In the Catholic Church, the Fourth Sunday of Easter is the Good Shepherd Sunday. Today, we celebrate Christ, our Good Shepherd and we pray for vocation, especially religious vocation of clergy and nuns. This morning, our parish invited one of our parishioners, Brien Wong, who has finished his third year of philosophy training and is entering the next stage of formation in the Holy Spirit Seminary. I listened to his homily twice. His sharing was systematic, sincere and touching. He fine tuned his homily to meet the needs of the two congregations. He did not paint a rosy picture for promotion purposes but the congregations would not miss his point. When God invites us to serve him, He is actually giving us opportunities to obtain more grace. There is abundant grace behind our meagre sacrifices. Fr. Martin Ip was the celebrant of the second mass. After Brien's sharing, he added a remark to bring out what Brien did not speak out explicitly, that in reality, nobody could made sacrifice for God. God is actually inviting us to drink more fully from His abundant life.
Brien began his homily with what all the parishioners were familiar, the clergy. Last Sunday, our parish priest, Fr. Milanese invited him to do a sharing this Sunday. He felt honoured. The mass he attended was celebrated by our retired priest, Fr. Lejeune. His legs were hurting so much so that two acolytes had to support him on both sides to move up the altar. Naturally, Brien asked, "Why does a fragile priest insist on serving the altar and the congregation despite his great pain?" Brien told the congregation that once a senior priest shared his thoughts with the seminarians. The priest said that when joy and enthusiasm welled up in their hearts when they approached the altar, their vocation was still there. However, his heart ached when once he attended an jubilee celebration of a nun, he saw rows of greying priests and nuns.
Brien said he usually lowered his head during homily to listen more attentively to the homily. Once in a while, he looked up. His sight met the gaze of Fr. Lejeune's. Though it was losing its lustre,.it was full of tender aspirations. He told the congregation to cherish the reading of the Scriptures, to draw life from the Word of God.
When the priest hoisted the host during Consecration of the Eucharist, Brien looked up and remembered Jesus' words:
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me (John 12:32).
After mass, Deacon Tsang approached him and eagerly reminded him of the upcoming sharing. Brien was moved.
These feelings and meditations pretty much summed up his response to God's will.
Brien, God gives you an opportunity to engage full time in meditating your vocation. Pray for me that I am able to discern correctly God's will and respond promptly before it is too late.
Yesterday, it was Buddha's nativity.
The day before (Friday), my parents came over to stay for two days to celebrate my father's birthday which falls on the same date as the Buddha's birthday. This morning, we scheduled to have morning tea in a tea-house and my younger brother would get up at 5 a.m., travel for more than one and a half hour from Chai Wan to have tea with us and bring our parents back. While he was travelling, it poured cats and dogs. Amber heavy rain warning was issued and later elevated to red. My younger brother, who was a retired electrical engineer, knew that we had a busy schedule ahead and would have greater difficulty in taking care of my parents, insisted on bringing home. He had all the contingency plans in his heads and was confident that the rain would stop soon. He proved to be right. I only had to accompany them for three stations and I was persuaded to turn back to attend mass.
My Lord, I entrust my younger brother and my parents in Your care. Have mercy on them. I believe that You have a good plan for them. Amen.
Today, I was attracted to the following familiar verse in particular.
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must
bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and
one shepherd (John 10:16).
Traditionally, we would think of ecumenism among Christians. Christians are human and no matter how much the Lord has taught them about charity, they still argue and insist on their views and consequently, they split. Perhaps these schisms are good for humanity as a whole. Had Christians not broken up, they would not have been more efficient in spreading the Gospel globally. Of course, there are prices to pay because blood was shed in persecutions.
Today, through centuries of evangelical encounters with great civilizations and small, Western Churches have to give up their egocentric religious chauvinism.
Since ancient time, the Church naively claimed that "extra Ecclesiam nulla salus", (EENS outside the Church there is no salvation.) Today, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the Church has undergone deeper self-reflection and they reach a better understanding of the meaning of "the Church". The Church cannot imprison God and claims monopoly over His salvation. God is a free God and He has His own ways to save us all, be it Confucius or Matteo Ricci. If the Church is unable to accept and respect other religious traditions and human traditions, she needs to learn from the words of her Lord: there there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. Jesus Christ our Lord is the one Shepherd. Popes, cardinals, bishops and theologians are his helpers. Other religious leaders too work for our Good Shepherd. They have never ever, not Confucius, not even Gautama Buddha or Dalai Lama, claimed to be our Creator or Redeemer. Their job is to enlighten mankind. Only Jesus (of course, other antichrists) claims to be our Creator and Redeemer.
