roots in the love of God. It flows out of our experience of God’s love through Christ. Spiritual minded people have to ask themselves whether their behaviour and actions match with their devotion to God, and social workers need to ask themselves whether their service is motivated by God’s love or something else. Jesus has made an intimate connection between our worship of God and service to neighbours. In John’s Letter this connection is more explicit: “We love (others) because he (God) first loved us. Those who say, ‘I love God,’ and hate their brothers and sisters are liars; for those who do not love a brother or sister whom they have seen, cannot love God whom they have not seen” (1 John 4:19-20).

If not for God’s love, why on earth should we do good to those who hate, abuse, strike on our cheek and take away our belongings as Jesus teaches in Lk 6:27-35? Since it is not in our human nature, it becomes extremely difficult (if not impossible) even when we want to do it on humanitarian ground. When there is so much love of God in our hearts, we are able to rise above our normal nature with supernatural grace better than those who do not have such motives. We are not commanded to be affectionate or friendly towards these people but to do good to such people also by making a decision of the mind. To love God with all one's heart, soul and mind, is to choose to respond to God’s love as God has chosen to love us, in spite of our unworthiness. For example, in many traditional families there are conflicts between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law, not because both of them know ‘law’ but because they do not have natural attraction towards each other as blood-related persons have. Even if they do not have natural liking, good feeling and attraction for each other, they can decide to serve, care for and help each other only if they are motivated by the love of God. In every situation (in family, neighbourhood, religious community or workplace) we have to daily decide to accept people as they are; to do good even if they do not; to make sacrifices for the welfare of others; to help even those who never help us; to forgive those who have offended us; etc. Loving is not a feeling but a choice.

Why is love, as taught by Jesus, a commandment? First of all, Jesus does not command emotional or affectionate love, but love in action. He commands active love or love to be shown in action such as doing deeds of mercy even when we don't feel like doing them towards those with whom we do not have a good feeling. Secondly, Jesus, our Teacher summons us (his disciples) everyday to obey his twin commandments. He will do so till the end of our lives. Since we can never exhaust the limits, scope and opportunities for love, the Master continues to command us (his disciples) every day to love selflessly, to serve the needy, to make sacrifices for the welfare of others, to share our resources with those who do not have, to forgive those who have offended us, etc. Since it is difficult to love those who do not love us, Christ’s command reminds us to make a decision to love such people with his grace. If we disobey our Guru every time, how can we be called his faithful disciples? Thus love, as taught by Jesus, is a decision of the mind to be made everyday.

5.  Response to God's Word

Do we consciously do good, render a service, show compassion, perform deeds of mercy and do self-sacrifice for the needy, by making a decision of the mind even if we don’t have a good feeling towards them? Do our faith or religious practices influence our behaviour is such a way that they motivate us to serve and do deeds of mercy to our neighbours, especially the suffering and the needy? Do we live our lives by choice – by making decisions of the mind daily to accept people as they are; to do good even if they do not; to make sacrifices for the welfare of others; to help even those who never help us in our family, neighbourhood, religious community or workplace? Do we always try to remain as faithful disciples of our Master (Jesus) by obeying his greatest commandment in this manner?

6.  A prayer

Dear and merciful God, grant that we may consciously do deeds of mercy and self-sacrifice for anyone in need out of choice.  May our faith and religious practices influence our behaviour is such a way that we get motivated to render service to the suffering and the needy. We are sorry for the times we lived as unfaithful disciples of our Master (Jesus) by disobeying his greatest commandment of loving God by loving our neighbours. Amen.

 

29th Sunday of Ordinary Time (A)

 

Twenty-ninth Sunday of Ordinary Time (A) [Mt 22:15-21]

22.10.2023

The Question about Paying Taxes to Emperor Caesar

Readings: (1) Is 45:1.4-6 (2) 1 Thess 1:1-5

1.  Theme in brief

Obedience to God versus obedience to the State

2.  Focus Statement  

We must give to the State (‘Caesar’) the things that belong to it, and to God the things that belong to him; and only when the State goes against God’s laws, we are bound to disobey it.

