Thirty Second Ordinary Sunday, Year C
Theme: God of the Living 活人的天主
It is a tautology to say that the theologies of different denominations are not the same. Christians have to uphold two articles of faith in order to claim to be orthodox Christians. Otherwise, they are only heretics or at best unorthodox! The two articles are namely the Blessed Trinity and Jesus Christ is truly divine and human. There are denominations which are fluent in quoting the Bible but are unable to uphold the belief that their God is three-in-one or that the Blessed Virgin Mary is the Mother of God! By denying the Blessed Virgin Mary the title of the Mother of God, they deny the divinity of Jesus at the same time! Somehow, these denominations set up extra-constrains on the practice of their faith in order to ensure the “purity” of their beliefs. Regrettably, many of those extra-constrains are politically motivated and their theological ground is shaky. For example, the iconoclasm, that is the destruction of religious icons, images and monuments, which erupted in different eras and regions is mostly political rather than theological. Therefore, whether those extra-constrains are appropriate or not is debatable. Open-mindedness is in short supply. Very few are able to come together, talk and listen to each other, agreeing to disagree. Instead controversies and even blood-sheds are widespread!
“What has been, that will be; what has been done, that will be done. Nothing is new under the sun!” (Ecclesiastes 1:9). Religious arguments are nothing new. While Christians of different denominations argue over the real presence of Jesus in the Holy Eucharist, centuries ago, two Jewish sects, the Sadducees and the Pharisees, were arguing over the question of resurrection. I suspect such disagreements reflect a lot about their political inclinations and are also shown in their definition of scriptural canons. The Sadducees belonged to the priestly class. They were rich, powerful and were happy to cooperate with the Roman colonial government in order to maintain the status quo. They only accepted the Torah as canonical. On the other hand, Pharisees arose as the defender of national identity during the Babylonian Captivity. They anticipated the Messiah to liberate them from oppressors and to restore their identity as God’s Chosen People over the Gentiles. For them, the Prophets and Holy Writings such as Psalms, Job, Ruth and Daniel were also canonical.
The question of resurrection is not a simple theological controversy. It is both moral and political. For those who do not find justice in the present political situation, they put their hope in the resurrection of the dead and the Final Judgment, without which leading a moralistic life on earth was futile and martyrdom to defend the faith of their fathers would be meaningless. All the hard work of the scribes and teachers of the law during Babylonian Captivity would come to null ... Therefore, the Pharisees defended the belief in resurrection. On the other hand, the priestly class upheld that offering sacrifices to appease God was of paramount importance for a happy life on earth. Death is a great Equalizer! All men were mortal whether you’re righteous or wicked. Since nobody had come back to life to tell people a different story, therefore, seize the moment and make the best out of whatever had been given you. Forget about resurrection and the Final Judgment! I suspect that the story of the seven brothers was a trump card devised by the Sadducees. Resurrection would result in adultery which God forbids. God would not contradict Himself, would He? The logic was so water-tight that the Pharisees had not yet come up with an adequate rebuke. In the eyes of the Sadducees, Jesus was just a never-heard-of rabbi from the good-for-nothing Galilee. Defeating this carpenter rabbi with the “seven-brother story” was just a piece of cake for them.
Jesus does not stop there. He goes deeper and returns to the very beginning. Why do men die? In the story of the Original Sin, death was a containment measure to stop sins from spreading out of control. It was a temporary measure and was not God’s original intention in the Creation. It was temporary because it started its existence after Creation. It is never meant to be eternal! What would be the point of creating the known universe and letting life flourish in it if life ended in death? God would not contradict Himself, would He? So Jesus quoted Moses’ words to show that the Lord is “not God of the dead, but of the living, for to Him all are alive” (20:38). Not only does Jesus claim sovereignty over all the living and dead, but He also grants them eternal life in so doing!
Some Pharisees must have been watching the debate and applauded Jesus’ wits (20:39). No! Jesus did not simply want to win an argument. He wants to strengthen the faith of all of us in Him. I’m not God of the dead but God of the living. Don’t be scared by the death which stands between you and Me. Trust in Me and I’ll deliver you and help you transcend death to enjoy “the fruit from the tree of life” (Genesis 3:22)! Had Jesus not come back to life all the brilliant arguments above would have been mere witty sophism. Therefore, the arguments about resurrection must be understood in the light of the Resurrection of the Lord. Furthermore, it is unwise to impose extra-constrains on our faith since God wants us to return to Him with our free-will. The lesser the constrains the better when it comes to approaching and embracing God’s mercy.
Let us follow Peter’s example and confess, “Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.” (John 6:68) Since resurrection is both moral and political, let us lead a righteous life compatible with resurrection: to love God and to defend the welfare of the marginalized.
God bless!
2019 Reflection
Picture Credit: happenings.xrysostom.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment