Between the intent and the rule !
January 26, 2024
It is interesting to note that if we continue reading the Gospel of Luke beyond today’s reading we will find the story unfolds quite differently from how it starts. After Jesus read in the synagogue on that day, the initial response was that “all spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips.‘ (Luke 4:22).
But in a short time, the atmosphere changes and ”they got up, drove him out of the town, and took him to the brow of the hill on which the town was built, in order to throw him off the cliff.” (Luke 4:29). What happened? In interpreting the passage he had read, Jesus points out to them (Luke 4:24-27) something that John the Baptist had earlier said to the Pharisees and Saducees (Mathew 3:9), namely, that their vaunted claim that they were the chosen people did not assure them of any special treatment before God. This was too much for the Jews in Nazareth to digest, because it hit at the heart of their self-identity, and so they want to kill him.
And this incident could be seen as a precursor to the story of Jesus’ life. Initially he was thought of as the new Messiah, primarily because of the many wonders or miracles he did that solved many of their human sufferings. Secondly, “he taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law”.(Mathew 7:29). So the crowds were happy to follow him unquestioningly. But then he pushes people to question long held rules and traditions, questions their own religious faith, and even challenges the religious establishment. Eventually all this is too much to take. It was all so different from the kind of religion they had created for themselves, the image of God they had fostered for generations, and so much a challenge to their understanding of their faith, that the religious establishment orchestrates his arrest and eventual crucifixion.
It would seem that we human beings generally prefer to have a God who is in our own image and likeness - i.e. we prefer a God who lives up to our own ideas of how God ought to function. And so, if the kind of religion, if the kind of God, that Jesus tried to introduce us to, does not fit into this our own image, then we reject it.
Pope Francis seems to be facing the same challenge. Though as a Jesuit provincial in Argentina he had refused to stand up to the Government of that time in support of his beleaguered Jesuit confreres (like many in authority in the Church do today), by the time he became Pope he seems to have had a metanoia, and so begins to start speaking truth to power as for example in his recent condemnation of the Israeli human rights violations in Gaza, his questioning of the arms economy, his questioning of unbridled capitalism, his recent remarks about Trump’s immigration plans as disgraceful, and so on. Together with that, he suddenly stands up to speak for those who have long been ‘excluded’ by the Catholic Church, (e.g. the divorced and remarried, the LGBTQ community, those from other religions, and so on) As a result, for those whose religious security is grounded in a belief that the Catholic Church can never make a mistake, (despite Pope John Paul II publicly asking pardon for Church actions in over a hundred instances), these statements or teachings of Francis seem to go against the Church’s long-established traditional approaches. And so like the Jews of Nazareth who could not accept that their long cherished belief in their special status before God was perhaps to be questioned, there are many who actively oppose Francis for opening the doors to such approaches which seem to bring into question the image they have created for themselves of a forever inerrant Church.
Perhaps, even in our closest relationships, we make the same choice of wanting the other to be in our own image or likeness. Parents want their children to live as the parents feel is right, and adult children expect the same of their parents; husbands expect their wives to be a certain way, and wives have expectations of husbands in the same manner, and so on with all our closest relationships. It is always a struggle to know how much each of us must let the other be, even if it is different from what we would like/want; it is always a struggle to know how much it is OK to push the significant others in our lives to change in the ways that we feel is right for them. I find this balance extremely difficult to keep. Perhaps the only rule of thumb that sometimes helps me, is to see the values expressed in the ‘other’s’ way of living, rather than to focus on his/her behaviours. For the behaviours (the presenting actions) are but the expressions of these values. But to make this distinction and to take that into account when engaging with the significant others in our own lives, is extremely challenging.
And the same principle could usefully be applied to religious matters. In fact I would suggest that this distinction between the values behind the rules/commandments and the rules/commandments themselves is something that Jesus understood very well. For it is only this distinction that can help us harmonise the fact that Jesus could publicly declare: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them”, (Mathew 5:17), and then in practice go about publicly breaking so many commandments, like the law of the Sabbath, the law of cleaning hands before eating, and later under his inspiration his disciples would even ignore the law of circumcision, the law against unclean foods, and so on.
