We are prophets of a future not our own

Fourteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time Year C

There is irony in the mission which our Lord entrusted to His disciples. On the one hand, He does not soften the blow by assuring them that the mission will be easy. In fact, He tells them from the outset that they will be sent into hostile territory where they will inevitably face opposition, sometimes subtle and sometimes explicit: “I am sending you out like lambs among wolves.” The contrast couldn’t be more stark.

Sheep are prey animals, what more when you are a young lamb. Sheep are defenceless. They can’t fight, so they can only flee or huddle together when threatened. Their best chance of survival is to stay close to the larger flock and under the care of a shepherd who serves as their personal bodyguard. Leaving the flock would only mean certain death. And yet, it is our Lord who commands them to leave the safety of His pastoral care and venture out in the wide world on their own. The imagery invokes this frightening prospect – they will be easy prey for predators.

And this is what our Lord promises will precisely happen to us. We are not sent out into a Christian friendly world and we should not live under the illusion that we would be warmly welcomed. It will be a world hostile to our values, indignant to our presence and in clear opposition to what we stand for. Using the image of a wolf or perhaps even a wolf pack in contrast to us hapless lambs is meant to highlight the risks of our adventure.

But instead of equipping ourselves with necessary weapons which would ensure our safety, like a big stick or being armed to the hilt like Rambo, we should go forth unencumbered by things which would provide us with additional security. Our presence in the world should be one of innocence, wishing no offence on anyone and yet treated by others as offensive just by existing. Furthermore, our message should be a simple one: “Peace to this house!” No warning of retaliation to any potential threat like: “If you touch me, you will be obliterated!”

“Peace be to this house!” The Hebrew term sālom', or shalom (or the longer greeting “Shalom eleichem”), is typically translated as "peace" and was used in ancient greetings and farewells as of today, much as the Arabic “Assalamualaikum”. Shalom can mean the opposite of war, but it also refers to completeness, soundness, and welfare; it includes a sense of calm security in circumstances and relationships. In an Israelite context, wishing someone shalom means to say, "May God be with you." For ultimately, such peace could only be attained when one’s will was in total harmony with the will of God, when our thinking is aligned with His.

Our Lord doesn’t stop here. He seems to micromanage the entire adventure of these disciples. They were to take nothing with them–no money, no change of clothes, no itinerary. There is to be an urgency to their mission - no extra time to exchange pleasantries with people on the road. And when they enter a town, they were to accept hospitality from the first person who offered it. They shouldn’t be picky with regard to their accommodation or look around for better housing. But then our Lord adds this practical advice. When they encounter hostility, our Lord instructed them to just leave and shake off the dust from their feet while doing so. When people reject us and our message, He gives us permission to depart with no regrets. This assignment is rather amazing from a modern perspective. Do you know any person who would set out on a trip with no luggage, no money (or credit cards), no schedule, no clear strategy, and no host organisation or family to greet them at their destination? That’s a crazy way to travel, right? Sorry, but in this case, it was the Lord’s way to do missions.

But what is more surprising is the brevity and the simplicity of the message which they were to proclaim: “The kingdom of God is very near to you.” What or who precisely is this Kingdom? In terms of a succinct explanation, no one does it better than Pope Benedict XVI of happy memory who wrote: “the Kingdom is not a thing, it is not a geographical dominion like worldly kingdoms. It is a person; it is He… By the way in which He speaks of the Kingdom of God, Jesus leads men to realise the overwhelming fact that in Him God Himself is present among them, that He is God’s presence.” (Pope Benedict, Jesus of Nazareth, Part 1)

When, the disciples returned to give a report of their successes, our Lord’s answer that He saw Satan fall is an important corrective to their skewed understanding. Satan fell not because of the disciples’ efforts. It was not something which had just happened. The fall of Satan before time was witnessed by our Lord who existed before time. In fact, it is the Lord who caused the fall of Satan and his minions. It is the Lord who has established His own kingdom, whereas we His disciples, are merely invited to share in His victory and the benefits thereof. If Christ had not won the victory, our efforts would be futile. Ultimately, there is no reason to boast of what we’ve done. Rather, should we be given an opportunity to boast, we should boast of what the Lord has done for us. This is precisely what St Paul tells us to do in the second reading: “the only thing I can boast about is the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom the world is crucified to me, and I to the world.”

Our mission is best summarised in the beautiful prayer written by Fr Ken Untener and attributed to martyred Archbishop of San Salvador, St Oscar Romero:

“It helps, now and then, to step back and take a long view. The kingdom is not only beyond our efforts, it is even beyond our vision. We accomplish in our lifetime only a tiny fraction of the magnificent enterprise that is God's work. Nothing we do is complete, which is a way of saying that the Kingdom always lies beyond us. No statement says all that could be said. No prayer fully expresses our faith. No confession brings perfection. No pastoral visit brings wholeness. No program accomplishes the Church's mission. No set of goals and objectives includes everything”.

“This is what we are about. We plant the seeds that one day will grow. We water seeds already planted, knowing that they hold future promise. We lay foundations that will need further development. We provide yeast that produces far beyond our capabilities. We cannot do everything, and there is a sense of liberation in realising that. This enables us to do something, and to do it very well. It may be incomplete, but it is a beginning, a step along the way, an opportunity for the Lord's grace to enter and do the rest.

We may never see the end results, but that is the difference between the master builder and the worker. We are workers, not master builders; ministers, not messiahs. We are prophets of a future not our own.”

Inwards to Outwards, Downwards to Upwards

First Sunday of Lent Year C

People have often noted that our society has become increasingly Godless or more atheistic. Is this true? There are countless of studies done in the West that seems to support this proposition. When surveyed, the majority of individuals state that they don’t identify with any religion. As Chesterton said, “He who does not believe in God will believe in anything.” Just recently, Lady Gaga when receiving her Grammy award, proudly declared: “music is love,” perhaps a deliberate spin on St John’s declaration that “God is love.”

We may be tempted (forgive the obvious pun) to focus merely on the temptations of Christ on this First Sunday of Lent, but the readings actually take us along another path of reflexion - what do we really believe in - the faith which we profess. You will notice that during the season of Lent and Easter, it is strongly recommended that the longer Nicene Creed is substituted with the shorter Apostles’ Creed. The reason for this substitution is not due to the brevity of the latter since our liturgies of Lent are typically lengthened by the Rites associated with the RCIA. The real reason is that the Apostles’ Creed is the creed used at baptism and the focus of both Lent and Easter is the Sacrament of Initiation, which begins with Baptism.

That is the reason why we have two ancient examples of professions of faith in today’s readings, the first predating Christianity, while the second is one of the earliest Christian creeds.

In the first reading, we have the ancient profession of faith which focuses on what God has done for the Israelites during the Exodus. Moses instructs the people that this creed is to be said by the priests when making an offering on behalf of the people, reminding them of the reason why the sacrifice is made. They should never forget that God is the very reason for their existence, their survival, and their freedom.

