God has always been gracious towards me, richly showering me with whatever I need. He always answers my pleas.I have no doubt about it. Where else need I to turn to? So, what is still troubling my mind in deciding to follow His call to become a deacon? What is it there which is pulling my heels?
I attended an anticipatory mass in Ss. Peter and Paul Church yesterday because this morning, I had to be on duty to distribute report cards to the parents. I had the opportunity to listen to the homily of Fr. Jorge Montagna, IVE. He was very systematic and compassionate. His words were not harsh.
The gospel reading was taken from Matthew 6:24-34. It was about the Divine Providence of God. Even though God is our Heavenly Father, He honours our free will and does not shove His benevolence down our throat. Now comes the funny situation in which we have taken everything into our own hands and have forgotten that we have a Heaven Father who will always be there to lend a helping hand.
Fr. Jorge summarized the passage into three teachings: that God our Father should be the centre and focus of life, not money (Matthew 6:24). It is true that money provides security and depending on the needs of the individuals, some people spend their whole life hoarding security. They choose to serve mammon instead of God.
Secondly, God our Father will provide and lastly, He provides more than enough.
Fr. Jorge quoted the life of a St. Benedict whose totally reliance on the Divine Providence was admirable. Truly, modern men have not trust in His love enough.
Fr. Jorge was knew that people would fight back with the daily starvation of innocent children in many underdeveloped countries. He easily explained it away with the greed and sinfulness of the rich and developed countries.
Zette married Brian yesterday. The priest delivered a beautiful homily. What touched me most was not the teaching about total committment of each to the spouse. Rather it was his point that deep in each one of our soul, there is a sanctuary of God. In matrimony, the two don't simply share all of their life, but also their God. I will work hard on this newly discovered front.
In the evening, we had a dinner gathering of old friends of Choi Hung. The focus quickly concentrated on the life of one of our friends, Ms. M whose divorced husband was my secondary school classmate and my God son. Though Ms. M is not a Catholic, her attitude towards the marriage she had shared with my classmate was incredibly Catholic. Regrettably, my classmate had suffered a lot in his childhood. He never knows who his biological father was. He was raised with his step-father. However, I don't want to credit Freud for his explanation for my classmate's subsequent extra-marital affairs with his colleagues. On the other hand, Ms. M's total committmenet and trust towards my classmate humbles me. They finally divorced last year and I have not seen my God son for many years. What can I do for them? I feel so helpless.
Dear Lord, Have mercy on my classmate and Ms. M. I trust that Your Divine Providence is more than enough for our needs. May we find peace and reconciliation in Your benevolence. Amen.
Sunday, 27 February 2011
Sunday, 20 February 2011
Was Jesus demanding too much?
In the Old Testament, the Chosen People were asked to be holy like their God because their God was holy.
For I am the LORD your God; consecrate yourselves therefore, and be holy, for I am holy (Leviticus 11:44a).
Of course, it all depends on what it meant to be holy in the culture and customs of the Chosen People. As far as we can get, keeping themselves from ritually unclean things would make the Chosen People holy and observing all the commandments would make them holy too. Once 'holiness' is materially defined, a legalism would creep in. People would be more concerned with the letters of the commandments instead of making use of the spirit of the commandments to elevate their goals and value-system. They would care more whether they had done enough or whether they had done accurately. Gradually, hypocricy was bred even among genuinely sincere people. Therefore, a pragmatic/materialistic approach to holiness is doomed to fail.
However, if we consider the meaning of being holy from a theological/philosophical angle, it is even worse. We find that being holy is impossible. God is God. Only God is holy and we are but creatures. We are no angels, or God. Nothing we do in the material realm can make us holy. So, how can we be holy? Therefore, in a sense, Jesus' teaching is more approachable. Instead of demanding us to be holy, Jesus told us to achieve something more accessible --- to be perfect.
You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5:48)
Today, I attended three masses. Without exception, the priests and archbishop pointed to forgiveness in their homilies on perfection. Therefore, if we are able to forgive and to love our enemies, we attain perfection. The gospel reading today is the most challenging of all the biblical texts: do not resist evil, to turn another cheek, to walk an extra mile and to love your enemies etc. These teachings are diametrically opposite our human nature. Jesus has turned everything human upside down. Was Jesus asking for the impossible?
Once when Jesus was teaching about the extreme difficulty for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven, he encouraged his disciples that nothing is impossible for God.
But Jesus looked at them and said to them, "With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." (Matthew 19:26)
We need to pray for God's grace to empower us to follow these challenging teachings.
