Homily Christ the King - Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom

Homily for Christ the King Sunday Year C 2016

2 Samuel 5:1-3, Colossians 1:12-20 and Luke 23:35-43

Introduction

“Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.”  With these words the Good thief, crucified together with Jesus, sees something in him, which others had failed to see.  That Jesus is not only the Christ, the Messiah, but also a King.

But what kind of King is Jesus?  Is he the tyrant king like bad King George whom the USA kicked out to become a republic?  Or is he like the ceremonial European royalty of today whose power is just a tad more than that of our Prom King and Queen, the King of Rex and Endymion, the King of Rock and Roll.

Scripture and Theology

The three readings of today suggest what kind of King Jesus Christ is.

The Kingship of Jesus has its origins with King David about whom we read in the first reading.  Actually although Saul was in fact the first King of Israel, as we heard in the reading, it was David who did all the fighting, even killing Goliath the Philistine.  And so after Saul died, the elders of the Twelve tribes come to David and asked him to be their shepherd, commander and King, presenting their request as the will of God.  And after David agreed to do so, they anointed him king, anointing with oil being the official way of making someone a king, just like inauguration is the way the President of this country takes office.

As king, David did a pretty good job.  Perhaps his most important contribution was to unite the Twelve tribes of Israel into one nation, under one God.  His son Solomon would continue David's work, and would in fact build the Temple, the central place of worshipping God.  Unfortunately things changed after Solomon.

·        Solomon's sons, however split the Kingdom into two, the southern Kingdom of Judah and the Northern Kingdom of Israel.

·        And 250 years later, the Northern Kingdom of Israel was conquered by the Assyrians, with the people being dispersed, never to return home till today.

·        Then about 150 years later still, the Southern Kingdom of Judah was also conquered by the Babylonians and sent into exile.

The Kingdom of David was now no more.  Had God given up on his people?  Certainly not.  For God kept sending them prophets like Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, to give them hope that the Kingdom of David would be restored.  The Christ, the Messiah, would establish a completely new type of Kingdom.

That is where Jesus comes into the picture.  St. Paul in the second reading describes beautifully this new kingship of Jesus Christ, into whose kingdom God has transferred us after delivering us from the power of darkness.  It is in this kingdom where "we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins."  Moreover, this kingdom of Jesus is not just recovering the territory over which David was King; he is not even just king of the earth; he is also King of heaven.  This is because Jesus "is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.  For in him were created all things in heaven and on earth, the visible and the invisible . . . ."  His Kingdom is a great improvement on that of David in its scope.

And now to the gospel passage.  Why choose this passage of Jesus on the cross for the feast of Christ the King?  Why not some other passage that shows Christ in his glory?  This is the Church's way of telling us that the Kingdom of Jesus comes about, not by war and fighting, but by humble sacrifice.  We heard that the soldiers nailed a sign above his head saying: “This is the King of the Jews,” the words whose Latin initials, INRI (Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum) we have on all our crosses and crucifixes.  They did so to mock him, "hey, look here is someone claiming to be a king, but is being executed like a common criminal in the most shameful, most painful way."  How ironic; usually kings execute people; now the King of the Universe is himself executed.

But the Good Thief sees through all this paradox and realizes that Jesus is God, and he is a King of a much greater Kingdom than that of the Romans.  After telling off his fellow criminal for insulting the Son of God, he makes his own request: “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.”

And so all three readings have told us that like King David, Jesus has come to reunite the people of God, but this time he is reuniting all the earth and indeed heaven as well. Moreover, his kingship is not one of military or political power, but one spiritual power that comes from the sacrifice of the cross.

Christian Life

It is this kingship that we celebrate today, as we end the liturgical year.  The Kingship of Christ is not that of the tyrant with too much power nor that of a ceremonial king with hardly any power.  He has just enough power to do good, to offer a sacrifice that saves all humankind.  In fact the Preface of today, that is the prayer the priest says before we sing the "Holy, Holy, Holy" will praise God the Father, for anointing Jesus Christ an eternal priest and King of all Creation, King of "an eternal and universal kingdom, a kingdom of truth and life, a kingdom of holiness and grace, a kingdom of justice, love and peace."

