祝聖拉脫朗大殿
主題：我們都是聖殿
梅瑟蒙召解放以色列人脫離埃及的奴役，過了紅海，到西乃山與天主訂立盟約。他按天主的吩咐造了一個約櫃，安放著天主所頒佈的十誡。天主就用這種形式與他們在曠野同行了40年。
進入客納罕福地定居下來，建立了以色列國之後，在公元前957年，撒羅滿王在耶路撒冷建成第一座聖殿，把約櫃與梅瑟在曠野高舉過的銅蛇，供奉在內。雖然天主藉依撒意亞先知曾表示過天是天主的寶座，地是天主的腳凳，天主不需要住在人手建造的聖殿（依66：1）。但聖殿是有存在價值的。一方面它表示天主的臨在；另一方面，它又是聚集萬民，祈禱崇拜天主的好地方。但好境不常，以色列沒有遵守誡命，結果召來亡國之痛。在公元前721年，北國以色列率先亡國予亞述。在公元前586年，南國猶大繼而亡國，座落耶路撒冷有370年歷史的聖殿被毀，約櫃與銅蛇，從此下落不明。大部份猶大國人，充軍巴比倫。
厄則克耳是舊約的「四大先知」之一。他在猶大國亡國前十年，與所有貴族及壯丁，已先被擄往巴比倫做人質。在那裡天主召叫他做先知，給他神視之恩，並傳達天主的說話去鼓勵安慰後來一齊充軍的同胞，告訴他們天主仍與他們同行。厄則克耳在猶大國亡國之前是一個司祭，所以對聖殿有一份不能磨滅的感情。亦因如此，先知書記載的最後一個神視，亦是有關新聖殿的神視。今天的第一篇讀經就是該神視的一部份。公元前538年，波斯帝國滅巴比倫，波斯王居魯士恩准猶大國人回國，他的兒子達理亞更資助他們重建聖殿。厄則克耳的神視應驗了一部份。至於從聖殿流出的水有滋養生命，治療疾病的神視，就有待耶穌基督來應驗了。
在今天所讀的福音中的聖殿就是公元前515年落成的第二座聖殿，它亦經歷希臘帝國和羅馬帝國的摧殘，到公元前20年，大黑落德為了討好猶太人，開始維修並擴建這第二座聖殿，到耶穌清理聖殿的時候，已擴建了46年了。這聖殿，在公元70年，羅馬帝國鎮壓猶太人叛亂時一把火燒了，結束了它的585年歷史。當年耶穌不滿聖殿的司祭，貪污腐敗，把聖殿變成為詐騙斂財的地方，而不是萬民祈禱敬拜天主的地方。於是耶穌義憤填膺，驅逐商人，清理聖殿。結果招至殺身之禍，完成贖世的工程。在福音中，耶穌清楚表示自己就是那座「不經人手所興建的真正聖殿。」更好說，聖殿只不過是一個記號，象徵在基督內天人聚合，天人合一。
其實耶穌更加是湧到永生的活水。在耶穌受難的時候，有士兵為了保証耶穌真是在十字架上死了，就用長矛刺透耶穌的肋膀。立刻就有血和水從刺穿了的肋膀湧出。我們相信，這血和水不單表示耶穌為了拯救人類所作的完全交付，並且，這是天主的意思，藉聖洗聖事治好我們的罪過，並以耶穌的聖血，滋養我們的靈魂。
耶穌升天及聖神降臨後，門徒數目雖然大增，但仍未成氣候。他們在教友的家中團聚擘餅，是「家庭教會」，亦即是今天所說的「基基團」。當遇到本地官員的欺凌或羅馬帝國的逼害時，他們的組織不能是公開的地上教會，而是冒生命危險在地下墓穴舉行主的晚餐的，名副其實的「地下教會」。有意見認為在禮儀中獻香，除了象徵祈禱上達於天主台前之外，還有辟臭辟蟲的實際作用。終於，守得雲開見月明，羅馬帝國的逼害結束了，教會進入一個昇平的時代了。
今天我們所慶祝的「祝聖拉脫朗大殿節」的拉脫朗大殿，是羅馬四大教堂之首，被稱為「一眾聖堂之母」。約在公元313年，君士旦丁大帝把它贈送給羅馬的主教，於公元324年祝聖，後來更成了教宗的座堂，已有1690年歷史。是君士旦丁令基督徒可以享有「信仰自由」，是他開創先河，令以後的王帝、貴族，慷慨地捐贈大量物業和土地給教會。也是這個原故，紀念「主的晚餐」由一個簡單的擘餅晚餐，慢慢進化成充滿宮廷禮節的彌撒。其實聖堂最重要的，不單是建築上的氣魄或者是令人肅然起敬的祈禱氣氛，而是在聖堂裡祈禱的人。
聖伯多祿和聖保祿兩位宗徒都不約而同教訓說：「我們是建造耶穌基督這座屬神殿宇的活石（伯前2:5），是聖神的宮殿（格前3：16）。」既然我們是聖殿，就讓我們默想我們有甚麽可以流出，滋養治療別人的生命。
首先，我們沒有讀過醫科，又不會行神蹟，又怎樣醫治別人呢？沒有讀過醫科，對。我們真的不會行神蹟，錯！事實上，醫治的力量來自耶穌基督，我們只不過是負責輸送天主恩寵的渠道。我們蒙召成聖，不是憑自己的法力行神蹟，而是把天主的恩寵傳送給別人，同時亦享受在傳送過程中所通過我們的恩寵。聖母是滿被聖寵者，不是因為她修行多年，累積了很多聖寵，很大的法力，而是她接受天主的召叫，把恩寵之源，耶穌基督輸送到這世界上。是她告訴耶穌婚宴上沒有酒了，是她站在十字架下接受了教會之母的任務，是她在耶穌升天後陪著耶穌復活後所聚集到的120個門徒，在她陪伴下，聖神降臨，開始了「教會的時代」。天主是不會偏心的，祂不會給聖母很多恩寵，給我們小小恩寵，我們與聖母的分別在於我們的輸送管是否暢通，有沒有閉塞。
我們暢通嗎？我們自己有沒有勤領聖事，與主結合呢？我有沒有祈禱讀經，體會耶穌的心意，好能把祂的恩寵輸送給別人呢？
我們閉塞嗎？常見的一種閉塞是驕傲。上星期的福音所講的山羊與綿羊的比喻，可以理解為鼓勵大家多行愛德，服事弱小者身上的耶穌基督。但大家有沒有反轉來想一想，調轉身份，成為饑渴者、病弱者，自己成為耶穌的化身，謙遜地接受他人的服事，造就他人成為輸送天主恩寵的渠道呢？這樣做，我們豈不做到了「在病弱中成聖自己、在接受服事中聖化他人」嗎？就讓我們繼續努力，成聖自己，聖化他人，轉化世界。
天主保祐。
Feast of the Dedication of St. John Lateran Basilica
Theme: All of us are temples
God called Moses to liberate the Israelites from Egyptian slavery. They crossed the Red Sea and reached Mount Sinai to seal the Old Covenant with God. Moses followed God’s instructions to build an Ark of Covenant and put the Ten Commandments in it. In this manner, God accompanied the Israelites in the wilderness for 40 years.
After settling in Canaan to build up the Kingdom of Israel, King Solomon finished building the first Temple in Jerusalem in 957 B.C. In this Temple, he put the Ark of Covenant and the Bronze Serpent which Moses had once raised in the wilderness for adoration. Though God spoke through Isaiah that heaven is his throne and the earth is his footstool, that he does not need to rest in a Temple built by man (Isaiah 66:1), the Temple still has its intrinsic values. On the one hand, the Temple signifies the presence of God among men. On the other, it is a good place to gather all peoples to pray and worship God. Unfortunately, the fidelity of Israelites was short-lived. They did not observe the commandments and ended up being conquered. In 721 B.C., the northern kingdom Israel was annihilated by the Assyrians. In 586 B.C., the southern kingdom Judah had fallen into the hand of the Babylonians. The 370-year-old First Temple of Jerusalem was burnt down. The Ark of Covenant and the Bronze Serpent were nowhere to be found. Most of the people of Judah were exiled to Babylon.
Ezekiel was one of the Four Major Prophets of the Old Testament. Ten years before the fall of Judah, he was captured as hostages together with the aristocrats and strong young men to Babylon. There, God called him to be a prophet and gave him the gift of vision to pass on God’s words of consolation to those exiles who joined him later, telling them that God exiled with them. Before Judah was conquered, Ezekiel was a priest. He had an inerasable emotional bond with the Temple. That was why the last vision recorded in the book was a vision related to the new Temple. The first reading we heard today is part of that vision. In 538 B.C., Persia conquered Babylon. Cyrus the Persian king allowed the exiles of Judah to return home. His son Darius even subsidized their rebuilding of the Temple. The vision of Ezekiel was partly fulfilled. That part of the life-giving water flowing out from the Temple had to wait for its fulfillment in Jesus.
