Saturday, 21 March 2026
Sunday, March 22, 2026 - Hope for the hopeless, Life for the lifeless
To read the texts click on the texts: Ezek37:12-14; Rom 8:8-11; Jn 11:1-45
Why
do we keep visiting the old and infirm and those in hospitals when we have no
miracle drug to take away their pain? Why do we commit ourselves to the
political process when there is so much cynicism and a malaise of despair in
politics today? Why does the Church through her priests, religious and laity
continue to reach out to those in need despite the tremendous opposition by
vested interests and the attempts at destruction of those works by those who
cannot bear to see the poor get their due and rights? The prime reason is
because we continue to believe that God is still in charge, that he is still in
control and that with his help and hope in him we will overcome.
“The
smell of death is everywhere. The pictures you see on TV do not tell the whole
story. You only see the devastation in those pictures. But when you are here,
you not only see the devastation, but you smell it, no matter where you go or
what you do.” Those who visited the tsunami disaster areas described the scene
in this way time after time. The very smell of death permeated the air. This
could also be a description of what Ezekiel may have felt when the Lord
challenged him to see that he would open the graves of the dead of Israel and
restore them to life again. Yet, the Lord did indeed act in accord with his
word and life was restored. Death which is the absence of the breath of God’s
spirit was transformed to life by the life-giving spirit of God. Ezekiel
realized that there was no limit to God’s power to save and that everything was
possible for God. He continued to hope and communicated this hope to all of
Israel. Even in exile in Babylon, Israel must not give in to despair, but hope.
The Psalmist expresses this hope in the Lord. He is so confident of the mercy
of God and his power to redeem that even from the depths of despair he knows
that the Lord will hear his cry for help.
Martha,
the sister of Lazarus, despite her verbal acceptance of Jesus as the
Resurrection and the Life, did not expect that her brother would be raised and
brought back to life again. This is why when Jesus asks for the stone to be
removed from the tomb, her focus is the smell of death. The reason for Jesus’
great distress was not because of the insincerity of the mourners, nor because
the people did not believe that he was the source of life and stood among them,
not even because he was forced to perform a miracle in public with the crowd
present, but in all probability because of what sin and death had done to
humanity. They had succeeded in robbing humanity of hope. The tears that Jesus
sheds, while being an acknowledgement of what sin and death are capable of
doing, are not tears of despair. Physical death is indeed difficult to accept,
but it surely is not the end. Thus, we are not asked not to weep, but only not
to give in to despair, not to lose hope.
However
tempting it might be, however human, however understandable, hopeless despair
is not a Christian way of living. However painful our current circumstances,
and however agonizing our honest questions—about job loss, wayward children,
financial disaster, chronic sickness, destruction of works and institutions
that have been painstakingly built, false allegations made by vested
interests—ultimately things will get worse, for nothing can compare to the
horrible specter of death that awaits us all. But Christian faith believes that
God in Christ will conquer and transform even that ultimate enemy death.
Paul’s
letter to the Romans talks about the same Spirit of God that gives life. He explains that the same Spirit that raised
Jesus from the dead lives in us and is responsible for giving us life.
As
we near the end of Lent, we are being reminded that God’s Spirit is the source
of our life as a community. We are not
only being prepared for Christ’s resurrection but our own.
We
can make some choices about how we get to Easter. We can choose not to focus on the things of
the world that distract us and drain our life from us. We can choose to resist loving or accepting
some more than others because they are different or think differently. We can deny those things that satisfy a sense
of artificial power based on material things. We can choose to nurture a sense
that we are individually more important than who we are together, as a family.
Or
we can be restored by allowing the Spirit of God to give us life. We can choose to live as Jesus lived. We can live our call to be a community of
faith focused on the strength of our unity.
We can give ourselves over to be restored by letting those things that
separate us from God and each other die and be resurrected in Spirit to life as
faithful believers. The choice rests with us.
Friday, 20 March 2026
Saturday, March 21, 2026 - Will you understand that God will reveal himself to you in ways you never even considered? Will you find him in everything that happens today?
To read the texts click on the texts: Jer11:18-20; Jn 7:40-52
The
invitation of Jesus to the thirsty to come and drink from the living water that
he will give leads to the discussion among the people which begins the text for
today. While those who come on hearing this invitation regard Jesus as “the”
prophet, others explicitly call him the Messiah. Still others question whether
Jesus could really be the Messiah because of the popular belief that the
Messiah would come from Bethlehem. Yet it was also true that some believed that
the origins of the Messiah would be a mystery and no one would know where he
would come from. These contrary views lead to a difference of opinion and
though some want to arrest Jesus they do not lay hands on him.
When
the police return to inform their masters that they could not arrest Jesus
because they had never heard anyone speak like him, they are accused of having
also been deceived by Jesus and taken in by his sophistry.
Nicodemus
who is also one of the Jewish authorities speaks on behalf of Jesus and reminds
his companions of the law and a hearing that was required before judgement. His
question is ironic and seems intended to bring out that his companions
knowledge of the law is a matter of doubt. They respond to Nicodemus in the
same way in which they respond to the temple police. They deride him and assert
their seemingly superior knowledge of scripture. Though they are emphatic that
no prophet is to arise from Galilee, this knowledge is faulty, because the
scriptures do speak of the Galilean origins of the prophet Jonah. John intends
to convey through this assertion on the part of the Pharisees that they had
misunderstood both the origins of the Messiah and who he is. Traditional
messianic categories are inadequate because they rely on prior assumptions and
expectations rather than judging Jesus on the basis of what he reveals about
himself: that he is the one sent from God.
Jesus
will always remain bigger than anything that we can ever imagine. Our most
intimate encounters with him must make us realize this. He cannot be captured
by the concepts, words or images that we use and while these help us to get to
know his better, they will always be inadequate. Yet, this does not mean that
we cannot know him as intimately as we want to. He reveals himself to each of
us according to the level of openness we possess.
Thursday, 19 March 2026
Friday, March 20, 2026 - Will you open your eyes, ears and heart and SEE that God is present in our world even today?
To read the texts click on the texts: Wis 2:1,12-22; Jn 7:1-2,10,25-30
The
feast of the tabernacles was originally a harvest festival and was linked to
the journey of Israel in the desert after the exodus when they stayed in tents
or booths. It was a seven day festival that brought great joy and during this
festival people lived in booths to remember their sojourn and God’s
graciousness to them. The liturgical rites performed during this festival,
included water libation and torch-lit processions. These form the background
for the discourse of Jesus during this festival.
The
crowds are surprised to see Jesus teaching in public despite the death threats
and so wonder if he could indeed be the Messiah. They also wonder if the
authorities know that Jesus is the Messiah but are denying it for some reason.
Soon, “reasonableness” gives way to insight and intuition when the crowds go
back to their stereotypes. They “know” where Jesus comes from and since no one
will know where the Messiah comes from, Jesus cannot be the Messiah. The fact
is that the crowds know only one aspect of Jesus’ antecedents. Jesus informs
them that they are not aware that his real origin is in God. One will only be
able to recognize and know Jesus when one realizes that he comes from God and
has been sent by him. This upsets the listeners and though they try to arrest
him, they cannot do so, because the ordained hour set by God has not yet come.
