Saint Blaise, Bishop and Martyr

Blaise is believed to have been a physician and bishop of Sebaste in Armenia, and to have been put to death under the Emperor Licinius and the prefect Agricolaus in the early 4th century. There is no evidence of a cult in either the East or West prior to the 8th century, and the accounts written in Lives in Greek and Latin are believed to be purely fictitious.

But according to these, he was the son of rich and noble Christians, and was consecrated bishop at a very young age. After becoming a bishop, a new persecution of Christians began and he received a message from God to take refuge in the hills. While there, a woman brought him her son, who was near death because of a fish bone stuck in his throat. Blaise restored the boy back to health.

Later, men hunting in the mountains came on a cave surrounded by wild animals who were sick.  Blaise walked among them unafraid and cured their illnesses.  Recognising Blaise as a bishop, he was captured and brought back for trial.  On the way, he persuaded a wolf to release a pig belonging to a poor woman. When Blaise was sentenced to be starved to death, the woman, in gratitude, sneaked into the prison with food and candles.

The tradition says he was martyred by being beaten, attacked with iron carding combs and finally beheaded. Now, at the annual blessing of throats on his feast day, two candles tied together in the shape of a ‘V’ are used in the ritual. In Latin, the blessing prayer is:

Per intercessionem Sancti Blasii liberet te Deus a malo gutteris et a quovis alio malo.

This translates as:

“May God at the intercession of Saint Blaise preserve you from troubles of the throat and every other evil.”

Water with the blessing of St Blaise is also given to sick cattle. Because the iron combs with which he was tortured were similar in appearance to wool-combs, for a long time, Blaise was the patron of wool-combers.

He is also patron saint of the city of Dubrovnik (where he is known as Sveti Vlaho) since 972 AD. Here, on 3 February, the relics of the saint, his head, a piece of bone from his throat and his right and left hands, are paraded in reliquaries.

Blaise is also listed as one of the Fourteen Holy Helpers. The shrine at Canterbury in England claimed to have his relics and at least four miracles were recorded as happening there. The last one of these was dated 1451.

Read more

Friday of Week 1 of Ordinary Time – Gospel

Commentary on Mark 2:1-12

After some days, Jesus returns to Capernaum from his refuge in the desert. Immediately the crowds gather in and around the house where he is staying. It is so crowded that there is no room to get in or out. The ‘house’ is not identified and it is not important. In the early Christian communities, they gathered in one house to celebrate the Eucharist. Jesus was there among them. Some people are inside the house with Jesus; others are still on the outside.

Then, four men arrived carrying a paralytic friend. They were anxious to get to Jesus. Seeing no way in, they went up by the outside staircase and on to the flat roof, removed a few tiles, and let the man down right at the feet of Jesus.

Jesus is touched by their faith, trust and confidence in him—all essential conditions for healing. Jesus says to the paralysed man:

Child, your sins are forgiven.

This must have been a surprising statement to the paralytic. He had come for healing, not forgiveness. Some scribes who were also present were not only surprised, they were deeply shocked, thinking contemptuously to themselves:

Why does this fellow speak in this way? It is blasphemy! Who can forgive sins but God alone?

They are perfectly right, but their eyes are closed to drawing the obvious conclusion. They don’t see because they do not want to see, because—even worse—they think they can see. Even today, we meet Christians like that, who are convinced they and they alone are in sole possession of the ‘truth’.

Jesus, knowing their thoughts then challenges them:

Why do you raise such questions in your hearts? Which is easier: to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Stand up and take your mat and walk’?

Then he tells the man:

I say to you, stand up, take your mat, and go to your home.

Of course, telling a person their sins are forgiven is certainly easier, but does the fact that Jesus could heal the paralytic instantly also mean that his sins were forgiven?

We need to realise the close links the Jews of the time made between sin and sickness. Many kinds of sickness were seen as punishment for personal sin or even the sins of parents (see also the story of the man born blind in John’s Gospel, chap 9). The man in this present story was understood to be paralysed because of some sin in his life. If Jesus could clearly remove the illness, then the cause of the illness was also being taken away. In so doing, Jesus makes it clear that in forgiving the man’s sin, he was not blaspheming. He was what he claimed to be.

In our time, we realise that there can be a link between physical illness and the way we act and relate with people. We know that there is a mutual influence between our thinking and our attitudes, feelings and behaviour. Some sicknesses can be psychosomatic, or might result from stress or an imbalance in our relationships with others, our work or our environment. The words holiness, wholeness, health and healing all have a common root. The whole person, one in whom all parts are in perfect harmony, is the truly holy person.

That wholeness is something we need to pray and work for. The paralysed man represents all those who are paralysed in other ways, those who are not able to behave with the freedom that a well-integrated person has. And that integration and wholeness concerns our relations with others, with ourselves, with our environment and, of course, with God.

