2 January – Gospel
Commentary on John 1:19-28
From today until January 5 inclusive, we will be reading from the beginning of John’s Gospel after the Prologue and up to the story of the wedding at Cana. This corresponds to Chapter 1 and the beginning of Chapter 2. It begins with John the Baptist’s testimony about himself, and then Jesus’ revealing himself to his first disciples. It finishes with the wedding feast at Cana, described as the first of the ‘signs’ performed by Jesus. There are seven such ‘signs’ altogether in John’s Gospel. The whole section covers just one week, which reflects the first week of creation in the book of Genesis. Here there is a new creation under way.
The section is divided as follows:
- John the Baptist’s negative testimony about himself.
- His positive testimony about Jesus.
- The revelation of Jesus to Andrew and Peter (in that order).
- The revelation of Jesus to Philip and Nathanael (also in that order).
- The wedding feast at Cana.
Today we look at the first section, John the Baptist’s ‘negative’ testimony about himself. It is clear that John the Baptist was causing something of a stir with his preaching. As such, officials were sent out from the Temple in Jerusalem to make some enquiries. Because he said he was not the long-awaited Messiah, they wanted to know who he was. He said he was not Elijah come again (whose re-appearance was expected to signal the imminent arrival of the Messiah), nor was he a Prophet like Moses. But his questioners persisted, as they had to bring back some information to the authorities in Jerusalem. John answered them with a modified version of words from Isaiah:
I am the voice of one crying out in the wilderness,
‘Make straight the way of the Lord’. (Is 40:3)
This still does not satisfy, and now some Pharisees—distinct from the priests, who were all Sadducees—want to know why John is baptising when he is neither the Messiah, nor Elijah nor the Prophet.
John says that he is just baptising with water:
I baptize with water. Among you stands one whom you do not know, the one who is coming after me; I am not worthy to untie the strap of his sandal.
By these words, he implies that someone who is really a Prophet is on the way, and bringing with him a much greater baptism. John is simply preparing the way by a baptism whose emphasis is on purification and repentance. The new baptism will bring the power of God’s Spirit.
Obviously, there is much in John the Baptist’s role with which we can identify. John preceded Jesus in time, and prepared people for his coming. We, rather, are called to precede Jesus in other ways by making it possible for other people to come to know him and to follow him. We are not the Light, but we are called to give constant witness to the Light. Jesus said that he was the “Light of the World” (John 8:12), but he also said to his disciples:
You are the light of the world. (Matt 5:14)
And so we must ask, do I see myself as reflecting the light of Jesus to others?
Read more
Friday of Week 5 of Ordinary Time – Gospel
Commentary on Mark 7:31-37
Jesus is still in gentile territory. He has now moved east from the Mediterranean coast to the interior, on the east side of the Sea of Galilee, in the area of the Decapolis (Greek for “Ten Towns”).
A deaf and mute man is brought to Jesus for healing. He takes the man aside, puts his fingers in the man’s ears, touches his tongue with spittle, looks up to heaven and prays, “Be opened”. Immediately the man’s ears are opened, his tongue loosed and he is able to speak plainly. As often happens in this Gospel, the people who witnessed the miracle are told not to say anything about it to anyone:
…but the more he ordered them, the more zealously they proclaimed it.
The people “were astounded beyond measure” and they said:
He has done everything well; he even makes the deaf to hear and the mute to speak.
As often happens in the Gospels, and especially in Mark, what we have here is much more than a miracle story, i.e. the healing of a physical ailment. We are approaching a climactic part of this Gospel, and this passage leads into it. What Jesus does to this man is something that is meant to happen to every one of his followers, including his immediate disciples.
We all need to have our ears opened so that we can hear and understand in its fullness the message of Jesus. In addition to that, once we have heard and understood, the natural consequence is that we go out and speak openly to the world about what we have heard and understood. Both hearing and speaking are inseparable for the Christian disciple.
And so, in the older form of the baptismal rite, the celebrant touched the ears of the one being baptised and put saliva on the lips (saliva was then still believed to have healing powers). This rite symbolises the grace of the sacrament by which the newly baptised (in speaking about an adult) hears and accepts the Word of God, and undertakes the responsibility of proclaiming it in word and action.
And, as in today’s story, when we have truly experienced the power of that message and the love of God in our own lives, we cannot but do what that man did—broadcast it far and wide.
Read more
Thursday of Week 13 of Ordinary Time – First Reading
Commentary on Genesis 22:1-19
Today we read of an extraordinary test that Abraham was asked to go through by God. It is to be understood as a test and not a temptation. God never tempts his people to wrong, but things are allowed to happen to confirm our faith or prove a commitment we have made.
We have seen how several times God promised Abraham that he would be the father of a great people. And now he is asked to offer his only legitimate son—the only link with that promised future—as a holocaust to God. It just did not make any sense at all.