The
crucial question here is whether or not one perceives Jesus as having been sent
by God. The answer to this question determines whether one is on the right
track or engaged in only superficial reflection. One reason why the
authorities’ could not recognize Jesus as having been sent by God was because
they had made up their minds already. They refused to let God work in the way
he wanted. They decided how God must work and how the Messiah would come. They
“knew”. This “knowledge” led to their being closed to the revelation that God
made, so that even after he came, they continued to look for another.
God
continues to come to us in various disguises and forms. He comes in persons,
events and situations. If we decide in advance how he must come, then there is
the danger that we too might continue to miss him and not be aware of his
presence. The way to be able to find him in all things and all things in him is
to be open and receptive and let God be God. It is to open our eyes, ears and
every fiber of our being to the revelation that he will make and to be prepared
for that revelation in the most unexpected persons, places and events.
Wednesday, 18 March 2026
St. Joseph, model of faith, hope and love - March 19, 2026
St. Joseph, model of faith, hope and love
I. Introduction: St. Joseph is one of
the very few Saints who has two feast days to honour him. The scriptures do not
say much about this silent saint. As a matter of fact, St. Joseph does not
speak in the scriptures. His voice is not heard. This is to be expected because
St. Joseph was a man of action more than words.
II.
Inspiration from St. Joseph: As we celebrate a year dedicated to St.
Joseph we can draw inspiration from him in many areas of our own lives.
1) Attentive listening: Matthew is the only one
of the four Evangelists who places Joseph on the centre stage in his Infancy
Narrative. The angel appears to Joseph in a dream on four separate occasions.
(Mt 1:20-21; 2:13; 2:19-21; 2:22).
Before
(Mt 1:18-19) the first of these dreams (1:20-21) Joseph had already made up his
mind to follow the law because he was righteous. He became aware of the
pregnancy of Mary - to whom he was engaged or betrothed - and possibly
suspected her of adultery. The only logical explanation of the pregnancy was
that Mary was guilty of adultery. Joseph
had the choice to pursue a legal trial for adultery (Deut 22:23-27) or draw up
a bill of divorce. Joseph chose the latter option because he did not want to
publicly shame Mary and it would attract less attention
Hearing
with the ears of our head and seeing with the eyes of our head is only one way
of hearing and seeing. True hearing and seeing require that we hear and see
also with the ears and eyes of our hearts.
2) Trusting God’s word: The angel explains that
the child conceived in Mary is from the Holy Spirit (Mt 1:20) and Joseph must
take his pregnant betrothed as his wife. Not only is he to do that, he will
also not have the privilege as the foster father to name this child. This name
has already been chosen by God as communicated by the angel (1:21). His trust
in God’s word shows in his action.
When
things go the way we want, it is easy to believe and trust God’s word. However,
when God’s word calls us to act the opposite of the way want, it is not easy to
accept and follow.
3) Action more than words: Joseph’s trust in
God’s word does not end with his acceptance of Mary and Jesus as his wife and
son respectively. In the three dreams that follow the first (2:13; 2:19-20 and
2:22), he is asked to perform actions which are extremely difficult. However,
since it is God’s plan and God’s hand is at work, Joseph acts in obedience.
In
the first of these dreams, Joseph is asked to go to Egypt hastily. He obeys. In
the second, when the family is in Egypt, he is asked to go to Israel (2:19-20).
Once again, he obeys. The choice of Nazareth and not Judea in Israel as the
place of residence of the family is also attributed to Joseph’s obedience
(2:22-23).
We
sometimes look for God only in miracles or extraordinary events. Yet, God keeps
revealing God’s power, might and love in the ordinary events of our lives. Like
Joseph we must open our hearts wide to see.
4) Acting without expectation: In most of our
relationships with others including members of our families, we act with some
or other expectation. Sometimes, we expect those to whom we have been generous
and kind to also be generous and kind to us in return. At others times, we
expect a word of gratitude and even praise for reaching out. At still other
times, we expect that those to whom we have reached out will not be ungrateful.
With Joseph, there were no expectations whatsoever. He did what had to done.
Each
of us is also called by God in our own way to be God’s instrument of love and
peace. God does not expect that we do extraordinary things to reveal this love.
If like Joseph we can reach out to another even in a small way, we will have
done well.
5) Model for workers and the sanctity of work:
The Gospel of Matthew tells us that Joseph was a carpenter (13:55). He does not
state whether Jesus followed his foster father in this trade. In his Gospel, he
refers to Jesus as “the carpenter’s son” (13:55). The Gospel of Mark, however,
informs us that Jesus did follow Joseph in this trade. When Jesus goes back to
his hometown, the townsfolk identity him as “the carpenter” (Mk 6:3).
The
celebration of the feast of St. Joseph, the worker on the first day of May each
year – when Workers Day or Labour Day is celebrated in many countries of the
world - is a celebration of the saint and his work ethic, but also a
celebration of the participation of humans in God’s work of creation. In this
Joseph becomes an inspiration and model to workers of the meaning of hard work
and earning one’s living through the sweat of one’s brow.
6) Model of discernment and faith: Obedience to
God’s word required a lot of discernment and faith from Joseph. He was aware
that he would not have been able to recognise immediately whether he was indeed
doing God’s will. The dreams could have been the result of his own imagination.
It required discernment to know that they were not. All decisions that he had
to take - the hastening to Egypt, remaining in Egypt when the threat to the
child was still alive, and the return to Nazareth - were life changing
decisions. They would affect not only his life, but also the life of his wife
Mary and Jesus. This is why he had to be convinced of that which he could not
see and hope that his actions were in accord with what God wanted him to do
One
important rule of a good discernment is that we do not make decisions when we
are upset or even elated. This is because these decisions will be based only on
emotion and not discernment. We have to be at equanimity before we make
important decisions and in this regard, Joseph is a model to be imitated.
7) Protector of the family and of the world: In
his role as foster father of Jesus, Joseph was protector of his family. The
safety of his family was of prime importance to Joseph and he placed their
needs and safety above his own.
This
quality of Joseph can be extended to include his protection of the whole world.
As he kept the interests of his family uppermost, so he keeps the interests of
the world uppermost in his intercession for the world.
When
we are tempted to live self-centered and selfish lives, Joseph’s selflessness
comes as a breath of fresh air inviting us to be other-centered and to make a
difference to the lives of others.
III. Conclusion: In the play Hamlet,
there is a scene in which Hamlet says to his friend Horatio “There are more
things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy”
(Hamlet 1.5). One understanding of this is that while there are many things
that the human person does know, there are possibly more things that we do not
yet know.
One
such happening is the Covid-19 pandemic. While theories abound about the origin
of the virus and how best to respond to it, the fact is that we are still
groping in the dark. This is why like St. Joseph we are called to listen
attentively.