In the same way, we too need to constantly ask ourselves what is the value expressed in the Sacraments, the prayers, the moral and other rules of the Church? For example, what is the value behind going to Church every Sunday? Is it just an obligation we fulfil or is it a time taken out from our busy work-filled days, to reflect on our lives from a Jesus-perspective, and remind ourselves of how we are to be committed to others in the world around us? Do we follow the rule without the value - and is it possible to follow the value without following the rule? Is the sacrament of baptism just a sacred ritual, without a value or meaning behind it - isn’t it really an external expression of an inward change? Again, can a person have an inward change, but choose not to be baptised - and conversely are there many who choose to be baptised without any change of heart? Or let us take the rule in the Catholic Church that a person in mortal sin should not be allowed to receive Holy Communion. This is based on the belief that mortal sin is essentially a complete rejection of God. This rule is then applied to those Catholics who have been divorced and then remarried outside the Catholic Church, by assuming that such people are objectively in a state of mortal sin. But is this remarriage really a complete rejection of God? In fact Pope Francis questions this equating the acts of of divorcing and re-marriage with mortal sin, when he speaks of the many reasons why moral culpability is limited. (Encyclical, Amor Laetitia (paras 303 and 304).
Furthermore, Francis also points that sometimes “a subject may know full well the rule, yet have great difficulty in understanding its inherent values” (Encyclical, Amor Laetitia para 301), and thus acknowledges the real possibility of being unable to see the values hidden behind a rule or commandment of the Church. But isn't it important for us to realise and acknowledge this distinction between the internal values and the external expressions of them, whether in religion or in our relationships. But how difficult that is - especially when we get hurt by a religious rule that seems unreasonable and cruel, or by the external expressions of one who is close to us.
And so,
Between the intent and the rule,
Between the desire and the expression,
Lies a dusky ocean of hurt
Simmering in un-understanding.
But who has time, who has the will
who has the capacity, or the energy,
To keep searching for the meaning
To delve down to the light.
And so the people come and go
Talking of Michelangelo.
'The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock')
First Reading: Nehemiah 8: 2-4a, 5-6, 8-10
So on the first day of the seventh month Ezra the priest brought the Law before the assembly, which was made up of men and women and all who were able to understand. He read it aloud from daybreak till noon as he faced the square before the Water Gate in the presence of the men, women and others who could understand. And all the people listened attentively to the Book of the Law.
Ezra the teacher of the Law stood on a high wooden platform built for the occasion. Ezra opened the book. All the people could see him because he was standing above them; and as he opened it, the people all stood up. Ezra praised the Lord, the great God; and all the people lifted their hands and responded, “Amen! Amen!” Then they bowed down and worshiped the Lord with their faces to the ground.
They read from the Book of the Law of God, making it clear[a] and giving the meaning so that the people understood what was being read.
Then Nehemiah the governor, Ezra the priest and teacher of the Law, and the Levites who were instructing the people said to them all, “This day is holy to the Lord your God. Do not mourn or weep.” For all the people had been weeping as they listened to the words of the Law.
Nehemiah said, “Go and enjoy choice food and sweet drinks, and send some to those who have nothing prepared. This day is holy to our Lord. Do not grieve, for the joy of the Lord is your strength.”
Second Reading: First Corinthians 12: 12-30
Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. For we were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many.
Now if the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be? But in fact God has placed the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. If they were all one part, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, but one body.
The eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” And the head cannot say to the feet, “I don’t need you!” On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty, while our presentable parts need no special treatment. But God has put the body together, giving greater honor to the parts that lacked it, so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.
Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret?
Gospel: Luke 1: 1-4; 4: 14-21
Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.
Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside. He was teaching in their synagogues, and everyone praised him. He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:
“The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisonersand recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him. He began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”
Comments
Post a Comment