Although we sometimes, think of God's Kingdom as being only other worldly, actually the Kingdom starts right here on earth and will be fulfilled on the other side.  And so the take-away for us from today's feast and its readings is that Jesus' Kingdom is both "already here" and at the same time it is "not yet."

·        That is why Jesus set up the Church, to help him establish that kingdom.

·        That is why we are Christians, the minions of Jesus in establishing the Kingdom here on earth, so that it will be complete in heaven.

·        That is why as Christians we have one eye on the things of earth, and another eye on the things of heaven.  For example, during this Jubilee year of Mercy we have carried out the seven corporal works of mercy: feeding the hungry and giving drink to the thirsty, clothing the naked and welcoming the stranger, visiting the sick and the prisoner, and burying the dead.  At the same time we have not neglected the seven spiritual works of mercy: instructing the ignorant and counselling the doubtful, admonishing sinners and bearing patiently those who wrong us, forgiving offenses and consoling the afflicted, and again praying for the living and the dead.

The Kingdom of Jesus is not going to build itself; Jesus has laid the foundation, done the heavy lifting and now wants us to carry on the work, and with God's grace bring the Kingdom to fruition in heaven.  We must bring to bear on the Kingdom of God, the fruits we have received from the Jubilee Year of Mercy.

Conclusion

And so, while we share the fears and hopes, the sorrows and joys of our fellow citizens of this world, as true followers of Jesus we must remember that we are in this world, but we are not of this world.  This message is perhaps what we need to heal the bruises and divisions of this past election cycle.  Both the losers and victors must remember that Jesus Christ is still King of the Universe.  For at the end of time, although we are all invited into the heavenly kingdom of Jesus Christ, admission will require that we have been faithful to all his teachings, while on this side of that Kingdom, while in the construction phase.

But since as weak human beings we are imperfect in fulfilling Jesus' commands, let us make the prayer of the Good Thief, our own daily prayer, asking: “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.”  We can then harbour the hope that the Lord will respond to us like he did to the Good Thief: "Amen, I say to you, [today] you will be with me in Paradise.”

Post-election Reflection

What is a priest to do?

I just cannot win.  Before the election, quoting Pope Francis, I preached that Catholics should study the issues, pray about them and vote according to their conscience and I was lambasted by my conservative friends for encouraging people to vote for Clinton.  Now after the election when I say that Catholics should stop attacking people for how they voted in conscience, I am lambasted by my liberal friends for defending those who voted for Trump.  I just cannot win.

And when, like I did before the election, I insist that the platforms of both parties do not conform fully to Catholic teaching, both sides of the ideological divide cry foul.  They believe that their man/woman is practically a saint; how dare I impugn his/her message!  I just cannot win.

It is at times like this that I have existential doubt as to my mission as a priest, of course not because I cannot win.  Rather, I have made it my life’s mission, at least intellectually, to almost never operate out of a binary framework, when dealing with contingent things.  The binary framework sees either black or white literary and metaphorically, either good or evil, rather than discerning shades of "more or less;" after all we are dealing with contingent things.

During this election cycle, I suggested that Catholics were stuck between a rock and a hard place, because both platforms departed from Catholic teaching in serious ways.  For me, it was not a choice between a good and a bad candidate, a good and bad platform.  At first I spoke in terms of a choice of the lesser of two evils, in a manner of speaking, but my moral theology colleague reminded me that Catholics can never choose evil.   In other words, despite their imperfection, a Catholic should choose what he or she saw as the better of the two seriously flawed platforms.  And so, I would agree that at election time, when the choice is between two candidates, after studying and praying over the issues, a Catholic is faced with a binary situation, in which he or she has to make a choice in conscience.

But apart from the actual choice in the booth, it seems clear to me that both platforms need to be put under greater scrutiny, to see how much they conform to the will of Christ as channelled through Church teaching.  And now after the election, the platform of the winner, which he intends to put into action, need even more thorough scrutiny.  I suspect that the Catholic Bishops Conference had two drafts of their congratulatory letter, for whichever candidate won.  While the contents of the two letters were probably the same, that middle paragraph that described the issues of contention between the Church and the candidate, was different.