We
live in times where many of us would prefer to see before we believe. If we are
of this mind, then there is no need for faith. St. Joseph teaches us to believe
even without seeing. He also teaches us to believe even when we cannot see.
This is because like him, we too must realise that God’s will for the world
will always be better than what we want for ourselves. We must learn from St.
Joseph how to make our will subservient to God’s.
Our
actions in most cases, even the seemingly altruistic ones are often with our
eye on the reward. St Joseph teaches us that we must learn to find the reward
in the doing of the action.
Thursday, March 19, 2026 - St. Joseph, Guardian of Jesus - When in a dilemma do you usually do the right thing or the loving thing? Would your life have been any different if Jesus had not been born?
To read the texts click on the texts: 2 Sam7:4-5a,12-14a,16; Rm 4:13,16-18,22;Mt1:16,18-24a
Devotion
to St. Joseph became popular from the 12th century onward and in the 15th
Century the feast of St. Joseph began to be celebrated on March 19 every year.
Devotion to St. Joseph as foster father of Jesus and husband of Mary grew
tremendously in the 19th Century and continues till this day.
The
Gospel text for the feast of today includes one verse of the genealogy, which
specifies that Joseph was the husband of Mary of whom Jesus was born. The
verses that follow narrate the story of his birth. Since Mary and Joseph were
engaged, they were legally considered husband and wife. Thus, infidelity in
this case would also be considered adultery. Their union could only be
dissolved by divorce or death. Though Joseph is righteous or just, he decides
not to go by the letter of the law and publicly disgrace Mary, but he chooses a
quieter way of divorcing her. God, however, has other plans for both Joseph and
Mary and intervenes in a dream. Joseph is addressed by the angel as “Son of
David” reiterating, once again after the genealogy, the Davidic origin of
Jesus. He is asked to take Mary as his wife and also informed that is the
Spirit’s action that is responsible for her pregnancy. He is told that he is to
give the child the name “Jesus". Jesus (Iesous) is the Greek form of
"Joshua" which, whether in the long form yehosua, ("Yahweh is
salvation") or in one of the short forms, yesua, ("Yahweh saves”),
identifies the son, in the womb of Mary, as the one who brings God’s promised eschatological
salvation. The angel explains what the name means by referring to Ps 130:8. The
name “Jesus” was a popular and common name in the first century. By the choice of such a name, Matthew shows
that the Saviour receives a common human name, a sign that unites him with the
human beings of this world rather than separating him from them.
Matthew
then inserts into the text the first of ten formula or fulfillment quotations
that are found in his Gospel. This means that Matthew quotes a text from the
Old Testament to show that it was fulfilled in the life and mission of Jesus.
Here, the text is from Isa 7:14 which, in its original context, referred to the
promise that Judah would be delivered from the threat of the Syro-Ephraimitic
War before the child of a young woman, who was already pregnant, would reach
the age of moral discernment. The child would be given a symbolic name, a short
Hebrew sentence “God is with us” (Emmanu‘el) corresponding to other symbolic
names in the Isaiah story. Though this text was directed to Isaiah’s time,
Matthew understands it as a text about Jesus, and fulfilled perfectly in him,
here in his birth and naming.
This
birth narrative of Matthew invites us to reflect on a number of points. Of
these, two are significant. First, many
of us are often caught in the dilemma of doing the right thing which might not
always be the loving thing. If we follow
only the letter of the law, we may be doing the right thing but not the most
loving thing. However, if we focus every
time on the most loving thing, like Joseph, it is surely also the right thing.
Though Joseph could have done the right thing and shamed Mary by publicly
divorcing her, he decides to go beyond the letter of the law and do the loving
thing, which in his case was also the right thing.
Second,
the story also shows us who our God is.
Our God is God with us. Our God is one who always takes the initiative,
who always invites, and who always wants all of humanity to draw closer to him
and to each other. This God does not come in power, might, and glory, but as a
helpless child. As a child, God is vulnerable. He is fully human and, in his
humanity, is subject to all the limitations that humanity imposes on us. Yet,
he will do even that, if only humans respond to the unconditional love that he
shows.
Tuesday, 17 March 2026
Wednesday, March 18, 2026 - Jesus revealed the Father through all that he said and did. Will you reveal Jesus by what you say and do today?
To read the texts click on the texts: Isa 49:8-15; Jn 5:17-30
These
verses contain the first discourse in the Gospel of John. It is made up of many
closely related themes. The Jews are outraged that Jesus has healed on the
Sabbath and in answer to this outrage Jesus answers them in the following
verses. To the charge that Jesus was making himself equal to God, Jesus answers
that he as Son can do nothing apart from the Father. He is completely dependent
on the Father and merely does the Father’s work. The Father reveals all that he
does to his Son including raising the dead and giving them life. Thus the Son
shares in the life giving work of the Father. The Son has also been given the
power and authority to judge. This implies that everyone is under the Son’s
reign and rule, and thus must confer on him the same honour that is conferred
on the Father. The one who does not honour the Son does not honour the Father
since it is the Father who has sent the Son.
To
hear the Son’s word and believe in God opens the gift of eternal life. The
alternative is judgement. This judgement will be based on the response to the
Son in the present. Those who accept him and do good will be granted the
resurrection of life whereas those who reject the Son and thus do evil will go
to the resurrection of condemnation. The now will determine the later, the
present will determine the future. This part of the pericope ends with an idea
expressed earlier namely that the Son can do nothing on his own and will do
nothing on his own, because he seeks only to do the will of his Father.
Monday, 16 March 2026
Tuesday, March 17, 2026 - How do I show that I have really been forgiven? What does it means that I can rise, take up my mat and walk?
To read the texts click on the texts: Ezek47:1-9, 12; Jn 5:1-3, 5-16
The
miracle of the healing of the paralytic is exclusive to the Gospel of John. The
story is set in Jerusalem and the miracle occurs during one of the Jewish festivals
though John does not specify which one. Later in the narrative we are told that
the day of the festival was also the Sabbath and this adds to the significance
of both the festival and the Sabbath and thus the miracle and the controversy
that follows. Festivals in John are used as a platform for a deep revelation of
the person of Jesus and this festival is no exception.
John
gives a detailed description of the place where the miracle was performed as if
encouraging the reader to place him/herself in that place. Three kinds of
invalids are mentioned: the blind, the lame and the paralyzed. These are at the
pool waiting for the stirring of the water. Popular belief was that an angel
was responsible for the stirring of the water and thus for the inexplicable
bubbling at the surface. Of these one is singled out. He is a man who has been
ill for thirty-eight years, which symbolizes that his illness is almost
permanent. At this point the text does not tell us what his illness is. Jesus
picks out this man and again we are not given a reason. Did he come across to
Jesus as the one most in need? Was he the only one who did not have someone to
help him? We are only told that Jesus “knew that he had been there a long
time”. Jesus initiates the miracle by approaching the man. Yet, he does not
force his healing on the man as is evident in the question that he asks him;
“Do you want to be made well?” The man does not answer the question but begins
his litany of complaints. He has already set limits to what he believes can be
done for him. He does not expect the impossible. Jesus responds to the man’s
complaints with three imperatives: “stand up, take your mat and walk”. That
Jesus’ words are effective and transformative is evident in the fact that the
man was made well. He obeys Jesus’ commands to the letter: “He took up his mat
and walked”.