3.    Explanation of the text

According to today’s gospel text, the Pharisees sent their disciples along with the Herodians to entrap Jesus about the question of paying taxes to the Roman government headed by Emperor Caesar (22:15,17). [Herodians were a group of people within Jewish society who were sympathetic to the Roman government]. Their question was whether it was lawful to pay taxes to a foreign government (22:17). If Jesus were to say: “You must pay taxes,” the Pharisees would accuse him of being a traitor who colluded with the foreign occupiers. In that case he would be branded as an enemy of the Jewish nation. If he were to say: “Do not pay at all,” the Herodians would bring a charge of subversion or sedition against him and report the matter to Caesar. For this crime he could be executed. For Jesus, the question was like a dead end!

Jesus answered their question in such a way that he could escape from their trap. He found it unsafe to clearly say either yes or no. He innocently asked them to show him a coin with which they paid their taxes (22:19). They quickly took out a denarius from their pockets which, as devout Jews, they were not supposed to carry, because it had the Emperor’s image on it. He asked them, "Whose head is this and whose title” (22:20)? In other words, whose image was printed on that coin?  And they had to admit that it was Caesar’s (22:21). He answered them by saying that they should give back to Caesar what is Caesar's due, and to God what is God's due (22:21). Greek philosophers in ancient days said that real justice implied "giving back to everyone what is their due." If so, what Jesus probably meant was, as per the principle of justice, all people, including Caesar, should get what was due to them. In other words, they must give to the State (‘Caesar’) the things that belonged to it, and not things that belonged to God (22:21). Even the State (‘Caesar’) must render to God what belongs to him and must be subjected to his laws. Thus, Jesus accepted the legitimate claims of the State over its citizens, but refused to give it divine rights. He insisted that God’s claim over us was far superior to the State’s.

By giving such an answer Jesus acknowledged that there were things that were properly under the jurisdiction of the government, and things that were not. To render to Caesar what is Caesar's, is to return his own coin to him by paying taxes and fulfilling one’s duties towards the State; to render to God what is God's is to worship and serve him alone (cf. 4:10). Jesus probably meant that the Pharisees were confusing others about what belonged to God and what belonged to the State; they were rendering to neither what belonged to them. They were not giving government its due, and were refusing God his due since they rejected Jesus’ message of God’s Kingdom.

Since they were carrying and using the offensive coin, Jesus called them hypocrites who were putting him to the test (22:18). Both the groups were paying the taxes by using the Roman coin. Thus they indirectly acknowledged the Roman authority over them. Jesus’ shrewd reply did not give any chance to either party to catch him. Though they failed in their plot at this point and faced a great deal of embarrassment, they never gave up this charge till the last moments of his life. At the time of his trial later on, one of the charges they would bring against him before Pilate would be that he forbade paying taxes to Caesar (Lk 23:2).

4.  Application to life                     

Today’s gospel text deals with some interesting questions: How to deal with the issues of conflict that may sometimes arise between God and Caesar (that is, worldly rulers and governments), the Church and the State, citizenship of this world and of the Kingdom of God. Caesar or worldly kings and governments have their own legitimate authority. All authority comes from God (Jn 19:11) and Caesar (the State) is also responsible before God for his decisions or actions and for the proper exercise of his authority. But Caesar is after all Caesar; he is not God, because he does not have almighty powers. Let him continue to rule as Caesar only, and not as God. He himself must be submissive to God and render to him what belongs to him. When some of the modern Caesars overstep their authority and put themselves in God’s place, we need not obey them. In other words, when the laws of the State go against the laws of God or against our faith and moral principles, we have to obey God and follow our conscience rather than the State.

A Christian must decide what Caesar’s domain is rightfully and what can be claimed by God alone. Who has sovereignty – government or God – over which matters? What is truly God’s, what is State’s? Let us see what we should render to God. As per our faith, "The earth is the Lord's and all that is in it" (Psalm 24:1). Since all that we are and have are God’s gifts to us, we are bound in justice to give back to God our gratitude, faithfulness, trust and submission. Our constant acts of praise and thanksgiving to God, especially in the Eucharistic celebration, are nothing but our way of paying back what we owe to God. We are called to serve and worship him with single-minded devotion and holy lives. In faith we hold that our bodies, souls, intellects, will and values are God's gift to us. We owe God all these things so that we may use them for his purposes or according to his will and for the service of our neighbour.