In the second reading, St Paul explains that the Christian profession of faith should focus on our belief in Jesus as Lord and what God has done by raising Him from the dead: “If your lips confess that Jesus is Lord and if you believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, then you will be saved. By believing from the heart you are made righteous; by confessing with your lips you are saved.”

Finally, in the gospel we come to realise that creeds are not just meant to be propositional (mere statements of belief) but are meant to be practical (to be lived out). Here we have the three temptations posed by Satan to the Lord. St Luke’s ordering of the temptations is slightly different from Matthew’s version (the second temptation is switched with the third). On the face of it, these three temptations appear to have nothing to do with our profession of faith but are in fact an inversion, a parody of our fundamental faith. Satan, the adversary of God and man, is attempting to lure our Lord into making a mockery of faith by professing a faith which places trust in His own resources and even in the devil, as opposed to placing our trust and faith in God. Before we affirm our faith in God, we must renounce our dependence on Satan.

This is the reason why during the rite of Baptism and the renewal of baptismal promises made at Easter and before one receives the Sacrament of Confirmation, the renunciation of sin is a necessary prelude to the profession of faith and both precedes the administering of the sacrament of baptism and confirmation. Because of the renunciation of sin and profession of faith, which forms one rite, the elect would not be baptised merely passively but will receive this great sacrament with the active resolve to renounce error and hold fast to God.

As I had mentioned earlier, St Luke’s ordering of the temptations differ from that of St Matthew’s. Unlike St Matthew, Luke concludes the list of temptations with the temptation that takes place within the Temple precinct and not on a mountaintop. Here, we witness the audacity of the devil to challenge God’s sovereignty, the ultimate basis of all temptations. These temptations are not merely luring Christ or each of us to place our trust in the cravings of the flesh or the material things of the world. Sin ultimately turns us away from God. The devil is actually selling us this lie - trust in your own desires, trust in your own power, trust in your own strength - because trusting in God is wholly insufficient! It is never enough!

The gospels in setting out these three temptations are trying to juxtapose to the experience of the Israelites in the wilderness with our Lord Jesus’ own experience. The three temptations of Jesus recall the three failures of the Israelites in the desert. Where the devil tempts the Lord to turn stones into bread, we see how the Israelites complained about the lack of food in the desert. Where the devil places our Lord on a mountain and promises Him lordship over the world if only He would bow and worship him, the Israelites questioned the lordship of God and instead worshipped an idol, a bronze calf. Where the devil tempts our Lord to test God, the devil had succeeded in getting the Israelites to test God while they were in the desert.

Satan was tempting Jesus to recapitulate the Israelites' lack of trust in God. Jesus would have nothing of it. In one of the most beautiful lines in Sacred Scripture, the letter to the Hebrews tells us, "We do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathise with our weaknesses, but we have one who in every respect has been tested as we are, yet never sinned" (Heb 4:15). The story ends with our Lord’s victory. Temptation does not necessarily lead to sin. If we hold fast to the Lord, and rely on His grace and strength, we will be victorious. Lent is the season when we are called to recapitulate our Lord’s victory over sin rather than the Israelites’ failure. The Church aids us in the battle by recommending the three practices of Lent – fasting, almsgiving and prayer. The practices of Lent are the remedy to the temptations of the Evil One.

At the end of this Lenten season, we will celebrate and profess the mystery of faith - the death and the resurrection of the Lord. At Easter, the priest will invite you to renew your baptismal promises with these words: “Dear brethren, through the Paschal Mystery we have been buried with Christ in Baptism, that we may walk with him in newness of life. And so, let us renew the promises of Holy Baptism, which we once renounced Satan and his works and promised to serve God in the holy Catholic Church.” We turn away from being ‘inwards and downwards’ to being ‘outwards and upwards.’ Having rejected Satan and all his works and empty promises, let us with firm conviction profess our faith publicly in God the Father and His works, in God the Son, Jesus Christ, and His works, and in God the Holy Spirit and His works. Those works, which the Lord has begun in us, will continue in us throughout this season of Lent and beyond until the Lord completes it when we go forth to meet Him as He returns in glory.

Sin should never be tolerated

Twenty Sixth Sunday in Ordinary Time Year B

Tolerance is a highly valued attribute in today’s culture, perhaps seen as its greatest virtue. According to this value system, the only thing which cannot be tolerated is an intolerant person. This is why Christianity, the Church and our set of moral teachings are most frequently vilified because they are perceived by the world’s magnanimous standards as rigidly intolerant. Should anyone in the Church have the audacity of proposing a set of moral norms to us, they would most likely be met with this question: “who are you to judge?”

Today’s passage is made up of two sections which provide us with what seems to be opposite ends of a spectrum. The first part seems to have an extremely tolerant and inclusive Jesus reprimanding His own disciples for their narrow-minded intolerance. However, our Lord in the second part launches into this vitriolic diatribe against those who cause scandals and in fact, even condemns them to destruction and hell fire should they fall into error. So, how do we make sense of this bi-polarity? Is our Lord Jesus the model of tolerance or intolerance? I believe the question is misguided. Our Lord is neither the epitome of tolerance or intolerance. Tolerance has nothing to do with His actions. Context is needed in reading both sections.

Let’s begin with the first section. Pay close attention to the words used by the Apostle John in his complaint to the Lord: “Master, we saw a man who is not one of us casting out devils in your name; and because he was not one of us we tried to stop him.” Take note that this man who is the subject of John’s complaint is being accused of not being “one of us,” the “us” here specifically referring to the Twelve Apostles who had been chosen and commissioned by the Lord to preach and cast out demons. There is no indication that this man is not one of our Lord’s followers; he could very well have been a disciple or follower of the Lord, as is evidenced by the fact that this man casts out demons using the name of Jesus and not his own nor by any other power. It would appear that the Apostles, or at least John, thought that this authority was exclusively theirs and they had a monopoly over these matters. They had forgotten that their authority is derived from the Lord who can choose to share it with anyone whom He chooses.

A similar situation is narrated in the first reading, where it is Joshua who complains to Moses that two men who were not part of the original group of seventy elders were now exercising the authority of prophecy. Moses answered him, “Are you jealous on my account? If only the whole people of the Lord were prophets, and the Lord gave his Spirit to them all!” This is an important reminder that the Spirit of God blows where He wills and who are we to put limits on His actions. We should be rejoicing at God's generosity rather than complain out of jealousy if He chooses to favour others. Although we must respect the freedom of God to give what He wills where He wills it, there must also be prudent discernment of spirits to ascertain whether the origin of such action or teaching is the Holy Spirit or from some other source. As St Paul reminds us in 1 Thes 5:21-22, “But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; abstain from every form of evil.”