So, when the Church engages in dialogues with other religious traditions, she respects the other party as well as insisting on the role of Jesus as our Sole Saviour. She must keep in mind what the Prince of the Apostle, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, says.
Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved (Acts 4:12).
Dear Lord, strengthen the hesitant hearts to respond to You generously. We need more Shepherd helpers to tender Your flock. Amen.
Sunday 29 April 2012
Sunday 22 April 2012
Making good things out of bad
It is arrogant for us to think that our faith is stronger, or more advanced than the others. We are not superstitious. We know a lot of biblical stories, and the words and deeds of Jesus as well as the teachings of the Catholic Church. No, we should be humble. Therefore, I prefer saying that our faith is more mature. Not only do we know, but we are also able to discern deeper meanings in God's actions.
Theoretically speaking, if our God were only able to make better things out of things that are already good enough, it would be no big deal. Such a deity is not worth believing. Rather, the God Christians believe in like to show off His brilliance by elevating the lowly from the dirt. To illustrate my point. Suppose a student from an elite school in the urban area enters the university, there is nothing extraordinary about him or his school. However, if a student from a Band Three school in the New Territories enters the top university in Hong Kong, this is sensational and should make headlines. Christian schools in Hong Kong should assist their God to send more Band Three students to the universities, in order to glorify Him.
When two kings engage in battles, we expect to see a showing off of military power. However, when Christ engaged in a decisive battle to defeat Satan, we only see a pitiful disillusioned carpenter wailing, "My God, my God! Why hast Thou forsaken me?" on the cross. This is the modus operandi of God. He likes to turn bad things good. He chose an apparent defeat to conquer Satan and death to defeat Death. In order to lead a new life, the old self must die first! Die Now. Live Later! This is the ultimate paradox. To be able to see glimpses of hope in disasters requires a mature faith to discern. When people are arguing for the right to die or advocating abortion to raise the status of women, Nick Vujicic and Stephen Hawkings are living testimonies of faith, hope and charity. Perhaps that also explains why the Messiah must suffer in order to deliver us from death (Luke 24:46-47). There are values and meanings in evil and suffering.
The Cultural Revolution between 1966 to 1976 was an annihilating disaster for everybody in China. Cultural heritages were destroyed. Human relations were destroyed. A whole stratum of intellectuals were destroyed. Even natural resources and infrastructures of the whole nation were destroyed. Thousands of human lives and trillions of dollars were wiped out. My God, can any good come out of such a disaster? I was not able to see any until yesterday when we attended the lively lecture of Dr. Anthony Lam Shui Ki of the Holy Spirit Study Centre. He talked about the situation of the Catholic Church in mainland China after the Communists had taken over in 1949. Dr. Lam was able to show us the sufferings the Catholic Church had undergone in those days. Foreign missionaries were driven out. Local uncooperative bishops were rounded up and imprisoned. Puppet leaders were consecrated and implanted into the hierarchy, forcing bishops loyal to Vatican to suffer auto-excommunication from the Pope. Church buildings were confiscated because the parishioners were unable to pay heavy levies imposed by the government. Later, seeing no more hope of practising their faith and serving the Church, some local priests were married out of despair etc. However, Dr. Lam also demonstrated what good the Cultural Revolution could do to the Church!
During the Cultural Revolution, many communist officials were themselves victims of Red Guards. They were no longer able to protect and grant privileges to those bishops and priests who had earlier been persuaded to cooperate with the Party. Those who were imprisoned because they were loyal to Vatican were consoled that their sufferings were not in vain. Those who had earlier "defected" took the public humiliation and criticism during the CR as a penance and found reconciliation with God. Mature faith helped people weather through the disaster. Even Communists began to appreciate the contribution of religion to human existence, especially in extreme situations. Halleluia! Praise be the Lord! He has not abandoned His believers in mainland China. We may now know better why the Messiah must suffer and die in order that redemption may be realized on earth.
Dear Lord, open our minds to understand the Scriptures (Luke 24:45) so that we may become better witness to Your great love. Amen.
