常年期第十五主日，乙年
主題：「拂去腳上的塵土」是幼稚的抗議嗎？
殯葬禮是一個很好的傳福音場合，因為殯葬禮是一個名正言順，宣講生命意義，人生終向的機會。倘若亡者的親友是教友，這是一個「新福傳」，為教友重溫天主教信仰的機會；倘若親友不是教友，這是一個向未有信仰的人，介紹天主教信仰的好機會。這是執事我喜歡主持殯葬禮的原因：宣講福音。當然親友之中，因為不同道而不願意聽的，仍有自由離開靈堂一會兒，到外面抽煙，執事我是不會強人所難的！既然接受福音與否，是個人的自由，今天福音的其中一點，聽來便有點奇怪了。
在今天的福音，我們找到耶穌基督給十二宗徒非常清晰的「福傳」指示：兩個兩個一組，互相支援，並展示出基督信仰的團體特徵（谷6:7）；不要以為雄厚的資源有助福傳，因為使人心轉化的是聖神而不是財富（6:8-9）；不要戀棧成就，不願離開，應當讓本地人得以成長（6:10）。最後，對於拒絕福音的地方，「你們就從那裡出去，拂去你們腳下的塵土，作為反對他們的證據」（6：11）。真奇怪，為甚麼要「反對」他們呢？我們不是應該以耶穌基督的心為心，憐憫那些無知的人嗎？拒絕福音是他們個人的選擇，我們應該尊重別人的自由選擇，而不是反對嘛！恐怕這個有關傳福音的指示，有更深層的象徵意義吧！
首先，第一代基督徒，全部都是猶太人。耶穌基督是否採用了一些猶太人的習俗，作為傳福音的指示呢？「拂去腳下的塵土」是否猶太人的習俗呢？讓我們翻查聖經，看看「拂去腳下的塵土」，有甚麼象徵意義。
第一，這句說話在聖經中一共出現了五次，全部都在新約中。雖然舊約也有提及「腳下的塵土」，但祇有兩次，而且與「拂去」，與「反對」無關（依49:23；拉3:21）。
舊約有八個章節提及「脫鞋」的習俗，包括站在神聖的地方，和與「代兄立嗣」的法津有關。與「代兄立嗣」有關的「脫鞋」習俗，纔有「反對」的意義。看來，「拂去腳下的塵土」是基督徒獨有的行為模式，不一定是出於猶太人的習俗！
第二，瑪竇福音沒有提及「作為反對他們的證據」（瑪10:14），「反對」祇出現在寫給外邦人的福音中（谷6:11；路9:5）。看來真是基督徒自己創造出來的獨有行為，並賦予「反對」的意義了。
第三，這五個「拂去腳下的塵土」的章節，全部與傳福音有關：三個是給十二宗徒說的（瑪10:14；谷6:11；路9:5），一個是給七十二門徒說的（10:11），而最後一個是真正實行了的（宗13:51）。事緣保祿和巴爾納伯在第一次傳教旅程，到了丕息狄雅的安提約基雅傳福音，很多外邦人信了主，惹來猶太人的妒忌，遂煽動當地要人驅逐他們二人出境，「二人就把腳上的塵土向他們拂下，往依科尼雍去了。」（13:50-51）。
執事在想，傳福音牽涉到很多錯綜複雜的人際關係。正如【訓導篇】所說，「尋找有時，遺失有時；保存有時，捨棄有時。」（訓3:6）。很多做子女的，或妻子的，不斷勸說父親/丈夫領洗入教，做父親/丈夫諸多推辭，直到配偶去世後纔認真地考慮將來在天上重聚！可見時間真的不在福傳者手中。所以保祿說：「我栽種，阿頗羅澆灌，然而使之生長的，卻是天主。」（格前3:6）因此，執事認為，當人拒絕福音的時候，祇是時機未成熟而已，犯不著「拂去腳下的塵土」，反對他們。這樣做，是否有點幼稚呢？還是有更深層的意義呢？
從社會結構的分析看，傳福音是為那打破結構性的罪惡，推倒迫人犯罪的制度。從這個角度分析，拒絕福音就是拒絕悔改，繼續剝削弱小的兄弟，堅持犯罪。這樣的話，基督徒有責任反對他們，不能默許。
對於沒有聽過福音的人，天主不能降罪。所以「天國的福音必先在全世界宣講，給萬民作證，然後結局纔會來到。」（瑪24:14）到時，傳福音者的腳上，必定沾滿了所到各地的塵土，除了拒絕福音的地方！即是說，傳福音者腳上的塵土，代表了曾接待過他們的地方。某地方的塵土不在傳福音者的腳下，並不表示他們沒有聽過福音，而是他們拒絕了，令傳福音者拂去了腳上的塵土。沒有某地的塵土，就成為了某地拒絕福音的證據了！到時他們所受的懲罰，比索多瑪的更嚴慘烈！
各位兄弟姊妹，讓我們呼籲天主聖神的助佑，減少我們拂去腳上塵土的機會。
天主保祐！
2018年講道
圖片鳴謝：freebibleimages.org
Fifteenth Ordinary Sunday, Year B
Theme: Is Shaking Dust Off the Feet A Naïve Protest?