But Abraham had committed himself by covenant to be obedient to the Lord and had consecrated his son Isaac to the Lord by circumcision. The Lord put his servant’s faith and loyalty to the supreme test, thereby instructing Abraham, Isaac and their descendants as to the kind of total consecration the Lord’s covenant requires. The test also foreshadowed the perfect consecration in sacrifice that another offspring of Abraham would undergo in order to wholly consecrate Abraham and his spiritual descendants (i.e. all of us) to God and to fulfil the covenant promises.
There is a parallel here with the story of Hagar and Ishmael which we read yesterday:
- A journey into the wilderness
- An encounter with an angel
- Divine consolation and reassurance
- A miracle at the site
- The naming of the site
Abraham is told to:
Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains that I shall show you.
The location of Moriah is not known for certain, but it has been identified with the hill on which the Jerusalem temple was later built and later tradition accepted this identification. We see Abraham accepting God’s injunction without a word of protest. This is clearly intended to be another example of his tremendous faith and trust in God’s word.
Rising early in the morning, he saddled his donkey and took Isaac together with two of his young men. And, before setting out, he also cut some wood for the sacrifice. It was on the third day of travelling that Abraham saw the place of sacrifice in the distance. He told the young men to remain behind with the donkey, while Abraham and Isaac went to the mountain to worship. After that, ‘they’ would return (i.e. Abraham would return with the burnt remains of his son).
He then laid the wood for the sacrifice on the shoulders of his son, while he himself carried the fire (a torch for kindling the offering) and the knife, and then they proceeded to the place of sacrifice. As they walked, Isaac spoke to his father:
The fire and the wood are here, but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?
Abraham replied that God himself would provide the sacrificial lamb.
On reaching the place of sacrifice, Abraham built an altar and put the wood on it. He bound his son and laid him on the altar on top of the wood (Isaac seems strangely submissive to all of this!). The future Lamb of God would be sacrificed on wood also.
Just as Abraham raised his knife to kill his son, an angel from heaven called him by name. Speaking in the name of God he said:
Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.
Abraham then saw a ram caught in a nearby thicket by its horns. He took the ram and sacrificed it instead of his son. And Abraham called the place “The Lord will provide”, a reference to the answer Abraham gave to his son earlier on about providing a lamb for the sacrifice. It became a proverbial saying:
On the mount of the Lord it shall be provided.
This saying was particularly meaningful if the ‘mount’ was to be identified with the hill of Zion on which the Temple was later built.
There then comes a solemn blessing from the Lord. Because Abraham was ready to sacrifice his only son, he is told by God:
…I will indeed bless you, and I will make your offspring as numerous as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of their enemies, and by your offspring shall all the nations of the earth gain blessing for themselves, because you have obeyed my voice.
The “gate of your enemies” is the first clear indication that Israel’s inheritance of Canaan will involve war with the local people and the capturing of cities. To capture the city gates was tantamount to taking the whole town or city. Abraham then returned to where he had left the young men and they went to Beer-sheba where Abraham lived.
There are some remarkable foreshadowings in this story of Jesus’ later experience:
- As Abraham offered up his only son, so God the Father too will offer up his only Son to be sacrificed.
- Isaac carrying the wood for the holocaust on his shoulders prefigures Jesus carrying his cross to Calvary.
- And when Isaac asks where is the sheep for the holocaust, Abraham answers:
God himself will provide the lamb for a burnt offering…
Jesus, too, would be the sheep of the sacrifice, he will be the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.
There is one big difference, however. In the end, God spared the life of Isaac once he knew of Abraham’s fidelity; but God, who loves the world so much, did not spare his own Son, who was both Priest and Victim.
Some commentators also see in the story the basis of the ritual prescription for the redemption, the ‘buying back’ of the first-born of Israel. The first fruits of flocks and herds and animals were usually offered in sacrifice. However, humans were not to be sacrificed, but bought back—’redeemed’.
Commentators also see in the last minute preventing of Abraham killing his son, strong opposition by the Israelites to the child-sacrifice which was common among neighbouring peoples. But above all, in this incident it is Abraham’s faith which reaches its climax.
Once again we, too, can reflect on the extent of our faith and trust in God. Are we ready to give God anything he asks for, knowing that whatever he asks is for our good? In my life now, what would I find it most difficult to give up if God asked me?
Read more
Wednesday of Week 27 of Ordinary Time – First Reading
Commentary on Jonah 4:1-11
After having single-handedly (with some help from the Lord, of course) converted a city of 120,000 people from the king downwards, one would have thought that Jonah would have been filled with a wonderful sense of achievement. At best, he would have thanked and praised God for his wonderful works; at the least, he would have been patting himself on the back for being such an effective prophet.