My left-leaning friends seem by and large resigned to the fact that the Democrat platform differs from Catholic teaching in many ways; they usually want Catholic teaching to be changed to fit their ideology.  My right-leaning friends, however, seem to equate their candidate’s platform with orthodox Catholic teaching; if there is a lack of concordance between the two, it is the Catholic teaching that is heretical – it does not need to change – it has never been Catholic teaching.  In fact often the words orthodox and conservative are used as synonyms.  That is why any suggestion before the election that people choose according to their conscience was met with resistance, because it suggested that there could be any other morally right choice besides the conservative one.  That is why any suggestion that now after the election we have to dialogue with the newly elected leaders on any issue meets with consternation – what is there to dialogue about, they ask?

If in the past the Catholic priests and bishops have had some difficulty in convincing their left-leaning flock that many aspects of the Democrat platform, e.g. on abortion, marriage were at odds with Catholic teaching, now they have an even greater challenge in convincing their right-leaning ones that many aspects of the Republican platform, e.g. on immigration, refugees, capital punishment are similarly at odds with Catholic teaching.  I say this because of my own personal experience of pushback and that of my fellow priests this past week.  Several of us were called liberals for not speaking about abortion and for mentioning the "c" word, not "Clinton," but "conscience" on the Sunday before elections.  But I guess since Pope Francis has been called the same or worse, I am in good company.

Belonging in the same company as the Pope, however, does not ease my existential crisis!  My crisis remains because these sentiments are not coming from extremists such as those you find on lifesitenews.com or churchmilitant.com, but from ordinary, faithful, church-going Catholics – your lectors, ministers of communion, ushers and members of sodalities.  I have to wonder if are we experiencing in the Church the wider revolt of the rank and file against their leaders like we have seen in the US Republican Party and the UK Labour Party?

As I continue pondering my existential crisis, a practical question remains however.  What should I preach this first Sunday after the election?  Should I just say nothing about the elephant in the room (no pun intended) and just stick to the Scripture readings?  I am sure that my homiletics colleague would probably disagree because homilies are supposed to speak to the people's current situation and not about some pie in the sky.

What is a priest to do?

Homily for Dedication of Lateran Basilica – November 9, 2016

 Flowing from a healed Church into a broken world

Introduction

Preaching about the dedication of St. John's Lateran Basilica is daunting enough on the day after any election, almost impossible after this election. That is why, I must say I have always considered Fr. Nile, our Director of Liturgy, a good friend, that is, until he assigned me to preach today.

How do you preach about some big old church building in Rome when the bigger elephant in the room is the just concluded one-of-a-kind election?

And yet perhaps the very mystery that we celebrate today, the mystery of the Church, can help us all refocus on who we are as the Body of Christ.

Scripture and Theology

Any time we dedicate a church, or like today celebrate the anniversary of its dedication, what we are really celebrating is us, the Church with the big "C."  As the Preface of today's Mass will proclaim, God sanctifies "the Church, the Bride of Christ, foreshadowed in visible buildings."  That is why St. Paul tells the Corinthians and us too: "You are God’s building . . . the [holy] temple of God." This building Paul is constructing, so that "the Spirit of God dwells in you."

The Spirit of God was doubtless absent from the Jerusalem temple, which had been turned into a marketplace for livestock and financial services.  Not that selling doves and sheep to be used for sacrifice was evil. Neither was it a sin to provide worshippers the service of exchanging their pagan coins for suitable temple money.  But for God's sake literally, Jesus is abhorred that these profane activities are taking place in his Father's House, the visible symbol of God's people, the place where they should focus on worshipping God.

That is why Ezekiel's vision has the water flowing out of the temple into the profane world, rather than from the profane world into the temple.

·        The water flowing from the temple made fresh the salt waters of the sea.

·        The water gave life to living creatures, providing an abundance of fish.