Similarly, all natural laws, natural justice, human and fundamental rights, freedom of speech and freedom of faith and conscience belong to God’s domain. Suppose a government denies these rights or tramples upon them, then it oversteps its limits and takes the role of God. In such matters we need not obey the State. Similarly, the mother earth and her natural resources are a gift from the Creator for our sustenance. If her resources are overused and abused by over-exploitation either by the governments or the corporate/business world, they overrule God’s own design and care for humanity. They cannot say they have a right to do what they want with God’s creation and cause ecological imbalance that threatens human existence. This is exactly what Peter and other apostles proclaimed even in the midst of persecutions in the early Church: “We must obey God rather than any human authority” (Acts 5:29), because the Jewish religious authorities were denying them the right to speak what in conscience they held to be true. 

Now the question comes: Is committed Christian discipleship opposed to being a good citizen of the State? Not at all. Practising our faith in a committed manner does not excuse us from our social and civic responsibilities, especially when they do not conflict with our total allegiance to God. Which are the things that are Caesar's? Generally speaking, the things that are Caesar's (or the State’s) are what Caesar says they are, under his legitimate authority such as taxes and public order. Whichever be the government, it is our duty to pay legitimate taxes, since they are meant for common good. We have to respect and obey lawfully constituted authority of the State (Government). On the contrary, sometimes the laws of the State may clash with God’s laws, or with Christian faith and morals. Take for instance, legalization of euthanasia, abortion, homosexual marriages, etc., by some States. In these matters, we are bound to follow our conscience rather than the State.

When a government provides needed goods and services, then we must give back to the government our loyalty and support. We should also protect public property out of concern for public good. Certain misuse/ abuse of services provided by the Government noticed in some regions are not so much against the Government or its property (as people commonly think), but against human society. For instance: directly hooking electricity from the overhead wires and using it freely to the extent of burning all the lights at daytime also; travelling freely without tickets; destroying public property, especially during riots and protests; using dubious means to evade taxes; bypassing all established rules by bribing the officials; etc. But where a government is a dictatorship that imposes itself on the people's will, the principle of justice does not demand that people give their loyalty and support. Mahatma Gandhi had launched a movement of civil disobedience against the British government that ruled India. He believed that it is morally right not to pay taxes to such a foreign government that occupies one’s nation.   

Some use this gospel text to justify unconditional loyalty and support to corrupt and totalitarian governments. When the Church criticizes such rulers or governments, they accuse her of interfering in politics. They say that all civil, economic and social affairs should be exclusive realm of the Sate and the Church as well as her ministers should stick only to spiritual affairs. When a government commands people to do what God forbids, or commands them not to do what God commands to do, should the Church or her ministers not stand for God and perform their prophetic role of raising voices in protest? Should Christians co-operate and collaborate with the government’s unjust, discriminatory and immoral decisions, policies and actions? In such instances, Christians must obey God rather than human authority, exactly as Peter had declared before his religious authorities in his days. (See above).

There is a possibility that our disobedience to Caesar in order to be faithful to God will cost a lot: We may be accused as anti-national or unpatriotic, or may have to face heavy sanctions by the government, harassment from the officials, brutality of the police, arrest, imprisonment, or even death – as it happens in some parts of the world. Christians employed in government services may not be able to go against a government’s unjust policies for the sake of safeguarding their jobs. But does it mean they should prevent their own people from protesting against violations of human rights by their government by threatening them with dire consequences? They have to answer this question before God.

It is clear that God alone has absolute claims over our lives. But, besides worldly rulers/ governments/ regimes as mentioned above, there are other powers that vie to make their claims over us or try to rule over our hearts. In modern world, consumerism and materialism can compete with our absolute loyalty to God. If not guarded, money and possessions can become our lords that dilute our absolute allegiance to God alone. We can divide our property, but we can never divide our loyalty to God. Many of our currency coins or notes are bearing the image of past political rulers or national leaders who are dead. But we should not forget that we bear the image and likeness of the living God to whom alone our life and everything else belongs.