The Temple we read in the gospel today was the Second Temple built in 515 B.C. It also went through sacrileges and vandalism during the Greek and Roman empires. In 20 B.C., in order to please the Jews, Herod the Great renovated and extended this Second Temple. When Jesus cleansed it, the building project had gone through 46 years. This Temple too was burnt down in 70 A.D. by the Roman army when it suppressed the first Jewish Revolt, thus ending its history of 585 years. What infuriated Jesus was the mismanagement of the priests whose corruption had turned the Temple from a house of prayer for the peoples into a house of cheats. Consequently, Jesus was killed to fulfill his salvation project. In the incident, Jesus made it clear that he himself is the true Temple which is not built by human hands. To put it better, the Temple was only a sign symbolizing the communion of God and men in Jesus.
In fact, Jesus is the living water running towards eternal life. During his Passion, a soldier, in order to ensure the death of Jesus, pierced his side with a spear. Immediately, blood and water gushed out from his wound. We believe that this water and blood not only show how Jesus totally surrendered himself in the redemption of mankind, but it is also a means with which God intends to heal us through baptism and to nourish our souls through the Eucharist.
After Jesus’ ascension and the descent of the Holy Spirit, the number of disciples multiplied but the Christian community was still insignificant. They broke bread in the houses of the disciples. They formed ‘house churches’, or ‘basic Christian Communities’ in modern jargon. When the local officials bullied them, or when the Empire systematically persecuted them, they could not officially be recognized as churches. Christians had to risk their lives to celebrate the Lord’s Supper in the catacomb. They were truly ‘underground churches’. Some experts opine that the incense offered in liturgy not only symbolizes our prayers reaching up to heaven, but also served practical purposes as deodorant and insect repellent. At last, Roman persecution ended. The Church has entered a peaceful era.
The Lateran Basilica whose dedication we celebrate today ranks the oldest and the first of the four major basilicas in Rome. It has been honoured the mother and head of all the churches in the city and the world “omnium urbis et orbis ecclesiarum mater et caput”. Around 313 A.D., Constantine gave it to the bishop of Rome. It was consecrated in 324 A.D. and later made the cathedral of the Roman Pontiff. It is already sixteen hundred and ninety years old. It was Constantine who gave religious freedom to Christians. It was him who set a precedent for subsequent kings and nobles of donating mansions and land to the Church. And it is because of this practice that the simple bread-breaking Lord’s Supper has evolved into a mass that is full of regal pomp and ceremony. In fact, the most important element in a church building is not its awe commanding architecture or its solemn prayerful atmosphere. It is the people who pray in it.
Both Ss. Peter and Paul teach that we are living stones which build up the spiritual house (1 Peter 2:5) and God’s temples (1 Corinthians 3:6). Since we are God’s temples, let us meditate what flows out from us that nourishes and heals.
Firstly, we have not studied medicines, nor can we work miracles, how do we heal? Haven’t studied medicines? You’re probably right. Unable to work miracles? Wrong! Indeed, healing powers come from Jesus Christ. We are only channels responsible for the transmission of God’s grace. We are called to be holy, not to work miracles with our magical powers, but to channel God’s grace to others and in doing so, enjoy the grace that goes through us. Our Lady is “full of grace”, not because she has practised contemplation for ages, thus accumulating a lot of graces and powers. Rather, it is because she humbly accepted God’s call to bring forth the source of all graces, Jesus Christ into this world. It was she who told Jesus that people had drunk up all the wine in the wedding banquet. It was she who stood under the cross to be given the mission to be the Mother of the Church. It was she who accompanied the 120 disciples Jesus gathered before his ascension. With Our Lady around, the Holy Spirit descended and inaugurated the Age of the Church. God will not favour Our Lady by giving her many graces and giving us little. The difference between the BVM and us is whether our channel is obstructed or not.
Is our channel unobstructed? Are we in communion with the Lord through receiving the sacraments frequently? Do we know the will of the Lord through prayers and bible studies? Can we channel His grace to the others unobstructed?
Is our channel obstructed? One of the most popular obstructions is pride. The message of the gospel reading last week (Matthew 25:31-46) can be interpreted as an encouragement for us to do more charities, to serve Jesus Christ in the needy. But have you ever thought about it upside down, about a switch of roles to become the hungry, the thirst and the sick, to become an incarnated Christ to humbly accept the service of the others, making them a channel of God’s grace? In so doing, haven’t we “sanctify ourselves in our sickness, sanctify others in being served”? Let us work hard to sanctify ourselves, sanctify others and transform the world.
God bless.
Sunday, 9 November 2014
Sunday, 2 November 2014
OC and three out of Six Corporal Works of Mercy
Today, we celebrated the Feast of All Souls and launch the remembrance of the faithfully departed for the whole month. Traditionally, we Catholics pray for the souls in the Purgatory. They can no longer help themselves because they have shed their physical bodies. However, we on earth can perform many different types of Works of Mercy to help them. In fact, when the Church encourages us to perform these works, we are actually helping ourselves as well.
The idea of Corporal Works of Mercy comes from the gospel reading today, Matthew 25:31-46. This is the famous scene of the Last Judgment if you care to believe in it. As I use to saying, Jesus told us beforehand the syllabus of the Final examination: feed the hungry, quench the thirsty, shelter the homeless, clad the naked, nurse the sick and visit the imprisoned (vv 35-36). During the Last Judgment, Jesus will not ask whether you were baptized, you have skipped masses or saying graces. But of course, this does not give you a licence to oversleep and miss a Sunday mass. This syllabus is designed for all humanity, peoples of all faiths or no faith. This is the minimum requirement to enter eternal life. We Catholics count ourselves privileged to be baptized and to enjoy the foretaste of heaven on earth before it ends.
Does the story give me any inspiration in seeing the present OC stalemate?
It all started with the fact that the Occupiers have been fed up with the injustice a government that favours the tycoons with the approval from the Central government. Many SME shops have been folded up because of high rents. Many young people cannot buy a flat to start their own families. All the citizens have to foot the bill of overspent MTR projects to join the Mainland and many scandals are played out among government officials etc. They are hungered and thirsted of democracy. They want a government that is also accountable to them and not just to the rich and the Central government. Who can feed them and quench their thirst?
The students are like helpless souls in the Purgatory. They find themselves entered a cul-de-sac but are unable to find a way out. The adults outside insist that the decisions have been final. It is out of the question for NPC to amend their August 31 Announcement. Our students remain "imprisoned" as long as they uphold their ideals and demands which the adults dismiss as unrealistic and impracticable. They are free to go whenever they give up. But do we want to see them give up?
Quite a number of people do. For example, many anti-Occupation groups which have emerged from nowhere to take advantage of the situation to demonstrate their loyalty to the Central Government as can be heard from their mouthpieces in Hong Kong; those who claim that their livelihood have been hurt (e.g. taxi drivers, truck drivers, shop-owners, hotel managers and tour agencies etc.) and of course the HKSAR Government whose image has been more tarnished the longer she takes to resolve the impasse. However, many anti-Occupation tactics, such as tear gas, smear campaigns such as unsubstantiated allegations of foreign interventions, provisional court injunctions, withdrawal of sponsorship to universities, provocations and scuffles with Occupiers etc. seem to have backfired and fanned the momentum of the Occupation more. Do both governments want to end the Movement by dissipating the energies of our students? Do both governments see that by extending a helping hand to these helpless students, they are helping themselves in the long run instead? I always feel sorry for the Central government for her failure to attract competent people to do their jobs. Judge for yourselves the characters and qualities of those anti-Occupiers.
On the other hand, the students are practising some of the Beatitudes taught in the gospel. The generation gap in mentality is truly nowhere more obvious than in this Umbrella Movement. Unfortunately, so far nobody is able to offer a satisfactory compromise to bridge the gap. We don't know how long the students are going to hold out and I worry whether this course of political education would produce a huge group of disillusioned radical activists in Hong Kong in the future.
Dear Heavenly Father, what is your plan? Not our will, but Your will be done. Grant Your unworthy servant the joy to see a righteous ending. Amen.
The idea of Corporal Works of Mercy comes from the gospel reading today, Matthew 25:31-46. This is the famous scene of the Last Judgment if you care to believe in it. As I use to saying, Jesus told us beforehand the syllabus of the Final examination: feed the hungry, quench the thirsty, shelter the homeless, clad the naked, nurse the sick and visit the imprisoned (vv 35-36). During the Last Judgment, Jesus will not ask whether you were baptized, you have skipped masses or saying graces. But of course, this does not give you a licence to oversleep and miss a Sunday mass. This syllabus is designed for all humanity, peoples of all faiths or no faith. This is the minimum requirement to enter eternal life. We Catholics count ourselves privileged to be baptized and to enjoy the foretaste of heaven on earth before it ends.
Does the story give me any inspiration in seeing the present OC stalemate?
It all started with the fact that the Occupiers have been fed up with the injustice a government that favours the tycoons with the approval from the Central government. Many SME shops have been folded up because of high rents. Many young people cannot buy a flat to start their own families. All the citizens have to foot the bill of overspent MTR projects to join the Mainland and many scandals are played out among government officials etc. They are hungered and thirsted of democracy. They want a government that is also accountable to them and not just to the rich and the Central government. Who can feed them and quench their thirst?
The students are like helpless souls in the Purgatory. They find themselves entered a cul-de-sac but are unable to find a way out. The adults outside insist that the decisions have been final. It is out of the question for NPC to amend their August 31 Announcement. Our students remain "imprisoned" as long as they uphold their ideals and demands which the adults dismiss as unrealistic and impracticable. They are free to go whenever they give up. But do we want to see them give up?