Instead, we find him in a foul humour and very angry. He is angry that God could have compassion on a longstanding enemy of Israel, one who had caused great suffering to God’s people. His thinking was that God’s goodness should be shown only to Israelites, not to Gentiles and certainly not to Assyrians.
His self-righteous world has been turned upside down. As a devout Hebrew, one of God’s chosen and a prophet to boot, he has regarded all unbelieving Gentiles as deserving only of God’s fiercest punishments. That was why he did not want to have anything to do with them; that was why he wanted to flee as far from them as he could get.
He is very disappointed in his God, but attributes it to God’s basic weakness:
O Lord! Is not this what I said while I was still in my own country? That is why I fled to Tarshish at the beginning, for I knew that you are a gracious and merciful God, slow to anger, abounding in steadfast love, and relenting from punishment.
This description of Yahweh is one which God himself gave to Moses (see Exod 34:6-7) at Sinai and becomes a formula repeated more than once in the Old Testament. God’s gentle patience is in strong contrast to Jonah’s anger.
Lord, please take my life from me, for it is better for me to die than to live.
To Jonah, God’s mercy to the Ninevites means an end to Israel’s favoured standing. Jonah shortly before has rejoiced in his deliverance from death in the sea, but now that the pagan and sinful Nineveh lives, in anger and frustration he prefers to die. But Yahweh asks:
Is it right for you to be angry?
Jonah is angry because God has not treated the Ninevites the way he thinks they deserve.
Jonah then leaves the city and sits down to the east of the city where he makes a shelter for himself. He wants to see what is going to happen to the city. He expects and hopes that a terrible destruction is going to come down on it. After all, at the beginning of the story God had said how angry he was with the Ninevites.
Jonah’s shelter does not seem to have been very effective because God then ordains that a castor-oil plant should grow up over him to give shade for his head and soothe his bad humour. Jonah is delighted with the shelter the castor-oil plant provides. A castor-oil plant is a shrub growing over 4 metres high with large, shady leaves. God graciously increases the comfort of his stubbornly defiant prophet. Jonah does not see the contradiction between God being kind to him when he disobeys Yahweh, and his being kind to the Ninevites who have promised to give up their sinful ways and disobedience.
But just when Jonah is enjoying the shade of the tree, God ‘appoints’ a worm to attack the tree which causes it to wither. On top of that, Yahweh further ‘prepares’ a scorching east wind to blow in from the desert. Without shelter and under the blazing sun, Jonah feels absolutely miserable:
It is better for me to die than to live.
God then quietly asks Jonah:
Is it right for you to be angry about the bush?
Jonah replies:
Yes, angry enough to die.
But it is now time for Jonah to learn his lesson. The message is clear. Everything is God’s doing. He is the ultimate Lord. He gives and he takes away. And he gives and takes to whomever he will—Jew or Gentile.
Jonah has got all worked up over a tree which, without any effort on his part, appeared overnight and just as quickly disappeared. Why should Yahweh, then, not be concerned:
…about Nineveh, that great city, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand persons who do not know their right hand from their left and also many animals.
Jonah can only see wilfully wicked people, but Yahweh sees a people, who, like small children, need a father’s gentle compassion to point them in the right direction.
The message of the story is clear. It says that God’s compassion reaches out to every single person. Jonah, representing a certain class of Israelite, whom we see later in the Gospel, could not extend God’s compassion to the Gentile. Jonah and his countrymen traditionally rejoiced in God’s special mercies to Israel, but wished only his wrath on their enemies. God here rebukes such hardness and proclaims his own graciousness.
In the story, God takes compassion on Jonah, when he is thrown into the stormy sea, on Nineveh which repented of its sin and even on the prophet in his moment of self-pity. At the end, Yahweh explains with gentle irony how his solicitude extends even to the animals—how much more then to men, women and children, “who do not know their right hand from their left”. The story thus prepares the way for the Gospel: God is Love (see 1 John 4).
And this is the lesson of the whole book. It is a lesson in tolerance. It is a lesson that others besides God’s chosen people can be forgiven their sin, that they can repent of their sin, that they can be open to the influence of God and do good things.
In this book we are very close to the spirit of the New Testament where Jesus comes to save and not to condemn. The first Christians were all Jews and it came as something of a surprise to them that Gentiles could receive and respond to the Spirit of Jesus just as well as they could.
Jonah is a book attacking narrow-minded bigotry and sectarianism. As such its message is still all too relevant in a world where cynics say that the world would be better off without religions which are the source of so much suffering, violence and divisiveness. Let us remove all bigotry and intolerance from our Christian lives. Let us rejoice to see the Spirit working in other people and be happy to work with them to bring about the Kingdom.
