世上有永生嗎？ Is there Eternal Life?

世上有永生嗎？（瑪19:16-22）
在【舊約】是找不到「永生」的概念，它祇有「高壽/長壽」。例如遵守「孝敬父母」的誡命，便可以「在上主你的天主賜給你的地方，延年益壽/高壽」（出20:12，申5:16），向天主奉獻馨香祭，可以為君王的長壽祈禱（厄上6:10）等。所以，這個少年可能受到外來思想的影響，纔會懂得詢問有關「永生」的問題（瑪19:16）。但他仍然擺脫不了舊約的觀念，以為多行一些「善」，便可以得到他所理解的「永生」！
很明顯，這少年的「永生」觀念是錯誤的；他心目中的「永生」，可能是指在俗世享受高壽的「不死版」！於是耶穌把它更正為「進入生命」（19:17）。這生命就是與天主子，生命的主宰結合的生命（若17:3）。而且，可能會令你失望，為了獲得這生命，並沒有甚麼嶄新的方法、其他的「善」，祇不過是舊約時代，梅瑟所傳授的誡命而已！可惜，以色列民族祇按字面的意義遵守；在遵守的過程中，並沒有領會到誡命的精神。這位少年也犯了同樣的毛病，既然他已遵守了所有的誡命，為甚麼他還感覺到空虛，好像尚欠缺了甚麼似的。
耶穌基督來，並不是為了廢除誡命，而是使它「成全」（瑪5:17）。所以，祂啟示給這少年誡命的精髓：愛德，一份好像耶穌基督所示範的，捨己為人的愛，一份令別人成長進步的愛！這樣做，他的真正「永生」便會在天上開始！注意，「永生」是在天上兌現，而不是在俗世上享受的！
主啊！惟祢有永生的話，我們去投奔誰呢？（若6:68）我們相信，祢就是生命。亞孟。


圖片鳴謝：https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ChineseJesus.jpg
生命恩泉

---

Is there Eternal Life? (Matthew 19:16-22)
We are not able to find the concept of eternal life in the Old Testament. There is only longevity. For example, when you keep the honour thy father and thy mother commandment, "you may have a long life in the land the Lord your God is giving you" (Exodus 20:12, Deuteronomy 5:16), and offering sacrifices of pleasing odour to the God of heaven, you may pray for the life of the king and his sons (Ezra 6:10) etc. Therefore, probably this young man was influenced by foreign ideas such that he knew to enquire about the question of eternal life (Matthew 19:16). Still, he was not able to free himself from Old Testament concepts, thinking that by doing more "good", he would be able to gain the "eternal life" as he understood it.
Obviously, his concept of "eternal life" was wrong. In his mind, eternal life is an immortal version of longevity! So, Jesus corrected it as "to enter into life" (19:17). This life is a life in union with the Son of God, the Author of Life (John 17:3). Furthermore, perhaps it would disappoint you that in order to gain this life, there is no new tricks, no extra "good", but the commandments handed down by Moses in the Old Testament! Unfortunately, the Israelites observed the letters of the laws only. In the process of keeping the laws, they failed to understand the spirit. This young man made the same mistake. He had kept all the commandments. Yet, he felt empty, that something was missing.
Jesus came not to abolish the commandments but to fulfil them (Matthew 5:17). Therefore, he revealed to this young man the essence of commandments: charity which Jesus Christ has demonstrated. A charity of sacrifice, a love of edifying others! In this way, his eternal life would start growing in heaven! Pay attention, eternal life is enjoyed in heaven, not in the secular world!
Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life (John 6:68). We believe that you are life. Amen.