Quite a number of people do. For example, many anti-Occupation groups which have emerged from nowhere to take advantage of the situation to demonstrate their loyalty to the Central Government as can be heard from their mouthpieces in Hong Kong; those who claim that their livelihood have been hurt (e.g. taxi drivers, truck drivers, shop-owners, hotel managers and tour agencies etc.) and of course the HKSAR Government whose image has been more tarnished the longer she takes to resolve the impasse. However, many anti-Occupation tactics, such as tear gas, smear campaigns such as unsubstantiated allegations of foreign interventions, provisional court injunctions, withdrawal of sponsorship to universities, provocations and scuffles with Occupiers etc. seem to have backfired and fanned the momentum of the Occupation more. Do both governments want to end the Movement by dissipating the energies of our students? Do both governments see that by extending a helping hand to these helpless students, they are helping themselves in the long run instead? I always feel sorry for the Central government for her failure to attract competent people to do their jobs. Judge for yourselves the characters and qualities of those anti-Occupiers.
On the other hand, the students are practising some of the Beatitudes taught in the gospel. The generation gap in mentality is truly nowhere more obvious than in this Umbrella Movement. Unfortunately, so far nobody is able to offer a satisfactory compromise to bridge the gap. We don't know how long the students are going to hold out and I worry whether this course of political education would produce a huge group of disillusioned radical activists in Hong Kong in the future.
Dear Heavenly Father, what is your plan? Not our will, but Your will be done. Grant Your unworthy servant the joy to see a righteous ending. Amen.
Sunday, 26 October 2014
Love until it hurts
Today, we read of the well-known story of the Greatest Commandment in the Law of Moses. When a Pharisaic scribe asked Jesus which the greatest commandment among the 613 laws was, Jesus answered him with ease by quoting Deuteronomy 6:5. "Love the Lord, your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your mind." (Matthew 22:37). Of course, the quote was not exact because in Hebrew, it was "with all your might וּבְכָל-מְאֹדֶךָ" and Septuagint it was also "might ἐξ ὅλης τῆς δυνάμεώς σου" instead of "with all your mind ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ διανοίᾳ σου". That is to say, LXX translates the Hebrew original faithfully while the New Testament Greek chooses another word. Anyway, let the biblical scholars settle this difference and let us continue.
Jesus continued to quote the Leviticus 19:18 to give the second greatest commandment. This is the famous "Love your neighbour as yourself." (22:39) Many people miss an important point in the ministry of Jesus. When Jesus was tempted by Satan, Jesus countered the Devil only with quotations from Deuteronomy. He did not use his own authority. Similarly, when Jesus answered the challenges from the Jewish authority, he made use of materials which the `Jews were familiar. Jesus did not teach them new things, things which they had not heard of. Jesus adapted to their level of understanding. Therefore, it is a happy misunderstanding to say that Jesus taught us to love our neighbour as ourselves. No, Jesus did not. He only reminded what the Jews had already known from the Old Testament. People who say this is unfamiliar with the Bible as well as Jesus' MO in his public ministry.
The second greatest commandment is the only way we can fulfill the first greatest commandment. Doing the second commandment is the only concrete way we can love God who is a spirit. John was probably the first apostle to interpret this when he wrote,
"If a man say, I love God, and hates his brother, he is a liar: for he that loves not his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen?" (1 John 4:20)
Of course, Jesus also left us the Parable of Sheep and Goats (Matthew 25:31-46) to encourage us to serve the poor and the needy. In serving these needy people, we will be able to serve God. Still, these two commandments belong to the Old Testament. People would naturally ask what makes the New Covenant superior to the Old. Well, during the Last Supper, Jesus gave a new commandment quite similar to the Old Law,
"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; even as I have loved you" (John 13:34).
So, what is the difference between the Old commandment and the New commandment? How is the New superior to the Old?
"For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it" (Ephesians 5:29).
In short, when you love yourself, you nourish and cherish yourself. You will not hurt yourself. When you love your neighbour as yourself, you nourish and cherish your neighbour. Yet, you love within your capacity so as not to hurt yourself. However, if we love as Jesus has loved, we must love until it hurts because Jesus has sacrificed himself to die on the cross for us. Here lies the difference. Christian love is to do good until it hurts.
Not only is it unpopular, it also hurts to be paternalistic for the good of people. Blessed Pope Paul VI was one such example. This evening, the Hong Kong Diocese celebrated the Beatification of Pope Paul VI. In recounting his many contributions to the modernization of the Church, Cardinal John Tong fondly remembered how he was ordained by the Supreme Pontiff. In his encyclical Humanæ Vitæ, Paul VI insisted on the traditional teaching against artificial contraception, contrary to the majority recommendation of the theologians. This made him unpopular. He must have been deeply hurt because few people appreciated his love and concern for the good of his flock. Relaxation on the use of artificial contraceptives pleases the crowd and brings them convenience. However, such practices objectify women and promote a culture of death. It will bring people away from God, rather than drawing them near. This is a perspective new to me. It requires a moral man of steel to be able to uphold an unpopular, yet beneficent traditional teaching. Blessed Pope Paul VI is such a man of steel.
Dear Lord, we thank you for sending us a blessed pastor to shepherd us. May his intercessions draw us close to you. Amen.
Jesus continued to quote the Leviticus 19:18 to give the second greatest commandment. This is the famous "Love your neighbour as yourself." (22:39) Many people miss an important point in the ministry of Jesus. When Jesus was tempted by Satan, Jesus countered the Devil only with quotations from Deuteronomy. He did not use his own authority. Similarly, when Jesus answered the challenges from the Jewish authority, he made use of materials which the `Jews were familiar. Jesus did not teach them new things, things which they had not heard of. Jesus adapted to their level of understanding. Therefore, it is a happy misunderstanding to say that Jesus taught us to love our neighbour as ourselves. No, Jesus did not. He only reminded what the Jews had already known from the Old Testament. People who say this is unfamiliar with the Bible as well as Jesus' MO in his public ministry.
The second greatest commandment is the only way we can fulfill the first greatest commandment. Doing the second commandment is the only concrete way we can love God who is a spirit. John was probably the first apostle to interpret this when he wrote,
"If a man say, I love God, and hates his brother, he is a liar: for he that loves not his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen?" (1 John 4:20)
Of course, Jesus also left us the Parable of Sheep and Goats (Matthew 25:31-46) to encourage us to serve the poor and the needy. In serving these needy people, we will be able to serve God. Still, these two commandments belong to the Old Testament. People would naturally ask what makes the New Covenant superior to the Old. Well, during the Last Supper, Jesus gave a new commandment quite similar to the Old Law,
"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; even as I have loved you" (John 13:34).
So, what is the difference between the Old commandment and the New commandment? How is the New superior to the Old?
"For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it" (Ephesians 5:29).
In short, when you love yourself, you nourish and cherish yourself. You will not hurt yourself. When you love your neighbour as yourself, you nourish and cherish your neighbour. Yet, you love within your capacity so as not to hurt yourself. However, if we love as Jesus has loved, we must love until it hurts because Jesus has sacrificed himself to die on the cross for us. Here lies the difference. Christian love is to do good until it hurts.
Not only is it unpopular, it also hurts to be paternalistic for the good of people. Blessed Pope Paul VI was one such example. This evening, the Hong Kong Diocese celebrated the Beatification of Pope Paul VI. In recounting his many contributions to the modernization of the Church, Cardinal John Tong fondly remembered how he was ordained by the Supreme Pontiff. In his encyclical Humanæ Vitæ, Paul VI insisted on the traditional teaching against artificial contraception, contrary to the majority recommendation of the theologians. This made him unpopular. He must have been deeply hurt because few people appreciated his love and concern for the good of his flock. Relaxation on the use of artificial contraceptives pleases the crowd and brings them convenience. However, such practices objectify women and promote a culture of death. It will bring people away from God, rather than drawing them near. This is a perspective new to me. It requires a moral man of steel to be able to uphold an unpopular, yet beneficent traditional teaching. Blessed Pope Paul VI is such a man of steel.
Dear Lord, we thank you for sending us a blessed pastor to shepherd us. May his intercessions draw us close to you. Amen.
Sunday, 19 October 2014
How I wish OC would end
I must declare beforehand that I am not a politically correct person. I am biased and support student movements. I am sympathetic because I feel guilty for failing to bring about a more democratic Hong Kong for them, leaving them to fight for it themselves. In my younger days, I participated rather marginally social movements, not patriotic movements in Hong Kong because by the time I entered university, I had missed the Protect Diaoyu Islands Movement. Moreover, I have not visited the Occupy sites. I have never been on the ground to feel the mood. I have not even responded to the Church's invitation to participate in prayer meetings, Eucharistic Adoration, Stations of the Cross etc. Therefore, you may question my "qualification" to speak on the topic.
