 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 2002 Homilies by Fr. Lope C. Robredillo August 4, 2002 Nothing probably more indicates the wide economic gulf between the rich and the poor than the food they eat, in both quality and quantity. In the United States, the problem is whether it
is healthier to eat beef or not. It is the American food — say the TV commercials — and it is the food most Americans eat virtually every day. But today, notes Richard Corliss, in "Should We All Be Vegetarians?" (Time,
7/15/02), it is for many an obscene cuisine. More and more Americans have started going vegetarian, believing that it would help them live longer and healthier lives. But in other parts of the globe, a choice between beef and
vegetables is a luxury, nay, a dream. Reuters reported (PDI
7/20/02) that widespread food shortages and rampant AIDS have put nearly 13 M southern Africans on the very edge of survival. The region's crisis — the worst since the 1992 drought — was brought about by a combination of severe drought, floods, economic decline and government mismanagement. According to Reuters, the residual debilitating effect of past conflicts and the region's extremely high AIDS infection rate that has killed many farmers and left millions of orphans, aggravated the famine. Kenzo Oshima, UN emergency Relief Coordinator, is quoted to have said that there is still an opportunity to avert famine and save lives, but the window is closing rapidly.
The reality of hungry millions recalls the Gospel today. According to Matthew, when Jesus disembarked and saw a vast throng in a deserted place, "his heart was moved with pity" (Matt
14:14). Obviously, the miracle story on the multiplication of loaves is about the compassion of Jesus on the about 5,000 men, not including the women and children, who in following him had experienced hunger. This story is quite relevant. For one thing, this serves as a corrective to the idea that limits the mission of Jesus to the spiritual realm. For some people, the Church should have nothing to do with the material problems of humanity; her province is only the Bible and the altar. For another, it shows that Jesus was in touch with the problems of society, and that he tried to meet what was needed by the hungry crowd — food. What is implied here goes beyond the exercise of one of the corporal works of mercy. Rather, it has reference to the unjust social structure in which millions of people are condemned to hunger and poverty. That countless people go to bed without food because they are deprived politically, socially, and economically — this is a moral evil that cries to heaven for an answer. In the Old Testament, when Israel was journeying in the desert, God gave them flesh to eat in the evening and fill of bread in the morning. So the people would not go hungry, he provided them with quail and manna in the desert of Sin (
Exod 16:7-8.13-14). Hunger, then, is a social problem that seeks solution. How is this solved? A week before the nation marked World Population Day on July 11, a Manila daily editorialized that the single obstacle to
progress is the Roman Catholic Church, for its refusal to countenance measures to curb population growth, which now hits 80 M, 32 M of which are poor. Beneath this observation is, of course, the perception that the problem is
basically that too numerous are the mouths to feed. This easily calls to mind the perception of Jesus' disciples in the Gospel. Seeing the thousands of hungry folks, the disciples suggested to Jesus to dismiss the crowd so they
could go to the villages and buy some food for themselves (Matt
14:15). Today, a number of experts propagate a Malthusian outlook, anticipating the collapse of civilization if population growth remains unchecked. Too many women and men divide among themselves the small pie. Since it is their teaching that hunger and poverty result from population growth, they flood us with condoms, pills and all kinds of anti-life gadgets. The fewer the family members, the more comfortable life is.
The Gospel, however, does not see the problem this way. While an unchecked population increase is to be recognized as a problem, a more fundamental one is the unjust sharing of the world's goods — resources, knowledge, power,
technology — which drives people to poverty and hunger. Far from being a problem of dismissing the crowd, Jesus saw the problem as one of breaking and sharing the bread available. Thus, he took five loaves, broke them, and gave
them to the disciples to distribute (Matt
14:19). Because the loaves were broken and shared, a big miracle happened — all those present, thousands of men, women and children, ate their fill, and when the fragments were gathered up, these filled twelve baskets (Matt
14:20-21). What are we to say in connection with this miracle story? We say that the basic problem today is not so much the growth of the population, but that only a small percentage of it — those in the West — have greater share of the world's goods, while the many have to content themselves with what falls from the rich countries' table.