Theoretically speaking, if our God were only able to make better things out of things that are already good enough, it would be no big deal. Such a deity is not worth believing. Rather, the God Christians believe in like to show off His brilliance by elevating the lowly from the dirt. To illustrate my point. Suppose a student from an elite school in the urban area enters the university, there is nothing extraordinary about him or his school. However, if a student from a Band Three school in the New Territories enters the top university in Hong Kong, this is sensational and should make headlines. Christian schools in Hong Kong should assist their God to send more Band Three students to the universities, in order to glorify Him.
When two kings engage in battles, we expect to see a showing off of military power. However, when Christ engaged in a decisive battle to defeat Satan, we only see a pitiful disillusioned carpenter wailing, "My God, my God! Why hast Thou forsaken me?" on the cross. This is the modus operandi of God. He likes to turn bad things good. He chose an apparent defeat to conquer Satan and death to defeat Death. In order to lead a new life, the old self must die first! Die Now. Live Later! This is the ultimate paradox. To be able to see glimpses of hope in disasters requires a mature faith to discern. When people are arguing for the right to die or advocating abortion to raise the status of women, Nick Vujicic and Stephen Hawkings are living testimonies of faith, hope and charity. Perhaps that also explains why the Messiah must suffer in order to deliver us from death (Luke 24:46-47). There are values and meanings in evil and suffering.
The Cultural Revolution between 1966 to 1976 was an annihilating disaster for everybody in China. Cultural heritages were destroyed. Human relations were destroyed. A whole stratum of intellectuals were destroyed. Even natural resources and infrastructures of the whole nation were destroyed. Thousands of human lives and trillions of dollars were wiped out. My God, can any good come out of such a disaster? I was not able to see any until yesterday when we attended the lively lecture of Dr. Anthony Lam Shui Ki of the Holy Spirit Study Centre. He talked about the situation of the Catholic Church in mainland China after the Communists had taken over in 1949. Dr. Lam was able to show us the sufferings the Catholic Church had undergone in those days. Foreign missionaries were driven out. Local uncooperative bishops were rounded up and imprisoned. Puppet leaders were consecrated and implanted into the hierarchy, forcing bishops loyal to Vatican to suffer auto-excommunication from the Pope. Church buildings were confiscated because the parishioners were unable to pay heavy levies imposed by the government. Later, seeing no more hope of practising their faith and serving the Church, some local priests were married out of despair etc. However, Dr. Lam also demonstrated what good the Cultural Revolution could do to the Church!
During the Cultural Revolution, many communist officials were themselves victims of Red Guards. They were no longer able to protect and grant privileges to those bishops and priests who had earlier been persuaded to cooperate with the Party. Those who were imprisoned because they were loyal to Vatican were consoled that their sufferings were not in vain. Those who had earlier "defected" took the public humiliation and criticism during the CR as a penance and found reconciliation with God. Mature faith helped people weather through the disaster. Even Communists began to appreciate the contribution of religion to human existence, especially in extreme situations. Halleluia! Praise be the Lord! He has not abandoned His believers in mainland China. We may now know better why the Messiah must suffer and die in order that redemption may be realized on earth.
Dear Lord, open our minds to understand the Scriptures (Luke 24:45) so that we may become better witness to Your great love. Amen.
Sunday 15 April 2012
Let us be edifying
Perhaps it is an "occupational disease" that we teachers can easily spot others' mistakes. However, I think it is a tendency common to all, not just among teachers. I believe that the ability of spotting problems/mistakes has a survival value for living in a hostile environment. Those organisms that fail to see problems are wiped out without leaving behind any offspring and genes. Seeing others' mistakes is evolutionary adaptive.
Moreover, the effects of making mistakes are more conspicuous than doing the right thing which has been taken for granted. When nothing unusual happens, who will notice? Pedestrians cross the road all the time safely and nobody notices. Only when an accident happens and somebody gets hurt or killed, will people start to pay attention to the design of that particular section of the road. Therefore, people are more capable of seeing the mistakes/problems of the others than giving edifying supports.
The Gospel reading today tells the famous story of doubting Thomas. Fr. Martin Ip taught me to look at the story from an angle I have never seen before.