In the case of the gospel, our Lord provides us with a criterion of discernment: “no one who works a miracle in my name is likely to speak evil of me. Anyone who is not against us is for us.” Is our Lord advocating some form of indifferentism, that all religions, all philosophies and all churches are the same and equal paths to salvation? Notice that our Lord is not asking His disciples to accept, include and tolerate all and sundry. Blind tolerance is not the objective of the Church. Those who are the enemies of truth, the enemies of the teachings of Christ and His Church, those who serve values opposed to ours, can never be accepted nor tolerated. To tolerate such behaviour would be to work against the very mission of Christ and the commission given to the Church. It is for this reason that heresy (erroneous or false teaching), apostasy (total renunciation of the Catholic Faith) and schism (disobedience against the legitimate authority of the Church) are met with the harshest of penalties - excommunication. One cannot claim to be “with us”, if the person or persons are clearly working “against us.” For this reason, we cannot shake hands with a false gospel or cooperate with those who would lead the flock astray.

This becomes clear in the second half of the passage. Those who are in fact working against the Body of the Christ, leading others astray are to be met with zero tolerance. Don’t take it from me. Listen to what the Lord Himself had to say: “anyone who is an obstacle to bring down one of these little ones who have faith, would be better thrown into the sea with a great millstone round his neck.” The word translated as “obstacle” is “skandalon” in Greek, which literally means “to trip up, to make someone fall.” This is what scandals do - they cause others to sin. Our Lord reserved His harshest condemnation for such a scenario - it is better that they meet with a Mafia-like execution than to continue leading others into error. Traditionally, this is reflected in the Latin maxim “error non habet ius,” “error has no rights!”

The irony we see in today’s world is that maximum tolerance is accorded to all forms of depraved behaviour where sexual sins are often presented as legitimate alternative life styles which need to be recognised and celebrated. Today’s society applauds itself for being highly enlightened and open-minded and that those who would take offence with such behaviour and lifestyles are the ones who should be opposed for their rigidity and bigotry.

Rather than construing the last few statements of our Lord in today’s passage as evidence of our Lord advocating some form of hudud punishment in the form of bodily mutilation, we need to recognise the ecclesial and symbolic meaning of His words. If St Paul describes the Church as the Body of Christ, what we are seeing here is the fundamental basis for the penalty of excommunication. Excommunication excludes the offender from taking part in the Eucharist or other sacraments and from the exercise of any ecclesiastical office, ministry, or function. On the face of it, it sounds unreasonably harsh. But we need to remember that excommunication is meant to be corrective and remedial, rather than punitive. By the penalty of excommunication, the Church does not condemn anyone. Rather it is a teaching tool - it is meant to emphasise the seriousness of certain sins or offences that cuts a person off from sacramental grace. Without this warning, the person may be deluded to continue in his or her error and wrongdoing.

Certainly, there are many things which we must learn to endure - the quirks and idiosyncrasies of others. God knows we have our own annoying traits which others have to put up with for the most part. But there is something which cannot be tolerated and should never be tolerated even in the name of being nice and peaceable - it is sin. Sin corrupts not only our lives but the community. But just like God, we must show forbearance and mercy to the sinner with the hope and expectation of his repentance. If we truly love our neighbour, then it is our fundamental duty where possible to reach out and lead him or her to the truth and to righteousness. We do so not because we are envious or judgmental. Charity demands we do something to stop the rot and prevent the person from being "thrown into hell where their worm does not die nor their fire go out." Let us never forget that it is not our reputation but the salvation of every soul which is at stake.

Kinship and Discipleship

Tenth Sunday in Ordinary Time Year B

One of the most colourful English expressions to describe a person who is out of his mind is “a sandwich short of a picnic.” Don’t attempt to wrap your head around this. What is pertinent in this description is the metaphor of a sandwich. In today’s gospel passage, although our attention is immediately focused on the heated argument between our Lord and His antagonists on the latter’s accusation that He is performing miracles with the power of demons, this is our first opportunity to see one of Mark’s sandwiches. Here, we begin with a story about our Lord’s family and end with another story about His family, while sandwiched in between is the story of Jesus and His conflict with the scribes.

The upper loaf of the sandwich begins with the story of how the family of Jesus wishes to take control of Him because they were of the opinion that He was “out of his mind.” Perhaps, one of the most painful experiences is to be accused by one’s loved ones as being insane. Those closest to our Lord tried to put a claim of control on Him because they thought He had gone crazy. This is a startling reminder that proximity to Jesus is not enough; allegiance to Jesus is what matters. That is what marks the followers of Jesus. It is striking that they want to silence Him, because He had just silenced the demons.

The scribes, a group of our Lord’s strongest critics, jumped at the opportunity to attack our Lord by accusing Him of being possessed by the Prince of Demons, Beelzebul. Mental illness in ancient times was a sure sign of possession. They were confident that this time their accusation would stick since our Lord’s own family had turned against Him and had become the prosecution’s star witnesses. The evidence is clear - the miraculous actions of our Lord preclude a natural explanation. There can only be two sources - it is either divine or demonic. The scribes don’t deny the supernatural power; they just redefine its source.

Our Lord then exposes the fallacy of their accusation and skewed reasoning by asking this logical question: “How can Satan cast out Satan?” It’s a rhetorical question because our Lord doesn’t wait for the answer from His attackers, He provides it. If our Lord is actually using or being used by demons, then wouldn’t such a civil war in the demonic realm lead to their ultimate destruction. That would be preposterous.

Our Lord proceeds to give the right interpretation. There is not a civil war from within but a direct invasion from without— from heaven itself. This is a heavenly war. Satan’s kingdom is not being built; it is being plundered. Someone stronger has come - God Himself. And Satan (the strong man) has been “tied up” and now his house is being plundered. Jesus the King, the Lord of all that has been and all that will come, and no one, certainly not the ruler of the demons can stand up to Him. He cannot bind Jesus—Jesus binds him and plunders his house.

Rejecting our Lord has now led the scribes to commit a sin that has eternal consequences: blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The blasphemy or sin against the Holy Spirit is saying that Jesus has an unclean spirit. They are saying that Jesus is motivated by evil rather than good, by an unclean spirit, rather than by the Holy Spirit. It is an unforgivable sin because they are rejecting the very gift of salvation which is being offered to them by the Lord. In this sense, they are the people Isaiah warned about: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness” (Isaiah 5:20). This is a stunning irony.

We have reached a fork in the road: One road leads to life and the other, to death. The Pharisees charge Jesus with blasphemy (Mark 2:7, and now Jesus charges them with blasphemy. No neutrality is possible. Someone is blaspheming—either Jesus or the Jewish leaders. Which side will we take?

Thankfully the answer is given by none other than the family of Jesus. At the start of this story, they misunderstand His intentions and believe Him to be mad. They who are supposed to be “insiders” prove themselves to be “outsiders.” But at the end of this passage, we can detect a transformation, though subtle. Jesus provides the true criterion of discipleship: “Anyone who does the will of God, that person is my brother and sister and mother.”