Today, the aspirants met with the VG. We spent two and a half hours sharing about the formation of deacons. The VG led the sharing and told us to focus and go deeper into our hearts. He discouraged us from taking part in too many of those deacon formation courses.
We had also shared our views on Paul's epistle to the Philippians 4:8-9. Without any previous agreement, at least four of us felt that justice was important. We aired our grievances about the injustice we encountered in our life. I brought out the injustice of one of my colleagues who left behind many exercise books for the supply teacher to mark. I grumbled in front of Brenda who somehow condones such an injustice. But John, who is now substituting, is so generous. For the sake of the students, he doesn't mind marking those exercise books left behind by S. From John I have learnt a lot. Yes, we should fight for justice. Yet, the Kingdom of Heaven is not built up through fighting for justice, but through a generosity to forgive and to embrace all.
Today, the VG read a resignation email from B.B.Joe who had already informed us. The email did not give any explanation why he gave up this deacon vocation. But in his short messages to the few of us, he did not hide his unhappiness with the VG. To forgive is divine. We are all too human. What a pity!
Dear Lord, I pray for B. B. Joe and for myself. Being vocal has cost me my job in La Salle. I thank You for the second chance You have given me in Shung Tak. I need to pray for greater strength to master myself and transform myself into a better servant of Yours. Amen.
For I am the LORD your God; consecrate yourselves therefore, and be holy, for I am holy (Leviticus 11:44a).
Of course, it all depends on what it meant to be holy in the culture and customs of the Chosen People. As far as we can get, keeping themselves from ritually unclean things would make the Chosen People holy and observing all the commandments would make them holy too. Once 'holiness' is materially defined, a legalism would creep in. People would be more concerned with the letters of the commandments instead of making use of the spirit of the commandments to elevate their goals and value-system. They would care more whether they had done enough or whether they had done accurately. Gradually, hypocricy was bred even among genuinely sincere people. Therefore, a pragmatic/materialistic approach to holiness is doomed to fail.
However, if we consider the meaning of being holy from a theological/philosophical angle, it is even worse. We find that being holy is impossible. God is God. Only God is holy and we are but creatures. We are no angels, or God. Nothing we do in the material realm can make us holy. So, how can we be holy? Therefore, in a sense, Jesus' teaching is more approachable. Instead of demanding us to be holy, Jesus told us to achieve something more accessible --- to be perfect.
You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5:48)
Today, I attended three masses. Without exception, the priests and archbishop pointed to forgiveness in their homilies on perfection. Therefore, if we are able to forgive and to love our enemies, we attain perfection. The gospel reading today is the most challenging of all the biblical texts: do not resist evil, to turn another cheek, to walk an extra mile and to love your enemies etc. These teachings are diametrically opposite our human nature. Jesus has turned everything human upside down. Was Jesus asking for the impossible?
Once when Jesus was teaching about the extreme difficulty for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven, he encouraged his disciples that nothing is impossible for God.
But Jesus looked at them and said to them, "With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." (Matthew 19:26)
We need to pray for God's grace to empower us to follow these challenging teachings.
Today, the aspirants met with the VG. We spent two and a half hours sharing about the formation of deacons. The VG led the sharing and told us to focus and go deeper into our hearts. He discouraged us from taking part in too many of those deacon formation courses.
We had also shared our views on Paul's epistle to the Philippians 4:8-9. Without any previous agreement, at least four of us felt that justice was important. We aired our grievances about the injustice we encountered in our life. I brought out the injustice of one of my colleagues who left behind many exercise books for the supply teacher to mark. I grumbled in front of Brenda who somehow condones such an injustice. But John, who is now substituting, is so generous. For the sake of the students, he doesn't mind marking those exercise books left behind by S. From John I have learnt a lot. Yes, we should fight for justice. Yet, the Kingdom of Heaven is not built up through fighting for justice, but through a generosity to forgive and to embrace all.
Today, the VG read a resignation email from B.B.Joe who had already informed us. The email did not give any explanation why he gave up this deacon vocation. But in his short messages to the few of us, he did not hide his unhappiness with the VG. To forgive is divine. We are all too human. What a pity!
Dear Lord, I pray for B. B. Joe and for myself. Being vocal has cost me my job in La Salle. I thank You for the second chance You have given me in Shung Tak. I need to pray for greater strength to master myself and transform myself into a better servant of Yours. Amen.
Sunday, 13 February 2011
We are more than one-dimensional
When will our mind and our body become one?