In the past, when we read the story of Thomas, we would "despise" him for being weak in faith, forgetting that he was one of the Twelve whom Jesus chose. On the other hand, we would feel "consoled" because even a Thomas would have moments of doubt and a Peter would deny the Lord three times in critical times which would cost his life. Thus God should not punish us when at times, we lost our faith in Him. Furthermore, sometimes, we would "admire" Thomas for being an empiricist, for trying to verify his faith etc. We too should follow his "scientific" example. Still we only defend Thomas halfheartedly. Deep down our soul, we do not want to become like him.
Today, Father Martin taught us to see the honesty/sincerity in Thomas. Though the other 10 fellow apostles told him that they had seen the risen Lord, Thomas did not want to please the crowd nor to follow the herd. True to his experience, Thomas did not bend to peer pressures. He remained unconvinced unless the risen Jesus could pass his tests. Just imagine. You have given up everything to follow this Galilean carpenter together with eleven other core members. Now that the master is dead. Their group leader has denied the master. One of them has betrayed the master and killed himself because of guilt. In short, the whole group has disintegrated. Who else can you turn to? It is true that 2 witnesses were enough in Jewish custom and now there were 10 witnesses. Their testimony should be believable. Yet, they were caged animals to be hunted down by the Jewish authority at any moment. It was prudent of Thomas to draw the line between himself and this group of disillusioned fanatics. In fact, Thomas' tests were reasonable. Why? It was because the other ten simply saw Jesus and had not verified further.
When he had said this ("Peace be with you"), he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord (John 20:20).
Thomas was being objective and sober-minded. Should you find fault with his being sober-minded?
Again, when we read what Jesus said to Thomas, we tend to think that Jesus was unhappy with Thomas' attitude and wanted to reprimand him.
Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing." (John 20:27)
Fr. Martin told us to rethink. Try to read it again with a positive thinking rather than with a conspiracy theory at the back of our mind. Remember. Jesus wants to build up Thomas, not to trample on him.
In fact, it would totally be out of the way for Jesus to force someone to believe in him. God respects our autonomy. He will not force us to stay in heaven if we prefer staying in hell with our friends. Therefore, when Jesus invited Thomas to perform his tests, to do exactly what he wanted to do, we have to rule out the assumption that Jesus wanted to force Thomas to believe in his resurrection. Jesus only wanted to strengthen his faith.
Now, the ball was in Thomas' court. What possibilities were open? If Thomas believed and accepted that this encounter with Jesus was true and real, he needed not to proceed with his test. But if Thomas refused to believe, he would proceed to touch the wound and even insert his hand into Jesus' side to verify. however, no matter how many tests you have done, you will not be completely convinced of the truth of something unless you are prepared to accept, to believe in the truth. Look at the Pharisees who demanded Jesus to perform yet another miracle though they had already witnessed many miracles performed by Jesus. Somewhere along the way, you must stop doubting and start believing. Paradoxically, you must somehow know the answer first before you recognize that you have found the answer. If you don't, how can you be sure that you have got it? Therefore, faith is our guide to uncover the truth. We cannot "blindly/objectively/without bias" search for the truth. Having faith does not interfere with our objectivity. Without faith, our effort will be totally wasted.
Often, it is easy to pinpoint others' shortcomings, weaknesses and mistakes. Especially teachers, we are eager to correct other people's mistakes. In doing so, we should bear in mind our mission/obligation to edify. Next time, when we really want to correct people, think how to edify them, how to build them up.
Dear Lord, I have little faith in people and in You. Strengthen my faith. Amen.
Moreover, the effects of making mistakes are more conspicuous than doing the right thing which has been taken for granted. When nothing unusual happens, who will notice? Pedestrians cross the road all the time safely and nobody notices. Only when an accident happens and somebody gets hurt or killed, will people start to pay attention to the design of that particular section of the road. Therefore, people are more capable of seeing the mistakes/problems of the others than giving edifying supports.
The Gospel reading today tells the famous story of doubting Thomas. Fr. Martin Ip taught me to look at the story from an angle I have never seen before.
In the past, when we read the story of Thomas, we would "despise" him for being weak in faith, forgetting that he was one of the Twelve whom Jesus chose. On the other hand, we would feel "consoled" because even a Thomas would have moments of doubt and a Peter would deny the Lord three times in critical times which would cost his life. Thus God should not punish us when at times, we lost our faith in Him. Furthermore, sometimes, we would "admire" Thomas for being an empiricist, for trying to verify his faith etc. We too should follow his "scientific" example. Still we only defend Thomas halfheartedly. Deep down our soul, we do not want to become like him.
