Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2013 16:52:35 GMT
Sunday, 30th June, 2013
Luke 9:51-62As the time drew near for him to be taken up to heaven, he resolutely took the road for Jerusalem and sent messengers ahead of him. These set out, and they went into a Samaritan village to make preparations for him, but the people would not receive him because he was making for Jerusalem. Seeing this, the disciples James and John said, 'Lord, do you want us to call down fire from heaven to burn them up?' But he turned and rebuked them, and they went off to another village. As they travelled along they met a man on the road who said to him, 'I will follow you wherever you go'. Jesus answered, 'Foxes have holes and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head'. Another to whom he said, 'Follow me', replied, 'Let me go and bury my father first'. But he answered, 'Leave the dead to bury their dead; your duty is to go and spread the news of the kingdom of God'. Another said, 'I will follow you, sir, but first let me go and say good-bye to my people at home'. Jesus said to him, 'Once the hand is laid on the plough, no one who looks back is fit for the kingdom of God'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2013 14:41:43 GMT
Sunday, 7th July, 2013
Luke 10:1-12. 17-20The Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them out ahead of him, in pairs, to all the towns and places he himself was to visit. He said to them, 'The harvest is rich but the labourers are few, so ask the Lord of the harvest to send labourers to his harvest. Start off now, but remember, I am sending you out like lambs among wolves. Carry no purse, no haversack, no sandals. Salute no one on the road. Whatever house you go into, let your first words be, "Peace to this house!" And if a man of peace lives there, your peace will go and rest on him; if not, it will come back to you. Stay in the same house, taking what food and drink they have to offer, for the labourer deserves his wages; do not move from house to house. Whenever you go into a town where they make you welcome, eat what is set before you. Cure those in it who are sick, and say, "The kingdom of God is very near to you". But whenever you enter a town and they do not make you welcome, go out into its streets and say, . "We wipe off the very dust of your town that clings to our feet, and leave it with you. Yet be sure of this: the kingdom of God is very near." I tell you, on that day it will not go as hard with Sodom as with that town. The seventy-two came back rejoicing. 'Lord,' they said 'even the devils submit to us when we use your name.' He said to them, 'I watched Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Yes, I have given you power to tread underfoot serpents and scorpions and the whole strength of the enemy; nothing shall ever hurt you. Yet do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you; rejoice rather that your names are written in heaven.'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2013 11:24:07 GMT
Sunday 14th July 2013 Fifteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time
Luke 10:25-37There was a scholar of the law who stood up to test him and said, “Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” Jesus said to him, “What is written in the law? How do you read it?” He said in reply, “You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your being, with all your strength, and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” He replied to him, “You have answered correctly; do this and you will live.” But because he wished to justify himself, he said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” Jesus replied, “A man fell victim to robbers as he went down from Jerusalem to Jericho. They stripped and beat him and went off leaving him half-dead. A priest happened to be going down that road, but when he saw him, he passed by on the opposite side. Likewise a Levite came to the place, and when he saw him, he passed by on the opposite side. But a Samaritan traveler who came upon him was moved with compassion at the sight. He approached the victim, poured oil and wine over his wounds and bandaged them. Then he lifted him up on his own animal, took him to an inn, and cared for him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper with the instruction, ‘Take care of him. If you spend more than what I have given you, I shall repay you on my way back.’ Which of these three, in your opinion, was neighbor to the robbers’ victim?” He answered, “The one who treated him with mercy.” Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.” Grafton Street, Dublin
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2013 12:22:20 GMT
The old road from Jerusalem to Jericho [1934]
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jul 13, 2013 20:35:02 GMT
Because we are so familiar with this story, and because so much of our present-day culture emphasises "reaching out to the Other" we tend to forget how shocking it is. Firstly, the Samaritans were regarded by the Jews as schismatics, collaborators, and traitors (feelings which were more or less reciprocated). For an equivalent you would have to think of a member of a group that you would generally regard as wicked and hateful - let us say a skinhead, an Islamist, an IRISH TIMES journalist, a TABLET contributor or suchlike - make such a substitution (think of other equivalent groups) and you will see how shocking Jesus' statement is. For us trads in particular, let us think of how the ACP have helped priests falsely accused of abuse when the church authorities dumped them, or how Mary Raftery spoke out for victims of clerical abuse who were betrayed over and over again by priests and bishops, or how feminists picked up on issues like domestic abuse which were previously brushed under the carpet, and we will find it cuts very close to the bone. Perhaps the Samaritan was, or would be assumed by Jesus' hearers to be, a scoundrel in many other aspects of his life - Jesus doesn't say this; He only judges him on what he did for the traveller. Similarly, some interpretations of the parable suggest there are mitigating circumstances for the priest and Levite's responses. Perhaps they were afraid the robbers were still nearby and might attack them if they lingered. (If this interpretation was accepted it would add correspondingly to the Samaritan's merit, since it would mean he was risking his own safety when he helped the traveller.) Another suggestion, once again, is one which trads should particularly bear in mind, namely that there were religious reasons for the priest and levite's actions. This suggestion is that if the traveller was going away from Jerusalem, the priest and levite were going towards it. What might they have been doing in Jerusalem? The suggestion is that they were going there to fulfil their priestly and liturgical duties at