Read more
Wednesday of Week 31 of Ordinary Time – First Reading
Commentary on Romans 13:8-10
Paul continues his practical advice to the Romans. The reading may be very short, but its message should be engraved deeply on the heart of every person—Christians and non-Christians alike. What is striking in this passage is that God or Jesus is not mentioned at all, but both are clearly understood to underlie the statements.
Paul says that the only debt we should incur with others is the debt of love. Because in loving another person, we are fulfilling all the requirements of the law.
The love owed to others is the one debt that can never be paid off. No matter how much we have loved, we are still under an obligation to keep on loving. And this love is not only extended to fellow Christians, but must include every other person—including those who wish us harm. And in doing so, we are not only fulfilling the requirements of the Mosaic Law, but of all law. If in upholding a particular law, I would violate the law of love, then that law cannot be obeyed.
So, says Paul:
The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery; you shall not murder; you shall not steal; you shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
In the original quotation from Leviticus, ‘neighbour’ meant a fellow-Israelite, but here it is extended to include every other human person, as we see in the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37). Jesus actually pushed that commandment even further. At the Last Supper he gave his disciples what he called a ‘new commandment’ when he said:
This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. (John 15:12)
Here the level of love is extended to match the love of Jesus which led him to “empty himself” and sacrifice his life for every single one of us.
The commandment also presumes that we love ourselves. Probably, most of us feel that we do, and even feel guilty about being selfish and self-centred. But that is not real self-love. Real self-love means the total recognition and acknowledgement of ourselves as we are, including both strengths and weaknesses. Most of us try to hide our real selves by hiding behind masks and creating an image that will impress others. That is not a sign of real love of self. But without a healthy self-love, there is a lack of inner security making it difficult to reach out in love to others.
Paul says that that “love is the fulfilling of the law” because genuine loving can cause no harm to brothers and sisters. Keeping the law in a legalistic fashion can do a lot of harm. This is what Jesus had against the Pharisees—they put the Law before love.
Paul’s teaching reminds one of St Augustine’s famous dictum: “Love and do what you like” or St Paul’s own saying, “Love covers a multitude of sins”. If one’s actions are motivated by a genuine love and concern for the well-being of others, then we cannot go wrong. A truly loving person is not going to commit adultery, is not going to kill or hurt, is not going to steal, or to cast covetous glances at what belongs to another.
The word for ‘love’ used by Paul is agape—a special kind of love. It can be defined as “a passionate desire for the well-being of the other”. It is a unilateral love in the sense that it is given and continues to be given even when there is no response, or even if it is rejected. It is the love that God extends to all created things and God’s agape is the source of all love in us. And wherever there is agape, there is God, because God is agape. That is why Paul can say that all the requirements of our faith are fulfilled, if all our words and actions are motivated by that agape.
Even in our church life, people can become very legalistic and set a lot of store by laws and regulations with very little love being shown. Many put the Ten Commandments ahead of the law of love. Yet as Jesus showed with the Pharisees, it is possible to keep the Law without a shred of love. One can keep many of the Commandments—especially those expressed negatively—by doing absolutely nothing!
But it is only through the love which we show for all those around us that the quality of our Christian life is measured. It is only by that love that our union with God is manifested. Observing laws, however exalted, is not enough. And doing nothing is of no help either. Love involves a constant and unconditional reaching out to all, friends and enemies, young and old, Christian and non-Christian, educated and illiterate, fellow country people and foreigners, close relatives and perfect strangers.
And as has been said, it is striking that God or Jesus are not mentioned in the whole passage. But the message is clear—I cannot love God and bypass my brothers and sisters, including those most obnoxious. It is no use spending hours in front of the Blessed Sacrament if I am not also constantly reaching out to find and serve Jesus in those around me. It is not difficult to talk to Jesus in the tabernacle. It can be much more difficult with some—an unreasonable boss or a rebellious teenager or an aggressive drug addict.
Finding Christ there and responding to him in such situations is the real test. At the same time, we thank God for the presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament as it is a wonderful environment for prayer and contemplation, and to reflect on the degree of loving others in our daily lives.
Read more
Friday of Week 14 of Ordinary Time – Gospel
Commentary on Matthew 10:16-23
Today’s passage clearly reflects later experiences of the Church as, for instance, described in many parts of the Acts of the Apostles and, of course, in the later history of the Church. Matthew’s Gospel was written some 50 years after the death and resurrection of Christ and naturally reflects some experiences of this period. It is both a warning and a description of what has happened and continues to happen to the messengers of the Gospel.
We are sent out like “sheep among wolves”. We are, in a way, defenceless, because we renounce any use of violence. There are wolves out there eager to destroy us because, despite our message of love, justice and peace, we are seen as a threat to their activities and ambitions.
We are to be clever as snakes and innocent as doves. We are to be as inventive and creative as we can be in dealing with the world. But we are to be innocent, not in the sense of being naive, but in the sense of being completely free of even any suspicion of wrongdoing. The end does not justify the means!
