[img]http://www.catholica.com.au/sunday/images/Y-not_an_640x166.gif[/img]
Twenty-third Sunday in Ordinary Time
Reading I: Wisdom 9:13-18b
Responsorial Psalm: 90:3-4, 5-6, 12-13, 14-17
Reading II: Philemon 9-10, 12-17
Gospel: Luke 14: 25-33
http://www.usccb.org/bible/readings/090416.cfm
Reading 1 Wis 9:13-18b
Who can know God’s counsel,
or who can conceive what the LORD intends?
For the deliberations of mortals are timid,
and unsure are our plans.
For the corruptible body burdens the soul
and the earthen shelter weighs down the mind that has many concerns.
And scarce do we guess the things on earth,
and what is within our grasp we find with difficulty;
but when things are in heaven, who can search them out?
Or who ever knew your counsel, except you had given wisdom
and sent your holy spirit from on high?
And thus were the paths of those on earth made straight.
Responsorial Psalm Ps 90:3-4, 5-6, 12-13, 14-17
R. (1) In every age, O Lord, you have been our refuge.
You turn man back to dust,
saying, “Return, O children of men.”
For a thousand years in your sight
are as yesterday, now that it is past,
or as a watch of the night.
R. In every age, O Lord, you have been our refuge.
You make an end of them in their sleep;
the next morning they are like the changing grass,
Which at dawn springs up anew,
but by evening wilts and fades.
R. In every age, O Lord, you have been our refuge.
Teach us to number our days aright,
that we may gain wisdom of heart.
Return, O LORD! How long?
Have pity on your servants!
R. In every age, O Lord, you have been our refuge.
Fill us at daybreak with your kindness,
that we may shout for joy and gladness all our days.
And may the gracious care of the LORD our God be ours;
prosper the work of our hands for us!
Prosper the work of our hands!
R. In every age, O Lord, you have been our refuge.
Reading 2 Phmn 9-10, 12-17
I, Paul, an old man,
and now also a prisoner for Christ Jesus,
urge you on behalf of my child Onesimus,
whose father I have become in my imprisonment;
I am sending him, that is, my own heart, back to you.
I should have liked to retain him for myself,
so that he might serve me on your behalf
in my imprisonment for the gospel,
but I did not want to do anything without your consent,
so that the good you do might not be forced but voluntary.
Perhaps this is why he was away from you for a while,
that you might have him back forever,
no longer as a slave
but more than a slave, a brother,
beloved especially to me, but even more so to you,
as a man and in the Lord.
So if you regard me as a partner, welcome him as you would me.
Gospel Lk 14:25-33
Great crowds were traveling with Jesus,
and he turned and addressed them,
“If anyone comes to me without hating his father and mother,
wife and children, brothers and sisters,
and even his own life,
he cannot be my disciple.
Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after me
cannot be my disciple.
Which of you wishing to construct a tower
does not first sit down and calculate the cost
to see if there is enough for its completion?
Otherwise, after laying the foundation
and finding himself unable to finish the work
the onlookers should laugh at him and say,
‘This one began to build but did not have the resources to finish.’
Or what king marching into battle would not first sit down
and decide whether with ten thousand troops
he can successfully oppose another king
advancing upon him with twenty thousand troops?
But if not, while he is still far away,
he will send a delegation to ask for peace terms.
In the same way,
anyone of you who does not renounce all his possessions
cannot be my disciple.”
Great crowds were traveling with Jesus
Great crowds were traveling with Jesus,
and he turned and addressed them,
“If anyone comes to me without hating his father and mother,
wife and children, brothers and sisters,
and even his own life,
he cannot be my disciple."
I wonder, what was he thinking? When Jeshua turned to face the crowd what was on his mind? It was pretty much a road show that followed them from town to town, complete with food sellers, hawkers offering clothes, footwear and rugs, perhaps entertainers too in the tradition of traveling circuses everywhere. And large numbers along for the ride, Fellow Travelers, enthusiastic for the excitement of it all. There was a sense of urgency in his tone, as he raised his voice and told them:
"If anyone comes to me and doesn't hate his family..., and his very life, he can not be a disciple of mine."
The translation lets us down badly when it doesn't capture the meaning well. Three points need to be clarified. Firstly, there is implied a distinction between one who travels with Jeshua in the anonymous crowd and one who comes to him as a disciple. There's nothing wrong with the first, but it doesn't mean much. It won't change the world. And his purpose is to change the world.
To change the world he has to demonstrate a better way of living life in everything he does. If he is going to show people they don't have to be enslaved forever by lies and greed and cruel oppression he must pursue the truth with total dedication. There is no room for compromise, for taking a short-cut here and there, like thinking that these large crowds prove that he is making a real impression on the population. Popularity is shallow. Counting Likes is a trap.
Only putting himself on the line without any reservation will show the way to others. And for this teaching-by-example to be effective it has to be seen close up. He needs disciples who will live this way, dozens of them, hundreds – the spark catching from one committed witness to anyone ready to hear and understand. One to one the fiery spirit spreads through the population and the culture changes, the moral culture, the spiritual awareness.