5.  Response to God's Word

When the laws of the State go against the laws of God or against our faith and moral principles, whom do we obey: God or the State? Do we render to God what belongs to him by showing our gratitude, single-minded devotion, faithfulness, trust and submission to him? Do we render to the State what are its legitimate rights? Are we faithful to our social and civic responsibilities? Do we pay legitimate taxes to the government or try to evade them by dubious means? Do we misuse and abuse public property and public utility services?

6.  A prayer

Father, the supreme Governor of the universe, we render you all praise, honour, glory, thanksgiving and worship. All that we are and all that we have comes from you and belongs to you. To you we return everything with total gratitude and trust. Grant that we may work for common good by faithfully fulfilling our civic and social responsibilities. Bless all governments and political leaders that may govern their States with justice and truth. Give us the courage to stand firm on your laws even at the cost of disobedience to the State when it negates them. Amen.

 

28th Sunday of Ordinary Time (A)

 

Twenty-eighth Sunday OF Year A [Mt 22:1-14]

15.10.2023

The Parable of the Wedding Banquet

Readings: (1) Is 25:6-10 (2) Phil 4:12-14.19-20

1.  Theme in brief

God’s invitation and our refusal

2.  Focus Statement

God always invites us to experience the joy of his banquet of love and salvation (called “the Kingdom of God or Kingdom of Heaven), but we refuse his invitation by making excuses and giving priority to worldly concerns.

3.  Explanation of the text

In this Parable of the Wedding Banquet, we can very well imagine that the king who gives a banquet is God the Father, the son for whose wedding the banquet is prepared is Jesus Christ and the banquet is the Kingdom of God to which Jesus came to invite people. Israel was first invited to the Kingdom, but when the Kingdom appeared in and through Jesus, she refused to accept it.

There are three parts in this parable as far as invitation to the banquet is concerned:

(1) The sending of his servants by the king twice to call the invited guests (22:3-4): The first group of servants refers to the prophets sent by God to Israel whose invitation to repent was refused by the Israelites (22:3). The second group of servants, who met with not only indifference but also were murdered, refers to John the Baptist and Jesus himself, both of whom were murdered (22:6).

(2) The third attempt of the king to call everyone from the streets (22:9): It refers to Jesus’ ministry to the outcasts of Jewish society and later the early Church’s outreach to the Gentiles. Since Israel refused invitation to the Kingdom, all kinds of people, both good and bad were invited, including tax-collectors, prostitutes and Gentiles.

(3) The king’s inspection regarding the fitness of guests (22:11): It refers to the new way of life to be lived by sinners who were invited to the wedding feast of the Kingdom of God. They should have worn ‘wedding robes’ that symbolize their repentance and conversion (22:12). Failure to come to wedding hall without proper dress was a sign that their response was half-hearted.

When everything for the wedding feast was ready, the king sent his servants with these words, “Come to the marriage feast” (22:4). They had to either accept or refuse the invitation immediately. This indicates the urgency of response to Jesus’ invitation to become a citizen of God’s Kingdom and live according to its demands. There are two types of people who deliberately refused the invitation: (1) the careless ones who were engrossed in their work and business (22:5); and (2) the violent ones who seized, mistreated and killed the servants sent by the king to invite them (22:6). The former made light of such a loving invitation (22:5) which showed their lack of seriousness. They were careless about their duty or responsibility to attend.

By their refusal to accept the invitation, they deliberately insulted the host (that is, the king in this story) who took so much trouble to arrange such a sumptuous banquet out of his generosity. If not a single invited guest would have attended such a great banquet, what a shame the king would have to face. Indeed, it was an act of open rebellion against the king by his invitees. The king had no way of saving his honour but by gathering anybody on the road to be his guests.

The king’s order to gather all whom they found, both good and bad (22:10), indicates Jesus' own mission to sinners and the Gentiles. It tells us that in God’s Kingdom there is a mixture of good and bad people or virtuous and sinners. It may also indicate the mixture of both Jews and Gentiles in the Church. Anyone is welcome to the banquet, but once they have accepted the invitation, they are supposed to wear the proper dress, namely repent and change their life-style. If they become complacent and fail to persevere in their new life, they will be thrown out of the wedding hall or the Kingdom (22:13).