As has happened so many times and continues to happen, followers of Christ, simply because they are his followers and for no other reason, will be hauled into court or will be the victims of intimidation and torture. This is our opportunity to give witness to Christ and everything that the Gospel stands for.
“When they hand you over” is a favourite Gospel expression. John the Baptist was handed over; Jesus himself was handed over first to the leaders of his people and then to the Romans; his disciples too will be and are handed over; and in every Eucharist, we hear that Jesus in his Body is handed over to us:
This is my Body, which is given up [Latin, tradetur: handed over] for you.
When we are “handed over” we are not to be anxious about what to say:
…what you are to say will be given to you…
This has been confirmed again and again by people who have been arrested and interrogated. Not only do they know what to say, but very often their fear, too, disappears. In fact, once released, they simply go back to what they were doing when they were first arrested; we see this in the Acts of the Apostles. And Jesus continues:
…it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you…
The enemies of the Gospel have no ultimate answer to truth, love and justice.
Jesus also warns:
…you will be hated by all because of my name…
These words of Jesus are sad because they are true. The following of Christ can break up families. Family members have betrayed each other and handed each other over. However, once baptised, we enter a new family with new obligations. Our commitment to God, to love, to truth, to justice, to freedom, transcends obligations that arise from blood. I cannot obey a father who tells me to violate the Gospel; I cannot cooperate with a brother who urges me to do evil. It involves painful choices, but the opposite would be, in the long run, worse. This is something we can sometimes find difficult to accept. It is difficult to understand that the following of the loving and loveable Jesus can create such hostility and hatred.
When they persecute you in this town, flee to the next…
We need to be clear that Jesus never tells us to go out of our way to seek persecution or to be hated. On the contrary, we are to make Christianity as attractive as possible. We want people to share our experience of knowing and being loved by Christ.
One of the reasons why the Church spread so rapidly throughout the Roman world was precisely because of Christians fleeing from persecution. There comes a time, however, when we can run no further, or when it is clear we have to take a stand and cannot compromise.
Read more
Friday of Week 30 of Ordinary Time – Gospel
Commentary on Luke 14:1-6
Today we enter a series of four teachings from Jesus, all connected with meals. It begins with another example of a confrontation between Jesus and some religious leaders on a Sabbath. Altogether there are seven Sabbath healings recorded in the Gospels, of which Luke mentions five. The other two are in John—the healing of the paralysed man at the Sheep Gate (see John 5:10 and following) and the healing of the man born blind (John 9:14 and following).
Jesus had apparently been invited to have a meal in a Pharisee’s house on a Sabbath day. We have mentioned before that the word ‘Pharisee’ means ‘separated one’. They numbered about 6,000 and were found all over Palestine. They taught in synagogues, saw themselves as religious paragons, and were self-appointed guardians of the Law and its observance. They regarded their interpretations of traditions to be virtually as authoritative as Scripture (see Mark 7:8-13). The scribes studied, interpreted and taught the Law, both written and oral. Most of them were also Pharisees and hence they are often paired in the Gospel.
It certainly looks as if the invitation was what is known as a ‘set up’ because, we are told, “they were watching him closely”. And there right in front of him (what a coincidence!) was a man suffering from edema, an accumulation of fluid in the body caused by some other illness (this is the only place in the original Greek of the New Testament where the term Luke uses for this sickness is found).
Far from being put on the defensive, Jesus immediately throws down a challenge:
Is it lawful to cure people on the Sabbath or not?
Strictly speaking, according to the letter of the Law as interpreted by the scribes and Pharisees present, it was not lawful. Because ‘curing’ involved medical work and it could take time and energy. By asking them his question before the healing, Jesus made it difficult for them to protest afterwards. And in fact they dared not give him an answer. To say ‘yes’ could make them seem lax in their interpretation; to say ‘no’ would seem cruel to the man.
So Jesus took the man, healed him on the spot and sent him off. He then turns to his critics with another question:
If one of you has a child or an ox that has fallen into a well, will you not immediately pull it out on a Sabbath day?
They had no answer because no answer was necessary or possible. What Jesus had done was unlawful only according to rabbinic interpretations, but not according to the Mosaic Law itself.
Their mindset was revealed and it was not the mindset of Jesus. For them, people came second to legalities. For Jesus, the law was there for people. Jesus was moved by compassion and the well-being of people. Sometimes that meant the law had to be put aside—a principle which they also recognised as proved by the examples that Jesus gave.
How many times have we become the victim of our desire for human ‘respect’—of failiing to go to the help of a person because we were afraid of what people might say or how they might judge us? They may even throw Church ‘rules’ and ‘commandments’ in our face as criticism. But no one who acts out of genuine love for others can go far wrong. No truly loving act can be sinful.