Perhaps we have asked the wrong question. This is an analytic way of thinking, breaking down something into its components and study them. Man is broken down into mind and body. But I think it is wrong to pitch the mind against the body. This is the mistake of dualism, a Greek philosophical legacy. The Greeks believed that the soul descended from the Idea world and entered a material body in this world of senses. When people died, their souls regained freedom and returned to the Idea world. That explains the poor reception of Paul's preaching in Athens. This idea has dominated the thought pattern of the western world for centuries because Christianity adopted it so much so that mortification of the body has been highly valued. To a certain extent, this idea served a historical purpose --- martyrdom. A martyr would die fearlessly, to give up his/her body for his/her faith. Thus, a tradition is set up. It takes a long-reigning Pope John Paul II to turn the tide. He developed the Theology of the Body, putting our attitude back to the right track.
This kind of dualistic thinking exhibits itself when we talk about action and motive. We can only observe the external action of a person but not his inner motive. We can see what a person does ---say helping people, stealing money and praying to God etc. However, people do the same thing for different reasons, with different motives. John hands Mary ten thousand dollars in order to solve her problem, or to please her, or to gain people's good impression, or to repay an earlier debt, or to follow the procedures etc. But is it true that the action, handing Mary $10,000, is the same in all cases? I think not. Other than the motives, I thnk that the manner, the attitude and the mutual feelings with which the money is handed will be totally different. Therefore, even if we simply look at the actions in themselves, together with all the visible elements accompanying them, we are able to tell that they are different without resorting to the motives. Indeed, the "motives" are deduced from these accompanying visible elements. I am not trying to abolish of the concept of "motive/intention". I think that it is a useful concept, especially in ethics and criminology. It is a useful shorthand for discussion. Like body and soul, the distinction between action and motive should not be over-emphasized.
In explaining Jesus' teaching in Matthew 5 today, we tend to say that the Pharisees and the teachers of the Law had stressed too much the letters of the Law and had ignored its spirit. They have been caricatured as being legalistic. When Jesus said that he did not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it (Matthew 5:17), we tend to think and teach that Jesus came to reinstate the lost spirit of the Law, thus fulfilling it. This is not a bad explanation, but I think that it is inadequate because we have broken down the Law into its letters and its spirit. But should we break it down in this manner?
In the gospel reading today, we heard of Jesus teaching in a very authoritative manner. For four times, we read Matthew reporting in the same formula: "You have heard such and such, but I say to you so and so" (Matthew 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32, 33-34). Indeed, Jesus taught authoritatively and such is the manner in which God announced His Law. But Jesus denied that he made use of his authority to abolish the Law. Instead, he brought our attention to things we had ignored. Jesus did not teach new things.
Thus, Jesus teaches that not only should we not kill, but we should also not be angry. It is well known that anger would lead to murder. In fact, Jesus was drawing our attention to the source, the root of murder. Again, not only should we not commit adultery, but we should also not be lustful because lust is the root of adultery. We should not divorce because divorce is an adulterous act caused by lust, by being unfaithful to your vow of being faithful to your spouse. Lastly, not only should we refrain from swearing falsely, but we we should also not swear at all. There is no need to swear when what we speak is the truth, nothing but the whole truth.
Jesus is teaching the same Law, but he shows that areas of our life which we have ignored. He draws up a more comprehensive, integrated picture: murder is extended to anger, adultery to lust, divorce to unfaithfulness and swearing to telling the truth etc. We are an integrated whole. We are not one-dimensional men.
Dear Lord, You have come so that I may have life, and have it abundantly (John 10:10). You have come to enrich my life. May I learn to love you more so that Your life will well up in me to eternal life (John 4:14). Amen.
Perhaps we have asked the wrong question. This is an analytic way of thinking, breaking down something into its components and study them. Man is broken down into mind and body. But I think it is wrong to pitch the mind against the body. This is the mistake of dualism, a Greek philosophical legacy. The Greeks believed that the soul descended from the Idea world and entered a material body in this world of senses. When people died, their souls regained freedom and returned to the Idea world. That explains the poor reception of Paul's preaching in Athens. This idea has dominated the thought pattern of the western world for centuries because Christianity adopted it so much so that mortification of the body has been highly valued. To a certain extent, this idea served a historical purpose --- martyrdom. A martyr would die fearlessly, to give up his/her body for his/her faith. Thus, a tradition is set up. It takes a long-reigning Pope John Paul II to turn the tide. He developed the Theology of the Body, putting our attitude back to the right track.