This is where the Catholic interpretation takes an entirely different tangent from that of Protestants. For Protestants, our Lord’s words are putting Mary in her place, that is putting her down. But for Catholics, this is a clear affirmation of Our Lady’s esteemed position as our Lord’s most favoured disciple.

The clue is to be found in what our Lord meant by “family”: “who are my mother and brothers?” Who is our Lord’s true family. Once again, we are forced to decide the meaning of this word, as we were forced to decide on the source of His power - is He speaking of His earthly family or heavenly one? The Lord does not call us to simply belong to an earthly family. He comes to adopt us into His Heavenly family. For those hearing His teachings, He comes to adopt those into the household of our Heavenly Father.

So, back to our riddle. Did the Lord push aside His mother Mary when He says the words in this passage? Listen to what Jesus says, “Anyone who does the will of God, that person is my brother and sister and mother”. What does Mary say at the end of the Annunciation? “Let it be done to me according to thy word … according to thy Will!” Mary is the only one who declares so freely and openly that she is willing, and she does the will of God the Father. There can be no better candidate who meets this criterion of discipleship. So, it’s true that in one sense, our Lord is putting Mary “in her place”. It just happens that her “place” is as His mother not just by virtue of blood but more importantly in faith.

A slice of bread does not make a complete sandwich. You need two slices, two perspectives - one as a starting point and another as an ending. The truth of the matter is that sometimes we do behave like the family of Jesus at the beginning of the story trying to take charge of our lives by taking charge of our God. But this is a lie, the very same lie sold to our first parents which caused them to be expelled from paradise. We have to learn the painful lesson that no one can take charge of God. He is in control. He is the One who subdues, not the one who is subdued. It is we who must be subdued, who must submit willingly and lovingly to His will. Mary provides us with the perfect example of this. Only then, can we attain our true identity as members of God’s heavenly family and “that when the tent that we live in on earth is folded up, there is a house built by God for us, an everlasting home not made by human hands, in the heavens.”

A New Authority

Fourth Sunday in Ordinary Time Year B

“Don’t put words into my mouth” is a popular way of deflecting accusations by arguing that you have been misquoted, that your original speech has been embellished by words which do not reflect your original intent. Under these circumstances, you would not appreciate any extrapolation by others. The original words and context are always the best, or as they would say, “from the horse’s mouth.”

Despite our insistence on others keeping faithful to what we had originally said, we always appreciate novelty in speech. Innovation excites. Repetition bores. Sometimes, the truth does not matter especially when it hurts and does not work in our favour. The more fanciful the story, the more entertaining. That is why the best gossips and rumours are often the most incredulous. Who wants to know the boring truth, when you have the make-believe version that is much juicier?

Our readings today reverse the above cultural trends.

Instead of innovating with our own words and ideas, the first reading seeks to look for an ideal prophet following the archetype of Moses, someone who speaks God’s words and not his own. In fact, only God has every right to demand that we do not put words in His mouth and claim to speak on His behalf when He has not spoken these words at all. “All they have spoken is well said. I will raise up a prophet like yourself for them from their own brothers; I will put my words into his mouth and he shall tell them all I command him. The man who does not listen to my words that he speaks in my name, shall be held answerable to me for it. But the prophet who presumes to say in my name a thing I have not commanded him to say, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.” The Lord promises to raise up another leader like Moses, a prophecy which can only be fulfilled perfectly in the person of Jesus.

In the second reading, we are reminded by St Paul that words are not sufficient in witnessing the gospel of the Kingdom. It must be matched by actions and a particular value-based lifestyle. This is why St Paul advocates the celibate life. He does so not because he believes that marriage is bad and that the conjugal life is somewhat evil. He does so because celibacy, just like marriage, is also a sign of the life of the Kingdom. Celibacy does not make sense unless the values of the Kingdom of God fill the celibate’s whole horizon.

Finally, we have a miracle story in the gospel where our Lord exorcises a man possessed with an evil spirit in the synagogue. The crowds seem impressed by our Lord’s teachings, because “unlike the scribes, he taught them with authority.” St Mark does not elaborate any further as to the meaning of this term: “authority.” We often believe that “authority” and “power” are interchangeable. Yes, although there is intersection between the two concepts, one does not immediately imply the other. Persons with authority can be made powerless and those with power may not have authority.

The original Greek used by the evangelist would help us make more sense of the differences between these two words. The Greek word for power is dunamis, from which we derive the English dynamite. Our Lord had power as evidenced by His power to perform healing miracles, raise the dead, calm storms and cast out demons. But the unclean spirits likewise had power over the humans and the animals which they possessed. The difference between our Lord and the demons is that the former had authority (exousia) to exercise that power, while the demons did not. Exousia or authority points to limits, accountability, ministry and jurisdiction. Our Lord possessed authority by virtue of His identity - being the Son of God - an identity and authority which even the demons recognised and feared. Notice that the demons did not acknowledge the authority of the scribes, Pharisees and religious establishment. In the case of our Lord Jesus, He possessed both authority and power. The demons possessed their subjects with power but without authority.

Likewise, in modern times, many people are no respecters of authority, viewing it as tyrannical and old fashioned. They fail to recognise that without authority, without true limits, jurisdiction and accountability, everything descends into sheer abuse of power. Nothing exists in a vacuum. When we reject legitimate and rightful authority, we become an authority unto ourselves. My favourite definition of a Pharisee reflects this irony - a Pharisee sees a law when there is none and breaks a law when there is one.

It is authority which links our Lord’s deeds with His words, and this is the reason why the crowds commented that our Lord teaches with authority even though they had just witnessed an exorcism, for they saw both our Lord’s teachings and His deeds are united by their common source - authority - “he gives orders even to unclean spirits and they obey him.”

One last point needs to be raised when it comes to the truth of the Word of God. The crowds also declared this after having seen our Lord’s authority over demons: “Here is a teaching that is ‘new’”. Is novelty the benchmark for truth? Modernist would argue that it is so. In their efforts to revise the teachings of Christ, the Word of God and the traditional teachings of the Church, they argue that the only criterion which matters is that all these must be in synch with the values of modern times, values which are constantly shifting and expanding, what we call “new!” What they fail to recognise is that the hallmark of Christianity is not novelty but fidelity. We will be judged not by how the Church gets in “with the times,” but how she is more perfectly faithful as a Bride of Christ, whom St Augustine calls “O Beauty, Ever Ancient Ever New.” It is Christ who makes the teachings of the Church new, not us.

Preaching in all its forms is indispensable to the Church’s mission given to her by Jesus Christ: “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:16-20). Such preaching cannot just be a car salesman’s pitch, rooted in half truths. It cannot just be one that tickles the imagination of our audience and entertains them with innovation and creativity. It must always be done with the authority given to us by the Lord through the Holy Spirit and not spring from self-appointment. Finally, preaching must lead others to be conformed to Christ and not to the world. The world may demand what is popular and effective but only Christ’s teachings are going to get us to heaven.