Immediately
after the miracle, there is an objection on the part of “the Jews” (which here
refers to the Jewish authorities who oppose Jesus and not the Jewish people in
general) because the man was carrying his mat on the Sabbath and this
constituted work which was not allowed on the Sabbath. The man responds that he
is simply obeying what Jesus asked him to do. The Jewish leaders prefer to
focus not on the fact that he had been made well, but on the one who told him
to violate the Sabbath. The man cannot respond to the question of the Jewish
leaders about who Jesus is, since he does not know Jesus.
At
this point Jesus reenters the story and finds the man in the temple confirming
that he has been made well and speaks to him about sin. He invites the man to
move from the mere physical healing to spiritual healing. The man on
encountering Jesus again, announces to the Jews that it was Jesus who made him
well. While some see these words of the man as pointing Jesus out to the Jewish
leaders, others interpret them as an announcement of the man about who Jesus
is. Again the leaders refuse to focus on the positive action of the man being
made well and focus instead on the violation of the Sabbath. This is why they
decide to persecute him.
Two
issues are brought out in this story. The first is that of illness. While we
may be able to see with the eyes of our head, it is possible that we too like
many of those who were at the pool may be psychologically or spiritually blind.
We may not be able to see another person’s point of view and imagine sometimes
that ours is the only correct viewpoint. We may also be blind to the sufferings
of the numerous people around us and close ourselves in on our own small
worlds. We may have the facility and use of both of our legs, but may have
given in to lethargy or laziness. We may have lost the desire and drive to do
what we have to do. We may be able to use all our limbs and move about freely,
but may have given in to fear. We may also be carrying resentments, bitterness,
anger, jealousy and even rage in our hearts because of which we are paralyzed
and not able to move freely.
The
second issue which the story brings out is that of law versus love. Like the
Jewish leaders we are also guilty sometimes of focusing too much on the law and
not enough on love. Like they were not able to focus on the man’s wholeness but
only on the violation of the Sabbath, so we are sometimes prone to focus on the
negatives rather than on the positive. We prefer often to give a negative
interpretation to a person’s actions and words rather than a positive one.
The
miracle thus calls each of us to give up the blindness of our heart and the
lameness of our mind and the paralysis of our spirit and to focus on the
positive of God’s unconditional healing and love made visible in Jesus.
Sunday, 15 March 2026
Monday, March 16, 2026- Do you believe in God only when things go the way you plan or do you continue to believe in all circumstances? Is your God only a miracle worker or is he a God with you and for you?
To read the texts click on the texts: Isa 65:17-21; Jn 4:43-54
The
healing of the royal official’s son (4:46-54) which is part of our text today
begins after the dialogue with the Samaritan woman (4:1-42). The first two
verses of today’s text (4:43-45) serve as an interlude between the two stories.
John uses the saying of the prophet having no honour in his own country, to
show why Jesus came to Galilee. In John, Judea is Jesus’ own country and since
he was not accepted there, he had to go to others including the Samaritans.
Like the Samaritans, the Galileans welcome him.
The
first verse of the miracle story that follows is an introduction narrating the
case. The son of a royal official is ill in Capernaum. The mention of Cana and
a summary of the first miracle of turning water into wine anticipate another
miracle. The healing in this miracle, however, is done at a distance. The
official makes a request for Jesus to come down and heal his son who is at the
point of death. The immediate response of Jesus is directed not to the official
alone but to all. That Jesus did heal the official’s son is an indication that
his words are not meant merely as a rebuke, but go deeper. Though the people
will base their faith in him merely on signs and wonders, Jesus invites them to
realize that these are not what will motivate him to act. He will act only in
accordance with the will of God. Human expectation cannot determine his action.
Even after hearing this seeming rebuke, the official is not deterred. He
perseveres in his request. With a word and from a distance, Jesus performs the
healing. The official’s faith is Jesus is seen in his obedience to the command
to “Go”. He does go on his way.
The
attestation of the miracle is provided by the servants of the official who meet
him when he is still on his way to his home. The official on further enquiry
realizes that Jesus is the one who has performed the healing and is led to
faith. The man now believes in Jesus, not only in Jesus’ word.
At
the end of the miracle John remarks that this was then second sign that Jesus
worked after coming to Galilee. In his Gospel, John always refers to the
miracles of Jesus as signs.
Sickness
and brokenness are very much visible in our world today and most are in need of
some form of healing or another. At times doctors are not able to diagnose an
illness and at other times when they are and perform a complicated operation,
ask the patient and family members to pray and have faith. There is only so
much that they can do, the rest is in God’s hands. The official in the story
had probably gone to Jesus as a last resort (his son was not merely ill but at
the point of death) after having explored and exhausted all other avenues. He
is single minded in his purpose and will let nothing deter him. He believes and
perseveres. His faith gains for him not only his son’s life but also the gift
of faith in Jesus.
This
means that faith cannot be based on external signs alone and remain at that
level. If it is and does, then one will look at Jesus as a mere miracle worker.
The focus here would be only on the actions of Jesus and not on his person from
which his actions flow. If one is able to go beyond the action to the person of
Jesus, then one will also be able to see who God is: God with us, for us and in
us.
Saturday, 14 March 2026
Sunday, March 15, 2026 - Loss of Vision - "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly. What is essential is invisible to the eye."
To read the texts click on the texts:1Sam 16:1, 6-7,10-11,13; Eph 5:8-14; Jn9:1-41
Some
time ago, a young man came to see me to pour out his heart. He admitted he was
a workaholic, because of which he was increasingly distancing himself from his
wife and two children. His marriage was on the verge of breaking up, since he
could not find time to spend with his family. He was caught in a vicious
circle. He worked hard in order to provide for his family and the harder he
worked and the more time he spent in the office, the further was he moving away
from his family
As
he poured his heart out, I simply listened. His job had become his obsession.
He wanted to give his wife and children things he had never had as a child and
this effort to gain all things for his family became an enemy of the persons he
loved most. He finally looked up at me and exclaimed, “I’ve lost sight of
everything that matters most!