This kind of dualistic thinking exhibits itself when we talk about action and motive. We can only observe the external action of a person but not his inner motive. We can see what a person does ---say helping people, stealing money and praying to God etc. However, people do the same thing for different reasons, with different motives. John hands Mary ten thousand dollars in order to solve her problem, or to please her, or to gain people's good impression, or to repay an earlier debt, or to follow the procedures etc. But is it true that the action, handing Mary $10,000, is the same in all cases? I think not. Other than the motives, I thnk that the manner, the attitude and the mutual feelings with which the money is handed will be totally different. Therefore, even if we simply look at the actions in themselves, together with all the visible elements accompanying them, we are able to tell that they are different without resorting to the motives. Indeed, the "motives" are deduced from these accompanying visible elements. I am not trying to abolish of the concept of "motive/intention". I think that it is a useful concept, especially in ethics and criminology. It is a useful shorthand for discussion. Like body and soul, the distinction between action and motive should not be over-emphasized.
In explaining Jesus' teaching in Matthew 5 today, we tend to say that the Pharisees and the teachers of the Law had stressed too much the letters of the Law and had ignored its spirit. They have been caricatured as being legalistic. When Jesus said that he did not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it (Matthew 5:17), we tend to think and teach that Jesus came to reinstate the lost spirit of the Law, thus fulfilling it. This is not a bad explanation, but I think that it is inadequate because we have broken down the Law into its letters and its spirit. But should we break it down in this manner?
In the gospel reading today, we heard of Jesus teaching in a very authoritative manner. For four times, we read Matthew reporting in the same formula: "You have heard such and such, but I say to you so and so" (Matthew 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32, 33-34). Indeed, Jesus taught authoritatively and such is the manner in which God announced His Law. But Jesus denied that he made use of his authority to abolish the Law. Instead, he brought our attention to things we had ignored. Jesus did not teach new things.
Thus, Jesus teaches that not only should we not kill, but we should also not be angry. It is well known that anger would lead to murder. In fact, Jesus was drawing our attention to the source, the root of murder. Again, not only should we not commit adultery, but we should also not be lustful because lust is the root of adultery. We should not divorce because divorce is an adulterous act caused by lust, by being unfaithful to your vow of being faithful to your spouse. Lastly, not only should we refrain from swearing falsely, but we we should also not swear at all. There is no need to swear when what we speak is the truth, nothing but the whole truth.
Jesus is teaching the same Law, but he shows that areas of our life which we have ignored. He draws up a more comprehensive, integrated picture: murder is extended to anger, adultery to lust, divorce to unfaithfulness and swearing to telling the truth etc. We are an integrated whole. We are not one-dimensional men.
Dear Lord, You have come so that I may have life, and have it abundantly (John 10:10). You have come to enrich my life. May I learn to love you more so that Your life will well up in me to eternal life (John 4:14). Amen.
Sunday, 6 February 2011
It is a matter of passion
Today, Fr. Martin celebrated the 11 a.m. mass with us. The gospel message is the familiar theme of Christians being the salt of the earth and the light of the world (Matthew 5:13-14). He used the concept of 'comfort zone' to explain Jesus' teaching in relation to with Beatitudes we read last Sunday. Being the salt of the earth and the light of the world is the essence of a Christian. But God respects our freedom. We are free to work hard to actualize this Christian essence within us, or hide ourselves in our "comfort zone" to rot.
Some people are more adventurous. They are not afraid to reach out, to meet strangers and to take risks. In so doing, their experience is enriched and their horizon expanded. Some people are more timid. They do not have enough confidence to raise the stake. They can only do routines because routines are proven to be safe. Being habitual saves them a lot of energy to make decisions which could be painful. However, Christians, by nature, should not be a slave of habits and comforts. They are born-again. They are converted. Their old-selves have been nailed onto the cross with Christ and they have been raised from the dead through baptism. Therefore, they should not return to their old-selves, their "comfort zones" any more.
The 2 books of Chronicles portray an ideal King David. They even attribute the building of the Jerusalem Temple to him but in fact, it was Solomon, his son, who spent seven years to build the Temple. David is a complex character. At the beginning, he was painted a good shepherd, somebody chosen after the heart of God to replace King Saul (1 Samuel 13:14).
But David was not without faults. While he was a fugitive fleeing from Saul's attempt on his life, he gathered a gang to follow him. They acted more or less like bandits, living on extortion. He even threatened the life of Nabal, a rich man with 3000 sheep and 1000 goats, because Nabal did not pay him respect (1 Samuel 25:1-13). Later, Nabal died (not in the hands of David) and David took over his wife Abigail.