the Temple. Now, the Law of Moses prescribed that touching a dead body, especially if you were a priest, made you ritually unclean, and required an elaborate purification ritual before you could be cleansed again. (The Evangelist may assume his audience already knew this, as, for example, the story of David and Bathsheba assumes the audience know Bathsheba was engaged in the ritual bath prescribed for Jewish women who have had their period, and hence she could not already be pregnant by Uriah.) The suggestion is that the priest and the levite passed by because they were afraid that if they touched the man and he was dead they would have to undergo this purification ritual, which would involve considerable trouble and expense not to them alone but to those awaiting their ministry. This would make it one of those points in the Gospel where Jesus emphasises love of God and neighbour above ritual observance, where the thief and the whore who repent are exalted above the self-righteous who assume they have no need to repent, where we are told that those who perform the corporal works of mercy did it unknowingly for the Lord, and those who neglect the suffering neglect the Lord. Lastly, we need to be reminded just how startling and demanding Jesus' call to universal brotherhood and offer of grace to all is, in human terms. Who can love the stranger, or the enemy, as one's family and friends and compatriots? We are told over and over again that any human fellowship or honour group depends not only on inclusion but on exclusion - on some outer group against whom it is defined. Jesus challenges us to do without this, and it is not so easy as you might think. A Nietzsche who rejects this as inhuman in some respects understands it more clearly than many of us who accept it with our lips.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jul 15, 2013 21:13:43 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2013 21:08:10 GMT
Sunday 21st July 2013 16th Sunday in Ordinary Time
Luke 10:38-42Jesus entered a village where a woman whose name was Martha welcomed him. She had a sister named Mary who sat beside the Lord at his feet listening to him speak. Martha, burdened with much serving, came to him and said, “Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me by myself to do the serving? Tell her to help me.” The Lord said to her in reply, “Martha, Martha, you are anxious and worried about many things. There is need of only one thing. Mary has chosen the better part and it will not be taken from her.”
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2013 21:11:21 GMT
Martha worked. Mary listened.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jul 19, 2013 21:56:25 GMT
I can think of some women of my acquaintance who are extremely sympathetic to Martha on this one. One way of looking at it is about the need to achieve interior spirituality if our good works are to be sustainable. (One of the more distressing things I have sometimes found in discussions with pro-life activists is that there are SOME people who not only are not willing to engage in long-term thinking rather than running out and yelling abuse at the pro-choice provocateurs, which of course is exactly what the provocateurs want - but they actively resent the suggestion that they should stop and think and discuss the possibility that their tactics need to be raised - they will protest that the persons making the suggestion are condescending to them and treating them as ignorant peasants, and is probably a coward and a fake pro-lifer. Plato's parable of the Cave comes to mind.) The problem though is that Martha has a perfectly legitimate point; someone had to do the housework. Another is about the value of the contemplative life - there is a recurring complaint that contemplatives are lazy parasites and that only the active life really achieves anything. Our Lord's reminder that Mary has chosen the better part can be seen as rebuking this view. Of course again it has to be qualified, for it is indeed very easy for contemplatives to become lazy and go through the motions in a form of spiritual sloth. The motto I use comes from St Bede the Venerable, who was a monk - one of the great monastic scholars of all time - who was also very much concerned with the pastoral duties of monks (who dominated the local church in northern England in his day; a parallel, though perhaps a fanciful one, might be with the English Benedictine clergy sent out to Australia in the early nineteenth century who were drawn away from monastic life to wider travel and evangelisation). He was very acutely aware that monastic communities could fall into sloth and be used as a front for worldly concerns, and I like to think that part of this reflected his awareness that, as in any feudal society, the work of the monastery rested on the support of tenants as well as laybrothers, and that the scholars thereby incurred a responsibility of which we ought to be conscious.
Here again I seem to be making excuses for Martha. Maybe the best interpretation may be simply that she should have trusted Jesus - if the situation had required it He would indeed have sent MAry to help her sister, and if He did not do so he must have had good reason for it, possibly because of Mary's particular circumstances. Mary may have needed consolation or enlightenment at that particular time and place, and Martha should not have judged her.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2013 19:14:22 GMT
To me it says work can be good, but work should be a means to an end, and not used as a means to try and look and feel superior to others. Many of us work obsessively as part of the well named 'rat race' and think we have already heard the words of Christ, yet few of us actually stop, listen, and think. There is a happy medium.
On a side note, unhappily, the weekly gospel article (written by a Tom Cox) that accompanies our mass leaflet every week, actually managed to subtly spin this gospel along the lines of women in particular should not value themselves if they undertake 'menial' work in the home / church and instead should strive to take a more active role. (This is the same gospel article leaflet that including a quote from Buddha a few weeks ago !)
No home or church would last too long if the important work, some people now try to term 'menial' was not carried out. Terming such essential and valuable work 'menial' is an insult to everyone, not to mention highly damaging.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Jun 29, 2014 10:39:17 GMT
Today is the feasts of St. Peter and St. Paul, apostles. The Nigerian priest in the Holy Spirit Church, Ballymun, preached a homily in which he described both apostles as two sides of the same coin. In particular I found it interesting that he said St. Peter was a conservative and St. Paul was a liberal, and that we need both in the Church.
|
|