兄弟的守護者 My Brother's Keeper

常年期第十五主日，丙年
主題：兄弟的守護者

法學士試探耶穌的問題，即他應當做甚麼，纔能獲得永生？（路10:25）在耶穌時代是沒有答案的，因為超出了舊約時代的思想！在舊約是找不到「永生」的概念，祇有「高壽/長壽」，例如遵守「孝敬父母」的誡命，便可「在上主你的天主賜給你的地方，延年益壽/高壽。」（出20:12，申5:16）向天主奉獻馨香祭，可以為君王的長壽祈禱（厄上6:10）等。耶穌基督把超出「考試範圍」的題目帶回「考試範圍」之內，即法學士的專業範圍之內，以免出現上面指出的莫名其妙局面。今天連我們也不敢說完全明白，以當年法學士的認知程度，即使說出答案，他也不會明白！於是耶穌修訂了法學士提問的範圍，讓他可以很高興地炫耀自己對法律的知識。但法學士又不忿耶穌基督這樣輕而易舉地脫身，便繼續窮追猛打耶穌（路10:29），給了耶穌基督說出「慈善撒瑪黎雅人比喻」的機會！也給我們認識到，「獲得永生」並不像若望福音說的「信耶穌得永生」那麼抽象，那麼虛無縹緲，而卻是實實在在，非常具體的「愛主愛人」！

古代很多聖人和教父，對這個比喻作出了深刻的解釋。例如：聖安博說，這個撒瑪黎雅人就是耶穌基督自己，兩個銀錢象徵了新舊約，店主就是奧跡的管理人。聖安博的學生聖奧思定說，客店象徵了教會，酒和油象徵了教會的聖事，和現實的歷史一樣，猶太人瞧不起撒瑪黎雅人，同時也瞧不起這個來自北方，來自加里肋亞的木匠，但耶穌基督願意成為了我們的鄰人。
我倒喜歡聖葉理諾的教訓，在他的一篇講道中，他指出舊約把「近人」解釋為兄弟、家人、親戚或同鄉，是太狹窄了。主耶穌基督教導我們，因為我們有同一個天父，因此，所有的人都是我們的兄弟，都是我們的近人！雖然「愛人如己」（肋19:18）是出於舊約梅瑟的法律，但降生成人的天主子耶穌基督，把它還原到真理的層次。因為眾人都是按天主的肖像所造，你我原本是兄弟，祇因私慾偏情的侵害，纔彼此敵我分明，有藍絲黃絲之分。天主子降生成人，願意我們彼此相愛，化解仇恨。祂以十字架上的犧牲，恢復了眾生的真正身份。

歷代以來，教會遵循耶穌基督的教訓，救濟遇上困難的兄弟姊妹。首先，【宗徒大事錄】已記載了新興教會照顧寡婦（宗6:1）。在以後的日子裡，無論在和平的時期，或是在天災人禍，戰爭瘟疫漫延的時代，教會救濟了不少窮人，收留了無數孤兒寡婦，照顧了不計其數的病弱者，和探望囚犯！
不過，教會漸漸認識到，舊約的倫理，不足以應付現代的問題。例如，窮人之所以是窮人，並不再是因為他們懶惰，或者是遭遇不幸；而是因為社會上出現了結構性的邪惡，例如奴隸制度！以色列人曾經在埃及為奴四百年，深明在一個被捧為神的法老王的統治之下的國家，公義是不存在的。他們向天主呼求，天主便派遣梅瑟，解放了他們。這是一個預像。因為天主子將會降生，把全人類從罪惡的奴役中，解放出來。在人類的歷史上，曾出現過不少解放奴隸的運動。最有名的，包括大家所熟悉的美國總統林肯解放黑奴。即使世俗的人，也續漸醒覺到社會上存在著不少結構性的剝削制度，讓一小撮人，騎在大多數人頭上，奴役他們。

1891年，教宗良十三世，看見工業革命所帶來的經濟繁榮，原來是建築在剝削工廠裡的工人而來。他痛心資本主義踐踏工人的人性尊嚴，而社會主義所倡議的革命，祇是為了奪權，而不是在於保障天主肖像的尊貴。因此，他發表了天主教的第一份社會訓導文件：【新事物通諭】，敦促教友在自己的崗位上，以具體的行動，關心工人的苦況，並改善他們的處境，好能更實在地履行「愛人如己」的誡命。這樣挑戰不公義的社命制度，無可避免地與政治角力，打破了「政教分離」的謬論。在理想的，公義的世界裡，宗教與政治，各司其職，相輔相成。可是，在現實的俗世中，宗教信仰決不能好像比喻中的司祭和肋未人一樣，祇顧祈禱祭獻，不理近人的死活。基督徒必須守護自己身邊的兄弟，守護我們被剝削的近人。所以，宗教信仰必定與政治交手。
愛主愛人，永遠是基督徒的標記。若望宗徒說得好：「那不愛自己所看見的弟兄的，就不能愛自己所看不見的天主。」（若一4:20）耶穌基督的教訓，比社會主義更革命性。祂要求我們不但愛近人，還要「愛你們的仇人，善待惱恨你們的人；應祝福詛咒你們的人，為毀謗你們的人祈禱…」（路6:27-28）