4.  Application to life                     

In this parable, Jesus likens God’s invitation to enter God’s Kingdom to the messianic banquet in OT terms (Isaiah 25:6-10). What he means in plain language is that God always invites us to live a life of love, sharing, service, fellowship and justice, and experience his salvation. The joy of living this type of life and the offer of salvation made by God through Jesus is compared to the taste of a wedding banquet in this parable. The invitation sent first to invited guests and later to everyone found on the main streets (22:3,9-10) is a free act of magnanimity or benevolence from the part of the king. Even today, God continues to send invitation card to us out of his magnanimity, though we are not his ‘close relatives’, that is, in spite of being sinners and not in close union with him.

God’s invitation to experience the joy of salvation or grace is a free gift. It is up to us to accept it or refuse. It is also an invitation to love selflessly, to serve willingly, to make sacrifices joyfully, to care for the uncared for, to forgive without conditions, to show mercy towards the suffering, etc. These are the ways in which we co-operate with God to establish his Kingdom on earth. But often we knowingly and wilfully, stubbornly and obstinately refuse to accept God’s invitation either by making excuses or by our indifference. We become deaf to God’s invitation to love and refuse to cooperate with his grace. Why? First reason is clear from today’s parable: our engrossment in worldly affairs, such as our business, work, and cares of life. Though work and business are important for life, we should not allow them to be our gods whom we worship. This happens when we give first priority to worldly concerns, as if work were the only purpose of life. In that case, the Kingdom of God receives very low place in our list of priorities.

Other reasons for our refusal of God’s invitation are our unwillingness to sacrifice our self-interests, indifference towards the poor and the needy, carelessness in spiritual matters, over attachment to wealth, possessions, etc. Then in order to justify our action and behaviour, we add ‘ifs’ and ‘buts’ such as, “I would have done it, if not…” or we postpone the opportunities for service and self-sacrifice by saying: “Let’s see later on!” That shows that we do not feel the urgency of serving the needy as demanded by the king in today’s parable. See the way some of the invitees treated the servants sent by the king. They not only refused to go for wedding feast but also violently seized, mistreated and killed the servants (22:6). We too mistreat Jesus and murder his values by living a life contrary to our call or faith. Sometimes we mistreat the messengers through whom God invites us to live by his standards such as our parents and spiritual guides. We oppose, criticize and make fun of them or show a “don’t care” attitude. We lack seriousness in our Christian commitments and make light of our spiritual and social duties or responsibilities. Thus our response to God’s invitation to relish his ‘wedding feast’ remains half-hearted and cold.

Excuses get multiplied when some people get into addictive habits, such as substance abuse (alcoholism, drug addiction, etc.) or behavioural addiction (mobile phone, internet, sex addiction, etc.). Normally, such people make a number of excuses to cover up their bad behaviour or to protect themselves from those who want to snatch away that substance or object (such as drug, alcohol and internet) on which they are physically and psychologically dependent. The same thing is true of those who allow themselves to be driven by lust, over-anxiety, excessive worries and fears, depression and tensions. They too get addicted to these issues. It is to such people God always sends his invitation to admit their powerlessness to change their condition and surrender their lives into his hands without making excuses, and allow him to take them where he wants and give them what he wills. Once a person gets addicted to anything, he/she makes so many excuses to cover up his/her problem and protect oneself from the pain of giving up such a habit or from the inability to give it up.

What a wonderful opportunity those invitees got, but missed it and suffered irreversible loss. Hence, it is good to examine the excuses we make or reasons we give to avoid involvement in building up a loving and just society. The same thing applies to the excuses we make for not giving up our bad habits or deep-rooted disorders mentioned above. We need God’s light to see whether they are genuine. Quite often they may signify our unwillingness to make sacrifices and live our Christian faith in a committed manner. We must examine whether we remain as Christians for the sake of social identity or interest only in our personal salvation without any concern for our community or society. Let us also examine the excuses we make in various areas of life:  to give some time for our spiritual duties; to forgive those who have hurt us; to render an occasional service which has no reward; to sacrifice our time and resources for the good of others; to give time for family and children; to live honestly; not to pardon those who have offended us; etc.