The
fox says something similar to the Prince in The Little Prince by Antoine de
Saint-Exupery: “And now here is my secret, a very simple secret; it is only
with the heart that one can see rightly, what is essential is invisible to the
eye.” The young man realized that he had lost his vision, the heart vision. He
had not lost his external sight or vision, but the inner vision, the heart
vision, which enables one to see clearly. He left my room with a promise to set
his priorities right and thanked me for listening
The
loss of vision, which the young man experienced, is similar to the one
experienced by both Samuel in the first reading of today and Pharisees in the
Gospel text. In the case of Samuel, the reason for the loss vision is due to
mistaken perception and judging by outward appearances alone. However, God
makes it clear to him that he judges not by the external but looks at the
heart. In the case of the Pharisees, the loss of vision was caused by their set
opinions and understanding. They wanted to follow the law as thoroughly as they
could, but did not realize that they had mixed it up with their interpretation
and preconceived ideas and thus had shut the door to any kind of revelation
that God was constantly making in Jesus through his Spirit
They
were so sure of everything – that God did not work on the Sabbath, that Moses
was God’s only spokesperson, that anyone born blind and anyone who broke the
Sabbath had to be a sinner, that God did
not work through sinners, that God did not work on sinners and that furthermore
no one could teach them anything. In this context, it must be noted that John
makes abundantly clear in this text that physical illness is not the effect of
sin. Rather sin here is connected with spiritual blindness and anyone who
rejects the true light who is Jesus is guilty of sin and so is spiritually
blind. This is an even more dangerous blindness than the physical one
The
man born physically blind comes to both physical sight and spiritual sight in
his being able to see and recognize Jesus as the one who is sent. Through
opposition and persecution the blind man moves from a confession of “the man
Jesus,” to “prophet,” to “one from God” and finally to a confession of Jesus as
the Son of Man and the Lord.
The
second reading of today reminds the Ephesians and us, that like the man in the
Gospel who represents all of us, we were also blind and stumbling in darkness,
but now we live in the light of Christ and his Good News, and that light is
seen in the way we behave. In the way we relate with other people in “complete
goodness and right living and truth”. Our lives are to have a transparency
where there is no darkness, no hidden behavior which we would be ashamed to
reveal to others.
So
we must think about our darkness, our blindness. Of course, acknowledging our
own spiritual blindness can be embarrassing, painful, and threatening. To
confess our own groping darkness and howling demons within, our frustrations,
fears, and failures, unnerves us. Such a confession may be unsettling. We may
be also anxious of what others might say, think or do.
Tradition,
jealousy or legalism, blinded the religious leaders and prevented them from
seeing the obvious. What blinds us to the truths that we should be seeing?
Regardless of what it is, Jesus offers to remove blindness and show us the
light.
We
have been “enlightened” through baptism and are commissioned to confess and
witness to our faith. Imitating the journey of the man who finally recognized
Jesus, we should progress to an inner enlightenment, so that we can confess the
crucified one as the Son of Man, who, when lifted up, will draw all things to
himself.
Friday, 13 March 2026
Saturday, March 14, 2026 - Does the content of your prayer include despising or condemning others? Has pride prevented you from encountering God? What will you do about it today?
To read the texts click on the texts: Hosea5:15 – 6:6; Lk 18:9-14
The
parable that forms the text today is knows as the Parable of the Pharisee and
tax Collector but is not so much about these persons as it is about the
disposition for prayer in any person. It is exclusive to Luke. The parable is
addressed not to the Pharisees, but to those who “trusted in themselves that
they were righteous and regarded others with contempt”. This could be a
description of any self-righteous person.
The
two men who went up to the temple to pray are introduced as a Pharisee and a
tax collector. Pharisee means “separated one” and the Pharisee in the parable
takes this prayer position. He stands apart or by himself. Though he begins his
prayer with thanksgiving, it is soon clear that it is not genuine thanks, but
self centered. He is aware of the presence of the tax collector in the temple
and regards him with contempt even as he prays. The Pharisee makes clear that
he follows the law perfectly and obeys even the injunctions to fast and give
tithes. He asks nothing of God probably because he thinks he is self-sufficient.
By
contrast the tax collector will not dare to come near but stands “far off”.
This indicates his position before God. He does not consider himself worthy.
While the commonly accepted posture of prayer was with hands folded and looking
up to God, this tax collector stands with his head bowed and “would not even
look up to heaven”. Instead he beats his breast in acknowledgement of the fact
that he is unworthy and a sinner. His prayer is God centered. He cedes all
power to God. He has nothing to boast about.
The
comment at the end of the parable makes clear its intent. The Pharisee returned
to his home without having been made righteous, but the tax collector was
accepted before God.
Those
who trust in their own righteousness will regard others with contempt, and
those who regard others with contempt cannot then bring themselves to rely on
God’s grace. Therefore, persons who exalt themselves over others and boast of
their virtue before God will discover that they have cut themselves off from
both, and persons who are aware of their need for grace and forgiveness will
not be able to despise other people.
The
nature of grace is paradoxical: It can be received only by those who have
learned empathy for others. In that regard, grace partakes of the nature of
mercy and forgiveness. Only the merciful can receive mercy, and only those who
forgive will be forgiven. The Pharisee had enough religion to be virtuous, but
not enough to be humble. As a result, his religion drove him away from the tax
collector rather than toward him.
Thursday, 12 March 2026
Friday, March 13, 2026 - Will your love for God show in your love for at least one person today?
To read the texts click on the texts: Hosea 14:2-10; Mk12:28-34
In
Matthew 22:35, the lawyer asks the question about the great commandment in
order to test Jesus; in Mark he is not hostile and does not intend to test
Jesus. As a matter of fact, Mark mentions at the beginning of the incident that
the lawyer thought that Jesus had answered the Sadducees well and at the end of
that response, he commends Jesus for his answer. Jesus responds to the lawyer’s
question in the words of the “Shema”, which speaks of love of God (Deut 6:5-6),
but adds also the love of neighbour (Lev 19:18). The scribe’s response to this
is to acknowledge Jesus’ answer as correct and to add that following these
commandments is greater than sacrifices and burnt offerings. Jesus concludes
the dialogue by stating that because the scribe has recognized what his
priorities are, he is not far from the kingdom of God.
Love
of God cannot really be separated from love of neighbour. The two go together.
Our love for God is made manifest and tangible only when we reach out in love
to someone else. While Paul gives a
beautiful description of what love is and what it is not in 1 Corinthians 13,
my own definition of love is that in love there is no “I”.
Wednesday, 11 March 2026
Thursday, March 12, 2026 - Which is the demon that has possessed you and does not leave you free? Will you attempt to get rid of that demon today?
To read the texts click on the texts: Jer 7:23-28;Lk11:14-23
The
onlookers respond to the exorcism of a demon that made a man mute, in different
ways. While there are some who are amazed, others attribute Jesus’ power to
cast out demons to Beelzebul and still others ask for a sign from heaven. This
is an indication that no one doubted Jesus’ power to exorcise and heal. They
attributed it to different sources. In his response to this charge and test,
Jesus says that since exorcisms represented a direct assault on Satan’ power
and kingdom, it is clear that he cannot be on Satan’s side. Also, if Jesus’
exorcisms’ were performed by the power of Satan, the same would have to be said
of other exorcists belonging to their community. Instead Jesus’ works indicate
that the kingdom of God has indeed arrived. Through his exorcisms, Satan’s
power is broken. In the simile of the strong man and his castle, Jesus
explicates that he is the stronger one who overpowers Satan who had guarded his
kingdom well till this time. Finally Jesus invites his listeners to take a
stand for him. The saying here is strong. If one does not positively opt for
Jesus, one has opted against him. The time now is for decision and choice.