·        It even gave life to trees, to bear fresh fruit and leaves for medicine.

The temple was the source of life for the profane world and not vice versa.

Similarly, today's church buildings, because of the worship that takes place in them, must continue being symbols of God's positive influence on the world, an influence provided by the people of God that gather in them and then flow out, like the temple water, back into the world.  St. John Lateran, the Pope's Cathedral is that symbol for the universal Church,  St.  Louis Cathedral, for the Church of New Orleans, and our parish churches for our parochial communities.

Christian Life

The divisiveness, acrimony and frankly pagan ways of this election cycle are a clear message that even more life-giving water must flow from the Church, the Body of Christ, into society to bring life, fresh fruits and healing.

When Pope Francis was asked what advice he had for American Catholics during this election that placed them between a rock and a hard place, he gave a two-part answer.  First, he advised Americans to "study the issues, pray and decide in conscience" – pretty standard moral theology principles.  In the second part, however, he diagnosed the root causes of the situation.  He said:

When a country has two, three or four candidates who are unsatisfactory, it means that the political life of that country is perhaps overly politicized but lacking in a political culture. . . . People belong to one party or another party or even a third, but for emotional reasons, without thinking clearly about the fundamentals, the proposals.

And then he concluded: "One of the tasks of the Church . . . is to teach people to develop a political culture."

Conclusion

These words of Pope Francis should be for us a summons to action.  We, God's Temple, must, by our word and by our example, provide the nourishment that can create a truly Christian political culture in the world today. 

But to do that, we must first cleanse inside our own temple and only then hope to cleanse the outside world.  I offer three suggestions.

1.    Let civility in discourse ring in the Body of Christ and so be the fresh water flowing into salty sea of acrimony, vitriol and ad hominem attacks.

2.    Let unity in diversity ring in the Body of Christ and so be the water that provides life to a people divided on racial, social and religious grounds.

3.    Let fidelity to Christ ring in the Body of Christ, so that in the words of one Cardinal Bergolio, we may live more fully by the criteria that the Lord commands rather than by the criteria of the world and so bring his life-giving message in its fullness to a world of darkness and death.

And finally, we must remember that we cannot this do at all, without praying to and getting the grace of Jesus Christ, the King of Kings, the Lord of Lords.

Homily 32nd Sunday: What happens to us after we die, depends on what we do before we die?

Homily for 32^nd Sunday of Ordinary Time Year C 2016

2 Maccabees 7:1-2,9-14, 2 Thessalonians 2:16-3:5 and Luke 20:27-38

Introduction

"What happens to us after we die?"  This is an important question that all human beings wonder about.  But perhaps during this election week, the question at the forefront of our minds instead is: "who should I vote for?"  I would like to suggest that in fact the two questions are somewhat related and I will try to show how.

The question of the after-life often receives one of two kinds of answers.

·        On the one hand, some hold that nothing happens after we die; this life is it.  After death there is nothing, zilch, nada!

·        On the other hand, others hold that there is life after death, but they don't agree on exactly what kind of life.  For example, some eastern religions believe in re-incarnation, with us coming back as plants or animals.

Fortunately, today's readings provide an answer to this question, an answer that not only tells us that there is life after death, but also what kind of life it is, and that what happens to us after we die, depends on what we do before we die.

Scripture and Theology

Both the gospel and the first reading teach us this message using the example of seven brothers and one woman: a wife and her seven husbands in one case, a mother and her seven sons in the other.

The setting of the gospel is an argument between Jesus and the Sadducees. The Sadducees were a group of temple priests who believed that only the first five books of the Bible were the Word of God; and since those books did not say anything about the resurrection, there must not be any life after death.

And so, they set before Jesus a situation of seven brothers who, one after another, married the same woman.  Following the law of Moses, they married her to raise up descendants for their deceased brothers, who had died childless. Perhaps also, they married the widow to support her financially and socially.

The Sadducees use this scenario to trap Jesus with this apparently difficult question: “Now at the resurrection whose wife will that woman be?”  They think that they have placed Jesus between a rock and a hard place.