As an armchair ethicist, teaching my students DSE Ethics and Religious Studies, I prayed to God when OC started prematurely. I prayed to the Archangels and guardian angels to protect the people when tear gas was fired to disperse the crowd in Admiralty. When misinformation and fallacies were freely floating around in the cyber space, I engaged in debates with various WhatsApp groups including my beloved intelligent LSC old students and in particular a heated face-to-face analysis with one of my Catholic colleagues. All in all, I submit everything to God's will. I believe that God has the best arrangements for all of us, the Central Government, HKSAR Government, the Occupiers and the rest of the world. After the baptism of this Umbrella Movement, the future of social unrest in Hong Kong will never be the same anymore. (I don't think it is appropriate to call it an "Umbrella Revolution" or "Colours Revolution" because Hong Kong cannot be independent, not to mention overthrowing the HKSAR Government or Central Government.) We have entered a New Age of social actions. The citizens of Hong Kong are aware of new possibilities and channels to express and fight for their rights. And this cannot be unlearned.
I thank my daughter for telling me to see things in the eyes of young people of these days. She said that this Umbrella Movement is a clash of old mentality vs. new mentality; old paradigm vs. new paradigm. She is right. While the government employs a PIE mentality (Proposal-Implementation-Evaluation. It was rumoured that the police's budget to deal with OC was 7 days), the Occupation Movement is impromptus and leaderless. While the police charges the crowd with formation, batons, pepper spray and tear gas, the crowd was like playing online games in teams. While many old soldiers saw signs of early phases of June 4, some even mistook the young people as Red Guards, the crowd wax and wane when "it was evenings and it was mornings, a 22nd day". How could they be able to see otherwise because a show of a certain man proposing to a lady whom he met just for a few days in the movement was put up in Mongkok in front of TV cameras. There are still people who continue to adhere to their old mentality in believing that our students are naive; that there is a "Black Hand", a foreign country in the background to manipulate them etc. Sometimes, I myself fell victim to this mentality. I do not apologize because I am no longer young. For example, I think the HKSAR Government is playing a cat vs. mouse game with the student leaders in the so called "dialogue". The topics of the scheduled meeting were about constitutionality and legality! One day before the meeting, the Government called it off because the students were "insincere and putting forth unrealistic demands, continuously moving the football goal" etc. Frankly speaking, I find no sign for optimism in the upcoming "dialogue" next Tuesday, though I see it as a contest between David and Goliath, but the student leaders are no David! I wish I were wrong because my old mentality is affecting my judgment. But I will definitely pray to God to side the students because this is God's MO. He opts for the poor and the weak and tells us to do so.
The seeds of conflict have been sowed long time ago in a soil of discontent. At the outbreak of SARS epidemic in 2003, all the citizens of Hong Kong were united and stood by the side of the HKSAR Government, cooperating with her to fight against a deadly virus which affected everybody. To deliver the HKSAR from bankruptcy, the Central Government benevolently started sending mainland tourists to cross the border shopping. However, discontents started to brew when government policies are getting more and more lopsided to benefit the rich, creating wider and wider income gaps; when young people have to live with their parents because prices of housing are sent soaring to heavens; when the shopping sprees of mainland visitors push up prices, grab up our milk powders and benefit only a handful of people; when the CE handed out government posts to award his election supporters and when scandals broke out one after another among his handpicked supporters etc. Perhaps the CE was following orders from the CG to demonstrate his loyalty but it was at the expenses of the citizens. Naturally, citizens want to choose a CE after their hearts. When hundreds of people came out to mourn for the death of a dog on the MTR tracks, I was surprised at the pressurized frustrations of people against big corporations. When thousands of people took to the street in these twenty odd days, I was surprised no more.
I said earlier that the upcoming Tuesday dialogue fails to inspire optimism in me. One of the reasons is the chairperson of the dialogue. The Government claimed her intention to look for a person of high virtuous calibre and is highly respected in the society (德高望重) to chair the meeting. It turns out that the person is another CE supporter handpicked to head one of the universities in Hong Kong. Don't make me wrong. I do not question his virtue and fame. Moreover, I admire his courage because many other university chancellors shy away from this invitation because this job pleases nobody. Rather, I lament for the CG because it fails to attract competent enough people, leaving the posts to be grabbed up by people of lesser calibre, the Gresham's Law (405 BC) as applied in governments. Once again, I am still unable to shake off my old mentality.
When all hopes seem gone, I still have my trump card. Today is Mission Sunday. In the gospel reading, Jesus promised his disciples to be with them always even unto the end of the world (Matthew 28:20). I am sure he is accompanying the Christians among the Movements. His presence will bless all the people present, students, mobs, police and onlookers etc. And like most people in Hong Kong, I pray that OC would end soon without bloodshed.
How do I wish OC would end? I suggest the three OC organizers and student leaders of all parties turning themselves in to the Wan Chai Police Station asap. Hopefully, it will trigger a wave of self-surrenders until a tipping point is reached that the crowd at Admiralty will wane. When Admiralty is dissolved, Mongkok will melt away.
Dear Father, hear my prayer. Not what I will, but what thou wilt. Amen.
As an armchair ethicist, teaching my students DSE Ethics and Religious Studies, I prayed to God when OC started prematurely. I prayed to the Archangels and guardian angels to protect the people when tear gas was fired to disperse the crowd in Admiralty. When misinformation and fallacies were freely floating around in the cyber space, I engaged in debates with various WhatsApp groups including my beloved intelligent LSC old students and in particular a heated face-to-face analysis with one of my Catholic colleagues. All in all, I submit everything to God's will. I believe that God has the best arrangements for all of us, the Central Government, HKSAR Government, the Occupiers and the rest of the world. After the baptism of this Umbrella Movement, the future of social unrest in Hong Kong will never be the same anymore. (I don't think it is appropriate to call it an "Umbrella Revolution" or "Colours Revolution" because Hong Kong cannot be independent, not to mention overthrowing the HKSAR Government or Central Government.) We have entered a New Age of social actions. The citizens of Hong Kong are aware of new possibilities and channels to express and fight for their rights. And this cannot be unlearned.
I thank my daughter for telling me to see things in the eyes of young people of these days. She said that this Umbrella Movement is a clash of old mentality vs. new mentality; old paradigm vs. new paradigm. She is right. While the government employs a PIE mentality (Proposal-Implementation-Evaluation. It was rumoured that the police's budget to deal with OC was 7 days), the Occupation Movement is impromptus and leaderless. While the police charges the crowd with formation, batons, pepper spray and tear gas, the crowd was like playing online games in teams. While many old soldiers saw signs of early phases of June 4, some even mistook the young people as Red Guards, the crowd wax and wane when "it was evenings and it was mornings, a 22nd day". How could they be able to see otherwise because a show of a certain man proposing to a lady whom he met just for a few days in the movement was put up in Mongkok in front of TV cameras. There are still people who continue to adhere to their old mentality in believing that our students are naive; that there is a "Black Hand", a foreign country in the background to manipulate them etc. Sometimes, I myself fell victim to this mentality. I do not apologize because I am no longer young. For example, I think the HKSAR Government is playing a cat vs. mouse game with the student leaders in the so called "dialogue". The topics of the scheduled meeting were about constitutionality and legality! One day before the meeting, the Government called it off because the students were "insincere and putting forth unrealistic demands, continuously moving the football goal" etc. Frankly speaking, I find no sign for optimism in the upcoming "dialogue" next Tuesday, though I see it as a contest between David and Goliath, but the student leaders are no David! I wish I were wrong because my old mentality is affecting my judgment. But I will definitely pray to God to side the students because this is God's MO. He opts for the poor and the weak and tells us to do so.
The seeds of conflict have been sowed long time ago in a soil of discontent. At the outbreak of SARS epidemic in 2003, all the citizens of Hong Kong were united and stood by the side of the HKSAR Government, cooperating with her to fight against a deadly virus which affected everybody. To deliver the HKSAR from bankruptcy, the Central Government benevolently started sending mainland tourists to cross the border shopping. However, discontents started to brew when government policies are getting more and more lopsided to benefit the rich, creating wider and wider income gaps; when young people have to live with their parents because prices of housing are sent soaring to heavens; when the shopping sprees of mainland visitors push up prices, grab up our milk powders and benefit only a handful of people; when the CE handed out government posts to award his election supporters and when scandals broke out one after another among his handpicked supporters etc. Perhaps the CE was following orders from the CG to demonstrate his loyalty but it was at the expenses of the citizens. Naturally, citizens want to choose a CE after their hearts. When hundreds of people came out to mourn for the death of a dog on the MTR tracks, I was surprised at the pressurized frustrations of people against big corporations. When thousands of people took to the street in these twenty odd days, I was surprised no more.
I said earlier that the upcoming Tuesday dialogue fails to inspire optimism in me. One of the reasons is the chairperson of the dialogue. The Government claimed her intention to look for a person of high virtuous calibre and is highly respected in the society (德高望重) to chair the meeting. It turns out that the person is another CE supporter handpicked to head one of the universities in Hong Kong. Don't make me wrong. I do not question his virtue and fame. Moreover, I admire his courage because many other university chancellors shy away from this invitation because this job pleases nobody. Rather, I lament for the CG because it fails to attract competent enough people, leaving the posts to be grabbed up by people of lesser calibre, the Gresham's Law (405 BC) as applied in governments. Once again, I am still unable to shake off my old mentality.
When all hopes seem gone, I still have my trump card. Today is Mission Sunday. In the gospel reading, Jesus promised his disciples to be with them always even unto the end of the world (Matthew 28:20). I am sure he is accompanying the Christians among the Movements. His presence will bless all the people present, students, mobs, police and onlookers etc. And like most people in Hong Kong, I pray that OC would end soon without bloodshed.