Once
he has answered his critics (11:17-23), Jesus moves on to exhort his listeners
to fill their lives with the kingdom of God, because it is possible that
despite the exorcism, if a person persists in his old ways, he will be
possessed once again and this will be ever worse than before.
While
there is no doubt that Jesus did exorcise people who were possessed by demons,
we must avoid getting caught up with exorcisms ourselves. Rather, today there
are many subtle forms of “possession” which are more dangerous than “external
possession”. Some of these are consumerism, selfishness, ignorance and a better
than thou attitude. We need to ask the Lord to exorcise these demons from our
lives.
Tuesday, 10 March 2026
Wednesday, March 11, 2026 - When was the last time you performed an action without any expectation of reward? Will you perform one today?
To read the texts click on the texts: Dt 4:1, 5-9; Mt 5:17-19
These
verses contain what are commonly known as the “theme” of the Sermon on the
Mount. In these verses, the Matthean Jesus makes explicit that he is a law-abiding
Jew. His attitude towards the Jewish law is fundamentally positive. However,
Jesus also makes explicit here, that he has come not merely to confirm or
establish the law, but to fulfill or complete it. This means that he will go
beyond a purely legal interpretation to a broader perspective. He will remove
the focus from the mere external and concentrate on the internal. The focus
will be more on the attitude than merely on the action.
While
laws, rules and regulations are necessary and help towards order, it is also
possible that they can become ends in themselves and not as they are meant to
be, means to an end. We might follow in some cases the letter of the law, but
miss out on its spirit. We might even follow the rule or law only because we
are afraid of getting caught and punished and not because we are convinced of
it.
Monday, 9 March 2026
Tuesday, March 10, 2026 - What would be your position if God kept a grudge against you for every sin you committed? Will you give up all your un-forgiveness today?
To read the texts click on the texts: Dan 3:25,34-43; Mt 18:21-35
The
text of today is the conclusion to Matthew’s “Community Discourse” (18:1-35).
It begins with a question from Peter about the number of times one is expected
to forgive. While Peter proposes seven times, Jesus’ response far exceeds that
proposal. The number seventy-seven can
be understood in this way or even as four hundred ninety (seventy times seven).
The point is not so much about numbers but about forgiveness from the heart. If
one has to count the number of times one is forgiving, it means that one is not
really forgiving at all. The story that
follows in 18:23-35 about the king who forgave his servant a debt of ten
thousand talents (a talent was more than fifteen years wages of a labourer).
The combination of “ten thousand” and “talents” is the greatest possible figure
and indicates the unimaginable sum of money owed. An indication of how large
this sum was can be seen when compared with the annual tax income for all of
the territories of Herod the Great which was 900 talents per year. The point is
that the debt is unpayable. The servant in his desperation asks for time to pay
back the debt. Though the king knows that no matter how much time is given to
the servant he will never be able to pay back what he owes, forgives him all
the debt in his magnanimity and generosity. The debt of the fellow servant to
him pales in comparison with his own debt to the king. Yet, if given time there
was a clear possibility that the money could be repaid, because though by
itself it was a large sum, it would not be impossible to repay. The servant who
had been forgiven by the king will have none of it. He refuses to listen and be
convinced. When the matter is reported to the king be the fellow servants, the
king takes back his forgiveness because the one who was forgiven could not
forgive in turn. This indicates that he had closed himself to the forgiveness
of the king and not received it completely. The conclusion is frightening
because it will be impossible for the first servant to repay the debt. This
means that he will be tortured for eternity.
How
easy it is to say “I am sorry” when we know we are in the wrong or have done
something that deserves punishment. We expect to be forgiven by others when we
do them harm after we have said sorry, and sometimes if they do not forgive us,
we get upset with them even more. We need to apply the same yardstick to
ourselves when others ask for forgiveness from us.
Sunday, 8 March 2026
Monday, March 9, 2026 - Have you set limits on where, when and in whom God can work? Will you leave God free? Will you let God be God?
To read the texts click on the texts: 2 Kgs 5:1-15a; Lk 4:24-30
The
text begins with the words “Truly I tell you” which is used six times in the
Gospel of Luke and always to introduce a solemn statement. Luke alone uses it
here to introduce the proverb that follows. This proverb is found also in Mark
(6:4), Matthew (13:57) and John (4:44), but in a different form there. In Luke,
the proverb is given in a negative form and “hometown” may also be translated
as “home country”. This leads to the interpretation that Jesus will be rejected
not only by the people of Nazareth (his hometown) but also by the whole of
Israel (his home country). The references to Elijah and Elisha are to reinforce
the statement made namely that the blessings of God were not restricted to one
particular group or community but were available to all peoples. No one was
excluded from the graciousness of God and from his bounty. This statement of
Jesus enraged the people who were listening to him and drove Jesus out of their
town. Though they were hostile to him, Jesus did not let that deter him, but
continued to do what he was meant to do.
This
scene suggests that the basis for their hostility toward Jesus was a difference
in the way they read the Scriptures. The people of Jesus’ hometown read the
Scriptures as promises of God’s exclusive covenant with them, a covenant that
involved promises of deliverance from their oppressors. Jesus came announcing deliverance,
but it was not a national deliverance but God’s promise of liberation for all
the poor and oppressed regardless of nationality, gender, or race. When the
radical inclusiveness of Jesus’ announcement became clear to those gathered in
the synagogue in Nazareth, their commitment to their own community boundaries
took precedence over their joy that God had sent a prophet among them. In the
end, because they were not open to the prospect of others’ sharing in the
bounty of God’s deliverance, they themselves were unable to receive it.
Not
only is this scene paradigmatic of Jesus’ life and ministry, but it is also a
reminder that God’s grace is never subject to the limitations and boundaries of
any nation, church, group, or race. Those who would exclude others thereby
exclude themselves. Human beings may be instruments of God’s grace for others,
but we are never free to set limits on who may receive that grace. Throughout
history, the gospel has always been more radically inclusive than any group, denomination,
or church, so we continually struggle for a breadth of love and acceptance that
more nearly approximates the breadth of God’s love. The paradox of the gospel,
therefore, is that the unlimited grace that it offers so scandalizes us that we
are unable to receive it. Jesus could not do more for his hometown because they
were not open to him. How much more might God be able to do with us if we were
ready to transcend the boundaries of community and limits of love that we
ourselves have erected?
Saturday, 7 March 2026
Sunday, March 8, 2026 - God is freely available to all
To read the texts click on the texts: Ex17:3-7; Rm 5:1-2, 5-8; Jn 4:5-42
At
first glance, it might seem that because of the mention of water in the first
reading and the Gospel, the theme of today centres around water. However, it goes
much deeper. It goes as deep as the immanent presence of God who is not only
with and around us, but also within us.\
This
story of Moses bringing water from a rock is similar to the one in Num 20:2-13,
where Moses and Aaron are denied entry into the land because of their lack of
trust in God, when after Moses struck the rock twice, water gushed from a rock.