我們既不及天主子的富足，又怎能去憐憫別人呢？我們有如被劫的猶太人，自顧不睱，又如何治療幫助身邊有需要的人呢？所謂仗義每多屠狗輩，窮人反而能守望相助。即使我們是受傷的，其實我們也有能力幫助別人的，祇不過我們不願放下成見和偏見罷了。能放下，便可以群策群力，共渡難關。近日發生的事，正需要我們放下偏見，放下黃絲藍絲之分，抱著慈悲和造就他人的態度，履行真福八端的指導，獲得真福八端的應許！沒有可能嗎？油塘連儂場所發生的事件，很清楚地告訴全香港的市民，耶穌基督「不要抵抗惡人…若有人掌擊你的右頰，你把另一面也轉給他。」（瑪5:39）的教訓並不是開玩笑，並不是癡人說夢。「在人所不能的，在天主是可能的！」（路18:27）
天主保祐！

2016年講道

Feast of St. Padre Pio (Year B)

The Catholic Church has been blessed with many favours from God who has given her many saints to take care of the faithful. Father Pio (1887-1968) was one such priest. He was famous not just for the stigmata on his body, but also for his fervent love of God and the souls of fellow men. He was able to lead people to God in his confessional where he usually spent more than 12 hours a day. Father Pio demonstrated all the theological and cardinal virtues expected of a Christian. His life was exemplary and continues to live on in those hearts and souls which he had touched in his life time. Praise be to God forever. Amen.

A small group of Jews returned from Babylon to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. These remnants returned to a place vacant for half a century. Naturally, it was occupied by the indigenous people: the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites(Ezra 9:1b).
When the Jews returned and settled down, some of them married the local people. Among them, the officials and chief men took the lead.
For they have taken some of their daughters to be wives for themselves and for their sons; so that the holy race has mixed itself with the peoples of the lands. And in this faithlessness the hand of the officials and chief men has been foremost (Ezra 9:2)
Ezra was filled with anger and despair. He interpreted their Babylonian Exile as God's punishment for the sins of their fathers. Now that God had been merciful so that a remnant was able to return to Jerusalem. However, these people seemed intended to test God to the limit. They ignored the precepts of the Torah and intermarried with the local people.
Therefore give not your daughters to their sons, neither take their daughters for your sons, and never seek their peace or prosperity, that you may be strong, and eat the good of the land, and leave it for an inheritance to your children for ever (Ezra 9:12, Deuteronomy 7:3)
Ezra saw these marriages as an invitation to God to destroy them.
And after all that has come upon us for our evil deeds and for our great guilt, seeing that thou, our God, hast punished us less than our iniquities deserved and hast given us such a remnant as this,
shall we break thy commandments again and intermarry with the peoples who practice these abominations? Wouldst thou not be angry with us till thou wouldst consume us, so that there should be no remnant, nor any to escape? (Ezra 9:13-14)
In the end, he imposed divorce on all mixed marriages. He told three full months to finish all divorce business.
Then the returned exiles did so. Ezra the priest selected men, heads of fathers' houses, according to their fathers' houses, each of them designated by name. On the first day of the tenth month they sat down to examine the matter;
and by the first day of the first month they had come to the end of all the men who had married foreign women (Ezra 10:16-17).
Was Ezra an alarmist, exaggerating the wrath of God? Did he have any hidden agenda? After all, what would he gain? Most likely, Ezra would gain nothing. The whole incident went down in the Jewish post-exile history as a major milestone in Judaism. But in the light of New Testament ethics, this is a powerful illustration of the irrationality of a legalistic morality.
St. Paul opposed divorce, even the divorce between a believer and the spouse. His focus was the opposite of the Torah and Ezra. The wrath of God was not his concern. Rather, Paul looked at the benefits for an unbelieving spouse.
To the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her.
If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him.
For the unbelieving husband is consecrated through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is consecrated through her husband. Otherwise, your children would be unclean, but as it is they are holy (1 Corinthians 7:12-13).
Fearing the wrath of God, Ezra imposed divorce on mixed marriages. Looking at the sanctity of marriage, Paul opposed divorce. Both sides have equally forceful logic. Therefore, rationality or even conscience could not decide. The will of God has the final say. Jesus has spoken against divorce. Period.