How do I wish OC would end? I suggest the three OC organizers and student leaders of all parties turning themselves in to the Wan Chai Police Station asap. Hopefully, it will trigger a wave of self-surrenders until a tipping point is reached that the crowd at Admiralty will wane. When Admiralty is dissolved, Mongkok will melt away.
Dear Father, hear my prayer. Not what I will, but what thou wilt. Amen.
Sunday, 12 October 2014
「去飲」的聖經意義 God throws a banquet for us
常年期第廿八主日（甲年）
主題：天主為我們預備了的盛宴
近半個月來，我們不斷聽到「去飲」的新聞報導。所以，今天就和大家一起，默想一點「去飲」的聖經意義。
耶穌時代，大部份人的生活水準低，貧困簡陋。一生人恐怕祗可以安排一次婚宴。能夠參加婚宴，盡情飲食，並不是常有的事，可以說是非常難得。所以，耶穌在描述天國的奧秘時，用了婚宴的圖像，以表達出天國的隆重、矜貴。
人類雖然犯罪遠離了天主，天主卻並沒有放棄祂創造的肖像。雖然人類忘記了、否認了他們的創造主，但天父仍不離不棄，想盡辦法與人溝通，啟示自己，甚至為了償還人類的罪債，派遣聖子降生受難，幫助人類與祂和好，建立一個和平友愛的天國。耶穌用婚宴的象徵告訴我們，天父大排筵席，提供一個我們與祂和解的機會，成為自己人，分享祂豐富的、永恆的神聖生命。在第一篇讀經，依撒意亞先知給我們粗略地素描了這個「美酒佳餚的盛宴」是甚麽一回事。
第一，「上主要永遠取消死亡。」表面上取消死亡是指人類不再老死，人人都可以擁有用不完的時間，可以發揮潛能，可以實現夢想，做從前想做但沒有時間去做的事。其實，罪惡和死亡把天主和人隔絕了，「取消了死亡」表示天主主動打破祂與罪人之間的隔膜。耶穌斷氣時，聖所的帳幔從上到下分裂為二正展示出這個意義。天主要以耶穌的死永遠地取消死亡。
第二，「上主要從人人臉上拭去淚痕，消除一切恥辱。」在天國裡人人不再受日曬雨淋、沒有休息的奴隸之苦，不再有疾病，不再有流淚，不再有惡霸欺凌，人人豐衣足食。注意，不是「眼淚」而是「淚痕」，是過去了的傷痛。即是說，天主不是止痛藥，不是人民的鴉片。祂不但安慰我們目前的痛苦，而且徹底地，從每個人童年的陰影開始，掃除一切心靈上的創傷。
這一切將會在天主的聖山上實現。「天主的聖山」在那裡？聖保祿說，我們的身體是「聖神的宮殿」。身體最重要的部份是人的內心。所以，這聖山，這個天國就在我們的心內。這「聖山」又是天主聚集祂子民的地方，所以，這聖山，這個天國就是我們，就是教會團體。
教會按福音的精神去生活，並發展出一套放諸四海皆準的普世價值，例如慈善、公義、真理、自由、誠信、包容等。這些就是天主所預備了的佳餚美酒，用來滋養人性，好使埋藏在人心內的天主肖像，得以展現無遺。
在一眾普世價值之中，我想同大家講一講「自由」的重要。天主是自由的，祂的肖像當然是自由的。倘若人沒有自由，他的一切所作所為都是迫不得已的話，他還需要為他所做的事，所犯的錯負責嗎？人民有自由，就有可能「人盡其才、地盡其利、物盡其用、貨暢其流。」(孫文，上李鴻章萬言書，1894)發展他的潛能，展示天主的肖像。所以「自由、自主」是非常重要的。耶穌在若望福音指出，真理使人自由。可惜，當今社會，流傳著很多似是而非的謬論。我想幫大家分析其中兩個同天主教有關的謬論。
第一，耶穌說「凱撒的歸凱撒、天主的歸天主」。表面上，這段福音好像鼓吹「政教分離」。政治歸政府，宗教歸天主，河水不犯井水。但是，試問這世界有甚麽不是屬於天主的呢？連凱撒不也是歸於天主的嗎？那麽教會是否事事都干預政府的運作呢？當然不是。祗有當政府推行的政策，違反福音的精神，違反公義時候，天主的子民就不能袖手旁觀了。例如，近來平等機會委員會提出的反歧視條例修訂法案的諮詢文件，引入澳洲的「事實婚姻關係」的概念，將會把現時一夫一妻的家庭關係，破壞無遺，教會就不能坐視不理了。
第二，很多人誤會，以為天主教選教宗都不是一人一票，就沒有資格講民主。這真是一個荒謬的言論。難道男人不能懷孕生子，就沒有資格做婦產科醫生了嗎？所以，天主教徒絕對有資格講民主。
好了，讓我們回到福音的比喻。很奇怪，今天所讀的比喻中，國王擺酒竟然有人不賞面！這是甚麽意思呢？福音說「有的去耕田，有的去做自己的生意，有的竟捉住僕人，凌辱殺死。」這使我聯想起這半個月來發生的「去飲」事件。
因為各人的恩賜不同，不是人人都有本領站台、有時間在現場分派物資、維持秩序。有的人可以躲在家中，上網起底、作勵志歌曲或者為香港祈禱。各人就按自己的恩賜，共同建立天國。
另一方面，有些人寧願去耕田、去做生意，也不領國王的情去飲。今天，為了目前的經濟損失而反對佔中的，大有人在。福音中的國王也沒有勉強那些農夫和商人去飲。恨祇恨那些使用暴力和恐嚇手段，去撕裂社會的人，天主當然會與他們算帳。
最後，可能有人能夠欺世盜名，混水摸魚。但縱使他們能騙盡天下的人，他們始終都逃不過天主的審判，天主會把那些別具用心、言行不一，沒有穿禮服的人趕出天國。
各位，沒有人願意見到「去飲」會悲劇收場，但沒有人能想得出如何收拾殘局的好方法。讓我們謙遜地承認自己的不足，祈求天主大發慈悲，不要讓青年人受到無辜的傷害。
天主保佑。
28th Ordinary Sunday (Year A)
Theme: God throws a banquet for us
Preface: At the advice of Fr. Milanese, our parish priest, I watered down the homily and chose the wording more cautiously. He allowed me to speak freely whatever in my mind. I thank Fr. Milanese for his guidance and confidence in me.
We have heard a lot of news about “Go Banqueting”** in the past two weeks. Therefore, today, I would like to meditate its biblical meaning.
In Jesus’ time, the living standard of most of the people was low. Their life was poor and simple. At most, they could only afford to organize only one wedding banquet throughout their life. Going banqueting and eating to their full was not common, if not rare. Therefore, when Jesus uses the image of wedding banquet to describe the mystery of the Kingdom of Heaven, he wants to show the solemnity, nobility and rarity of the Kingdom.
Though men disobeyed God and rejected God, God had never abandoned the image He created. Though men forgot and denied their Creator, the Father had never forsaken us, trying hard to communicate and reveal Himself to us. He even sent His son to incarnate and died for us to repay our debts, to reconcile with us to build up a peaceful Kingdom of Love. Jesus makes use of the image of wedding banquet to tell us that God throws a party to provide an opportunity for our reconciliation with Him, to become an insider, to share His overflowing, eternal and sacred life. In the first reading today, Isaiah sketched a picture of what “a feast of fat things, a feast of wine on the lees” is all about. (Isaiah 25:6)
Firstly, “The Lord shall swallow up death forever” (25:8a). Superficially, swallowing up death may mean that men will no longer age and die. All possess infinite amount of time, to realize their potentials, to materialize their dreams and to do what they previously could not afford the time to do. Actually, sins and death cut men off from God. Therefore, swallowing up death means God will take the initiative to abolish the separation between Him and sinners. The moment Jesus died and gave up his spirit, the curtain of the Holy of the holies was torn from top to bottom into two. This illustrated the reconciliation between God and men. God made use of the death of Jesus to swallow up death forever.
Secondly, “the Lord God will wipe away tears from all faces, the reproach of His people, He will take away from all the earth” (25:8b). In the Kingdom of Heaven, people will not suffer in the scorching sun as slaves without a brief moment of rest. There will not be diseases, tears and bullies. Everybody is well-fed. The “tears” come not only from recent sufferings, but also sufferings in the past. God is not an instant pain-killer, not the opium of the people. Not only does God console our sufferings at the present moment, He will thoroughly, and starting from trauma in the childhood, clear and clean up pains in the heart.
All these will happen “on the mountain of the Lord of hosts” (25:6a). So, where is this holy mountain? St. Paul said, our body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit (1Corinthians 3:16). The most important part of the body is our heart. Therefore, this holy mountain, this Kingdom of Heaven dwells in our hearts. This holy mountain is where God gathers His people. Therefore, this holy mountain, this Kingdom of Heaven is the Church community.
The Church lives up the evangelical spirit from which she derives a collection of universal values which are applicable anywhere in the world. For example, beneficence, justice, truth, freedom, integrity and tolerance etc. These are the “fat things, the wine on the lees” God has prepared for us, to nourish our human nature so that the image of God which is buried in our heart might be able to shine off.