The story in Exodus, which is the first reading of today, relates two place
names associated with this miracle. One is called Meribah (people quarrelling
with Moses) and the other Massah (putting God to the test). The grumbling of
the people reflected their general attitude. Even though they were freed from
oppression and led by God through the wilderness, they still complained.
Blessings were not enough. They wanted their needs and desires fulfilled
immediately! This attitude of the people stood in stark contrast to the
immanent and constant presence of the Lord. The testing of God is summed up in
the last sentence of the text: “Is the Lord among us or not?”
If
anyone doubted that God is indeed with us and in Jesus could cut through any
barriers that may have been set up, Paul reminds the Roman community of one
overriding fact: “Christ, while we were still helpless, died for the ungodly …
God proves his love for us in that, while we were still sinners, Christ died
for us.” If Jesus entered our lives while we were sinners, how can anything we
do later take Him out of our lives? He lives in us constantly.
This
also means, therefore, that no place, event, time or person is unworthy of
God’s salvation. Jesus’ conversation with the Samaritan woman makes this
abundantly clear. This incident is perhaps one of the most unusual of all those
reported in the New Testament. The conversation would surprise his
contemporaries. By engaging in a dialogue with the Samaritan woman, Jesus broke
two clear boundaries that had been set up. The first, which was between Jews
and Samaritans, and the second, between men and women. Yet John tells it to
reinforce the theme that in Jesus, who is the source of living water, God
continues to be present and freely available to all irrespective of caste,
creed, race, colour or gender.
In
explaining how this was possible, Jesus compared the water from Jacob’s well
with his living water. The water drawn from Jacob’s well would satisfy only
physical thirst. Lack of this water would thus cause thirst again. However, the
living water Jesus offered truly satisfied, because it gave eternal life. Jesus
painted the image of an artesian spring, water leaping up into life
everlasting. The woman understood only in part. She desired eternal life, but
only as a continuation of her present existence. She did not realize that the
reception of God’s gift required her to look to the giver. Even when she did
look, all she saw was a prophet, one who worshipped at the Jerusalem Temple.
She, being a Samaritan, had her own centre of worship. Jesus corrects this
misunderstanding by inviting her to realize that the time was fast approaching
when the location of worship would be irrelevant. Indeed, in the presence of
Jesus, that time had arrived. He revealed himself to her in the words, “I AM”,
and through this revelation, which here is absolute and with no predicate,
showed her God as someone who is present and acts in this world. Jesus is the
one in whom God is seen and known. Now the woman knew. Gender, nationality, and
moral standing did not matter. Only the Spirit mattered.
The
challenge of the texts of today is therefore to realize that openness like
Jesus has shown is necessary, if the Church is to continue the revelation that
Jesus made. All too often exclusivism on the part of the Church and a closed
attitude to those of different orientations has led to their being pushed away
from Jesus rather than being drawn to him. They also point out that with
healthy dialogue, understanding and insights can be gained. Through the
dialogue Jesus had with her, the Samaritan woman’s expectations were fulfilled
and exceeded and the Samaritans from the city recognized the Saviour of the
world. If we as Church realize this, then we can lead people to the immediate
experience of Jesus, which is and continues to be both a gift and a task.
Friday, 6 March 2026
Saturday, March 7, 2026 - How would you define your relationship with God? What names do you use to address God? What does this tell you about your relationship?
To read the texts click on the texts: Mic 7:14-15, 18-20; Lk15; 1-3, 11-32
The
setting for the Parable of the Prodigal son (more correctly called “The
Prodigal father”) is the same as at the beginning of Chapter 15 and concerns
the murmuring of the Pharisees and scribes because Jesus eats with “tax
collectors and sinners.”
Direct
taxes (poll tax, land tax) were collected by tax collectors employed by the
Romans, while tolls, tariffs, and customs fees were collected at toll houses by
toll collectors, the group that appears frequently in the Gospels and is not
entirely accurately identified as “tax collectors.” Toll collectors paid in
advance for the right to collect tolls, so the system was open to abuse and
corruption. The toll collectors were often not natives of the area where they
worked, and their wealth and collusion with the Roman oppressors made them
targets of scorn.
Those
designated as “sinners” by the Pharisees would have included not only persons
who broke the moral laws but also those who did not maintain the ritual purity
practiced by the Pharisees. The scandal was that Jesus received such outcasts,
shared table fellowship with them, and even played host to them.
The
beginning of the Parable which speaks of “two sons” indicates that the focus is
on their relationship to the Father and not to each other as “brothers”. The
demand of the younger son is disrespectful and irregular. There is no rationale
here. He was breaking family ties and treating his father as if he were already
dead. The father divides his life among them. As soon as the younger son
receives his share, there is a progressive estrangement. He goes into a faraway
country which indicates gentile land and mismanages the money given to him. He
spends it all on loose living. His descent into poverty and deprivation is
swift. He descends as low as to agree to work for a gentile and in a gentile
land. Swine were an abomination to Jews, and they were prohibited from raising
swine anywhere. The man who would dare to breed swine was considered
cursed. Human beings even ate carob
pods, which were used as animal fodder, in times of famine. This is an
indication of the complete destitution of the younger son. He comes to his
senses when he is at the depth of his degradation and in the midst of mire and
filth.
There
are four parts to the speech that the younger son prepares
1. An address – “Father”
2. A confession – “I have sinned”
3. Contrition – “I am no longer worthy”
4. A Petition – “treat me as one of your hired
servants.
The
journey begins with coming to himself and ends with his going to his Father. It
means learning to say ABBA again, putting one’s whole trust in the heavenly
Father, returning to the Father’s house and the Father’s arms. That the younger
son is serious about his return is shown in his action. He gets up from the
mire and begins the return to his father.
The
father’s response is mind boggling. While the son is still a long way off, he
runs to meet him. In the first century it was considered undignified for grown
men to run. The father sets aside respect and dignity. His only focus is his
son. The son begins his speech but is not allowed to complete it. The father
interrupts his son even before he can finish. He gives instructions to his
servants for a robe, ring and sandals all of which indicate that the son is
given back his original place as son. The call to kill the fatted calf is a
sign that the return of the son is to be regarded as a time of celebration. The
dead son has come alive, the lost son has been found.
Even
as the celebration is on, the elder son is introduced. When he is informed
about the reason for the celebration, he sulks and refuses to enter the house.
Like in the case of his younger son, the father goes to meet his elder son.
However, while he does not have to plead with the younger son, he does so with
the elder son. The elder son does not address his father as “Father”, nor does
he refer to his brother as “brother”. His argues his case on the grounds of
merit and what he thinks he rightfully deserves. Even as he does this, he
points to the failings of the younger son. What then is the point of being
good?