Read more
Saint Francis Xavier, Priest
Francis Xavier was born on 7 April, 1506 in his family’s small castle in Navarre, a Basque area in the Pyrenees. In September 1525, he went to begin studies at the College of Sainte-Barbe in the University of Paris. His roommate was Peter Faber (Pierre Favre) from the Savoy region of France. Everything changed for Francis, when, four years later, Ignatius Loyola (born, Iñigo López de Oñaz y Loyola), another Basque nobleman, moved in with them.
Loyola soon persuaded Faber to become a priest, but Xavier was more interested in a secular career and became a lecturer at the university. However in 1533, Ignatius finally got through to Xavier and won him over to work for God. Eventually the group would increase to seven with Ignatius as their mentor. He inspired them to join him in going to work in the Holy Land. On 15 August 1534, in the chapel of Saint-Denis in Montmartre, they all made vows of poverty and chastity and committed themselves to convert non-believers in the Holy Land.
In 1536, the group—without Ignatius who had returned to Spain—went to Venice in preparation to go to the Holy Land. While waiting, they worked in hospitals and then went to Rome where the non-priests were ordained by a papal delegate on 24 June, 1537. When war prevented their going to the Holy Land, the group put themselves at the disposal of the pope. In the meantime they went to various universities to preach; Xavier went to Bologna and later to Rome. During Lent 1539, the group discussed becoming a religious institute. Pope Paul III gave his consent provided they would send two of their number to evangelise in the new Portuguese colony in India—a request that had come from King John III of Portugal. Simon Rodrigues and Nicholas Bobadilla were chosen, but when Bobadilla fell sick, Ignatius reluctantly asked his close friend, Xavier, to take his place; they would never meet again.
Xavier and Rodrigues left Rome on 15 March, 1540. While waiting for a ship, they preached and took care of prisoners in Lisbon. They so impressed the king that Rodrigues stayed on while Xavier would go alone to India. As Xavier was boarding the ship on 7 April, 1541, he was told he had been appointed apostolic nuncio with authority over all the Portuguese clergy in Goa. The voyage to India took one year and one month. Xavier immediately began preaching to the Portuguese, whose Catholic behaviour left much to be desired. He began by reforming Goa, concentrating on the Portuguese colonists who, though nominally Catholic, were notoriously cruel to slaves, and lived in open concubinage with total neglect of the poor. By his example, preaching, and writing verses on Christian truths set to popular melodies, Francis did much to undo the scandalous behaviour of the European Christians.
His first mission was to the Paravas, pearl fishers on the southeast coast of India, near Cape Comorin. Xavier was poor at languages and had to rely on interpreters. They had been already evangelised, but had no pastor. Xavier baptised more and trained catechists as he moved on to other villages. In the final months of 1544, he was said to have baptised about 10,000 people in the region of Travancore on the south coast, before moving north to Cochin.
He mingled with the poor as a poor man himself, sleeping on the ground and living mainly on rice and water. Generally speaking, he was welcomed by the low-caste peoples, but ignored by the higher castes, especially the Brahmins. Everywhere he left behind numerous viable Christian communities. One good example was the persistent fidelity to Christianity of the Paravas, whose very existence he probably saved from extinction.
For long he dreamed of going further east, although he was not a good sailor and was poor at languages (despite a myth to the contrary). Xavier then sailed to the Portuguese colony of Malacca, on the west coast of the Malayan Peninsula, before moving on to the Moluccas, or Spice Islands (in eastern Indonesia) where he arrived on 14 February, 1546. In Christian villages, he baptised over 1,000 people, and visited the islands of Ternate and Moro (known for its headhunters). He then returned to Malacca and got two Jesuits to replace him.
In Malacca, Xavier met a Japanese named Anjiro interested in Christianity. What he told Xavier about Japan intrigued him and he decided to evangelise there. In April 1549, he set sail for Japan with Anjiro, now a Christian, and a number of Jesuits. Because of delays on the way, they did not reach Kagoshima, Anjiro’s hometown at the southernmost tip of Japan, until 15 August.
At first the mission went very smoothly and Xavier produced an abridged catechism in Japanese. The local prince allowed the missionaries to preach Christianity, but he did not convert. Xavier felt that the conversion of the Japanese would have to begin at the top with the emperor, but he did not know how to reach the imperial city, Miyako (Tokyo today).
He made only 100 converts in Kagoshima and another 100 in Hirado, a port on Kyushu used by the Portuguese. He then moved to Yamaguchi, Japan’s second largest city. He had an unsuccessful meeting with the daimyo there, so in December 1550, he went on to Sakai.