After the death of Saul, David was crowned King of Israel. Yet, he systematically exterminated the house of Saul from which nobody would come up to challenge his throne.
Yet, one more time when David had become the King of Israel, he had an affair with Bathsheba and impregnated her. Later, David had Bathsheba's husband murdered so that he could legitimately take Bathsheba over (2 Samuel 11:1-27). This is a well known story and in our course on Historical Books, we would analyze the narrative of this story. However skilfully we analyze the text, the question remains why God still upholds, protects and loves David despite his immoral and murderous actions. How did it square with God's justice? When God promised David an eternal dynasty (2 Samuel 7:16), did not God see that David would commit adultery with Bathsheba and murdered Uriah?
God spares David not because of what merits David had. Rather, it was David's passion that moved God (2 Samuel 6:12-22). Not only did he offer sacrifice lavishly (2 Samuel 6:13), but he also danced half-nakedly with all his might in the full sight of all the people to express his fervent love of God (2 Samuel 6:14, 20).
Why did I talk about King David? How is it related to the Gospel teaching today?
I believe it is a matter of passion. Like David, all Christians are flawed. But no matter how flawed we are, when we love God and our fellow men passionatel enough, we will be truly Christian. In order to realize the God-bestowed grace, we need a passion for God, a fervent love of Jesus and our fellow men. Passion and love are the fuel that propels us to eternal life.
Dear Lord, I have loved You too late, too little. May my love for You get hotter and hotter until it glows and shines. Amen.
Some people are more adventurous. They are not afraid to reach out, to meet strangers and to take risks. In so doing, their experience is enriched and their horizon expanded. Some people are more timid. They do not have enough confidence to raise the stake. They can only do routines because routines are proven to be safe. Being habitual saves them a lot of energy to make decisions which could be painful. However, Christians, by nature, should not be a slave of habits and comforts. They are born-again. They are converted. Their old-selves have been nailed onto the cross with Christ and they have been raised from the dead through baptism. Therefore, they should not return to their old-selves, their "comfort zones" any more.
The 2 books of Chronicles portray an ideal King David. They even attribute the building of the Jerusalem Temple to him but in fact, it was Solomon, his son, who spent seven years to build the Temple. David is a complex character. At the beginning, he was painted a good shepherd, somebody chosen after the heart of God to replace King Saul (1 Samuel 13:14).
But David was not without faults. While he was a fugitive fleeing from Saul's attempt on his life, he gathered a gang to follow him. They acted more or less like bandits, living on extortion. He even threatened the life of Nabal, a rich man with 3000 sheep and 1000 goats, because Nabal did not pay him respect (1 Samuel 25:1-13). Later, Nabal died (not in the hands of David) and David took over his wife Abigail.
After the death of Saul, David was crowned King of Israel. Yet, he systematically exterminated the house of Saul from which nobody would come up to challenge his throne.
Yet, one more time when David had become the King of Israel, he had an affair with Bathsheba and impregnated her. Later, David had Bathsheba's husband murdered so that he could legitimately take Bathsheba over (2 Samuel 11:1-27). This is a well known story and in our course on Historical Books, we would analyze the narrative of this story. However skilfully we analyze the text, the question remains why God still upholds, protects and loves David despite his immoral and murderous actions. How did it square with God's justice? When God promised David an eternal dynasty (2 Samuel 7:16), did not God see that David would commit adultery with Bathsheba and murdered Uriah?
God spares David not because of what merits David had. Rather, it was David's passion that moved God (2 Samuel 6:12-22). Not only did he offer sacrifice lavishly (2 Samuel 6:13), but he also danced half-nakedly with all his might in the full sight of all the people to express his fervent love of God (2 Samuel 6:14, 20).
Why did I talk about King David? How is it related to the Gospel teaching today?
I believe it is a matter of passion. Like David, all Christians are flawed. But no matter how flawed we are, when we love God and our fellow men passionatel enough, we will be truly Christian. In order to realize the God-bestowed grace, we need a passion for God, a fervent love of Jesus and our fellow men. Passion and love are the fuel that propels us to eternal life.
Dear Lord, I have loved You too late, too little. May my love for You get hotter and hotter until it glows and shines. Amen.
Thursday, 3 February 2011
2011 Lunar New Year Greeting
1,
1, 2,
3, 5, 8,
13, 21, 34, 55,
89, 144, 233, 377, 610 ...
What is the next number?
The rabbits had inspired this series.
They are truly productive!
May I wish you a
Productive & Successful year
ahead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)