In
his response to the elder son, the father first addresses his son as “Son”
though he was not addressed as “Father” and also reminds him that the younger
son is also his brother. Reconciliation for the younger son meant reconciliation
with his father, but for the elder son it means reconciliation with his
brother. There is thus both the vertical dimension and the horizontal dimension
of reconciliation.
Much
of the fascination of this parable lies in its ability to resonate with our life
experiences: adolescent rebellion; alienation from family; the appeal of the
new and foreign; the consequences of foolish living; the warmth of home
remembered; the experience of self-encounter, awakening, and repentance; the
joy of reunion; the power of forgiveness; the dynamics of “brotherly love” that
leads to one brother’s departure and the other’s indignation; and the contrast
between relationships based on merit and relationships based on faithful love.
Unfortunately,
we usually learn to demand our rights before we learn to value our
relationships. The younger son was acting within his rights, but he was
destroying his closest relationships in the process. How many times a week will
a parent hear one child say to another, “This is mine. Give it to me”? Children
quickly learn to demand their rights, but it often takes much longer for them
to learn how to maintain relationships. Governments and law courts defend our
civil rights, but how do we learn to defend our civil and familial
relationships?
From
a distance, the “far country” can be very appealing. Young people leave home
for fast living. Spouses move out to form liaisons with exciting new partners.
The glow that surrounds the far country is a mirage, however. Home never looks
as good as when it is remembered from the far country.
The
journey home begins with coming to oneself. That means that the most difficult
step is the first one. The younger son had to face himself in the swine pen of
his own making before he faced his father on the road. Pride can keep us from
admitting our mistakes; self-esteem may require us to take decisive action to
set right the things we have done wrong.
Although
the opportunity to restore relationships and remedy wrongs begins with coming
to oneself, it requires more. We must go to the person we have wronged. Was the
younger son just seeking to improve his situation, or was he seeking
reconciliation with his father? The direct confession in his interior monologue
confirms the sincerity of his intent. Neither the younger son’s pride nor his
shame mattered as much as his need to restore his relationship to his father.
He did not ask for his filial privileges to be restored. He did not even ask
for forgiveness. He merely stated his confession. When the prodigal son came to
himself, he came to his father. . . .
The
temptation a parent faces is to allow the child’s separation to become
reciprocal. If the child separates from the parent, the parent may be tempted
to respond in kind. The parable’s model of parental love insists, however, that
no matter what the son/daughter has done he/she is still son/daughter. When no
one else would even give the prodigal something to eat, the father runs to him
and accepts him back. Love requires no confession and no restitution. The joyful
celebration begins as soon as the father recognized the son’s profile on the
horizon
Insofar
as we may see God’s love reflected in the response of the waiting father, the
parable reassures all who would confess, “Father, I have sinned against heaven
and before you.” The father runs to meet his son even before the son can voice
his confession, and the father’s response is far more receptive than the son
had dared even to imagine. The father’s celebration conveys the joy in heaven.
The picture is one of sheer grace. No penance is required; it is enough that
the son has come home.
If
this is the picture of God’s joy in receiving a sinner coming home, then it can
also give assurance of God’s love to those who face death wondering how God
will receive them. In the end we all return home as sinners, so Jesus’ parable
invites us to trust that God’s goodness and mercy will be at least as great as
that of a loving human father.
The
elder brother represents all of us who think we can make it on our own, all of
us who might be proud of the kind of lives we live. Here is the contrast
between those who want to live by justice and merit and those who must ask for
grace. The parable shows that those who would live by merit can never know the
joy of grace. We cannot share in the Father’s grace if we demand that he deal
with us according to what we deserve. Sharing in God’s grace requires that we
join in the celebration when others are recipients of that grace also. Part of
the fellowship with Christ is receiving and rejoicing with others who do not
deserve our forgiveness or God’s grace. Each person is of such value to God,
however, that none is excluded from God’s grace. Neither should we withhold our
forgiveness.
The
parable leaves us with the question of whether the elder brother joined the
celebration. Did he go in and welcome his brother home, or did he stay outside
pouting and feeling wronged? The parable ends there because that is the
decision each of us must make. If we go in, we accept grace as the Father’s rule
for life in the family.
Thursday, 5 March 2026
Friday, March 6, 2026 - Will you give God his due by sharing with at least one person who does not have today? If God were to visit the vineyard of your life and ask for fruit what would your response be?
To read the texts click on the texts: Gen 37:3-4, 12-13, 17-28; Mt 21:33-43, 45-46
This
Parable is known variously as the parable of the wicked tenants or the Parable
of the Vineyard. While the parable in Mark has been allegorised, it is not
clear whether there was a non-allegorical parable going back to Jesus. Those
who are of the opinion that there was a non-allegorical parable interpret it to
mean that just as the tenants took radical action, so radical action is required
in order to gain the kingdom. Others see the parable to mean that the kingdom
will be taken away from Israel’s false leadership and given to gentiles and
sinners. Still others see the parable to mean that God does not abandon and
relentlessly seeks and searches for them and longs for a response from them.
In
Matthew, this parable is the centre of Jesus’ threefold parabolic response to
the chief priests and elders. The first of these is about the two sons
(21:28-32) and the third is about the great supper (22:1-14). He also links it
to the previous parable of the two sons by means of common words like vineyard,
son and the common theme of both which is doing God’s will rather than paying
lip service.
In
Matthew, the one who gives the vineyard to tenants is a “landowner” and not
simply a “man “as he is in Mark. This helps Matthew to use the term “Lord”
towards the end of the parable. The vineyard is described much like the one in
Isa 5:1-7 which indicates that Matthew intends the vineyard to be read as “Israel”
which it is in Isaiah. If in Mark the man who hired out the vineyard wants only
his share, here he wants all the fruit. This indicates that God’s claim on the
human person and all possessions it total and not partial. There are no half
measures with God. It is all or nothing. The two groups of servants which are
sent before the Son probably represent in Matthew the former and latter
prophets whom God sent to Israel to bring the nation back to him. It is only
after the two groups of servants are abused and murdered that the landowner
decides to send his Son. In Matthew the son is first taken out of the vineyard
and then killed (unlike in Mark where he is first killed and then thrown out of
the vineyard) to correspond with what actually happens at the passion and death
of Jesus (27:32). In Mark the question about the response of the owner of the
vineyard is asked and answered by Jesus, while in Matthew, Jesus asks the
questions and the Jewish leaders answer and through the answer pronounce their
own condemnation. The tenants had been unfaithful and will have to pay for this
unfaithfulness. The quotation of Ps 118:22-23 here results in increasing and
intensifying the condemnation of the tenants to whom what was given was given
in trust. Since they have been proved untrustworthy and unfaithful, they will
be denied further tenancy and others will be given the vineyard to tend.
The
Jewish leaders realize that the parable is about them and this only hardens
their stance against Jesus and strengthens their resolve to destroy him.
All
that we possess is given to us in trust. This means that while we may use what
we have, we have also to be concerned about those who do not have and be
generous with them. Selfishness on our part leads to our thinking that we must
use the things we have exclusively without even the thought of sharing them
with others.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)