Dear Lord, open our hearts to read Your words in the Bible. Enlighten our intellect and warm our souls so that we may live. Amen.

Men are from Mars

Today, we read a little bit of the book of Ezra. Ezra was a great Jewish Scribe, the founder of Judaism.
After 50 years of exile in Babylon, some Israelites had settled and prospered there. Therefore, when Cyrus the Persian King decreed that the Israelites returned to Jerusalem to rebuild the Temple, many Israelites were not too enthusiastic about the whole idea. Nevertheless, some did return and found the land depressively desolate. Naturally, they thought of rebuilding their own houses instead of rebuilding the house of God. Haggai the prophet was furious and scolded them. So, they started working on the rebuilding project. The Samaritans in the north intended to participate. But they were rejected by the local Israelites. Therefore, the Samaritans bad mouthed them before the Persian governor who disrupted the rebuilding project. Then Nehemiah and Ezra came forth so that the project would proceed. Moreover, they were able to secure the support of Darius, the Persian king to pay for all the costs from the royal coffers. The king also decreed that anybody disrupting the project was punishable by death.
Also I make a decree that if any one alters this edict, a beam shall be pulled out of his house, and he shall be impaled upon it, and his house shall be made a dunghill.
May the God who has caused his name to dwell there overthrow any king or people that shall put forth a hand to alter this, or to destroy this house of God which is in Jerusalem. I Darius make a decree; let it be done with all diligence (Ezra 6:11-12)
The Second Temple in Jerusalem was finally built. Of course, it was no comparison with the legendary Solomon Temple. A new phase of Jewish life had begun. It was the contribution of Ezra the Scribe.

On Tuesday evenings, we are still studying Moral Theology under Fr. Robert Ng, S.J. He was talking about the nine trends of Moral Theology that he observed in the post-Vatican II era. One of these trends was dialogues with people from different classes and religions. Among them, Fr. Ng mentioned the feminine theologians in particular. He lamented that the Catholic Church had been very patriarchic and thus legalistic. It was because the Church had been dominated by man theologians, such as St. Thomas Aquinas. After Vatican II, more and more women studied theology and many of them have been very successful and outstanding. They added another perspective in theological reasoning. Fr. Ng quoted the example of abortion.

Abortion is the killing of an innocent life. Therefore, the Catholic Church condemns it and punishes those involved in abortions with excommunication. Fr. Ng. lamented that the approach was too rational and legalistic, like Darius' decree mentioned above. Anybody not following the decree was punishable by death/excommunication. In reality, people would find ways to cheat or bypass the decree. Therefore, the whole purpose was defeated. Men are from Mars. They are too logical and aggressive, attacking anybody who does not toe the party line. However, the approach is not effective. Therefore, let us listen to what woman theologians have to say about the abortion topic.
According to Fr. Ng, he had read a woman theologian writing about the abortion topic. She said that if we wanted women to give up the abortion option, you had to appeal to their mother instinct, rather than scaring them with the fire of hell. During their pregnancy, mothers should look at beautiful baby posters more often. Then, they would not choose abortion.
Fr. Ng could not hide his admiration for woman theologians in his talk. In his three decades of teaching in theology, his best students are women. He even belittled his own writings as dry and lacked lustre. The writings of woman theologians glowed with an aura.

Dear Lord, I pray that I can keep an open mind to engage in dialogues. If I feel unappreciated, they may feel the same. Lord, help me rid of my prejudice against my neighbours. Amen.