Indeed, rich nations, rather than share their technical know-how, resources, technology and other goods, would even take advantage of the poor. They would, for example, not countenance balanced trade relations. Not
surprisingly, in a speech before the 59th Asean Chamber of Commerce and Industry at Malacañang on July 15, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo lashed out at First World nations for blocking exports from poor countries. John Paul II,
in his Sollicitudo rei socialis, emphasizing that imperialism is the cause of deteriorating poverty, points out that rich countries use mechanisms to get the wealth of poorer nations: "One must denounce the
existence of economic, financial, and social mechanisms which, although they are manipulated by people, often functions almost automatically, thus accentuating the situation of wealth for some and poverty for the rest. These
mechanisms, which are maneuvered directly or indirectly by the more developed countries, by their very functioning favor the interests of the people manipulating them. But in the end, they suffocate or condition the economies of
the less developed countries" (n 16). It has been noted by many scholars that the Gospel today has Eucharistic overtones. One, of course, does not have to quarrel with that interpretation. The fact that the wording in v 19 ("He
took the five loaves and two fish, looked up to heaven, blessed and broke them, and gave the loaves to the disciples") recalls the words of Institution is an indication of its Eucharistic allusion. But if this means anything, it is
that a correct understanding of the meaning of the Eucharist must take into account the problem of hunger. Salvation of Christians Amid Crisis by Fr. Lope C. Robredillo August 11, 2002 In his address to the more
than 500,000 crowd gathered in Toronto at the World Youth Day vigil last July 28, the 82-year old Pontiff, John Paul II, asked whether it was enough to rely on the technological revolution without reference to God, said:
"Christ alone is the cornerstone on which it is possible to build one's existence. The 20th century often tried to do without reference to Him. It ended by actually building that city against man." Indeed, there has been much
change in man's attitude to God in the 20th century. Even in the country, the culture tends to do away with the spiritual dimension of life. In the countryside, 50 years ago, once the bell rang at six o' clock, the whole family
gathered in front of the altar to pray the angelus and rosary. Now, they gather for such television soap operas as "Sana ay Ikaw na Nga!" or "Kung Mawawala Ka!" Indeed, how many people really make God the center of
their lives? But at the same time, a man of faith asks — why does God allow these things to happen? Why does He not reverse the cultural transformation? Why does He not visibly help those who wish to build brick by brick the city
of God within the city of man? Why doesn't He teach godless men a lesson that they cannot build the city of man without reference to the spiritual dimension of their lives? It is possible that Elijah raised almost similar
questions during his time. Around the middle of the ninth century B.C., God called him for a mission to bring back the people of Israel to true worship, because they had turned their back on Yahweh. Thus, he fearlessly spoke
against the proselytizing efforts of the pagan queen Jezebel in the northern kingdom and defeated her more than 800 prophets at Carmel (1 Kings
18). Since the queen was greatly displeased, Elijah ran for his life. And he felt frustrated that God seemed to have allowed him to battle against Jezebel alone, and that his mission had no success. So, he prayed for death: "This is enough, Lord! Take my life, for I am no better than my fathers" (1
Kings
19:4b). But as the First Reading indicates, it is not that God was absent in his fight against Jezebel; it is simply that he was not present in the way Elijah imagined: "A strong and heavy wind was rending the mountains and crushing rocks before the Lord — but the Lord was not in the wind. After the wind there was an earthquake — but the Lord was not in the earthquake. After the earthquake there was fire — but the Lord was not in the fire. After the fire there was a tiny whispering sound" (1
Kings 19:11-12). Yes the Lord was present, but in a new way — in a hidden way, as in a tiny whispering sound! Today's Gospel conveys an almost similar point. The narrative is rather symbolic: the scene of the disciples
gathered in a boat is unmistakably a picture of the Church, and the rough waves raised by strong headwinds that tossed the boat could easily be identified with the persecution that the early Church must have experienced. Like the
persecutions by Jezebel, the persecutions that the early Church underwent shook the faith of the Christians, some even giving it up. Others certainly raised questions whether Jesus cared for them, since in their prayer they felt
his absence. It is natural to expect that some would have wondered why Jesus allowed the persecutions to happen. But if the Gospel has anything to teach us, it is that in the direct need of the Church, when everything seems lost,
Christ is there present in their midst: "Get hold of yourselves! It is I. Do not be afraid" (Matt
14:27). The saying "It is I" reminds us of Yahweh's appearance in the Old Testament theopanies, as when God appeared to Moses saying "I am," assuring him that Yahweh was there to save His people. The point of the Gospel is that Christ does not abandon the Church; when it faces crisis and persecutions, He is always there to save His people.
What is important is that every Church leader or every Christian puts his trust in Him. To stress this point, Matthew tells us the story of Peter who asked permission from the Lord to share in his miraculous power, but
frightened by the power of the sea, the wind and the waves, became scared, buckled and started sinking. Like that of the disciples of the boat, the scene of Peter eventually collapsing is a picture of every Church leader or
Christian who, in the face of crisis, is caught in a conflict between faith and doubt. (It is even probable that this scene anticipates for the reader the latter failure of Peter in the passion narrative, when he denied the Lord
three time, fearing that he might share in the latter's fate!). Of course, it is not easy to face persecution. When the going gets tough, more than toughness is needed to get going — especially when one experiences reversals or
setbacks, one after the other, and there is no one to turn to, since the Lord Himself seems to be absent or not to care. But like the story of the small whispering sound in the First Reading, the story of the Lord coming to Peter
indicates that the Lord is with the Christian, though not necessarily in the way the believer expects Him to be present. Despite all appearances to the contrary, He does not abandon the Christian in crisis — He is always there to
save. All the Christian needs is trust in His presence, and in His power to save. He is always there with him, watching him in prayer, even as Jesus was at the top of the mountain praying while the disciples were inside the boat (
Matt 14:23). When the Christian faces crisis and persecution, Christ does not allow him to disappear, even as Jesus did not allow Peter to sink entirely (Matt
14:31). But it is faith that is decisive, it is faith that saves (Matt 14:32), for faith knows that God cares, despite appearances to the contrary. Which brings to mind the song Footprints in the Sand, a story about
a believer who dreamed he was walking with the Lord along the beach. Scenes from his life flashed along the sky, and for each scene, he noticed two sets of footprints in the sand, one belonging to him, the other to the Lord. In a
remarkable dialogue, the believer asked: "Lord, you said that once I decided to follow You, You'd walk with me all the way. But I have noticed during the most troublesome times in my life, there is only one set of footprints. I
don't understand why when I needed You most You would leave me." But the Lord replied: "My son, my precious child, I love you and I would never leave you. During your times of trial and suffering, when you see only one set of
footprints, it was then that I carried you." Of course, being saved does not always mean being freed from death; it could also mean being saved even in death.
Salvation of Others Who are Not Christian by Fr. Lope C. Robredillo August 18, 2002 When it comes to the doctrine of salvation, there still remains to be exclusivism in the teaching of many ecclesial bodies and sects: In Isang Pagbubunyag sa Iglesia ni Cristo, the
following is claimed: "Jesus taught that a person needs to enter into him in order to be saved… in Col 1:18, it says: 'And he is the head of the body, the church… Christ is the head and the Church is Christ's body. Whoever enters
into Christ, enters into Christ's head… therefore, in order for a person to be saved, he must become a member of the Iglesia ni Cristo." D. Platt's Counterfait!, from which the quote was lifted, states that according to the
teachings of the Jehovah's witnesses, only 144,000 will share in the heavenly glory, because this is plainly shown in Scriptures. If this is true, will the more than two billion people in the world who do not belong to the Iglesia
ni Cristo, or who are outside the 144,000, not share in God's glory? Is one saved exclusively on the basis of the body he enters into, or of a required number? Will it be only on the basis of who are able to get into an island, as
in the case of Ruben Ecleo's PBMA, which teaches that only those who come to Dinagat will be saved from the coming cataclysm? What does the Bible really say of salvation of peoples? The fate of other people, their salvation, was
a great concern of the early Church. It was even so crucial not only in the discussion but also in the division of the first Christians. In its early history, Israel did not consider the Gentiles within the purview of salvation.
For one thing, there was, as Grelot and Pierron note, scarcely any time that the existence of Israel as nation was not threatened, if not ravished by the Gentile nations, caught as she was in the currents of international politics.
If they opposed Israel, which was the depository of the essential values that pertain to salvation, they thereby set themselves in opposition to God's plan. For another, the Gentiles represent paganism, idolatry and tyranny.