Though God invites the good and the bad, those who respond to his invitation must put on the wedding garment of repentance and good deeds. They have to become worthy of becoming God’s guests by proper moral and spiritual response. Just as the invitees in this parable did to the king, sometimes professing Christians insult God not only by refusing his loving invitation, but also by not wearing the wedding robe, that is, by not living what they profess. They become so complacent that they take their new life for granted and fail to persevere in it. They should realize, though invited, they will not be saved automatically. They need to change their former filthy clothes and put on new garment, which implies a change of life.

5.  Response to God's Word

Considering the magnanimity of God towards sinners like us, what is our response? How often do we refuse God’s free offer of salvation and grace? What are the excuses we make to avoid our involvement in social service or charitable works? In what way we show indifference to our duty to build up a loving and just society? If we refuse God’s invitation again and again, is it not a sign of our hard-heartedness from our part? Do we get engrossed in worldly affairs, such as our business and work to the extent of neglecting our spiritual duties and giving time to our families? Do we mistreat Jesus and murder his values by living a life contrary to what we profess in faith? Are we wearing the wedding robe by living a life of grace and practicing what we profess, or by living a life of honesty, justice and truth?

6.  A prayer

O benevolent God, you always invite us to live a life of love and experience your free gift of salvation. We are so sorry for the times we refused your invitation wilfully and deliberately. Forgive us for our lame excuses, obstinacy and hard-heartedness. Grant that we may give first priority to build up communities of love, peace and justice and not to our worldly concerns. May we be found worthy to stand before you clothed in the garment of your grace by living what we profess. Amen.

 

27th Sunday of Ordinary Time (A)

 

Twenty-seventh Sunday of Ordinary Time  (A) [Mt 21:33-43]

08.10.2023

The Parable of the Wicked Tenants

Readings: (1) Is 5:1-7 (2) Phil 4:6-9

1.  Theme in brief

God’s goodness versus human wickedness

2.   Focus Statement  

    In spite of our sinfulness and ingratitude, God is so good, generous and patient with us that he gives us plenty of opportunities to repent and change by sending his messengers.

3.  Explanation of the text

The whole of salvation history is summarized in today’s Parable of the Wicked Tenants. It deals with God’s boundless goodness and benevolence towards humans in contrast with their wickedness or sinfulness. The Bible as a whole depicts God as a zealous lover who loves his beloved (that is, human beings) with an exclusive love. But human beings, quite often fail to respond to his love and break off their relationship with him by sinning. To save them, he visualizes a grand plan. He executes this plan by choosing a community (people), namely Israel and reveals to her his plan. When Israel becomes unfaithful, he sends prophets to bring her back to himself. But Israel rejects prophets, sometimes even by stoning and killing some of them. Finally, when the appointed time comes, God sends his only Son (Jesus), and through his Passion, death and resurrection saves sinful humans. Today’s parable highlights this wonderful love-story of God filled with his boundless love, generosity, patience and large-heartedness or benevolence for his beloved.

A parable in the strict sense is not supposed to have a word for word hidden meaning. But this one, like some other parables, breaks that rule and is converted into an allegory by the evangelist. According to this allegory vineyard is Israel; God is the owner of the vineyard; tenants to whom he leases his vineyard are the religious leaders of Israel, that is, the priests, the Pharisees and the elders (21:33); the successive emissaries (slaves) sent by the absentee landowner are the prophets sent to Israel by God, some of whom were stoned or murdered by them (21:34-36); and the son of the landowner is God’s own Son (Christ). The owner thinks that they will respect his son better than previous slaves (21:37). Instead, they seize and kill him outside the vineyard (21:39) – surely a reference to the crucifixion of Jesus outside the city of Jerusalem. Thus, the murderous behaviour of religious leaders of Israel reaches its culmination when they crucify Jesus, the greatest prophet of the New Age.  