Among the universal values, I would like to talk about the importance of freedom. God is free. So His images should also be free. If a man were not free so that whatever he did was done out of necessity, would he be held responsible for the things, the sins he had done? If people are given freedom, “man can fully discharge his capability, land can fully yield its produce and things can fully be utilized and goods can fully circulate.” (Sun Yat-sen, Letter to Viceroy Li Hongzhang, 1894) Then people can fully realize their potentials and allow the image of God to shine out clearly. Jesus once said, “and the truth will make you free” (John 8:32) Unfortunately, many fallacies are floating around in the city of Hong Kong. Now, I would like to discuss two fallacies related to Catholicism.
Firstly, Jesus said, “Render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Mark 12:17) Superficially, this piece of gospel text seems to advocate the separation between the Church and the State: politics belongs to the government and religion to God. “River water does not mix with underground water”. However, tell me, what on earth does not belong to God? Nothing. Without exception, everything belongs to God, including Cæsar. Then, shall the Church meddle with every step in the running of the State? Of course not. Only when the policy of the State contradicts the evangelical spirit, contradicts justice, are Christians justified to intervene. For example, recently, the Equal Opportunities Commission is conducting the consultation of Anti-Discrimination legilation review. EOC introduces an Australian concept of “de facto relationships” which will undermine the family structure of one man and one wife. The Church cannot sit there like a duck.
Secondly, many people misunderstand that since the Pope is not elected through universal suffrage, Catholics are not qualified to talk about democracy. This is truly a fallacy. Wouldn’t it be that men cannot get pregnant and give birth to babies, therefore, men are not qualified to become a gynecologist and obstetrician? Therefore, the fact that the Pope was not voted in with one man one vote, does not disqualify Catholics from airing their views on democracy.
Now, let us return to the parable in the gospel (Matthew 22:1-14). Strangely enough, in the parable we read today, how come there were people who dared not giving face to the king by refusing to attain the king’s banquet (22:3, 5). What does that mean? The gospel reads, “... they went off, one to his farm, another to his business, while the rest seized his servants, treated them shamefully, and killed them.” (22:5-6) This made me think of what had happened to “Go Banqueting” in the past two weeks.
Since we are gifted differently, not everybody has the ability to address the crowd, has time to distribute the supplies or to maintain order etc. Some people can stay home to surf the Internet to dig up people’s background information, to write cheering songs or even to pray for Hong Kong. Everyone makes use of the charisma he receives from God to build up the Kingdom of Heaven.
On the other hand, some prefer going off to his farm, to his business and do not give face to the king by refusing to attend the banquet. Similarly, today, many people do not Go Banqueting because of the perceived financial losses. In the parable, the king did not force the farmers and businessmen to go banqueting. Rather, he was infuriated by those who used violence and intimidation to tear the society apart. God will surely make them pay for it.
Lastly, perhaps some people are successful in cheating the whole world, making a name and taking advantages. Although they might be able to fool the world, they will not be able to run away from God’s judgment. Woe to those who harbour ulterior motives, who do not practise what they speak, who do not go banqueting in wedding garments, God will expel them from the Kingdom of Heaven.
Dear brethren, nobody wants to see a tragic ending to the Go Banqueting, but nobody is able to come up with a good solution to the present situation. Let us humbly admit our inadequacy, pray for the mercy of God not to let our young people sustain unjustified injuries.
God bless.
**“Go Banqueting” is the code name of “Occupy Central Movement”, known internationally as the “Umbrella Revolution”
主題：天主為我們預備了的盛宴
近半個月來，我們不斷聽到「去飲」的新聞報導。所以，今天就和大家一起，默想一點「去飲」的聖經意義。
耶穌時代，大部份人的生活水準低，貧困簡陋。一生人恐怕祗可以安排一次婚宴。能夠參加婚宴，盡情飲食，並不是常有的事，可以說是非常難得。所以，耶穌在描述天國的奧秘時，用了婚宴的圖像，以表達出天國的隆重、矜貴。
人類雖然犯罪遠離了天主，天主卻並沒有放棄祂創造的肖像。雖然人類忘記了、否認了他們的創造主，但天父仍不離不棄，想盡辦法與人溝通，啟示自己，甚至為了償還人類的罪債，派遣聖子降生受難，幫助人類與祂和好，建立一個和平友愛的天國。耶穌用婚宴的象徵告訴我們，天父大排筵席，提供一個我們與祂和解的機會，成為自己人，分享祂豐富的、永恆的神聖生命。在第一篇讀經，依撒意亞先知給我們粗略地素描了這個「美酒佳餚的盛宴」是甚麽一回事。
第一，「上主要永遠取消死亡。」表面上取消死亡是指人類不再老死，人人都可以擁有用不完的時間，可以發揮潛能，可以實現夢想，做從前想做但沒有時間去做的事。其實，罪惡和死亡把天主和人隔絕了，「取消了死亡」表示天主主動打破祂與罪人之間的隔膜。耶穌斷氣時，聖所的帳幔從上到下分裂為二正展示出這個意義。天主要以耶穌的死永遠地取消死亡。
第二，「上主要從人人臉上拭去淚痕，消除一切恥辱。」在天國裡人人不再受日曬雨淋、沒有休息的奴隸之苦，不再有疾病，不再有流淚，不再有惡霸欺凌，人人豐衣足食。注意，不是「眼淚」而是「淚痕」，是過去了的傷痛。即是說，天主不是止痛藥，不是人民的鴉片。祂不但安慰我們目前的痛苦，而且徹底地，從每個人童年的陰影開始，掃除一切心靈上的創傷。
這一切將會在天主的聖山上實現。「天主的聖山」在那裡？聖保祿說，我們的身體是「聖神的宮殿」。身體最重要的部份是人的內心。所以，這聖山，這個天國就在我們的心內。這「聖山」又是天主聚集祂子民的地方，所以，這聖山，這個天國就是我們，就是教會團體。
教會按福音的精神去生活，並發展出一套放諸四海皆準的普世價值，例如慈善、公義、真理、自由、誠信、包容等。這些就是天主所預備了的佳餚美酒，用來滋養人性，好使埋藏在人心內的天主肖像，得以展現無遺。
在一眾普世價值之中，我想同大家講一講「自由」的重要。天主是自由的，祂的肖像當然是自由的。倘若人沒有自由，他的一切所作所為都是迫不得已的話，他還需要為他所做的事，所犯的錯負責嗎？人民有自由，就有可能「人盡其才、地盡其利、物盡其用、貨暢其流。」(孫文，上李鴻章萬言書，1894)發展他的潛能，展示天主的肖像。所以「自由、自主」是非常重要的。耶穌在若望福音指出，真理使人自由。可惜，當今社會，流傳著很多似是而非的謬論。我想幫大家分析其中兩個同天主教有關的謬論。
第一，耶穌說「凱撒的歸凱撒、天主的歸天主」。表面上，這段福音好像鼓吹「政教分離」。政治歸政府，宗教歸天主，河水不犯井水。但是，試問這世界有甚麽不是屬於天主的呢？連凱撒不也是歸於天主的嗎？那麽教會是否事事都干預政府的運作呢？當然不是。祗有當政府推行的政策，違反福音的精神，違反公義時候，天主的子民就不能袖手旁觀了。例如，近來平等機會委員會提出的反歧視條例修訂法案的諮詢文件，引入澳洲的「事實婚姻關係」的概念，將會把現時一夫一妻的家庭關係，破壞無遺，教會就不能坐視不理了。
第二，很多人誤會，以為天主教選教宗都不是一人一票，就沒有資格講民主。這真是一個荒謬的言論。難道男人不能懷孕生子，就沒有資格做婦產科醫生了嗎？所以，天主教徒絕對有資格講民主。
好了，讓我們回到福音的比喻。很奇怪，今天所讀的比喻中，國王擺酒竟然有人不賞面！這是甚麽意思呢？福音說「有的去耕田，有的去做自己的生意，有的竟捉住僕人，凌辱殺死。」這使我聯想起這半個月來發生的「去飲」事件。
因為各人的恩賜不同，不是人人都有本領站台、有時間在現場分派物資、維持秩序。有的人可以躲在家中，上網起底、作勵志歌曲或者為香港祈禱。各人就按自己的恩賜，共同建立天國。
另一方面，有些人寧願去耕田、去做生意，也不領國王的情去飲。今天，為了目前的經濟損失而反對佔中的，大有人在。福音中的國王也沒有勉強那些農夫和商人去飲。恨祇恨那些使用暴力和恐嚇手段，去撕裂社會的人，天主當然會與他們算帳。
最後，可能有人能夠欺世盜名，混水摸魚。但縱使他們能騙盡天下的人，他們始終都逃不過天主的審判，天主會把那些別具用心、言行不一，沒有穿禮服的人趕出天國。
各位，沒有人願意見到「去飲」會悲劇收場，但沒有人能想得出如何收拾殘局的好方法。讓我們謙遜地承認自己的不足，祈求天主大發慈悲，不要讓青年人受到無辜的傷害。
天主保佑。
28th Ordinary Sunday (Year A)
Theme: God throws a banquet for us
Preface: At the advice of Fr. Milanese, our parish priest, I watered down the homily and chose the wording more cautiously. He allowed me to speak freely whatever in my mind. I thank Fr. Milanese for his guidance and confidence in me.