Read more

Friday of Week 1 of Ordinary Time – First Reading

Commentary on 1 Samuel 8:4-7,10-22

We begin reading today about Samuel and his involvement with Saul and the institution of the monarchy in Israel. The institution of the monarchy was a major turning point in Israel’s political and religious history. The sanctuary of the Ark of the Covenant in Shiloh had been destroyed and unity was in danger as the Philistine threat increased. Some of the people began asking:

…appoint for us, then, a king to govern us, like other nations.

Others held the opposite view that Yahweh, Israel’s only lord, should be left to provide leaders as circumstances required, as he had done in the days of the Judges.

These two schools of thought find a voice in anti-royalist (see chaps 8, 10:17-24, and 12) and royalist (chaps 9:1-10:16 and 11) versions of the institution of the monarchy, here placed side by side.

While the royalist view (which we will see in tomorrow’s reading from Samuel) will ultimately prevail, Saul, the first king, is scarcely distinguishable from the Judges who preceded him. The monarchy will only achieve its full development with David. He is one of the outstanding characters of the whole Bible, and in him the religious and civil functions of the Israelite monarchy will be harmoniously combined. David will be able to combine his political responsibilities with his service of the Lord. However, none of his successors will achieve this ideal. David, and really David alone (in spite of his serious weaknesses), remains the model of the future King through whom God is to bring about the salvation of his people, namely the Messiah, the Christ, the Anointed of the Lord.

As today’s reading opens we find the elders of the people approaching Samuel and telling him that, in view of his old age (and, it might be added, the corrupt behaviour of his sons), they should have a king. It soon becomes apparent, however, that the more basic reason for their request was a desire to be like the surrounding nations—to have a human king as a symbol of national power and unity who would lead them in battle and guarantee their security. As a loose conglomerate of tribes, they would never be able to deal effectively with their enemies (who had kings). Israel had suffered a number of calamitous defeats at the hands of its old nemesis, the Philistines, and the people saw that what was needed was a powerful leader as a strong unifying and rallying point.

There were two reactions to this innovation of having a king—one against and one in favour. Some would say they were forgetting that they were not like other nations. By their desire to appoint a human king they were, in a way, setting aside their real Lord. Israel had always been a theocracy where only God was its King and Lord, and where the idea of a human king seemed almost blasphemous. On the other hand, there were those who, for political reasons and even for the people’s survival, emphasised the need for a single, strong ruler.

In today’s reading we see the anti-royalist view. The misgivings of the anti-royalists are seen in Samuel’s displeasure at the people’s asking for a king. God is not happy, but he tells Samuel to let the people have their way:

Listen to the voice of the people in all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them.

The sin of Israel in requesting a king did not rest in any evil inherent in kingship itself, but rather in the kind of kingship the people envisioned and their reasons for requesting it.

Their desire was for a form of kingship that denied their covenant relationship with the Lord, who himself was pledged to be their saviour and deliverer. In requesting a king “like all nations” they broke the covenant, rejected the Lord who was their King, and forgot his constant provision for their protection in the past.

In a rather sarcastic tone, Samuel proceeds to tell the people all the ‘advantages’ they will accrue by having a king. His description reflects not so much what happened under Saul or David, but in a later period beginning with Solomon, and reflects the bitter experience of the writer’s own generation. Later on, we will see how terrible some of those kings really were.

Samuel warns them that virtual slavery will be upon them, saying:

These will be the ways of the king who will reign over you:

-He will take your sons and appoint them to his chariots and to be his horsemen, and to run before his chariots.

-He will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties and some to plow his ground and to reap his harvest and to make his implements of war and the equipment of his chariots.

-He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers.

-He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive orchards and give them to his courtiers.

-He will take one-tenth of your grain and of your vineyards and give it to his officers and his courtiers.

-He will take your male and female slaves and the best of your cattle and donkeys and put them to his work.

-He will take one-tenth of your flocks, and you shall be his slaves.

Then, and only then, will the people complain to God, but it will be too late:

And on that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the Lord will not answer you on that day.

They have made their own bed and will have to sleep in it. Only the king will enjoy rights; the people will have duties and obligations. In fact, the demands of the king would parallel all that Israel was expected to consecrate to the Lord as her Great King (persons, lands, crops, livestock)—even the whole population. But now it is going to be given to a very fallible and sometimes wicked human being.

For now, the people will not listen to Samuel’s arguments. They are determined to have a king like their neighbours who will lead them to war and fight their battles. And God said:

Listen to their voice and set a king over them.

Samuel then tells the people to go back to their own cities and towns.

We, too, can be very insistent in asking God to give us something we feel we really need. Yet, when it comes we may bitterly regret the consequences. Sometimes what we take to be the answer to a prayer may only be the fruit of our own persistence. But whatever happens, wherever our choices have led us, God is always there. It is always in our present situation, in the here-and-now, that we must learn to respond to his call. Even our mistakes can become moments of grace and enlightenment.

Read more