At last in January 1551, Xavier found a prince ready to take him and a fellow-Jesuit to Miyako, as servants in his entourage. They failed to see the emperor, but learnt that the most powerful ruler in Japan was the daimyo of Yamaguchi. Now the two Jesuits rented horses and dressed in silken robes. They were received formally by the daimyo and presented him with an array of expensive gifts and with impressive credentials from King John III of Portugal and Pope Paul III. They were allowed to preach Christianity and Japanese were free to convert. He also gave them a deserted Buddhist monastery to live in. Within six months they had 600 converts. By the time he left Japan, there were about 2,000 Christians in Japan. Sixty years later, these would prove their mettle by dying as martyrs under persecution.
Having planted the seed, in September 1551, Xavier left the mission in charge of Fr Cosmas de Torres and, intending to return to India, he took a ship for Malacca. There Xavier found a letter from Ignatius appointing him provincial of the “Indies and the countries beyond”. In early 1552, Xavier was back in Goa and found another letter telling him to return to Rome to report on the mission, but he decided that visit could wait until he had first gone to China. He felt that unless China was converted, its cultural satellites (of which Japan was one) would be slow to accept Christianity.
In September 1552, he landed on Shangchuan (Sancian) island, off the south coast of China, near Canton (Guangzhou). It was a hideout for Chinese smugglers and a base for Portuguese ships (soon to be replaced by Macau). None of the smugglers was willing to risk taking the Jesuit missionary over to China. One who promised to do so took Xavier’s money and disappeared.
On 21 November, Xavier developed a fever and was confined to his hut on the shore facing the Chinese mainland. Seven days later he fell into a coma, but on 1 December regained consciousness and kept praying. He died within sight of his goal, alone except for a young man who looked after him. It was the morning of 3 December, 1552. He was buried on the island and his body placed in quicklime to hasten its decomposition so that it could be brought to India. But on being exhumed, it was found to be in perfect condition. It was first brought to Malacca and later to its present resting place in the Basilica of the Bom Jesus in Old Goa, India, the shrine of Francis Xavier. His right arm was detached in 1615, and it is preserved in the church of the Gesu in Rome.
Francis was canonized by Pope Gregory XV in 1622, and declared Patron of the Foreign Missions (together with Therese of Lisieux) by Pope Pius XI in 1927. Francis left behind a precious legacy of letters by which he kept Ignatius Loyola, the Jesuit founder and his dear friend, informed of his missionary endeavours. Several religious missionary congregations bear his name, while many churches and colleges are dedicated to him in different parts of the world.
During his missionary life, he suffered extreme hardship, wore himself out with ceaseless activity, but lived a deeply spiritual life. Part of his unceasing labours were due to a conviction that all the non-baptised were doomed to eternal damnation, a conviction held by Christians of all kinds at the time.
Later missionaries would come to have a much deeper respect for the religions they encountered and would not speak of ‘pagans’. Francis was a man of his times, and his methods were not followed by later Jesuit missionaries such as John de Brito and Matteo Ricci, but there was no doubt about his integrity and his zeal. He is remembered for his tireless efforts in proclaiming the gospel in foreign lands and for his solidarity in word and lifestyle with the poor.
Read more
Saturday of Week 32 of Ordinary Time – First Reading
Commentary on 3 John 5-8
Like yesterday’s reading, today’s, from the Third Letter of John, is also very short, and it is a genuine letter. It is addressed to a Christian called Gaius, about whom we know nothing, and again the author is simply identified as “the Elder” or “Presbyter”. Unlike Letters 1 and 2, Letter 3 does not touch on the major issues of love and right teaching, but deals primarily with the question of hospitality shown to travelling preachers.
In Letter 2, the Christians in the church to whom the letter was written were urged not to give hospitality to people who were preaching unacceptable doctrines about Christ. In this letter the opposite problem seems to exist. A person called Diotrephes (see vs 9-12), who refuses to accept the authority of the Elder, seems to be refusing hospitality to teachers sent into his territory. He even excommunicated those who gave such hospitality.
In contrast, the letter praises Gaius for the hospitality that he has been giving to “brothers and sisters”, travelling preachers, who were sometimes complete strangers and were a feature of the Church at this time. As most local churches were small and isolated, it was necessary for them to be visited by competent people sent by the Apostles to bring them up to an acceptable understanding of the Christian life.
Local churches were expected to provide hospitality and support to such visiting missionaries. Paul generally did not avail of material help because he preferred to support himself, but he did emphasise that he had a right to such support. But he would certainly have availed himself of accommodation offered to him. Jesus speaks about this also in his discourse to his disciples who were being sent out on mission (see Matt 10:5-15).
This, of course, is completely in harmony with Jesus’ teaching in the Gospel. The final judgement will be made on the basis of how we treated strangers, especially those in need or who are marginalised. In crime-ridden cities of the ‘developed’ West, the keeping of this commandment becomes ever more of a challenge. But it must not be set aside.