So in a loud voice he gives the invitation and the challenge. Something for the crowd to think about.
* * * * *
Which brings us to the second problem: 'hate'.
I must say I find this text repugnant. Why do the classical translations keep the word 'hate'? It's not just blunt. It is offensive.
'Hate', the dictionary says, means (a) intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury (b) extreme dislike or antipathy. This hardly fits the context, yet it hits you in the face every time you read it. 'Hate your father and mother'. That is silly.
The Greek word is about a comparative choosing: miséō – properly means to detest, but on a comparative basis; to love someone less than someone else, i.e. to renounce one choice in favor of another [cf. Strong 3404 http://biblehub.com/str/greek/3404.htm]. Hence miséō does not indicate a soft choice but a crucial prioritising of one over the other; there is no aversion, anger or antipathy implied. in fact it will be with heartbreaking sadness.
The commentators too play around with the problem as though readers need to be protected. The result is often ineffectual. "Hate” is harsh, writes Reginald Fuller. It has been suggested that the original Aramaic meant simply “love less than.” But this in turn is probably too weak. The real meaning is that following Jesus means the surrender of the whole of one’s life. [LINK] St Louis http://liturgy.slu.edu/23OrdC090416/theword_indepth.html
'Following Jesus means the surrender of the whole of one's life'. That's nice and plain, isn't it. The next verse includes the word 'cross', and everybody yawns.
What's wrong with a little precise wording to convey the force of the challenge?
If anyone wants to come to me, he will need to give me and my mission priority over family - father, mother, wife, children, brothers or sisters, and even over his own life, or he won't have what it takes to be a disciple.
* * * * *
'You won't have what it takes': This is the last problem word in the text: 'cannot' has become so broad in meaning that it has lost its punch. 'You can't do that' can mean it's illegal, or you're not qualified, or you haven't got the talent, or simply you're not capable of it. You don't have what it takes to be successful in that field.
'Coming to Jeshua' as a disciple means joining him in his mission. In practice that means you give witness to the truth where you see the truth is being rubbished. That's the 'cross' he was talking about, the thing you get nailed to for blowing the whistle on thieves and liars as they rob the poor and screw the defenceless.
As the many heroic whistleblowers in recent times illustrate, to speak out will very likely cost you your family, your personal relationships, financial security, reputation and health – your very life.
I get disappointed when I read weak ineffectual commentaries on the gospel. The familiar 'surrender of the whole of one's life' does not capture the sense of urgency here. Jeshua is approaching the climax in his battle for the truth, and since the only weapon he has is the truth he is defenceless against the murderous intent of those he will expose. It will be the same for anyone who 'comes to him' as a fully-committed disciple. You can't protect yourself because in being a witness you have to be seen, to be open, and under cross-examination you will be exposed. They will tear at you, rip you to shreds, strip you of your human dignity and your right to a fair hearing and expose you naked, wounded, hurt and alone: a thing of ridicule to be despised. Yes, I am thinking of certain ones who have stood up for the truth before various Commissions lately. The likeness to Jesus is complete except for the actual flogging and nails.
Getting back to that word 'cannot'. The Latin has 'non potest', and the Greek ou dunatai = not the power. 'Power': dynamo comes to mind again. Both the Greek and the Latin are quite explicit: Unless you go the whole way with me, leaving all others aside, you will not have the power to win through. The power comes from directing all your energies towards the single purpose. Once battle is joined there can be no hesitation, no more counting the cost, no compromise with the truth, even though others will get hurt.
Is it any wonder the church has failed so badly, not only in criminal abuse happening within its ranks, but in the leadership hedging and dodging to minimise the damage, covering the truth that alone it is the christian's role to expose and defend? Is it any wonder, when these gospel teachings have been reduced to pious nonsense over centuries?
* * * * *
You mustn't hate your parents or your husband or wife, and never your children. If there is a call that must be preferred over their comfort and well-being, I think it can only come from God. The fact that Jeshua would claim that kind of priority is equivalent to claiming to be himself divine.
Don't you hate the agony of choosing? The gospel says that you've got to pick up your own cross and carry it like he chose to do. Idiot!
Why?
The question echoes down the ages. It's one thing that shit happens and we can feel badly done-by and look for comfort in complaining, but this business of choosing it, and seeing the way it impacts dreadfully on your other self, your loved partner and your children...
The Why keeps asking for ever.
* * * * *
There is a way to make this more palatable, but again it can become a cop-out. At a certain point, I think, the way becomes fully interior and we find we're talking about insight and the spirit's life. It's almost like you're looking on as your old body aches and pains, and you see others too as separate, paddling their own canoes. In this dimension you find you can give up all your stuff, be oddly detached in keenest love, and somehow you know how to do the best for them in total freedom.
I wonder will this awareness ever become established and permanent. Probably not. It's a mode of being that you slip into quietly, and just as softly it slips away and leaves you gasping like a fish on the edge of a drying lake waiting for the flooding rains to come again.