This parable has its background in the OT. In the Book of Isaiah (5:1-7), Israel is called a vineyard and its owner is the Lord of hosts. He did everything possible to nurture this vineyard. He established an everlasting covenant with her, delivered her from Egyptian slavery, led her through the desert and gave her the Promised Land. But Israel failed to discharge her duties faithfully as the chosen people of God and rejected God’s servants (that is, the prophets) who were sent to lead her to God’s ways. Now she is rejecting God’s Son (Jesus) also. The other tenants to whom the owner leases the vineyard after cancelling the lease of former tenants (21:41) are the Gentiles who accept the gospel rejected by Israel. Hence, this parable probably hints that now the Church has become the new Israel and is full of new tenants (that is, Gentile Christians). Since the leadership of Old Israel failed to produce good fruits, it was now handed over to the New Israel (that is, the Church) which is already producing fruits of so many Gentile Christians.

By highlighting the fact that the landowner’s benevolence towards his enemies goes beyond limits, this parable emphasizes God’s tremendous patience and kindness towards sinners. No earthly landowner would dare to send one’s own son after meeting such acts of treachery from his tenants; instead he would retaliate strongly against those murderers. From the world’s point of view, was it not an act of utter foolishness? Did he not make a mistake in believing that they would respect at least his son? Yes, he did; but in God’s way of thinking, it is not a mistake. It is the tenants (who are now likened to builders) who committed the greatest blunder by rejecting the cornerstone while constructing their building and suffered for it by losing their lease to the better accountable tenants (21:41-42).

4.    Application to life                      

As we have noted above, today’s Parable of the Wicked Tenants highlights the central theme of the whole Bible – God’s boundless love and generous mercy towards sinners. When we reflect on this central theme of the Bible, we come to know that there are common elements in God’s boundless love and mercy in the history of our salvation and our personal life-history. We can imagine how God has chosen us and loved us boundlessly from the first moment of conception and birth till today through so many people beginning with our parents. Each person who loved (loves) us and each event in our life (sweet or sour) proclaims God’s wonderful love and benevolence towards us. Like the chosen people (Israel), he chose our ancestors also to Christian faith, not because they were better than others or more worthy, but out of sheer love. Quite often he chooses the unworthy and the little ones and not the powerful ones.

If God has been so good and generous towards us, how are we responding to his goodness and mercy? Like Israelites, we too often reject God’s love. We too just murder the precious values of God’s Kingdom – love, peace and justice – like the tenants who murdered the slaves and the landowner’s son. Instead of producing sweet fruits of love of God and neighbour, we produce bitter or sour fruits by sinning against both. God gives us so many opportunities for repentance by sending his messengers like preachers, counsellors, teachers, trustworthy friends, spiritual leaders, guiding parents and supportive spouses. But we oppose them, try to suppress their voice and sometimes even react violently. Thus, we become unworthy of the trust placed by God in our hands. Let us examine and see how we have ‘stoned’ and ‘killed’ the prophets sent by God, not literally, but by disobeying, disregarding and discarding their good advice, direction and guidance. Sometimes we have ‘killed’ them with our heart-piercing words, that is, harsh and destructive criticism. If we think that we are self-sufficient and are not in need of any guidance and spiritual direction, the Kingdom of God may be taken away from us (21:43). We may lose it by losing our character or virtues.

Israel’s election as a holy people involved a responsibility to be a light for all other people. But she was unfaithful to her call and produced wild grapes instead of sweet grapes by worshipping idols and committing other sins against God’s commandments given through Moses. The same thing can be said about the new Israel, the Church. If we notice divisions, group conflicts, scandals, corruption, power-mongering in the Church or in our local Christian community, we can conclude that they are the symptoms of wild and bitter grapes in the Church. In spite of being Christ’s disciples, if we are totally immersed in the corrupt practices of the world and give bad example to people of other faiths by living a life contrary to the gospel-values, we produce sour grapes. If this is the case, today’s gospel invites us to repent for the times we have become like those unfaithful and rebellious tenants. This is a call to be converted from the state of being called “murderous and wretched tenants” and produce fruits of the Kingdom (21:43).