Funerals are very good evangelization occasions because the celebrants are entitled to speak about the meaning of life and the final destiny of humanity etc. If the relatives of the deceased are Catholics, it is an occasion of “New Evangelization” to review what Catholic faith is all about. If the relatives are not Catholics, it is a golden opportunity to proclaim Catholic faith to non-believers. That’s why I like presiding over funeral rites: evangelization. Of course among the relatives there may be other Christians who reject Catholic doctrines. They still have the freedom to leave the funeral parlour for a while, go outside to smoke a cigarette and come back near the end of my homily. I won’t be offended! People have the liberty to accept or reject the gospel. It is their freedom. Thus, one of the verses in today’s gospel sounds a bit odd.
In the gospel today, Jesus gave the Twelve very clear instructions on evangelization: They should go two by two, supporting each other and show the communion characteristic of Christian faith (Mark 6:7. Don’t think that rich resources will help evangelization. Rather, conversion of hearts depends on the Holy Spirit and not wealth (6:8-9. Don’t cling on to previous achievements and refuse to leave. We should allow local people to grow and develop (6:10. Lastly, “Whatever place does not welcome you or listen to you, leave there and shake the dust off your feet in testimony against them” (6:11 Isn’t it odd? Why should we protest against them? Shouldn’t we be merciful like Jesus Christ, feel pitiful for their stupidity? Rejecting the gospel is their personal choice. We should respect the freedom of other people and not to oppose them! Probably there is a deeper symbolic meaning!
First of all, the first generation Christians were Jews. Did Jesus Christ employ a Jewish custom to instruct evangelization? Is “shaking dust off the feet” a Jewish custom? Let us check the Bible to find out the symbolic meaning of “shaking dust off the feet”.
This phrase appears five times in the Bible, all located in the New Testament. Although there are two “dusk under the feet” verses in the Old Testament, there is nothing about “shaking off” or “protest against” (Isaiah 49:23, Malachi 3:21.
In the Old Testament there are eight verses about “removing sandals”, including standing on holy ground and Levirate laws in which a sense of opposition can be found. Thus, “shaking dust off the feet” seems to be an action peculiar to Christian, not necessarily Jewish!
Secondly, the verse in Matthew says nothing about “in testimony against them” (Matthew 10:14. This phrase appears only in gospels written for the Gentiles (Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5. It seems clearly to be something invented by Christians and given an opposition meaning.
Thirdly, all five “shaking dust off the feet” verses are related with evangelization: three of them are instructions to the Twelve (Matthew 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5, one to the seventy two disciples (10:11 and the last one is putting into action (Acts 13:51. In their first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas reached Antioch in Pisidia and preached. Many Gentiles believed in the Lord. The Jews were envious and incited leading men of the city to expel the two from their territory. “So they shook dust from their feet in protest against them and went to Iconium” (13:50-51.
This was the first time Paul was attacked by fellow Jews because he was successful in converting Gentiles. Probably it was not a mature response like the one he describes in the Galatians what he did in Antioch, opposing Peter to his face! At that time, Paul was on the right side. When the Jews who advocated circumcising Gentiles arrived, Peter drew back and separated himself from the Gentiles. Worse, the rest of the Jews and Barnabas acted hypocritically along with Peter. Paul saw that their action was not in line with the truth of the gospel and scolded Peter in the open (Galatians 2:12-14. Later when Paul wrote to the Corinthians about eating sacrificial meat, his teaching was more mature. He would not ignore other’s conscience even when he possessed the truth. On the contrary, for the benefit of the others and for their salvation, he advised believers to restrain their own freedom and refrain from eating the sacrificial meat (1 Corinthians 10:28-29, 33!
Thus, when Paul “shook dust off his feet” to protest against the jealous Jews, his reaction was probably not mature. Of course, it was possible for Paul who was fervent in saving souls to make use of this sign to warn his fellow folks that at the end of the world, they might suffer worse punishments than Sodom (Luke 10:12. Although Paul was later expelled many times because of successes in winning over many Gentiles, we do not find any more verses of “shaking dust off the feet”. Had Paul become more mature and tolerant? Not necessarily because one record is representative enough.
I’m pondering. Evangelization involves highly complex interpersonal relationships. “A time to seek, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away” (Ecclesiastes 3:6 Many children and wives have urged their fathers/husbands to receive baptism. The fathers/husbands keep putting off until their spouses pass away. Only then do they seriously think about reuniting them in heaven! Clearly, time is not in the hands of the evangelists. Paul says, “I planted, Apollos watered, but God caused the growth” (1 Corinthians 3:6. Therefore, I think that when people reject the gospel, it is simply not yet the right time for them to convert. It is not necessary to “shake dust off the feet” to protest against them. Doing so would be too naïve. Is there any more deeper meaning?
Taking the perspective of social analysis, evangelization is an attempt to break down structural sins and to overthrow sinful institutions that enslave men. From this perspective, rejecting the gospel is a refusal to repent, to continue the exploitation of the least of the Lord’s brothers and to insist on sinning. Viewed in this way, Christians have the responsibility to oppose instead of condoning them.
God cannot punish those who haven’t heard the gospel. Therefore, “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached throughout the world as a witness to all nations, and then the end will come.” (Matthew 24:14 Then, the feet of the evangelists will carry dust from all the places they have travelled except those that have rejected the gospel! That is to say, the dust represents places that have received them. Dust not found on the feet of the evangelists does not mean they have not heard the gospel but have rejected it so that the evangelists have shaken the dust off their feet. The absence of dust is a testimony against their rejection of the gospel! Then the punishments they shall receive will be far more terrible than Sodom!
Brethren! Let us invoke the help of the Holy Spirit to reduce our chances of shaking dusk off our feet.
God bless!
No comments:
Post a Comment