Not on the Way, in the Way

Twenty Second Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A

Those who know me well would have heard me sing a parody of that famous song immortalised by Josh Groban, “You raised me up.” In my twisted version, the first line goes like this: “You raised me up and then you slammed me down.” This sounds much like what the Lord does to St Peter in today’s Gospel. Last week, our Lord gave Simon a new name, Peter, the Rock, on which He promised to build His new temple, the Church, and which will stand as a lasting and formidable bastion against the gates of the underworld. No greater honour could be paid to any of the apostles. That was his high point!

But this week, our Lord drastically changes His tune and utters one of the meanest put-downs and aims it like a knife at Peter. Peter’s fortune is reversed - in last week’s passage, he was raised up to the highest heavens and in this week’s episode he is cast down from the heights like Satan. St Peter is now the agent of Satan, the stumbling block to those who might come to profess the same faith. This unexpected transformation from building block to stumbling block, from an instrument to an obstacle, from a lieutenant of Christ to an adversary, comes quickly – so quickly, in fact, that the two passages occur back to back in one continuous narrative.

What brought about this reversal of fortune for Peter? Having been identified as the Messiah, the Lord in today’s passage begins to spell out how He is planning to accomplish His work of salvation. The nature of His mission would entail suffering, rejection and death. It was clear to the apostles that Jesus was the Messiah. The notion that He was the suffering Messiah was much harder to digest. It required frequent repetition from the Lord to make real to their minds the thought that He had to suffer and be killed. It is no wonder that St Peter, who had just confessed that our Lord was the long-awaited Messiah, now pleads with Him to cease His madness, “Heaven preserve you, Lord,” or “God forbids!” “This must not happen to you.” The disciple who is meant to listen to the Master, now seeks to command the Teacher. St Peter found the cross offensive because he could not bear the thought that the Messiah, from whom he expected national deliverance, should be killed.

What Peter failed to realise is that the death of Christ was necessary, as the text tells us that “He was destined to go to Jerusalem.” The words “destined to go” imply a constraint, an imperative, a divine necessity. His death had been planned and willed by God through all eternity. The prophets had predicted it and He must fulfil it. Pope Saint Paul VI wrote: “In a mysterious way, Christ Himself accepts death... on the Cross, in order to eradicate from man's heart the sins of self-sufficiency and to manifest to the Father a complete filial obedience” (Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete in Domino, 9 May 1975). By willingly accepting death, the Lord carries the cross of all human beings and becomes a source of salvation for the whole of humanity. Peter couldn’t quite get it. None of the disciples could at this stage.

Our Lord’s reaction to Peter’s attempt to give Him guidance was as sharp as it was instantaneous: He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle in my path, because the way you think is not God’s way but man’s!” The Lord notes that unlike last week’s passage, where our Lord affirms that Peter’s confession of faith was revealed by the Father, the source of this week’s statement was from Peter himself. What’s worse, is that this human opinion was being used by the devil to tempt the Lord to turn His back on the cross, to choose safety and honour, over suffering and sacrifice. This was the nature of the three temptations which Satan used on our Lord in the wilderness before He began His public ministry. Satan had returned to tempt our Lord in the person of Peter. Of course, our Lord will have none of it because He knew that glory comes only after sacrifice. As one of my seminary formators once told a group of us, “If you are not on the Way, you are in the way!”

This dramatic exchange between our Lord and Peter would have been accentuated by the stunning backdrop. The town is Caesarea Philippi, a town built and named by an heir of Herod the Great in honour of Great Caesar and yet Philip the Tetrarch arrogantly attaches his name to the title - Caesarea Philippi - Philip’s City of Caesar. The vassal seeks to rule his liege. The arrogance of Philip, a minor ruler, is pretty rich. Similarly, Peter in remonstrating with the Lord, seeks to lord over Him. Instead of renouncing himself and follow the Lord’s lead, Simon Peter seeks to have the Lord follow his instructions and lead.

If you find this parallel coincidental, consider now the geographical location. Caesarea Philippi is in the foothills of Mount Hermon, in a region currently known as the Golan Heights, previously Syrian and then occupied and annexed by Israel after a series of wars. But what was most imposing about this region and city is the enormous rocky outcrop on which the city is built. At the foot of this rock was a natural spring which was considered to be a sacred shrine dedicated to the god Pan, who had the appearance of a satyr - a half goat and half man creature - almost demon-like. So, the words of our Lord spoken here take on another level of meaning when one has a view of the surroundings where He spoke. The rock on which He would build His Church would no longer be this geological rocky formation but a man, a seemingly weak one at that - Simon Peter; and when He subsequently called out Simon Peter as “Satan,” our Lord would not have been referring to the demon-like pagan god Pan, but the very same man whom He had named “rock” just a few minutes earlier.

The passage ends with our Lord spelling out what a disciple of His must do. The fate of the Master must now be the fate of the disciple, for this is what it means to “follow” Christ. “If anyone wants to be a follower of mine, let him renounce himself and take up his cross and follow me.” You see, the cross was not only for Jesus. It is ours too. The cross of Christ means your death and my death.

In the midst of the many voices clamouring for our time, our money, our allegiance and our attention, we are called to choose the cross, we are called to choose Christ, to the complete dispossession of all else. In His call to authentic discipleship, Christ challenges our most precious loyalties. As there can be no other gods before the God of Israel, there can be no other loves before Christ. The life you long for, the changes you want, come only through the cross — no other way! If you will live at the cross, the cross will take care of the rest. This is a great challenge for each of us.

The Cure D’Ars, St John Vianney, leaves us with this wonderful wisdom: “On the Way of the Cross, you see, my children, only the first step is painful. Our greatest cross is the fear of crosses. . . We have not the courage to carry our cross, and we are very much mistaken; for, whatever we do, the cross holds us tight - we cannot escape from it. What, then, have we to lose? Why not love our crosses, and make use of them to take us to heaven?”

Not everything which looks good is good

First Sunday of Lent Year A

The first reading and the gospel provides us with two paradigms of dealing with temptation - we can either surrender or resist at all cost. In the first reading, Eve surrendered to the serpent’s temptation of rationalising disobedience to God’s will. But in case one is tempted to blame her for man’s fall, we need to commend her for at least putting up a fight in initially resisting the serpent’s temptation by quoting God’s commandments. We can’t say the same for Adam. He gave in to his wife’s offer without any argument. No resistance, no fight, no struggle.

The serpent’s temptation is insidiously cunning. It provides an end that seems most desirable - becoming “like gods” who would autonomously know what is right and wrong. This ambition to be god-like has been man’s perennial temptation - hoping to achieve it through knowledge, through technological advancement, through medical discoveries which seek to prolong one’s life and perhaps one day, guarantee immortality. The irony in the story of the Fall, is that in desiring to be immortal gods, both Adam and Eve surrendered their natural gift of immortality (symbolised by the tree of life and its fruits which were available to them) and exchanged it for mortality - death, which was not part of God’s original plan for them, but because they chose to disobey God’s warning, death became their lot and that of their descendants.