When we reflect on God’s benevolence towards sinners like us, we come to realize how wicked we become by refusing his love so often!  We can compare this type of ingratitude with experiences of being let down or betrayed by our own people for whom we did or do so much, such as our children, relatives, friends, colleagues and close neighbours. These bitter experiences make us imagine how much disappointed God must be feeling when we are unfaithful to him. In spite of our wickedness and ingratitude, God is so good, generous and patient with us that even today and right now he offers us plenty of opportunities to abandon our wickedness, repent and change. He has loved us to the extent of allowing his Son to die a criminal’s death on the cross. Compared to that benevolence, what is or response?

Each one of us should think that this parable in today’s context is not about the Jews but about us. We are the tenants of God’s ‘vineyard,’ that is, his Kingdom. God has made us partners in his great enterprise or project for this world, that is, his Kingdom. We are like his stewards to whom he has entrusted the care for his ‘vineyard.’ He expects to see good fruits in it. He has a right to expect good fruits because he has done so much for us. This is a great privilege, which entails great responsibilities. The question we must ask is whether we are producing good fruits for God’s Kingdom. As this parable says, we quite often think God has gone to “another country” (21:33). We play the role of rats in the absence of cat. We misuse our freedom in the absence of God. But God wants to make us accountable to the duties and responsibilities entrusted to us. Yes, we are accountable to God for the care of our families, for mending our troubled relationships and reforming of our unforgiving attitudes. All these things require a great deal of patience, just as God is so patient with us. As mentioned in this parable, he wants to collect his produce (21:34), that is, fruits of genuine love gathered by overcoming selfishness, doing pro-active service, and working for justice and fellowship among us. This is what is meant by building up his Kingdom by making use of the Cornerstone or Keystone who is Christ himself. In other words, yielding fruits means submitting ourselves to God’s loving rule and living the gospel-values. It also involves bearing fruits of repentance for our failures to live the gospel way. Let us examine ourselves and see how we ‘murder’ the values of the Kingdom like genuine love and concern in our families, truthfulness in our society and justice in our dealings.

If we extend the application of this parable further, we can consider our family, community or society, institution, organization and the Church as our ‘vineyard’ which God has entrusted to our care. Instead of yielding sweet fruits in God’s ‘vineyard’ by behaving with a sense of responsibility and accountability, we are tempted to manage it for our personal advantage or benefits. There is a tremendous pressure or a silent war going on inside our hearts to succumb to the temptation of using the leadership and management roles entrusted to us in the family, the Church and the society to lord it over by becoming authoritarian, to always expect to be served and not to serve, to earn a name and fame for ourselves, to erect monuments that perpetuate our memory, to further our own hidden agenda, to enhance our power and position, to amass wealth for ourselves by misappropriating public or church funds, etc. We must understand that we are ultimately accountable to God for the misuse or mismanagement of the ‘vineyard’ entrusted to us. Today’s gospel invites us to examine whether we have succumbed to these temptations and behave in an irresponsible manner. If yes, we need to realize that ultimately we are accountable to God himself.

Even if we have occasionally succumbed to these tests, God, being God, is infinitely patient and merciful towards us. He gives us so many opportunities for repentance by sending his messengers like preachers, counsellors, trustworthy friends, guiding parents and supportive spouses (vv. 34, 36). But we oppose them, criticize them, try to suppress their voice and sometimes even react violently. Thus, we become unworthy of the trust placed by God in our hands. Will he not take away the Kingdom from us and give it to others who produce better fruits (21:43)?

5.  Response to God's Word

Let us praise and thank God for doing wonderful deeds for each one of us personally and to our community by calling us to Christian faith. Do we make use of so many opportunities given by God for repentance by sending his messengers like parents, spiritual leaders and trustworthy friends? Do we listen to them or try to suppress their voice? Like Israelites, do we too often reject God’s love instead of responding generously to his mercy? How are our fruits: sweet or sour? Do we ‘murder’ the values of the Kingdom like genuine love and concern in our families, truthfulness in our society and justice in our dealings? Are we accountable and responsible in our stewardship, or have mismanaged the ‘vineyard’ entrusted to our care?

6.  A prayer.

O boundlessly generous and patient God, what thanks can we render to you for the wonderful opportunities and messengers you provide us again and again to change our ways. Grant that we may respond generously to your infinite mercy towards us. We regret for the times we mismanaged the vineyard you entrusted to our care. Make us more responsible and accountable citizens of your Kingdom. Amen.