·        If he says that she will be the wife of all seven brothers, that is ridiculous; since even in polygamy, men married multiple women and not vice versa.

·        His only alternative is to cave in and agree that there is no life after death.

But like a good debater, Jesus escapes the dilemma by demolishing the wrong assumptions on which 

their question is based.  They assume that life after death is exactly like life here on earth.  But Jesus corrects that view and shows that the resurrected life is entirely different from the kind of life we have here on earth.

·        In this life we die, like the seven brothers and the woman did.  And that is why in this life, we need to marry and beget children, so as to replace those who die and continue to propagate the human race.  Death and marriage are part of the human condition here on earth.

·        But life on the other side is quite different.  In that life, we don't die anymore; and that is why we don’t need to marry and beget children.  Those seven brothers and their wife, after death, had no more need for descendants; for they had reached the highest form of life, where, as St. John tells us, we shall be like God and we shall see him as he really is.

Clearly in this debate, Jesus is ahead: Jesus – 1, Sadducees - nil.  But wishing to score another point, he goes ahead to quote from Exodus, a book the Sadducees believed in.  He reminds them that when Moses met God at the burning bush, Moses called him, "the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob," using the present rather than past tense, to show that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, although they had died centuries earlier, were in fact still alive on the other side.  Jesus – 2, Sadducees – 0.

The first reading from the book of Maccabees gives us another set of seven brothers and their mother.  They too, by their willingness to die rather than break the law of God, also teach us this something about the afterlife.  What they did is similar to what our military men and women, police officers and first responders do every day, putting their lives on the line, for the nation, peace, life, law and order.  As for the seven brothers and their mother, what motivates their courage and sacrifice is much greater and more valuable.  The words of the eldest brother sum up what they believe.  He says: “You are depriving us of this present life, but the King of the world will raise us up to live again forever.”

And so, what happens to us after we die?  Well it depends; if we have lived virtuous lives like these seven brothers, we can like them, hope to live with God forever.  We can hope to live the kind of life that has no more death, the kind of life where the love of wife and husband will be raised to a much higher level, so that it can be shared with more than just one person in the communion of saints.

Christian Life

Unfortunately, this teaching of Jesus, might be too distant for some of us.

·        Why should I think about death, that may not come for years down the road, when right now I have more urgent issues like work and bills, family and children to be concerned about?

·        Why should I think about the resurrection of the dead, whose timing even Jesus confessed not to know, when the future of our country is at stake during these elections?

And yet, like the Lord's prayer says, "your will be done on earth, as it is in heaven."  What we do here on earth affects what happens to us in the after-life!

During a recent interview, Pope Francis was asked by an American journalist, what advice he would give to American Catholics about this rather difficult election.  And this is what Pope Francis said:

You pose me a question where you describe a difficult choice, because, according to you, you have difficulty in one [candidate] and you have difficulty in the other. In electoral campaigns, I never say a word. The people are sovereign. I'll just say [this] a word: Study the proposals well, pray and choose in conscience.

The Catholic bishops of this country, including our own Archbishop Aymond, have essentially told us the same thing, giving us a list of important issues for us to study, pray and decide.

Of course not all Catholics have welcomed this guidance of the Church, suggesting that it is too general.  They say: "why don't the bishops and priests be more direct and tell us who to vote?"  When people ask me this question, what they often want me to do is to preach the particular decision that they have reached by their prayer and study in conscience.

But because I must be a father to all rather than merely a hero to some, my role as a minister of Christ is to form consciences, not to replace them with my own conscience, much less that of other Catholics.  Catholic ministers form consciences by our preaching the issues all year long, not just at election time.

Conclusion

The reason we must each follow our conscience is because when we get to the other side, we shall each stand before the Lord alone, to give an account of our decisions.  Nobody, not your political tribe, not your family and friends, and especially not your priest will answer for your decision.

Because we are dual citizens of earth and heaven, it is only by carrying out faithfully our citizenship here on earth, can we hope to secure our citizenship in heaven.  May God guide our consciences now and always.