We have heard a lot of news about “Go Banqueting”** in the past two weeks. Therefore, today, I would like to meditate its biblical meaning.
In Jesus’ time, the living standard of most of the people was low. Their life was poor and simple. At most, they could only afford to organize only one wedding banquet throughout their life. Going banqueting and eating to their full was not common, if not rare. Therefore, when Jesus uses the image of wedding banquet to describe the mystery of the Kingdom of Heaven, he wants to show the solemnity, nobility and rarity of the Kingdom.
Though men disobeyed God and rejected God, God had never abandoned the image He created. Though men forgot and denied their Creator, the Father had never forsaken us, trying hard to communicate and reveal Himself to us. He even sent His son to incarnate and died for us to repay our debts, to reconcile with us to build up a peaceful Kingdom of Love. Jesus makes use of the image of wedding banquet to tell us that God throws a party to provide an opportunity for our reconciliation with Him, to become an insider, to share His overflowing, eternal and sacred life. In the first reading today, Isaiah sketched a picture of what “a feast of fat things, a feast of wine on the lees” is all about. (Isaiah 25:6)
Firstly, “The Lord shall swallow up death forever” (25:8a). Superficially, swallowing up death may mean that men will no longer age and die. All possess infinite amount of time, to realize their potentials, to materialize their dreams and to do what they previously could not afford the time to do. Actually, sins and death cut men off from God. Therefore, swallowing up death means God will take the initiative to abolish the separation between Him and sinners. The moment Jesus died and gave up his spirit, the curtain of the Holy of the holies was torn from top to bottom into two. This illustrated the reconciliation between God and men. God made use of the death of Jesus to swallow up death forever.
Secondly, “the Lord God will wipe away tears from all faces, the reproach of His people, He will take away from all the earth” (25:8b). In the Kingdom of Heaven, people will not suffer in the scorching sun as slaves without a brief moment of rest. There will not be diseases, tears and bullies. Everybody is well-fed. The “tears” come not only from recent sufferings, but also sufferings in the past. God is not an instant pain-killer, not the opium of the people. Not only does God console our sufferings at the present moment, He will thoroughly, and starting from trauma in the childhood, clear and clean up pains in the heart.
All these will happen “on the mountain of the Lord of hosts” (25:6a). So, where is this holy mountain? St. Paul said, our body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit (1Corinthians 3:16). The most important part of the body is our heart. Therefore, this holy mountain, this Kingdom of Heaven dwells in our hearts. This holy mountain is where God gathers His people. Therefore, this holy mountain, this Kingdom of Heaven is the Church community.
The Church lives up the evangelical spirit from which she derives a collection of universal values which are applicable anywhere in the world. For example, beneficence, justice, truth, freedom, integrity and tolerance etc. These are the “fat things, the wine on the lees” God has prepared for us, to nourish our human nature so that the image of God which is buried in our heart might be able to shine off.
Among the universal values, I would like to talk about the importance of freedom. God is free. So His images should also be free. If a man were not free so that whatever he did was done out of necessity, would he be held responsible for the things, the sins he had done? If people are given freedom, “man can fully discharge his capability, land can fully yield its produce and things can fully be utilized and goods can fully circulate.” (Sun Yat-sen, Letter to Viceroy Li Hongzhang, 1894) Then people can fully realize their potentials and allow the image of God to shine out clearly. Jesus once said, “and the truth will make you free” (John 8:32) Unfortunately, many fallacies are floating around in the city of Hong Kong. Now, I would like to discuss two fallacies related to Catholicism.
Firstly, Jesus said, “Render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Mark 12:17) Superficially, this piece of gospel text seems to advocate the separation between the Church and the State: politics belongs to the government and religion to God. “River water does not mix with underground water”. However, tell me, what on earth does not belong to God? Nothing. Without exception, everything belongs to God, including Cæsar. Then, shall the Church meddle with every step in the running of the State? Of course not. Only when the policy of the State contradicts the evangelical spirit, contradicts justice, are Christians justified to intervene. For example, recently, the Equal Opportunities Commission is conducting the consultation of Anti-Discrimination legilation review. EOC introduces an Australian concept of “de facto relationships” which will undermine the family structure of one man and one wife. The Church cannot sit there like a duck.
Secondly, many people misunderstand that since the Pope is not elected through universal suffrage, Catholics are not qualified to talk about democracy. This is truly a fallacy. Wouldn’t it be that men cannot get pregnant and give birth to babies, therefore, men are not qualified to become a gynecologist and obstetrician? Therefore, the fact that the Pope was not voted in with one man one vote, does not disqualify Catholics from airing their views on democracy.
Now, let us return to the parable in the gospel (Matthew 22:1-14). Strangely enough, in the parable we read today, how come there were people who dared not giving face to the king by refusing to attain the king’s banquet (22:3, 5). What does that mean? The gospel reads, “... they went off, one to his farm, another to his business, while the rest seized his servants, treated them shamefully, and killed them.” (22:5-6) This made me think of what had happened to “Go Banqueting” in the past two weeks.
Since we are gifted differently, not everybody has the ability to address the crowd, has time to distribute the supplies or to maintain order etc. Some people can stay home to surf the Internet to dig up people’s background information, to write cheering songs or even to pray for Hong Kong. Everyone makes use of the charisma he receives from God to build up the Kingdom of Heaven.
On the other hand, some prefer going off to his farm, to his business and do not give face to the king by refusing to attend the banquet. Similarly, today, many people do not Go Banqueting because of the perceived financial losses. In the parable, the king did not force the farmers and businessmen to go banqueting. Rather, he was infuriated by those who used violence and intimidation to tear the society apart. God will surely make them pay for it.
Lastly, perhaps some people are successful in cheating the whole world, making a name and taking advantages. Although they might be able to fool the world, they will not be able to run away from God’s judgment. Woe to those who harbour ulterior motives, who do not practise what they speak, who do not go banqueting in wedding garments, God will expel them from the Kingdom of Heaven.
Dear brethren, nobody wants to see a tragic ending to the Go Banqueting, but nobody is able to come up with a good solution to the present situation. Let us humbly admit our inadequacy, pray for the mercy of God not to let our young people sustain unjustified injuries.
God bless.
**“Go Banqueting” is the code name of “Occupy Central Movement”, known internationally as the “Umbrella Revolution”
Sunday, 5 October 2014
Whatever is true, whatever is just, think about these things
The Bible is reactionary to most governments. It should be included in the Index of Forbidden Books.
For example, the story of Exodus talks about the emancipation of Israelite slaves in Egypt. It inspires many wars of independence against colonial governments. Many prophets, from Samuel down to John the Baptist, Jesus Christ and his disciples, so called spokesmen of God, were troublemakers and accused kings of not doing the will of their God. They taught that the authority of kings was given by their God, putting a deity above kings and laws. In particular, Jesus taught his followers the so called Beatitudes, to use non-violence and non-cooperation to achieve their aims and promised them the Kingdom of Heaven. So, Christian loyalty is divided. They cannot be good and patriotic citizens. Today, we see many Christians and Cardinals supporting causes against their governments, making the population difficult to rule. In short, Christianity is a dangerous religion. It should be banned.
Unlike many other religions, Christianity demands its believers to get involved in their societies, to build a Kingdom of Heaven on earth. When people are satisfied with their livelihood, Christianity has no appeal. Christianity flourishes where people are being exploited. These people look for liberation, deliverance, redemption and Christianity promises them salvation, if not in this world, in heaven.
Most people are short-sighted and pragmatic. They want their daily bread. They care more about making their ends meet today than a fair society in the future. They are willing to be exploited so long as they are able to subsist. Adults are realistic. They are always ready to compromise. Just get back to normal asap, where normal means the usual daily exploitation they are suffering. An alien from outer space will be amused to see these mature creatures suffer so willingly! It will be amazed to see how the human nature can tolerate such flexibility. It is not at all a problem to abandon moral principles in order to survive, to meet their needs at this moment. Can this be the image of God? God must be very sad to see His image to be so defaced.
I am approaching my retirement. For the past 39 years, I have not achieved an open and fair society for the young people. I feel guilty to see the young people fighting for a fair society for themselves because we adults have failed to provide them one. We have not discharged our duties properly like the tenants in the parable of vineyard we read today (Matthew 21:33-46). May God judge us.
The OC is a new phenomenon in that the battle fields are not only the physical space but also the virtual space, thanks to the Internet. The rich and resourceful Goliath is playing on equal footing on the social networks with the meek David. The rich can mobilize many hired guns to provoke the non-violent underdogs and yet to little avail because the identities of those hired guns are quickly revealed, thanks to the Golden forum on the Internet. Conflicts in MK were orchestrated. Police was revealed to play both the good guys and the bad guys in provoking the peaceful demonstrators. A few hired extras played workers in the government HQ in front of TV cameras. Then our CE accused the OC protesters of blocking access to the government HQ so that 3000 civil servants were not able to render government services to the citizens. He issued an ultimatum, making Monday morning the deadline for protesters to open up the footbridge leading to the HQ. University vice-chancellors, professors, school principals called on their students to leave the HQ, fearing for their safety. Actually, these days, the government offices are still functioning. Supervisors instruct their staff to leave office at flexible hours after four. Do not leave at the same time for whatever reasons ...
The words of Isaiah and Philippians rang in my ears.