Gaius’ behaviour is a model of Christian charity, and he is further urged even to give them the help they need to get to their next destination. The preachers deserve this hospitality because they preach purely for the sake of the name—that is, the name of Jesus and his Gospel—and without any remuneration. They depend entirely for their support on the Christian communities they come to help and serve, and they get help from no one else. By offering them hospitality, the community is making its contribution to their work of spreading the Gospel message.
In our time too, we are expected to help support those who give of themselves full-time to the work of the Gospel. And, in most places, people are indeed very generous in supporting their clergy and religious. With the increase of more and more lay people devoting themselves full-time to evangelising and voluntary work with the Church, they too deserve from us the basic support they need in terms of shelter, food and other necessities.
As mentioned above, hospitality, which is still an essential practice in some parts of the world, has become a real problem in more developed societies. It is regarded as foolish and naive to trust the stranger. As a result, our homes are heavily secured with locks and alarms and we are slow to open the door to anyone except those personally known to us. Is this the price of ‘civilisation’ in an ‘advanced’ country?
We offload the responsibility of taking care of the poor, the homeless and the victims of addiction to social welfare bodies. We are willing to help by giving money, but not to giving our Christian love by reaching out to them on a person-to-person basis. Sometimes we may even avoid contact with a family member who has fallen between the cracks. The feared criticism of strangers can make us strangers even to our own flesh and blood.
Read more
Saturday of Week 14 of Ordinary Time – First Reading
Commentary on Genesis 49:29-33; 50:15-26
We conclude our reading from the book of Genesis today. We hear Jacob giving his final instructions before his death. He wants to be buried close to his ancestors, Abraham and Isaac with their wives.
Bury me with my ancestors in the cave in the field of Ephron the Hittite, in the cave in the field at Machpelah, near Mamre, in the land of Canaan, in the field that Abraham bought from Ephron the Hittite as a burial site.
We read about this purchase on Friday of Week 13. There Abraham and his wife, Isaac and his wife and Jacob’s wife, Leah, were all buried.
Then Jacob, having given his final instructions to his sons,
…he drew up his feet into the bed, breathed his last, and was gathered to his people.
That is, he joined all of his ancestors in Sheol.
With the death of Jacob, the sons were full of trepidation that Joseph would now want to settle his accounts with his brothers for all they had done to him. They pre-empted any vengeful action by sending Joseph a message. They quoted their father as telling them to go to Joseph and beg forgiveness for all the wrong they had done to him:
We beg you, forgive the crime of the servants of your father’s God.
Once again, Joseph weeps on the receiving their message.
They prostrated themselves before him and expressed their readiness to be his slaves. They need not have worried. Their prostration is another example of the prophetic dream which Joseph had shared with his brothers many years previously. And, ironically, in times to come, the Israelites will be reduced to virtual slavery in Egypt and this will trigger the Exodus.
They did not reckon with their brother; Joseph was a much bigger man than they:
Do not be afraid! Am I in the place of God?
He then tells them that all the evil they planned against him has, in God’s plan, been turned to good and has resulted in the liberation of many people. Joseph then promises to provide for them and all their dependents. It was now the brothers’ turn to be deeply touched by the magnanimity of someone who could, with some justification, have made things very nasty for them. We see here a clear pre-figuring of the teaching and example of Jesus later on. His teaching on the love of enemies, turning the other cheek and forgiving seventy times seven.
This may well be said to be the central lesson of the whole Joseph story. This is a lesson which we can apply to unpleasant experiences in our own lives. As Paul says:
We know that all things work together for good for those who love God… (Rom 8:28)
And probably it is only when we love God that we can understand the place of the evil and the tragic in our lives.
From now on, Joseph stays with his own family and lives to be 110 years old, long enough to see many of his grandchildren. It is now his time to leave the world. He tells his brothers he is confident that God will look kindly on them and, in time, bring them back from Egypt to the land he had promised to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in perpetuity.
And finally he asks his brothers to swear an oath that his bones be taken back to be buried with his fathers. This will not in fact happen until centuries later when Moses, mindful of Joseph’s last wish, will take Joseph’s bones with him as the Israelites begin their long trek to the Promised Land (see Exod 13:19). Joseph’s bones were eventually:
…buried at Shechem, in the portion of ground that Jacob had bought from the children of Hamor, the father of Shechem… (Jos 24:32; also see Gen 33:19)
The last verse of Genesis, which is not in our reading, says:
And Joseph died, being one hundred ten years old; he was embalmed and placed in a coffin in Egypt.
For the Egyptians the number 110 was seen as the perfect life span and would signify divine blessings on Joseph. Note too that the very last word of the book is “Egypt” and it is the setting for the opening of the next book, Exodus, and the next stage in the history of God’s People. In the coming weeks we will be reading passages from that great saga.
Read more