In today’s gospel, the devil tempts Jesus three times. He tempts Jesus to prove that He is the Son of God by turning stones into bread. He tempts Jesus to test God and see if God will really save Him, and he deceitfully promises Jesus all the kingdoms of the earth if He will worship him. Unlike the first human beings, Jesus does not succumb to the devil’s temptations. Unlike Adam and Eve, Jesus chooses to resist the devil, reject his lies and took a stand for God. Rather than challenge and disobey God, He obeys God and trusts in God’s power to save Him. Jesus is the New Human Being, the pattern for what we must become.

Let’s look at the nature of both sets of temptations, the one we find in the first reading and the second set in the gospel. Although, both the tempted, Adam-Eve and Jesus, responded differently, there seems to be a discernible pattern that threads through the temptations offered by both the primordial serpent and Satan. Both sets of temptations were in principle good suggestions in themselves. Can it be bad to want to be holy like gods, feed the hungry, or have the power to make significant changes in the world or even convert your enemies and make them your friends or fans? And the answer would be ‘no.’ What Satan is suggesting here is apparently good and the result would be guaranteed success for humanity’s future and our Lord’s mission, with much ease and little cost and pain on His or our part. It is “salvation” or what passes as “salvation” without sacrifice, without the cross. Wouldn’t that be great? The devil’s logic is simple, “It doesn’t matter how you get what you want as long as you get it.” But then again, the end doesn’t justify the means!

And this is how “evil” often looks like – it does not wear the face of a monster, but a benign one. It’s not like you have to wake up one morning, and decide to plot some monstrous plan to commit evil. You don’t. Evil often takes the path of a slippery slope, each decision, often innocent looking, taken one after another, until you’re swimming eyeball deep in the moral mud. As St Ignatius used to remind his retreatants, the devil tempts bad people with bad things but good people with seemingly good things. He doesn’t waste subtlety on the wicked but for the good, he will always try to sugar coat the bad by making it look good. The subtlety of the devil is to make us believe that we don’t really need God if we can find a solution of our own. Ultimately, in wanting to do it “our way,” it overlooks “God’s way.”

Returning to the story of the temptations of Christ, what is apparently missing from the “good” suggestions of Satan is God and His plans for us. We just need to take a quick look at each of the temptations to expose the cunning casuistry of the tempter.

In the first temptation, the devil tells our Lord, “If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to turn into a loaf.” Of course, the Church recognises that there is a fundamental option for the poor and should work towards the alleviation and even where possible, the eradication of destitution. This is where we see the devil ingeniously subverting this good and then reducing the entire gospel to a socio-economic solution. Resolving social problems becomes the primary yardstick of redemption. Make sure the world has bread, other things, including God, comes later. But then the Lord reminds us, “man does not live on bread alone.” Rather, it is Christ, who is the Life-giving Bread from Heaven, who is the real answer to our hunger.

In the second temptation, the devil transports the Lord to the pinnacle of the temple in Jerusalem, and challenges Him to perform a spectacular miracle. Imagine the instant influence and adulation Jesus could have acquired, if the crowds had witnessed Jesus literally being carried down by the angels or levitating in mid-air. But our Lord wisely responds that we “must not put the Lord your God to the test.” Authentic faith does not grow in the midst of a “circus” performance but often in low-key seemingly ordinary situations, in the silence of the heart.

In the third and final temptation, the devil shows the Lord the kingdoms of the world and promises power over them if only Jesus should worship him. The tempter is not so crude as to suggest directly that we should worship him. He merely suggests that we opt for the reasonable decision, that we choose to give priority to our machinations and thoroughly organised world, where God is exiled to the private sphere. Faith and religion are now directed toward political goals. The Lord challenges this falsehood by reiterating the fundamental commandment, “You must worship the Lord your God, and serve Him alone.”

This is what we face in many temptations: We want victory with limited commitment. We want heaven without sacrifice. We want a crown without the cross. As we begin this penitential season of grace, let us not just merely rely on our meagre strength and resources. In our eagerness to perform Lenten practices of self-denial, let us not forget that the end of all these acts is to expand the space in our hearts for God. They are not performed as if they are goals or achievements in themselves. Conversion is impossible without the grace of God. As we contend with our usual list of habitual sins, we often fail to recognise that one of our greatest temptations is to begin to rely on ourselves rather than on the power of God. To be a Christian is to be dependent upon God for everything, in battling temptations and growing in virtue. So does the end justify the means? Not if that end does not end in God and the means lead us nowhere closer to Him, for as St Thomas Aquinas reminds us, “the ultimate end of each thing (including man) is God.”

In His Name

Twenty Sixth Sunday in Ordinary Time Year B

Who was this itinerant exorcist in today’s passage? We have little information about him apart from what is said about him in John’s complaint: this man is “not one of us,” which means he is not part of the Lord’s band of disciples, or at least, a part of His inner circle, the Twelve. But John at least admits that this man is driving out demons in the Lord’s name.

Apparently, John’s criterion for legitimate ministry is acting under the disciples’ authority, they are the gatekeepers, instead of the Lord. He fails to recognise that their authority and power and that of this perceived “rival” comes from the Lord, who is the source and the foundation of their authority and power. His protest echoes the objection of Joshua in the first reading, who grumbled to Moses that Eldad and Medad were not part of the group to whom Moses imparted his spirit, yet they too received the gift of prophecy.

Although the disciples found fault with this man casting out demons in the Lord’s name because he wasn’t a part of their elite group, our Lord saw nothing wrong with his actions. In fact, our Lord reprimands them and orders them to not stop this man in his ministry: “You must not stop him: no one who works a miracle in my name is likely to speak evil of me.” He is directing His disciples to take an expansive, rather than a restrictive approach toward others who are acting in His name. And the reason is because “anyone who is not against us is for us.” The criterion for acceptance of the ministry of this person is that it is not in opposition to the Lord’s ministry and that of His disciples. But the converse is also true: “whoever is not with me is against me” (Matthew 12:30). In the end, there is no neutral ground in relation to Christ: sooner or later everyone (whether consciously or unconsciously) chooses either to be on His side or to oppose Him.

Some people, including Catholics, take our Lord’s words as justification for religious indifferentism. Religious indifferentism is the heretical belief that all religions have equal value and are equal paths to salvation. This popular notion is so ingrained in our psyche that anyone who makes counter claims concerning the uniqueness of the Catholic Faith or that Jesus is the sole and universal saviour of mankind, would be deemed heretical. In fact, this pernicious belief is quite likely the most widespread heresy of our present age. Though many would never admit that they are proponents of a heresy, we see it hidden in so many common sayings: “You have your beliefs and I have mine;” “It doesn’t matter which religion you belong to. It’s all the same.” So, was our Lord’s words to His disciples in support of this way of thinking?