"... and he (Yahweh) looked for justice, but behold bloodshed; for righteousness, but behold, a cry!" (Isaiah 5:7b)
"Finally brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honourable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things." (Philippians 4:8)
Dear Lord, all things are possible for you. Remove this cup of wrath from us. Yet not what we want, but what you will. Amen.
For example, the story of Exodus talks about the emancipation of Israelite slaves in Egypt. It inspires many wars of independence against colonial governments. Many prophets, from Samuel down to John the Baptist, Jesus Christ and his disciples, so called spokesmen of God, were troublemakers and accused kings of not doing the will of their God. They taught that the authority of kings was given by their God, putting a deity above kings and laws. In particular, Jesus taught his followers the so called Beatitudes, to use non-violence and non-cooperation to achieve their aims and promised them the Kingdom of Heaven. So, Christian loyalty is divided. They cannot be good and patriotic citizens. Today, we see many Christians and Cardinals supporting causes against their governments, making the population difficult to rule. In short, Christianity is a dangerous religion. It should be banned.
Unlike many other religions, Christianity demands its believers to get involved in their societies, to build a Kingdom of Heaven on earth. When people are satisfied with their livelihood, Christianity has no appeal. Christianity flourishes where people are being exploited. These people look for liberation, deliverance, redemption and Christianity promises them salvation, if not in this world, in heaven.
Most people are short-sighted and pragmatic. They want their daily bread. They care more about making their ends meet today than a fair society in the future. They are willing to be exploited so long as they are able to subsist. Adults are realistic. They are always ready to compromise. Just get back to normal asap, where normal means the usual daily exploitation they are suffering. An alien from outer space will be amused to see these mature creatures suffer so willingly! It will be amazed to see how the human nature can tolerate such flexibility. It is not at all a problem to abandon moral principles in order to survive, to meet their needs at this moment. Can this be the image of God? God must be very sad to see His image to be so defaced.
I am approaching my retirement. For the past 39 years, I have not achieved an open and fair society for the young people. I feel guilty to see the young people fighting for a fair society for themselves because we adults have failed to provide them one. We have not discharged our duties properly like the tenants in the parable of vineyard we read today (Matthew 21:33-46). May God judge us.
The OC is a new phenomenon in that the battle fields are not only the physical space but also the virtual space, thanks to the Internet. The rich and resourceful Goliath is playing on equal footing on the social networks with the meek David. The rich can mobilize many hired guns to provoke the non-violent underdogs and yet to little avail because the identities of those hired guns are quickly revealed, thanks to the Golden forum on the Internet. Conflicts in MK were orchestrated. Police was revealed to play both the good guys and the bad guys in provoking the peaceful demonstrators. A few hired extras played workers in the government HQ in front of TV cameras. Then our CE accused the OC protesters of blocking access to the government HQ so that 3000 civil servants were not able to render government services to the citizens. He issued an ultimatum, making Monday morning the deadline for protesters to open up the footbridge leading to the HQ. University vice-chancellors, professors, school principals called on their students to leave the HQ, fearing for their safety. Actually, these days, the government offices are still functioning. Supervisors instruct their staff to leave office at flexible hours after four. Do not leave at the same time for whatever reasons ...
The words of Isaiah and Philippians rang in my ears.
"... and he (Yahweh) looked for justice, but behold bloodshed; for righteousness, but behold, a cry!" (Isaiah 5:7b)
"Finally brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honourable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things." (Philippians 4:8)
Dear Lord, all things are possible for you. Remove this cup of wrath from us. Yet not what we want, but what you will. Amen.
Wednesday, 1 October 2014
OC no more
I thank God for bestowing on me an intelligent daughter. Over a glass of whisky, we discussed the current situation in Hong Kong, Occupy Central. But it is OC no more. Her analysis outgrows mine. I can rest contended.
The movement, sometimes known internationally as the Umbrella Revolution, becomes spontaneous. But it is not a revolution. The participants have no wish to overthrow the current regime. They do not want the Central Government to thrust CE candidates down their throats. They want real choices of CE candidates. Only then can universal suffrage be meaningful. Most people of Hong Kong don't want to become rubber stamps.
Anyway, the organizors of Occupy Central are no longer commanders of this movement which spills over to Causeway Bay, Tsim Sha Tsui and Mongkok. Journalists from BBC and CNN come to report it. Information Technology is fully made use of, FaceBook, WhatsApp and Twsitter etc. What about the supply line? People barbecued $12,000 of sausages to feed the protesters in Admiralty out of their own pockets. HKSAR realized that it was a blunder to send in riot police and to teargas the crowd. Now, they take a softy approach, hoping to wear the protesters down. The protesters may not last long, especially when they thin out to different parts of the city.
Of course, there are elements which worry people. Barbecues? It looks like a carnival. At the beginning, the organizers implicitly conjured up the image of Boston Tea Party by calling upon people to "attend a wedding banquet" as a code-name to occupy Central. The party merrying elements remind people of the early phase of June 4 massacre... Now, we see banners hanging over the footbridges declaring that this is not a party.
Moreover, the local TV stations are not truly autonomous in reporting. Some key messages of the OC organizers and student leaders are imperceptibly edited out in their news reports. This is understandable and I hope the IT literacy of the crowd is able to overcome this disadvantage.
Lastly, the shopkeepers and residents are annoyed. They lose business and are sometimes disturbed by the slogan chantings of the crowd. In fact, one of my students whom I enjoy talking on a par intellectually was emotionally disturbed when he saw me wearing a yellow ribbon in school. His father would be unable to seal a $500,000 deal because of the movement! I feel sorry about it. He, among many other honest business men, is an innocent collateral casualty. But who can be immune from suffering under an unfair government? Yesterday, he suffered. Today, you. Tomorrow, your son will! If you choose to suffer silently, it is your choice. But you cannot stop others from voicing their plights and to fight for their better future.
There is a lack of understanding especially among the elderly like me. I received WhatsApp messages, quoting a senior scholar who disagreed pessimistically with what the young people are doing on the ground. He is an admirable armchair historian. Though history almost always repeats itself, we can see a lot of encouraging elements in the movement. Young people collect rubbish on the ground. People are truly peaceful and even stop other from charging against the police. They are rational. When the ambulance services request the crowd to open up a through lane for emergency vehicles, it is done. Hong Kong is well known internationally as a city of demonstrations. We are proud of our peaceful and environmentally friendly demonstrations. We can be exemplars.
I invoked the Archangels on September 29. I will call upon the Guardian Angels tomorrow. And I can see that God is answering our prayers. May God be glorified forever and ever. Amen.
The movement, sometimes known internationally as the Umbrella Revolution, becomes spontaneous. But it is not a revolution. The participants have no wish to overthrow the current regime. They do not want the Central Government to thrust CE candidates down their throats. They want real choices of CE candidates. Only then can universal suffrage be meaningful. Most people of Hong Kong don't want to become rubber stamps.
Anyway, the organizors of Occupy Central are no longer commanders of this movement which spills over to Causeway Bay, Tsim Sha Tsui and Mongkok. Journalists from BBC and CNN come to report it. Information Technology is fully made use of, FaceBook, WhatsApp and Twsitter etc. What about the supply line? People barbecued $12,000 of sausages to feed the protesters in Admiralty out of their own pockets. HKSAR realized that it was a blunder to send in riot police and to teargas the crowd. Now, they take a softy approach, hoping to wear the protesters down. The protesters may not last long, especially when they thin out to different parts of the city.
Of course, there are elements which worry people. Barbecues? It looks like a carnival. At the beginning, the organizers implicitly conjured up the image of Boston Tea Party by calling upon people to "attend a wedding banquet" as a code-name to occupy Central. The party merrying elements remind people of the early phase of June 4 massacre... Now, we see banners hanging over the footbridges declaring that this is not a party.
Moreover, the local TV stations are not truly autonomous in reporting. Some key messages of the OC organizers and student leaders are imperceptibly edited out in their news reports. This is understandable and I hope the IT literacy of the crowd is able to overcome this disadvantage.
Lastly, the shopkeepers and residents are annoyed. They lose business and are sometimes disturbed by the slogan chantings of the crowd. In fact, one of my students whom I enjoy talking on a par intellectually was emotionally disturbed when he saw me wearing a yellow ribbon in school. His father would be unable to seal a $500,000 deal because of the movement! I feel sorry about it. He, among many other honest business men, is an innocent collateral casualty. But who can be immune from suffering under an unfair government? Yesterday, he suffered. Today, you. Tomorrow, your son will! If you choose to suffer silently, it is your choice. But you cannot stop others from voicing their plights and to fight for their better future.
There is a lack of understanding especially among the elderly like me. I received WhatsApp messages, quoting a senior scholar who disagreed pessimistically with what the young people are doing on the ground. He is an admirable armchair historian. Though history almost always repeats itself, we can see a lot of encouraging elements in the movement. Young people collect rubbish on the ground. People are truly peaceful and even stop other from charging against the police. They are rational. When the ambulance services request the crowd to open up a through lane for emergency vehicles, it is done. Hong Kong is well known internationally as a city of demonstrations. We are proud of our peaceful and environmentally friendly demonstrations. We can be exemplars.
I invoked the Archangels on September 29. I will call upon the Guardian Angels tomorrow. And I can see that God is answering our prayers. May God be glorified forever and ever. Amen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)