Therefore, in order that Israel would not be contaminated by their pagan and idolatrous worship and tyrannical rule, the Israelites tried to separate themselves from these nations. Indeed, the community of Israel would not even
permit Gentiles to become members (cf. Deut 23:2-8). There cannot be salvation for these pagans. This religious culture seems to be the backdrop of today's Gospel. When a Canaanite woman came to Jesus so that her daughter, who was
tormented by a demon, could be healed, and his disciple told him about it, Jesus replied: "I was sent only to the lost sheep of house of Israel" (Mark 15:24). In fact, he said to the woman, "It is not right to take the food of the
children and throw it to the dogs" (Mark 15:26). "Children," of course, represents Israel, while "dogs" is a Jewish term of contempt for Gentiles. But the exile of the Jews to Babylon transformed their view of the Gentiles. In
Isaiah, for instance, the prophet envisages a time when nations will come to Jerusalem to learn the law: "Many nations shall come and say: 'Come, let us climb the Lord's mountain, to the house of the God of Jacob, that he may
instruct us in his ways, and we may walk in his paths" (Isa 2:2-3). The nations will be converted, justice will be established, peace will reign and all worship one God. Thus the first reading: "My salvation is about to come, my
justice, about to be revealed. And all foreigners who join themselves to the Lord and becoming his servants — them I will bring to my holy mountain, and make joyful in my house of prayer… for my house shall be called a house of
prayer for all peoples" (Isa 56:1.6-7). In this Isaianic tradition, which has a universalist outlook, all will share in the one salvation of God, but of course, this happens through Israel. No wonder, St. Paul could write Timothy:
"God wants all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim 2:4). This is why, despite the earlier claim that he was sent only to the house of Israel, Jesus expelled the demon from the daughter of the Canaanite
(Matt 15:28). In principle, therefore, all Gentiles can share in the ultimate salvation. And just as Isaiah envisaged that the Gentiles will come to the Lord through Israel, so in the new order, all nations will receive salvation
through the new Israel, Jesus himself. "God has not destined us for wrath, but for acquiring salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Thess 5:9). In the plan of God, then, salvation is not dependent on a required number, or
limited to a sect, or to those who can get into an island in time for the great catastrophe. No! All nations are included in God's plan of salvation in Jesus Christ. The biblical faith is likewise the faith of the Catholic Church.
Says the Declaration Dominus Iesus on the Unicity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church: "It must therefore be firmly believed as a truth of Catholic faith that the universal salvific will of the One and Triune
God is offered and accomplished once for all in the mystery of the incarnation, death and resurrection of the Son of God" (n 14). But how does a man or woman, Gentile or not, respond to God's offer of salvation? In today's
Gospel, Matthew tells us that the response of faith is salvific. When the woman insisted, saying, "Please, Lord, even the dogs eat the leavings that fall from their master's table," Jesus told her, "Woman, you have great faith!
Your wish will come to pass." And Matthew adds that that very moment, her daughter got better (Matt 15:27-29). By faith of course is meant not simple trust or confidence. Rather, in the words of the same Declaration, it is "by
which man freely entrusts his entire self to God, offering the full submission of intellect and will to God who reveals, and freely assenting to the revelation given by him. Faith is a gift of grace; in order to have faith, the
grace of God must come first and give assistance, there must also be the interior help of the Holy Spirit, who move the heart and converts it to God, who opens the eyes of the mind and gives to everyone joy and ease in assenting to
and believing in the truth. The obedience of faith implies acceptance of the truth of Christ's revelation, guaranteed to God. At the same time, and inseparably, it is a free assent to the whole truth that God has revealed. Faith
therefore as a gift of God and as a supernatural virtue infused by him, involves dual adherence: to God who reveals and to the truth, which he reveals, out of the trust, which one has in him who speaks. Thus, we must believe in no
one but God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit" (n7). by Fr. Lope C. Robredillo August 25, 2002 Ever since sex scandals rocked the
Roman Catholic Church in the United States, the local Church in America has never been the same. Many people believe that pedophilia in the ranks of the clergy diminished their trust in Church leadership. No wonder, efforts have
been made to restore confidence. The US Bishops, for example, decided in June to bar priest-abusers from any position that requires face-to-face contact with parishioners, removing them from parish work, and in some cases
defrocking them entirely. Last August 10, in a move that was less restrictive than the zero-tolerance policy adopted by the American Bishops, the leaders of the US religious orders decided that sexually abusive
priests be kept away from children, but not expelled. The document issued by the Conference of Major Superiors of Men states that "these religious priests or brothers who have molested children or adolescents have broken the bonds
of trust invested in them. We feel this hurt deeply." According to a wire report from the Associated Press, victims' advocates criticized the document, saying that it gives too much freedom in disciplining guilty priests.