The key phrase to understand the context of our Lord’s words is “in my Name” or “in Jesus’ name.” This man was not doing it by his own authority. He was not claiming that his ability to exorcise and heal, came from his own resources or from some other deity. His actions pointed back to the Lord. If demons are cast out and people are healed, it is the Lord Jesus’ doing, not his. Our Lord’s words are not meant to give a stamp of approval to religious indifferentism. In fact, it is the very antithesis of religious indifferentism. That if anyone is saved, he or she is saved by Jesus and Jesus alone, no one else can take credit for it. To do something in the Lord’s name is to acknowledge the bankruptcy of our own resources and the adequacy of His grace.

Our Lord had just taught His followers that the criteria needed to become His disciple calls for self-renunciation and sacrifice. They are to reject worldly glory, resist the temptation of making a name for themselves because ultimately, what a disciple does, he does it “in the name” of the Lord. The fact that they felt envious and threatened by this perceived rival to their privileged authority, reveals their true motives. They were selfishly possessive of God’s grace, and rather than rejoicing that others had a share in it, they felt jealous and saw them as rivals. The disciples were doing good works for self-glory. They were doing it to make a name for themselves. Rather than acting in our Lord’s name, they were acting in their own.

Our Lord continues teaching them by saying: “If anyone gives you a cup of water to drink just because you belong to Christ, then I tell you solemnly, he will most certainly not lose his reward.” In a way, this serves as a parallel to last week’s last verse, which spoke of hospitality shown to a child is equivalent to hospitality shown to Christ and the One who sent Christ. In both sayings, what is highlighted is the generosity of God toward all and the great value of simple, humble acts of service and hospitality, regardless of whether such acts are done by persons inside or outside the Church. Note once again, that what is being promoted is not religious indifferentism but that all acts of kindness towards a disciple because of his association with Christ, will be rewarded.

The last part of today’s passage, provides a balanced perspective to our Christian vision of discipleship. If the first part of today’s passage accentuated the need for broad mindedness and inclusiveness regarding the good deeds of others, this last part reminds us that sin should never be tolerated. Goodness and kindness by others can and should always be celebrated, but sin is never to be encouraged. If God can reward someone for his or her good deeds, He will not hesitate to punish someone for their evil deeds. So, our Lord uses a series of hyperbolic analogies, from drowning to bodily mutilation, to emphasis the gravity of sin. These examples may appear barbaric by modern standards, but they are used precisely to illustrate God’s complete abhorrence of sin, whether it be directed to another or to oneself.

The opening and the concluding section of today’s passage reveals to us the nature of God - He is both merciful and just – one does not exclude the other. There is no contradiction. God welcomes and rewards acts of goodness wherever He finds it, and not just among those who claim to know Him or act in His name. As goodness can never be a companion to evil, so too God will not tolerate evil and sin within us. These have deep implications in our own spiritual lives - we too must welcome and celebrate the goodness done by others if in the end it is done for the sake of God who will see to their reward, but we must be constantly on guard against the scandal of evil and sin, and be prepared to take all necessary steps to remove them through sincere repentance, or be prepared to “be thrown into hell where their worm does not die nor their fire go out”.

Choose Salvation and not just Safety

Twenty-Second Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A

I will not lie to you. I will not paint a rosy picture of what’s in store for every Christian who desires to live up to his or her name. The truth is simply this: being a Christian is really hard. So much easier to go with the flow, to fit in, to accommodate and follow how the world thinks, and does things. Try to go against the flow, and you would most likely get hit or be thrown under the bus. It is Venerable Fulton Sheen who tells us, “Today the current is against us. And today the mood of the world is, ‘Go with the world, go with the spirit.’” But the good bishop reminds us that “dead bodies float downstream. Only live bodies resist the current.”

This is the dilemma faced by St Peter in the gospel. To choose safety over risking losing everything. To either flee from the cross or embrace it. Peter chose safety over risk, flight over fight, and he will repeat this mistake at the very end of the gospel story when his Master gets arrested. What made his cowardice more pronounced in today’s passage is that he is trying to convince the Lord to do the same.

Just last week, Peter identified Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God; and the Lord announced that God had revealed this truth to him. On that basis, our Lord called Peter a “rock”, and promised to use him as a foundation to build His Church. Jesus even conferred the keys of the kingdom, a symbol of His authority on Peter. But this week, the mood changes. Peter’s rock melts and becomes jelly. What happened? Our Lord predicts and discloses to His disciples that He must suffer greatly, be rejected by the religious authorities, and be killed before rising from the dead. There is no glory without the cross. It’s confounding and downright frightening.

Peter then takes our Lord aside and tries to remonstrate with Him. We would imagine that Peter is being respectful and does not wish to challenge the Lord in front of the others. But the phrase “taking Him aside” has a more profound nuance. The phrase is more accurately translated “took possession,” as in the case of a demoniac possession, taking control of a person’s will and rendering him powerless. This is the action of the diabolical. This is what Satan attempted to do at the beginning of the gospel when he took our Lord aside and tempted Him with various paths that will lead our Lord away from His mission and the Cross. Peter now stands in the place of Satan and does the same. Peter is an obstacle to our Lord’s mission and tries to convince Him to abandon the means by which our Lord will achieve His mission by proposing a safer way, one which requires little sacrifice, one which has nothing to do with the cross.

But our Lord clarifies, “If anyone wants to be a follower of mine, let him renounce himself and take up his cross and follow me. For anyone who wants to save his life will lose it; but anyone who loses his life for my sake will find it.” It’s the cross which will define the disciple, not just the ability to do good deeds or spout correct doctrinal statements about Christ or God.

This is the lesson the apostles and all followers of Jesus would have to learn. When we cling tightly to life and comfort in this world, when we prioritise safety over salvation, we risk losing out on the real life God desires to give us. Peter, out of misguided love, proposed exactly that. Jesus had to correct him, out of true love, and call him back to allegiance to God’s way. As the apostles would soon learn, the path to glory, for Jesus and for us, must pass through Calvary, it cannot avoid the Cross. To avoid the cross would be to stand in the way of Jesus. Our place as His disciples, is to follow Him from behind, not stand in His way. And the crosses that we carry are not proof of God’s absence or powerlessness, but where God’s power can be found.

Real Christians embrace the cross. They don’t flee from it, give excuses for it, or find softer substitutes for it. Renouncing oneself and taking up one’s cross is more than giving up something. It’s not like your little Friday or Lenten sacrifice where you deny yourself chocolate or alcohol or sugar or coffee – basically anything that makes life pleasurable. Denying yourself isn’t an invitation to a private spirituality. It isn’t a form of spiritual masochism. No. It’s a call to live in God’s way, even at the cost of death. As our Holy Father, Pope Francis, reminds us, “There is no negotiating with the cross: one either embraces it or rejects it.”