Today, Father Martin taught us to see the honesty/sincerity in Thomas. Though the other 10 fellow apostles told him that they had seen the risen Lord, Thomas did not want to please the crowd nor to follow the herd. True to his experience, Thomas did not bend to peer pressures. He remained unconvinced unless the risen Jesus could pass his tests. Just imagine. You have given up everything to follow this Galilean carpenter together with eleven other core members. Now that the master is dead. Their group leader has denied the master. One of them has betrayed the master and killed himself because of guilt. In short, the whole group has disintegrated. Who else can you turn to? It is true that 2 witnesses were enough in Jewish custom and now there were 10 witnesses. Their testimony should be believable. Yet, they were caged animals to be hunted down by the Jewish authority at any moment. It was prudent of Thomas to draw the line between himself and this group of disillusioned fanatics. In fact, Thomas' tests were reasonable. Why? It was because the other ten simply saw Jesus and had not verified further.
When he had said this ("Peace be with you"), he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord (John 20:20).
Thomas was being objective and sober-minded. Should you find fault with his being sober-minded?
Again, when we read what Jesus said to Thomas, we tend to think that Jesus was unhappy with Thomas' attitude and wanted to reprimand him.
Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing." (John 20:27)
Fr. Martin told us to rethink. Try to read it again with a positive thinking rather than with a conspiracy theory at the back of our mind. Remember. Jesus wants to build up Thomas, not to trample on him.
In fact, it would totally be out of the way for Jesus to force someone to believe in him. God respects our autonomy. He will not force us to stay in heaven if we prefer staying in hell with our friends. Therefore, when Jesus invited Thomas to perform his tests, to do exactly what he wanted to do, we have to rule out the assumption that Jesus wanted to force Thomas to believe in his resurrection. Jesus only wanted to strengthen his faith.
Now, the ball was in Thomas' court. What possibilities were open? If Thomas believed and accepted that this encounter with Jesus was true and real, he needed not to proceed with his test. But if Thomas refused to believe, he would proceed to touch the wound and even insert his hand into Jesus' side to verify. however, no matter how many tests you have done, you will not be completely convinced of the truth of something unless you are prepared to accept, to believe in the truth. Look at the Pharisees who demanded Jesus to perform yet another miracle though they had already witnessed many miracles performed by Jesus. Somewhere along the way, you must stop doubting and start believing. Paradoxically, you must somehow know the answer first before you recognize that you have found the answer. If you don't, how can you be sure that you have got it? Therefore, faith is our guide to uncover the truth. We cannot "blindly/objectively/without bias" search for the truth. Having faith does not interfere with our objectivity. Without faith, our effort will be totally wasted.
Often, it is easy to pinpoint others' shortcomings, weaknesses and mistakes. Especially teachers, we are eager to correct other people's mistakes. In doing so, we should bear in mind our mission/obligation to edify. Next time, when we really want to correct people, think how to edify them, how to build them up.
Dear Lord, I have little faith in people and in You. Strengthen my faith. Amen.
Sunday 8 April 2012
HAPPY EASTER 2012
HALLELUIA!
THE LORD IS RISEN!
LET US REJOICE & BE GLAD!
MAY HIS JOY & LOVE & PEACE
RESIDE IN YOUR HEART
IN THE DAYS AHEAD!
HALLELUIA!
Tuesday 3 April 2012
Where no law is, there is no transgression
These two days I have been rushing through the translation of some Catholic Heritage webpages. I even missed writing the Passion Sunday blog. Now that I have finished translating my portion, I am already two days behind. There is no point rewriting the Sunday blog. I had better move ahead though it is impossible to finish the book of Romans within schedule, Lent. I know the book is not easy to handle. Perhaps I should allow myself more time to finish the remaining three quarters.
Today, I want to reflect on one particular verse in the Romans about the Law. It is an intriguing Pauline thought. Once again, the thinking pattern of people two millennia ago was very different from ours today. It reads.
Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression
ὁ γὰρ νόμος ὀργὴν κατεργάζεται: οὗ δὲ οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος, οὐδὲ παράβασις. (Romans 4:15).