Which makes people wonder: why are weak and wounded priests given positions of leadership in the Church? I am not sure if today's Gospel is of any help. But Roman Catholicism has always read the pericope in terms of
Petrine leadership. The story in Matthew, like that of Mark, begins with an opinion poll on how people perceived Jesus. People outside thought that he was John the Baptist, Elijah, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.
There was, of course, speculation that he was John the Baptist who returned from the dead (Matt 14:1). Elijah, who went up to heaven (2 Kings 2:11), was expected to return (Mal
3:1.23). People might have also thought that he was Jeremiah, because he relived the Prophet's experience of rejection and suffering. Or, they identified him with the prophets of old (Deut
18:15). It seems, however, that this range of opinion is aimed at providing a foil for the assertion of Peter: "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God" (Matt
16:17). Peter's confession of Jesus' messiahship is given on behalf of the community of disciples. But for Matthew — and this is distinctive of him — this is not simply a personal assessment of Peter. The perception of who Jesus really is does not come from human speculation, but from divine revelation: "Blest are you Simon son of Jonah! No mere man has revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father" (
Matt 16:17). Jesus called him blessed, because God has chosen Peter to be the recipient of this divine revelation. Precisely because he is the recipient of that revelation, Jesus constituted Peter the rock of
the Church he was to establish by calling him Petros, meaning Rock. In the words of Georg Schwaiger. Peter is to guarantee stability and security, permanence and unity. Christ himself is the foundation of the Church, but
this foundation appears visibly in Peter. Of course, it has been objected that Peter cannot be identified with rock, for the original Greek gives Petros for Peter and petra
for rock. But the problem is only apparent, because in the Aramaic language that Jesus spoke, the distinction does not exist. The Aramaic word for body is simply kepha. This, however, cannot be preserved as a Greek
translation, because petra which is feminine, cannot be applied to Peter. Thus the protestant scholar Howard Clark Kee: "Peter's nickname now becomes the basis for a play on words: Peter (Kepha) is to be the rock on
which the Church will be built." Accordingly, in the New Testament, Peter is named first in the post-resurrection list of the eleven, plays a significant role in the election of Matthias, is a preacher in the Jerusalem church and
spokesman for the Christian community, the object of miraculous divine care, and presides at the first council in Jerusalem. And yet, it may be asked: on the basis of what personal merit was Peter chosen to be a rock?
It seems that there was no personal basis at all. Judged from worldly standards, he had no special qualifications. Unlike the scribes, he was not a theologian nor a scholar of the Torah, he had no special social position nor was he
wealthy. On the contrary, if one judges him from his portrayal by Mark, Peter was a man of weak faith and had many failures. Jesus accused him of being on the side of men rather than of God (Mark
8:27-33). He rebuked him for failing to stay and watch. Indeed, Peter denied the Lord, probably even to the point of cursing him (Mark
14:37.71). One wonders then why, despite all these, God chose him to be the honored recipient of the fundamental revelation of Jesus' messiahship, and why Jesus himself chose him to be the rock. Obviously, "flesh and blood," the earthly capacities of the weak man that is Peter, are not responsible for the choice. It was simply God's pleasure. Which reminds us that the secrets of the Kingdom of God revealed only to the little ones, to the unworthy, out of God's pleasure: "Father, Lord of heaven and earth, to you I offer praise; for what you have hidden from the learned and the clever you have revealed to the merest children. Father, it is true. You have graciously willed it so" (
Matt 11:25-26). If the Church was placed in the hands of Peter who was weak, one wonders why people are scandalized when they discover that Church leaders exhibit some frailness or weakness. Weakness is a part
of being Church, precisely because, apart from being divine, it is also human, and also because it is put in the hands of weak, frail people. If the Church is strong, it is because God is, and not because of its strong leaders.
Personally, whenever the media exposes the weakness of the Church, I am not scandalized. My faith has not been shaken, because I know the Church is in the hands of God. When Pope John Paul II, ending the World Youth Day
celebrations in Toronto with a big outdoor Mass on July 28, urged the drenched 800,000 to stand by the Roman Catholic Church, not letting themselves "be discouraged by the sins and failings of her members," he was obviously right.
The sex scandals in the US are not the first, nor will they be the last. Indeed, if Christ entrusted the Church to weak and frail leaders, it could only mean that he trusts them so much — and he even guaranteed them with his
presence until the end of the world (Matt 28:30). There is, therefore, no reason for me to trust them any less than God Himself does. |
|||||||||||||
HOME
| CBCP News
| Bishops
| Jurisdictions | Commissions | |
|||||||||||||