Being a Christian is hard, but it has its rewards. In fact, the reward for being aligned to God’s ways instead of man’s ways, is far more precious and valuable than anything we can hope to possess and achieve in this life. When our Lord gives us a promise, better believe in it, especially when the going gets tough, when you feel all alone and alienated in your struggle to be faithful, when you are hit on all sides by those who will try to convince you that you are wrong. And this is what He promises, “For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and, when he does, he will reward each one according to his behaviour.”

The Heart of Temptation

First Sunday of Lent Year A

It’s Lent again, time to double or triple our efforts to get holy. Strangely enough, this is the time of the year, when temptation doesn’t get any sweeter or more alluring. The more we wish to grow in intimacy with God, the greater would be Satan’s effort to frustrate that goal. At the beginning of his pontificate, our Holy Father, Pope Francis, who is fond of speaking about the devil as a real being rather than just some impersonal concept, had this to say about temptation: “Temptation is a normal part of life's struggle, and anyone who claims to be immune from it is either a little angel visiting from heaven or "a bit of an idiot.”” He added that the biggest problem in the world isn't temptation or sin, rather it is people deluding themselves into believing that they're not sinners and losing all sense of sin.  That is why the Church begins this First Sunday in Lent with a meditation of the temptation of Christ. Yes, it is both challenging and comforting to acknowledge that no one is immune to temptation. Not even a hero. Not even a nobody. Not even people like you and me. And certainly not even Christ, the sinless One, the Son of God.

From the waters of the Jordan, the Spirit leads our Lord into the harsh wilderness to be tempted by Satan. The gospel presents this ordeal as an escalating series of three temptations. The first temptation is most subtle, seems harmless, innocent and even rationally necessary. The second is less so, but yet the lure of an audience could be interpreted as giving glory to God for a wondrous miracle. But the third temptation is the most blatant and audacious. All three are attempts by the Enemy to divert our Lord from the path of human suffering, the way of the cross, and ultimately from the obedience to the Father’s plan that His mission entails.

The first temptation runs: “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to turn into loaves.” What seems apparent to most people is that the devil wishes for our Lord to perform a miracle to relieve the suffering of His physical needs – to do something for His own personal benefit. Nothing wrong with that. But the real focus of this temptation is on the identity and power of Jesus. What was declared in public by the Father at the baptism, “This is my beloved Son”, is now tested in private. The temptation is not really about food but about turning our Lord away from the path chosen for Him by the Father. His mission is not to serve Himself by exploiting His divine prerogatives but to serve others by a life of heroic sacrifice. And that is why our Lord answers, “Man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.” God’s Word, God’s will for us, and our obedience to Him takes priority.

The second temptation brings our Lord to the holy city of Jerusalem where the devil perches Him high on the parapet of the Temple and utters these words, “If you are the Son of God ... throw yourself down”. Why was the Temple chosen? Well, this is the place where the Jews believed God had chosen to dwell among His people. Just as no one is immune to temptation, no place is also immune from the devil’s snares; not even the “holiest place“ on earth. As in the first temptation, the divine Sonship of Jesus is central to the test. This time the temptation is buttressed with a quotation from Scripture that promises God’s protection through His holy angels. Immediately one notices how the tempter adjusts himself to the one being tempted, the devil uses the same method as used by the Lord, the Word of God, to continue his assault. This second temptation is essentially a challenge to the trustworthiness of God. Satan wants Jesus to subject His Father’s promises to verification. It is an attempt to manipulate God into action, just like so many of us do in prayer. To which our Lord rightly answers, “You must not put the Lord your God to the test.” God is not on trial. We are. He doesn’t need to prove Himself. Rather, it is we who must prove our faith in Him.

The third temptation brings our Lord to the summit of a very high mountain. The purpose is to give Him a panoramic view of all the kingdoms of the world. This time the devil’s mask comes off. Subtle insinuations have proven ineffective. Now the ambition of Satan is laid open to view. Peering out at the great empires of the world, the devil says, “I will give you all these if you fall at my feet and worship me.” In essence, our Lord is being offered a shortcut to achieving His messianic objectives. Here, authority and power are handed to Him on a silver platter without Him having to pay for them with the cost of His life’s sacrifice on the Cross. In exchange, Satan wants nothing less than a brazen act of idolatry. Jesus is asked to repudiate the Father by surrendering Himself to the lordship of Satan. Our Lord rejects this last offer, “Be off Satan! For scripture says: You must worship the Lord your God, and serve Him alone.”

The last temptation actually exposes the true nature of the first two temptations and in fact, all other temptations. It is the repudiation of God. The ultimate goal of Satan is to keep us from worshipping the One he hates. As a master of persuasion, Satan easily deceives mankind into focusing on anything but God. Hardly any of us would admit that we would blatantly worship the Devil. But the devil’s temptation is more subtle. Secular society often finds itself believing that it has no need for God – as long as we can eradicate world hunger, find a cure to cancer, seek popular support for our political agenda and economic programmes of establishing economic justice and world peace – then there is no place for God in our lives. As attractive as this idea may be, the bottom line is that unless we are prepared to submit ourselves humbly to God in total obedience, all these man-made solutions would fail. Whenever we believe that we can move ahead with human progress and solutions without any reference to God, we have knowingly or unknowingly, fallen at the feet of Satan and worshipped him. As G. K. Chesterton once said, “For when we cease to worship God, we do not worship nothing, we worship anything.”

The devil’s last request is a parody of the worship which is due to God. In fact, if there is anyone who deserves our kneeling and worship, it is God alone. Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI had once remarked: “Kneeling does not come from any culture — it comes from the Bible.” Wise men knelt, Peter and the apostles knelt, lepers knelt, rulers knelt, Gentiles knelt, even men possessed by the devil knelt (Mark 5:6). They knelt only to the King of Kings. But even this Great King chose to kneel. He knelt to wash the feet of His disciples. In the garden of Gethsemane, He “knelt down and prayed” (Luke 22:41). On the other hand, there is one who will never ever kneel. ‘The devil has no knees,” wrote Abba Apollo, a desert Father of the Church who lived around 300 AD, “he cannot kneel; he cannot adore; he cannot pray; he can only look down his nose in contempt. Being unwilling to bend the knee at the name of Jesus is the essence of evil. (cf Is 45:23, Rom 14:11)” This by far, is the greatest irony. The Being that chooses to kneel to no one, now demands that the Son of God kneels to him.

The devil is no fiction. He is very real. But so is God. In a world where temptations seem to lurk around every corner, it may be prudent to return to God in prayer, always seeking His grace and assistance to face the wiles and lies of the enemy. Without God, nothing is possible, we are paralysed. With God in our lives, everything is possible. This is real discipleship — complete dependence on the Lord in everything. Our lives should be Christ-sufficient and not self-sufficient. This is the only way to see through and resist the temptations of Satan. Let our hearts be humbled during this Lenten season to place our entire trust in the Lord, and with Him, let us confidently stand up to the enemy and declare: “Be off Satan!