At first sight, it is a tautology. Some activities do not yet have any legal definitions to spell out the punishment. For example, on roads without speeding limit signs, James Dean and his buddies would freely drive their cars like crazy. When they knocked down and caused the death of a 500-year old tree, the driving action was not yet punishable. But when they knocked down and injured or even killed a pedestrian, the same driving action became a transgression of a piece of law written somewhere in the law book. That is obvious.
Let us take another perspective to look at the situation. I have no intention to offend powerful tycoons in Hong Kong. I just want to bring my readers' attention to the fact that many rich people are able to employ legal experts to help them make use of legal loopholes to obtain advantages. All too often, legal battles are games of the rich. They are able to win hopeless cases with legal technicalities, to pass environmental feasibility tests and to increase fares/tariff despite earning astronomical profits etc. But why, then, did Paul write about this?
On one hand, Paul is supporting the Law and does not want people to take advantage of justification by faith to allow themselves to do whatever they desire (Romans 3:31). On the other hand, he proves that keeping the Law does not brings righteousness after Lord Jesus had sacrificed himself on the cross for us. That the Law is inadequate has been proven. Paul uses the example of Abraham's circumcision to show the superiority of faith over Law. God's promise to Abraham is effected by the faith of Abraham, not by any law because the Torah was not yet given at that time. Then, he further exhibits the limitations of the Law. The Law does not brings God's promise but God's wrath because where no law is, there is no transgression (Romans 4:15).
So, what is transgression? Is it the same as sin?
For Paul, sin is something we have done below standard, coming short of God's glory, missing the bull's-eye. Transgression, on the other hand, is going beyond the standard, overdoing something. In this case, the Law lays down the boundary, set up the standard. While sin falls short of the standard, transgression goes over it. In many cultures, both overdoing and not doing enough are no good. For example「過猶不及」【論語‧先進】.
However, this is not the key point of Paul. He is not trying to tell us that the Law can never be complete. There will always be loopholes because the world is changing. New things which the Law has not covered will arise. No. Paul is not telling us that the Law is incomplete therefore keeping the Law cannot justify us. This is a valid argument but Paul is not saying this. Instead, he makes use of the concept of transgression to show that the Law, while setting up a standard, a boundary, brings God's wrath upon us at the same time.
Does it mean that without the Law, God's wrath would not descend upon us? Don't be naive! Abolishing all the Law will of course not save us from God's wrath. This kind of logic is wrong. There are many other ways in which we can incur the wrath of God. Setting up the Law is just one of the many ways. For example, before the Israelites received the Ten Commandments, they made a golden calf and worshipped it. God was angry. Could the Israelites say that they did not know it was wrong to worship idols? Some natural disasters are natural. But some shamans would attribute the disasters to the lack of piety on part of the natives. They should offer more sacrifices. However, I am sure no shaman would be so stupid as to legalize the number of sacrifices to offer a year. Because no matter how many sacrifices you legalize, there will always be chances of disasters. So, if we think of natural disasters as God's wrath, even without the Law on appeasing the deities, God's wrath will surely come down upon us.
So, what does Paul want to say?
Paul was making Abraham as an example to show the importance of faith for our salvation. Paul was discussing the promise God made to Abraham. The promise was that Abraham and his offspring would inherit the world through the righteousness of faith, not of the Law (Romans 4:13). Why not the Law? Hasn't God sworn that He would show mercy for thousands of generations to those who keep His commandments (Exodus 20:6).
Of course, Paul knows that God would show mercy to those who keep His commandments. However, Paul later argues that it is impossible to keep all the commandments. Therefore, we will surely incur God's wrath for three to four generations (Exodus 20:5). We will come to this point in later reflections.
More basically, when we know the Law, we will test the Law. Like students who want to test the patience of their teachers, children who want to test their parents, we too will go a little bit beyond the Law to test God, to see whether God will punish us. That is why laying down the Law will not help us attain God's promise. Instead, the Law becomes an obstacle because it provides us with a knowledge to test God's patience. We will incur God's wrath with this abuse of the knowledge of the Law.
Dear Lord, have mercy on us. Help us make good use of the Law to come close to You. Amen.
Today, I want to reflect on one particular verse in the Romans about the Law. It is an intriguing Pauline thought. Once again, the thinking pattern of people two millennia ago was very different from ours today. It reads.
Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression
ὁ γὰρ νόμος ὀργὴν κατεργάζεται: οὗ δὲ οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος, οὐδὲ παράβασις. (Romans 4:15).
At first sight, it is a tautology. Some activities do not yet have any legal definitions to spell out the punishment. For example, on roads without speeding limit signs, James Dean and his buddies would freely drive their cars like crazy. When they knocked down and caused the death of a 500-year old tree, the driving action was not yet punishable. But when they knocked down and injured or even killed a pedestrian, the same driving action became a transgression of a piece of law written somewhere in the law book. That is obvious.
Let us take another perspective to look at the situation. I have no intention to offend powerful tycoons in Hong Kong. I just want to bring my readers' attention to the fact that many rich people are able to employ legal experts to help them make use of legal loopholes to obtain advantages. All too often, legal battles are games of the rich. They are able to win hopeless cases with legal technicalities, to pass environmental feasibility tests and to increase fares/tariff despite earning astronomical profits etc. But why, then, did Paul write about this?
On one hand, Paul is supporting the Law and does not want people to take advantage of justification by faith to allow themselves to do whatever they desire (Romans 3:31). On the other hand, he proves that keeping the Law does not brings righteousness after Lord Jesus had sacrificed himself on the cross for us. That the Law is inadequate has been proven. Paul uses the example of Abraham's circumcision to show the superiority of faith over Law. God's promise to Abraham is effected by the faith of Abraham, not by any law because the Torah was not yet given at that time. Then, he further exhibits the limitations of the Law. The Law does not brings God's promise but God's wrath because where no law is, there is no transgression (Romans 4:15).
So, what is transgression? Is it the same as sin?
For Paul, sin is something we have done below standard, coming short of God's glory, missing the bull's-eye. Transgression, on the other hand, is going beyond the standard, overdoing something. In this case, the Law lays down the boundary, set up the standard. While sin falls short of the standard, transgression goes over it. In many cultures, both overdoing and not doing enough are no good. For example「過猶不及」【論語‧先進】.
However, this is not the key point of Paul. He is not trying to tell us that the Law can never be complete. There will always be loopholes because the world is changing. New things which the Law has not covered will arise. No. Paul is not telling us that the Law is incomplete therefore keeping the Law cannot justify us. This is a valid argument but Paul is not saying this. Instead, he makes use of the concept of transgression to show that the Law, while setting up a standard, a boundary, brings God's wrath upon us at the same time.
Does it mean that without the Law, God's wrath would not descend upon us? Don't be naive! Abolishing all the Law will of course not save us from God's wrath. This kind of logic is wrong. There are many other ways in which we can incur the wrath of God. Setting up the Law is just one of the many ways. For example, before the Israelites received the Ten Commandments, they made a golden calf and worshipped it. God was angry. Could the Israelites say that they did not know it was wrong to worship idols? Some natural disasters are natural. But some shamans would attribute the disasters to the lack of piety on part of the natives. They should offer more sacrifices. However, I am sure no shaman would be so stupid as to legalize the number of sacrifices to offer a year. Because no matter how many sacrifices you legalize, there will always be chances of disasters. So, if we think of natural disasters as God's wrath, even without the Law on appeasing the deities, God's wrath will surely come down upon us.
So, what does Paul want to say?
Paul was making Abraham as an example to show the importance of faith for our salvation. Paul was discussing the promise God made to Abraham. The promise was that Abraham and his offspring would inherit the world through the righteousness of faith, not of the Law (Romans 4:13). Why not the Law? Hasn't God sworn that He would show mercy for thousands of generations to those who keep His commandments (Exodus 20:6).
Of course, Paul knows that God would show mercy to those who keep His commandments. However, Paul later argues that it is impossible to keep all the commandments. Therefore, we will surely incur God's wrath for three to four generations (Exodus 20:5). We will come to this point in later reflections.
More basically, when we know the Law, we will test the Law. Like students who want to test the patience of their teachers, children who want to test their parents, we too will go a little bit beyond the Law to test God, to see whether God will punish us. That is why laying down the Law will not help us attain God's promise. Instead, the Law becomes an obstacle because it provides us with a knowledge to test God's patience. We will incur God's wrath with this abuse of the knowledge of the Law.
Dear Lord, have mercy on us. Help us make good use of the Law to come close to You. Amen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)